Download pdf - DISCLAIMER - Caltrans · i DISCLAIMER . Disclaimer: The information and data contained in this document are for planning purposes only and should not be relied upon for final design

i

DISCLAIMER

Disclaimer: The information and data contained in this document are for planning purposes only and should not be relied upon for final design of any project. Any information in this Transportation Concept Report (TCR) is subject to modification as conditions change and as new information is obtained. Although planning information is dynamic and continually changing, District 7’s Division of Planning and Local Assistance makes every effort to ensure the accuracy and timeliness of the information contained in the TCR. The information in the TCR does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation, nor is it intended to address design policies and procedures.

ii

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABOUT THE TRANSPORTATION CONCEPT REPORT ........................................................... 1 STAKEHOLDER PARTICIPATION .............................................................................................. 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................................. 3 CONCEPT SUMMARY .................................................................................................................. 4 Concept Rationale ..................................................................................................................... 4 Proposed Project and Strategies ................................................................................................ 5 CORRIDOR OVERVIEW ............................................................................................................... 8 Route Segmentation .................................................................................................................. 8 Route Description ...................................................................................................................... 9 Route Designations and Characteristics .................................................................................. 10 Community Characteristics ..................................................................................................... 12 Land Use ................................................................................................................................. 12 Development Plans along the SR-23 Corridor ................................................................... 13 Socio-Economic Profiles .................................................................................................... 14 System Characteristics ............................................................................................................ 18 System Operations ................................................................................................................... 18 Ramp Meter Listing ........................................................................................................... 18 Transportation System Management and Operations (TSM&O) ...................................... 20 Active Transportation .............................................................................................................. 21 Park and Ride Facilities ........................................................................................................... 27 Transit Facilities ...................................................................................................................... 28 Freight ..................................................................................................................................... 28 Freight Mode Profiles ......................................................................................................... 29 Environmental Considerations ................................................................................................ 32 Cap and Trade ......................................................................................................................... 33 Climate Change ....................................................................................................................... 33 CORRIDOR PERFORMANCE ..................................................................................................... 34 CORRIDOR CONCEPT ................................................................................................................ 36 Concept Rationale ................................................................................................................... 36 Planned and Programmed Projects and Strategies .................................................................. 36 Southern California Association of Governments’ Sustainability Planning Grant Program .. 37 CONCLUSION .............................................................................................................................. 40 APPENDIX A - Acronyms ......................................................................................................... A-1 APPENDIX B - Definitions ......................................................................................................... B-1 APPENDIX C - Sources .............................................................................................................. C-1

SR-23 TCR (2017) Page 1

ABOUT THE TRANSPORTATION CONCEPT REPORT

System Planning is Caltrans long-range (20-25 years) transportation planning process for evaluating existing and future operations and mobility. The System Planning process fulfills Caltrans statutory responsibility as owner and operator of the State Highway System (SHS) (California Government Code §65086 and Title 23 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 450 Subpart B) by identifying deficiencies and proposing improvements to the SHS. Through System Planning, Caltrans focuses on developing an integrated, multimodal transportation system that meets Caltrans goals of “safety and health, stewardship and efficiency, sustainability, livability and economy, system performance and organizational excellence.” System Planning is a continuous, comprehensive, and cooperative process that considers the entire transportation system, including highways, local roads, transit, freight and non-motorized modes of transportation.

The System Planning process is primarily composed of several parts: the District System Management Plan (DSMP), the Transportation Concept Report (TCR), the Corridor System Management Plan (CSMP), the Priority Listing of Projects/DSMP Project List and the Interregional Transportation Strategic Plan (ITSP).

The districtwide DSMP is a strategic policy and planning document that focuses on maintaining, operating, managing, and developing the transportation system. The TCR is a planning document that identifies the existing and future route conditions as well as future needs for each route on the SHS. The CSMP is a complex, multi-jurisdictional planning document that identifies future needs within corridors experiencing or expected to experience high levels of congestion. The Priority Listing of Projects is a list of the District’s planned and partially programmed transportation projects used to recommend projects for funding. These System Planning products are also intended as resources for the public and private stakeholders and for regional and local agencies. The TCR is a report and is not considered a plan under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970 and the National Enviromental Policy Act (NEPA) process of 1969.

SR-23 TCR (2017) Page 2

TCR Purpose

“California’s State Highway System needs long range planning documents to guide the logical development of transportation systems as required by California Government Code §65086 and as necessitated by the public, stakeholders, and system users. The purpose of the TCR is to evaluate current and projected conditions along the route and communicate the vision for the development of each route in each Caltrans District during a 20-25 year planning horizon. The TCR is developed with the goals of increasing safety, providing excellent stewardship, sustainability, system performance and organizational excellence through the use of integrated management of the transportation network, including the highway, transit, pedestrian, bicycle, freight, operational improvements and travel demand management components of the corridor.”

Transportation Concept Report Guidelines, September 2012.

STAKEHOLDER PARTICIPATION

Stakeholder participation was sought throughout the development of this TCR. Outreach involved both internal and external stakeholders including the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), the Ventura County Transportation Commission (VCTC) and cities along the corridor were asked to review the document for comments, edits, and to ensure consistency with their existing plans, policies, and procedures. The process of working closely with stakeholders adds value to the TCR by reflecting the local stakeholder perspective on needs, priorities, and plans.

SR-23 TCR (2017) Page 3

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The main purpose of this Transportation Concept Report (TCR) is to evaluate current and projected conditions along a route and suggest a configuration for State Route (SR) 23 that will meet projected demand. Historically, the freeway and highway system in Southern California has been highly congested and will increasingly be heavily congested into the future. Due to financial, environmental, right of way and political constraints, it has become increasingly difficult for Caltrans to continue to add more lanes to the system. The region is also limited by planned capacity increasing projects ability to meet air quality conformity status. Capacity enhancing projects have been led by local Regional Transportation Planning Agencies and generally funded through local sales tax measures and limited state and federal funding. Recognizing these constraints, the planned and programmed projects and strategies in the TCR are made within a framework of programming and implementation constraints and regional policy. The concept attainment configuration is meant only to show the severity of future conditions and what it would take to attain that level of service (LOS).

The TCR for SR-23 is divided into several major sections; three of the sections – the Corridor Performance, System Characteristics and Corridor Concept – are the core of the document. The remaining provide a context for analyzing the SR-23 corridor and include a documentation of resources.

SR-23 is a north-south intraregional route that originates in the city of Malibu (Los Angeles County) at SR-1, Pacific Coast Highway (PCH) and terminates in the city of Fillmore (Ventura County) at SR-126. Commuters from Fillmore and Moorpark use this route to access the 118 and the 101. It also provides recreational access to the beach and the Santa Monica Mountains.

Traffic volume is forecasted to increase on SR-23 ranging from 1,500 Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) to 96,000 AADT according to SCAG’s 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) modeling data. The LOS during the peak hour will be similar to current conditions. No addtional capacity is required to achieve an acceptable concept LOS.

A portion of SR-23 (from SR-1 to US-101) is on the Caltrans District 7 list of routes recommended for relinquishment. This TCR is only reflecting the Caltrans desire to relinquish non-primary routes to the local jurisdictions. All issues and concerns will have to be negotiated and agreed to by all concerned parties before any relinquishment proposal is finalized. While doing the system analysis for the TCR, Caltrans mission to provide a “safe, sustainable, integrated and efficient transportation system to enhance California’s economy and livability” provide guidance and a context for recommendations.

SR-23 TCR (2017) Page 4

CONCEPT SUMMARY CONCEPT – 2035 FACILITY

The table below depicts the traffic conditions on SR-23 projected for the year 2040. The Concept LOS indicates how many lanes it will require to achieve the desired LOS.

CONCEPT RATIONALE

SR-23 is a north-south intraregional state route that provides access from Fillmore and Moorpark in Ventura County to SR-118 and US-101. It also provides access to the Santa Monica Mountains, SR-1 and the beach in Los Angeles County. The portion of this route from U.S. 101 to SR-126 is part of the California Freeway and Expressway System.

Average Concept ConceptDaily Directional Peak Truck Peak LOS "D" LOS "F0"

Segment Traffic Split Hour Hour Attainment* Attainment*1

SR-1 to Los Angeles(LA)/ V/C LOSVentura County (VC) Line) 0.19 A

2LA/VC Co Line V/C LOS

to Portrero Rd 0.22 A3

Portrero Rd to V/C LOSTriunfo Canyon Rd 0.55 C

4Triunfo Canyon Rd to V/C LOS

U.S. 101 0.53 C5

U.S. 101 to SR-118 V/C LOS0.86 D

6SR-118 to SR-126 V/C LOS

0.66 CSource: SCAG's 2016-2040 RTP/SCS* V/C - Volume to Capacity ratio* MF - Mixed-Flow lane* The number of lanes in the LOS D attainment column is for both directions. LOS D attainment indicates how many lanes it would require to achieve LOS D. It is meant to show the severity of future conditions and what it would take to achieve LOS D. Caltrans is not suggesting that it is the Department's plan to build the facility to achieve the LOS D.* The number of lanes in the LOS F0 attainment column is for both directions. The data in the LOS F0 attainment column is intended to show the severity of congestion on the system and what it would require to achieve that LOS. Caltrans recognizes the difficulty in achieving the desired LOS given the financial, environmental, right of way and political constraints.* Sometimes the model output implies that there would be auxiliary lanes (each direction) and auxiliary lanes are given only half capacity. That is why instances where an odd number of lanes is shown for both direction.* The 2040 Baseline includes all planned and programmed projects in SCAG's2016-2040 RTP/SCS.* For consistency with SCAG's 2016-2040 RTP/SCS, year 2012 and 2040 were used.* 2012 & 2040 data is derived from the SCAG's 2016-2040 RTP/SCS model. Data in this report is meant to be used for comparison purposes only and is not to be used for specific projects without further analysis.

6

9,600 62.0% 1,130 (11.8%)

75 (6.6%)

22 2

96,400 56.0% 9,500 (9.8%)

1200 (12.7%)

66

4

26,000 59.1% 2,350 (9.0%)

100 (4.4%)

66 6

17,200 60.0% 1,550 (9.0%)

60 (3.8%)

44

2

2,400 51.2% 330 (13.6%)

15 (4.1%)

22 2

2040Baseline

RTP/SCS*

1,500 53.1% 210 (14.2%)

10 (4.4%)

22

SR-23 TCR (2017) Page 5

LOS is a qualitative measure describing operational conditions within a traffic stream and their perception by motorists. A LOS definition generally describes these conditions in terms of density, speed, travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruption, comfort and convenience. Traffic volume is forecasted to increase on SR-23 according to SCAG’s 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Community Strategies (RTP/SCS) modeling data. The LOS is projected to remain similar to current conditions. Hence, no additional capacity improvements are planned, programmed, or recommended for this corridor.

PROPOSED PROJECT AND STRATEGIES

Transportation Planning in California has three interrelated components – planning, programming and funding. In the development of a TCR, several core planning documents are reviewed that serve not only as source documents; but, they also serve as a blueprint on how a region chooses to develop their multi-modal transportation system. Planning documents referenced for this TCR include the Regional Transportation Plan, Regional Transportation Improvement Plan, State Transportation Improvement Program, and the Interregional Transportation Strategic Plan, the State Highway and Protection Program, City and County General Plans and other related plans and studies.

Brief descriptions of these plans are provided below:

• Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Community Strategies (RTP/SCS) – Metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) and regional transportation planning agencies (RTPAs) are mandated by State and Federal law to develop regional transportation plans every four years. The RTP provides a long-range vision for transportation investments to be funded by local, state, and federal transportation funds and combinations thereof over a 20- to 25-year period. The RTP takes the role of transportation in a broad context taking into account the economic, environmental, and quality-of-life goals for the future for that region. The Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) is a newly required element of the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). The SCS will integrate land use and transportation strategies that will achieve California Air Resources Board (ARB) emissions reduction targets. Section 65080 of the California Government Code is the primary statute that addresses the development of the RTP.

• Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) – MPOs are responsible for developing and adopting a 5-year program of proposed regional transportation projects every two years. RTPAs are responsible for developing and adopting a 4-year program of proposed regional transportation projects every two years. The projects in the RTIP are a subset of projects from an approved RTP. The RTIP lists all transportation projects and programs for which any action by a federal agency is expected and covers all modes – transit, highways, bridges, bicycles, pedestrian, freight, and local streets and roads. The RTP and RTIP are not static documents and may have projects added, deleted or modified after adoption through an approved amendment process. The RTIP includes estimated

SR-23 TCR (2017) Page 6

costs and schedules for projects that are reasonably expected to be funded during the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) period.

• Interregional Transportation Strategic Plan (ITSP) – California Government Code Section 14526 specifies that the purpose of the ITIP is to fund projects that “improve the interregional movement for people, vehicles and goods” and to develop Intercity Passenger Rail corridors of strategic importance. Prepared by Caltrans, it is a five year program of projects submitted to the California Transportation Commission for approval. Caltrans prepares the Interregional Transportation Improvement Plan (ITIP) and regional agencies prepare RTIPs.

• State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) – The STIP is a multi-year capital improvement program of transportation projects on and off the SHS, funded with revenues from the Transportation Investment Fund and other funding sources. STIP programming generally occurs every two years. The programming cycle begins with the release of a proposed fund estimate in July of odd-numbered years, followed by California Transportation Commission (CTC) adoption of the fund estimate in August (odd years). The fund estimate serves to identify the amount of new funds available for the programming of transportation projects. Once the fund estimate is adopted, Caltrans and the regional planning agencies prepare transportation improvement plans for submittal by December 15th (odd years).

• State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP) - Based on a prepared and approved asset management plan, the Department (Caltrans) is required to prepare a State Highway Operation and Protection Program for the expenditure of transportation funds for major capital improvements that are necessary to preserve and protect the SHS. Projects included in the program are to be “limited to capital improvements relative to maintenance, safety, and rehabilitation of state highways and bridges that do not add a new traffic lane to the system.” (Government Code section 14526.5, amended in 1992 by Chapter 1177 (SB 1435))

• General Plan – Local governments such as cities and counties develop a long-range general plan which describes the physical development of the community and guides the acceptable land uses for its jurisditions. Each city and county adopts and updates their General Plan to guide the growth and land development of their community, for both the current period and for the long term. It is also a policy document that lays out the future of the city’s or county’s growth through policy statements and serves as a guide for city and county staff, the planning commission, governing board, the city or county manager or mayor.

There are no capacity enhancement projects proposed for SR-23. However, there are several operational improvements, safety, and stormwater treatment projects proposed for SR-23. There is also a proposed relinquishment of Decker Canyon Road from SR-1 to SR-101 (see project listing

SR-23 TCR (2017) Page 7

on page 36-37). In addition, there are two completed Sustainability Projects - Kanan Road/Thousand Oaks Boulevard Intersection Pedestrian Evaluation and City of Fillmore (Business Park) - in the vicinity of SR-23.

SCAG’s Sustainability Planning Grant Program (formerly known as Compass Blueprint Grant Program) was established as an innovative vehicle for promoting local jurisdictional efforts to test local planning tools.

The Kanan Road/Thousand Oaks Boulevard Pedestrian Evaluation timeframe was 2012-2013. It focused on “conducting technical studies and drafting conceptual designs in order to improve safety and mobility for all road users at and around the intersection of Kanan Road and Thousand Oaks Boulevard in the City of Agoura Hills.”

The City of Fillmore (Business Park) project timeframe was 2007. Its focus was “to analyze the financial feasibility of a proposed business park proposed to achieve more blanced employment and housing opportunities.”

SCAG offers direct funding of innovative planning initiatives for member agencies through the Sustainability Planning Grants Program. The Sustainability Planning Grants Program provides direct technical assistance to SCAG member’s jurisdictions to complete planning and policy efforts that enable implementation of the regional sustainable community strategies (SCS). The Sustainability Program’s goal is based upon the principles of mobility, livability, prosperity and sustainability. (http://www.sustain.scag.ca.gov)

http://www.sustain.scag.ca.gov/

SR-23 TCR (2017) Page 8

CORRIDOR OVERVIEW

ROUTE SEGMENTATION

This TCR analyzes SR-23 conditions using the segment as the study unit. Segments are generally defined as freeway interchange to freeway interchange, county line to freeway interchange, or freeway interchange to end of freeway. They are developed with consideration of logical termini and independent utility. For the purpose of this report, SR-23 has been divided into six segments. The following map illustrates these segments.

SR-23 TCR (2017) Page 9

Route Segments for SR-23

R – First realignment T – Temporary connection

ROUTE DESCRIPTION

Pursuant to the California Streets and Highway Code, Section 323, SR-23 is described as follows:

“Route 23 is from:

(a) Route 1 near Aliso Canyon to Route 101. (b) Route 101 in Thousand Oaks to Route 118. (c) Route 118 to Route 126 near Fillmore.” The Los Angeles (LA) County portion of SR-23 begins at LA post mile (PM) 0.00 and ends at the Los Angeles/Ventura county line at PM 8.9. The Ventura (VEN) County portion begins at VEN post mile 0.00 and concludes at VEN post mile 24.16.

From the Pacific Coast Highway, SR-23 winds its way through Decker Canyon and Los Alisos Canyon, where it is known as Decker Canyon Road. Shortly after entering the Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area, SR-23 becomes Mullholand Highway and then quickly exits national park land. It still known as Mulholland Highway until it becomes Westlake Boulevard in the planned community of Westlake Village.

At US-101 in the city of Thousand Oaks, SR-23 breaks and jogs to the west, becoming the Moorpark Freeway from PM R3.32 to T11.54. The Moorpark Freeway is fairly unique in that the portion of the freeway shoulder from Olsen Road to Tierra Rajada is open to bicycle traffic. This freeway was specially designated as the Milltary Intelligence Service Memorial Highway in 1994.

When SR-23 meets SR-118, it breaks again and moves west again, reappearing as Moorpark Avenue. At that point SR-118 is known as Los Angeles Avenue. At Everett Street in the city of Moorpark SR-23 becomes Walnut Canyon Road and continues on as such up to Broadway Road where it veres west and becomes part of Broadway Road. SR-23 stays Broadway Road unil it turns north and evolves into Grimes Canyon Road.

As Grimes Canyon Road, SR-23 passes through Grimes Canyon and past oil wells and farmland. In the unicorporated agricultural community of Bardsdale SR-23 heads east and becomes Bellevue Avenue, eventually moving north from Bellevue to become Chambersberg Road.

SEGMENT DESCRIPTION BEGIN PM END PMNO. OF LANES

(EACH DIR.)1 SR-1 to Los Angeles/Ventura Co. Line LA 0.00 LA 8.90 12 Los Angeles/Ventura Co. Line to Portrero Rd. VEN 0.00 VEN T 1.49 13 Portrero Rd. to Triunfo Canyon Rd. VEN T 1.49 VEN R 2.25 24 Triunfo Canyon Rd. to US-101 VEN R 2.25 VEN R 3.32 35 US-101 to SR-118 VEN R 3.32 VEN T 11.54 26 SR-118 to SR-126 VEN T 11.54 VEN 24.16 1

SR-23 TCR (2017) Page 10

Shortly before ending at SR-126 in the city of Fillmore, SR-23 becomes “A” Street.

ROUTE DESIGNATIONS AND CHARACTERISTICS

The Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1973 (Public Law 93-87, 87 Statutes 250) mandated the functional classification of highways. Classification of roadways defines the role each element of the roadway network serves in meeting travel needs and serves as a management tool to use in a variety of areas ranging from appropriate design standards to jurisdictional responsibility and for funding eligibility under the Federal-aid program.

For the purpose of this analysis, SR-23 has been divided into six segments.

National Highway System:

SR-23 is part of the National Highway System (NHS) from the LA/VEN county line (PM 0.0) to Broadway Road (PM 15.54) north of the Moorpark city limits.

Federal Functional Classification:

Segment 1 is classified as a “Minor Arterial” in a rural corridor.

Segments 2, 3 and 4 are classified as “Principal Arterials” in an urban corridor.

Segment 5 is classified as an “Other Freeway or Expressway” in an urban corridor.

Segment

Freeway and Expressway

System

National Highway System

Strateigic Highway Network

Scenic Highway

Interregional Road System

Route

Federal Functional

Classification

Goods Movement

RouteTruck

Designation1

(SR-1 to Los Angeles /

Ventura County Line)

No No No No No Minor Arterial NoKingpin to Rear Axle

(KPRA) 30'

2 (Los Angeles / Ventura Co.

Line to Portrero Rd.)

No Yes No No NoPrincipal Arterial

No KPRA 30'

3 (Portrero Rd.

to Triunfo Canyon Rd.)


No KPRA 30'

4 (Triunfo

Canyon Rd. to US-101)


No KPRA 30'

5 (US-101 to

SR-118)Yes Yes No No No

Other Freeway or Expressway

NoTerminal

Access Route

6 (SR-118 to

SR-126)Yes See Below No No No See Below No See Below

SR-23 TCR (2017) Page 11

Segment 6 is classified as a “Principal Arterial” from SR-118 to Broadway (PM 15.54) then as a “Minor Arterial” from PM 23.45 to SR-126.

Truck Designation:

SR-23 is a California Legal Route from SR-118 to Shekell Road (PM 17.8). California Legal trucks have access to the entire state highway system, except where prohibited. From Shekell Road (PM 17.8) to SR-126 SR-23 is a California Legal Advisory Route with a 32’ KPRA.

SR-23 provides access from the cities of Fillmore and Moorpark to SR-118 and US-101.

Segment

Rural / Urban / Urbanized

Metropolitan Planning

Organization

Regional Transportation

Planning Agency

Congestion Management

Agency

Local Agencies

Tribes Air District

Terrain

1 (SR-1 to

Los Angeles / Ventura

County Line)

Rural

Southern California

Assoication of Governments

(SCAG)

Los Angeles County

Metoropolitan Trapnsportation

Authority (Metro)

Metro Metro Chumash

South Coast Air Quality

Management District

(SCAQMD)

Mountainous

2 (Los Angeles / Ventura Co.

Line to Portrero Rd.)

Urban SCAG

Ventura County Transportation Commission

(VCTC)

VCTC VCTC Chumash

Ventura County Air Pollution

Control District (VCAPCD)

Flat

3 (Portrero Rd.

to Triunfo Canyon Rd.)

Urban SCAG VCTC VCTC VCTC Chumash VCAPCD Flat

4 (Triunfo

Canyon Rd. to US-101)

Urban SCAG VCTC VCTC VCTC Chumash VCAPCD Rolling

5 (US-101 to

SR-118)Urban SCAG VCTC VCTC VCTC Chumash VCAPCD Rolling

6 (SR-118 to

SR-126)See Below* SCAG VCTC VCTC VCTC Chumash VCAPCD Rolling

SR-23 TCR (2017) Page 12

COMMUNITY CHARACTERISTICS

SR-23 is a north-south intraregional route that originates in the city of Malibu (Los Angeles County) at SR-1, Pacific Coast Highway (PCH) and terminates in the city of Fillmore (Ventura County) at SR-126. Malibu is a coastal community in Los Angeles County. It is known for its mild climate, beautiful scenery, and affluent residents many of whom are in the entertainment industry. Other cities along this corridor such as Simi Valley, Westlake Village, Agoura Hills and Thousand Oaks are primarily residential in nature. Agriculture has a large presence in and around the cities of Moorpark and Fillmore. Commuters from Fillmore and Moorpark use this route to access SR-118 and US-101. It also provides recreational access to the beach and the Santa Monica Mountains.

LAND USE

SR-23 serves an area that has a great deal of variety. Land use varies from recreational to residential to agricultural. Significant trip generators along this corridor include:

• SR-1/Pacific Coast Highway • City of Malibu • Pepperdine University • Santa Monica Mountains Recreation Area • Westlake Village • US-101 • City of Thousand Oaks • Thousand Oaks Performing Arts Center • The Oaks Mall • California Lutheran College • City of Moorpark • Moorpark College • SR-118 • City of Fillmore • Fillmore and Western Railway • SR-126

SR-23 TCR (2017) Page 13

DEVELOPMENT PLANS ALONG THE SR-23 CORRIDOR

IGR/SCH#

PROJECT TITLE

PROJECT PROPOSAL

IGR#050413

Moorpark Country Club Estates expansion in northern Moorpark Location: Championship Drive between Walnut Canyon Road and Grimes Canyon Road

85 single family homes on 2 lots adjacent to an existing single family subdivision.

IGR#050667

Essex Apartments north of central Moorpark Location: Casey Road and Walnut Canyon Road

200 apartment units.

IGR#060529

Hitch Ranch Specific Plan Location: Poindexter Avenue and west of Moorpark Avenue

The specific plan provides for the arrangement of various land uses on the 277.3-acre project site. The specific plan would allow the development of 755 residential dwelling units, 2.8 acres for institutional uses, 3.48 acres of active and passive recreational facilities and 56.8 acres of natural open space. In addition to the land uses described above, the specific plan area will include on-site detention basins, and project infrastructure, including streets and utility facilities. IGR#060611

Grimes Canyon Quarries Expansion Location: SR-23 in southeast Ventura Co. between Moorpark & Fillmore

Expansion of quarry operations in the low but rugged mountains between Moorpark and Fillmore in southeast Ventura County. The County Conditional Use Permit (CUP) numbers are: 4171-3 (Best Rock Co.), 4571-6 (Wayne J Co.), and 4874-2 (Grimes Rock Co.).

IGR#070554

Fillmore Business Park Master Plan Location: State Route 126 at C Street, D Street, and E Street

The Master Plan that would guide business park and local development on approximately 90 acres. Phase 1 development includes five specific projects totaling 1,227,779 square feet of business park and local serving retail, while Phase 2 development would include an additional 94,678 square feet of business park uses. IGR#110603

Thousand Oaks Boulevard Specific Plan Location: Thousand Oaks Boulevard roughly between Moorpark Road and Duesenburg Drive

Proposed land use regulations and development standards, which if adopted, would allow a greater range of mixed-use type projects, including taller structures with reduced building set-backs and lesser parking requirements. Initial preliminary estimates prepared by the Community Development Department indicated that the proposed Specific Plan could potentially generate about 370 dwelling units and approximately 1,100,000 square feet of commercial floor area over and above existing conditions. IGR#140935

Sapwi Trails Community Park Location: Erbes Road and E. Avenida De Los Arboles

Conejo Recreation and Park District proposes to develop a Community Plan on the approximately 145-acre project site, consisting of roughly 17 improved acres of various recreational amenities and special facilities which would support a number of passive and semi-passive recreational activities such as hiking, biking, disc golf, and non-motorized model glider flying. * Local Development/Intergovernmental Review (IGR) – A legally mandated program that requires Caltrans, pursuant

to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Statutes and Guidelines to review federal, state and local planning or proposed development activity that has the potential to impact state transportation facilities or other resources under the Department’s jurisdiction, and to recommend conditions of project approval that eliminate those impacts or reduce them to a level of insignificance. * For a list of applicable acronyms, see Appendix A.

SR-23 TCR (2017) Page 14

SOCIO-ECONOMIC PROFILES

Significant growth in housing, population, and employment are generally projected throughout the SR-23 corridor area. The following tables and graphs show projected socioeconomic growth in the cities along the SR-23 corridor per the SCAG 2016-2035 RTP/SCS growth forecast. (http://rtpscs.scag.ca.gov/Pages/default.aspx)

City of Agoura Hills2012 - 2040

2012 2040 CHANGEPopulation 20,500 22,700 10.73%Household 7,300 8,200 12.33%Employment 12,500 15,300 22.40%

http://rtpscs.scag.ca.gov/Pages/default.aspx

SR-23 TCR (2017) Page 15

City of Fillmore2012 - 2040


City of Malibu2012 - 2040


0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

Population Household Employment

City of Malibu

2012 2040

SR-23 TCR (2017) Page 16

City of Moorpark2012 - 2040


City of Simi Valley2012 - 2040


SR-23 TCR (2017) Page 17

City of Thousand Oaks2012 - 2040


0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

Population Household Employment

City of Thousand Oaks

2012 2040

City of Westlake Village2012 - 2040


SR-23 TCR (2017) Page 18

SYSTEM CHARACTERISTICS For the purpose of this analysis, SR-23 is divided into six segments based on logical termini including intersections, jurisdiction(s) and changes in land use.

Segment 6 is classified as “Principal Arterial” from SR-118 to Broadway (PM 15.54), then as a “Minor Arterial” from PM 23.45 to SR-126.

*From PM VEN 11.76-13.31Segment 6 is 3.2 lanes. From PM VEN 13.31-24.16 it is 1 lane.

SYSTEM OPERATIONS

RAMP METER LISTING Caltans is committed to using ramp metering as an effective traffic management strategy to maintain an efficient freeway system, and protect the investment made in constructing freeways by keeping them operating at or near capacity.

According to Deputy Directive (DD) – 35 (January 3, 1995) “Ramp Metering,” each district that currently operates, or expects to operate, ramp meters within the next ten years, shall prepare a Ramp Metering Development Plan (RMDP). The RMDP shall contain a list of each ramp meter locations that is currently in operation or planned for operations within the next ten years. Each district shall update its RMDP biennially and ensure that future ramp meter locations are included in the local Congestion Management Plans.

Sement/PM Facility Type

Mixed-Flow Lanes

(each direction)

HOV Lanes

(each direction)Centerline

MilesLane Miles

(each direction) 1

(LA 0.00-8.90) Minor Arterial 1 0 8.9 8.92

(VEN 0.00- T 1.49)Principal Arterial 1 0 1.49 1.49

3 (VEN T 1.49-R 2.25)

Principal Arterial 2 0 .76 1.52

4 (VEN R 2.25-R 3.32)

Principal Arterial 3 0 1.07 3.21

5 (VEN R 3.32-T 11.54)

Other Freeway or Expressway 2 0 8.22 16.44

6 (VEN T11.54-24.16) See Below 1* 0 12.62 12.62

Existing Facility

SR-23 TCR (2017) Page 19

SR-23 Ramp Metering Plan

Source: 2015 Ramp Metering Development Plan (DSMP)

Operational – Ramp meter is currently actively metering

Postmile Direction Location Comments

3.93 NB Hillcrest Operational4.89 SB Janss EB Operational5.05 NB Janss EB Operational5.09 SB Janss WB Operational5.25 NB Janss WB Operational5.87 SB Los Arboles EB Operational6.02 NB Los Arboles EB Operational6.06 SB Los Arboles WB Operational6.22 NB Los Arboles WB Operational7.01 SB Sunset Hills EB Operational7.14 NB Sunset Hills EB Operational7.2 SB Sunset Hills WB Operational

7.37 NB Sunset Hills WB Operational7.90 SB Olsen EB Operational8.21 SB Olsen WB Operational8.30 NB Olsen EB Operational8.51 NB Olsen WB Operational9.92 SB Tierra Rejada EB Operational

10.12 SB Tierra Rejada WB Operational10.16 NB Tierra Rejada EB Operational10.36 NB Tierra Rejada WB Operational11.21 SB New Los Angeles Operational11.43 NB New Los Angeles Operational

Segment 6 (PM VEN T 11.54 - VEN 24.16)

Segment 4 (PM VEN R 2.25 - VEN R 3.32)None

Segment 5 (PM VEN R 3.32 - VEN T 11.54)

None

None

None

Ramp Meters on SR-23

Segment 1 (PM LA 0.00 - LA 8.90)

Segment 2 (PM VEN 0.00 - VEN T 1.49)

Segment 3 (PM VEN T 1.49 - R 2.25)None

SR-23 TCR (2017) Page 20

TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS (TSM&O) As congestion spreads and intensifies and the level of incidents, delays, and disruptions increase, the level of service and reliability of the roadway systems in many areas continue to deteriorate.

The era of new roadway construction has largely ended in most of the country. In addition, the practice of widening existing freeways is also falling out of favor due to high costs, environmental considerations, the built-out nature of many urbanized areas, and community increased interest for more multi-modal transportation; therefore, growing momentum for more efficient use of the existing transportation system. It has become increasingly important to operate the existing network to its fullest service potential.

The Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21, P.L. 112-141) signed July 6, 2012, defines transportation system management and operations (TSM&O) as “integrated strategies to optimize the performance of existing infrastructure through the implementation of multimodal and intermodal, cross-jurisdictional systems, services and projects designed to preserve capacity and improve security, safety and reliability of the transportation system.” TSM&O activities focus on a set of well-known strategies such as incident management, traffic signal timing, ramp metering, road weather management, Active Traffic and Demand Management (ATDM), Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) technologies, and others to optimize the capacity of the transportation system, and to reduce traffic congestion while improving safety on existing roads and transit network. It should be noted that the new surface transportation bill, “Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act,” (P.L. 114-94) did not directly address TSM&O though it maintained the existing law from MAP-21. However, the FAST Act supports the deployment of transportation technologies and congestion management tools of which TSM&O plays a vital role in implementation.

Incorporating TSM&O into the planning and programming process will provide a more robust understanding of the statewide and regional transportation system. It provides a toolbox of strategies that goes beyond capacity expansion to include operations and demand management solutions.

The Caltrans Strategic Management Plan 2015-2020, is a “roadmap of Caltrans role, expectations, and operations.” After extensive outreach which included the California State Transportation Agency (CalSTA), Caltrans Executive Board, employees, stakeholders and partners, the following five strategic goals were established for the organization:

• Safety and Health • Stewardship and Efficiency • Sustainability, Livability and Economy • System Performance • Organizational Excellence.

Throughout the plan, there is a strong emphasis on “Safety, Preservation and Operations” and the system performance goal is the lynchpin to address these values. The system performance goal is

SR-23 TCR (2017) Page 21

to “utilize leadership, collaboration, and strategic partnerships to an integrated transportation system that provides reliable and accessible mobility for travelers.” The plan also states that “Caltrans recognizes that not every transportation solution is a highway solution” and has committed “to use TSM&O to better manage existing infrastructure.” Vehicle miles traveled (VMT) are associated with higher emissions of air pollutants and greenhouse gases (GHG) and congestion. TSM&O is a strategy that is being implemented on the district’s most congested corridors through Integrated Corridor Management (ICM) which optimizes the use of existing infrastructure assets and leverages unused capacity. ICM is the coordination of transportation operations to improve travel management and to address traffic congestion. Optimization of the use of TSM&O is integral for Caltrans to achieve its goals of reducing GHG and VMT.

Mobility Pyramid

The Mobility Pyramid (shown above) represents a hierarchy of comprehensive management strategies in which infrastructure expansion, although important, is not the only strategy to address mobility and safety needs. When applying TSM&O strategies, distinction has to be made between State Highways and Freeways. Although elements from the Mobility Pyramid, such as operational improvements, maintenance and preservation, apply to both highways and freeways, TSM&O strategies on freeways include more ITS based elements. Highways benefit more from operational improvements, whereas freeways are more suited for system monitoring and evaluation. Currently there are no TSM&O projects planned for SR-23, but operational studies are going on continually.

ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION

The Complete Streets Act of 2008 (AB 1358, Leno) requires cities and counties to incorporate the concept of Complete Streets, a balanced multi-modal transportation element, into their General Plan updates to ensure that transportation plans meet the needs of all users of the California roadway system.

SR-23 TCR (2017) Page 22

In 2013, the nations’ largest Active Transportation Program was created by SB 99, (Chapter 359, 2013) and Assembly Bill (AB) 101, (Chapter 354, Statues 2013), and dedicated to providing $120 million each year to develop safe bicycle and pedestrian facilities in communities throughout the State. Elements of the legislation include increasing the proportion of trips accomplished by biking and walking, increasing the safety and mobility of non-motorized users, ensuring that disadvantaged communities fully share in the program, and enhancing public health, including reduction of childhood obesity through the use of programs including, but not limited, to projects eligible for Safe Routes to School Program funding, and to advance the active transportation efforts of regional agencies to achieve greenhouse gas reduction goals as established pursuant to SB 375 (Chapter 728, Statues of 2008) and SB 391, (Chapter 585, Statues of 2009). The program was designed to move such investment from the periphery of the state’s transportation funding strategy toward the center, assuring that the state is meeting mobility, health, safety and environmental objectives.

The California Transportation Plan (CTP) 2040 (adopted June 2016) further explains Caltrans role and the shift being made for “more sustainable growth for California” which is reflected in investments being made that go beyond a focus on highways and can be characterized as a diversity of investments including “improving passenger rail service in California, the development of the nation’s first true high-speed rail system… the investment of Cap-and-Trade funds to improve communities and enhance public transit” and the continued pursuit by the current Administration to push for investment in “fix-it-first” strategies to improve highways, neighborhood streets, bridges and overpasses, and the state’s trade corridors.” This includes “concentrating more investment on improving bicycle and pedestrian facilities throughout the state.”

The United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) Policy Statement on Bicycle and Pedestrian Accommodation Regulations and Recommendations (March 11, 2010) “encourages transportation agencies to go beyond the minimum requirements, and proactively provide convenient, safe and context-sensitive facilities that foster increased use by bicyclists and pedestrians of all ages and abilities, and utilize universal design characteristics when appropriate.”

SCAG’s 2016-2040 RTP/SCS commits to investing $12.9 billion towards active transportation improvements. The goal is to improve safety, increase active transportation usage by encouraging local active transportation plans. SB 99 (Leno, 2013) pertaining to Active Transportation Program funding and Caltrans Deputy Directive (DD)-64-R1, on “Complete Streets - Integrating the Transportation System,” (effective October 2, 2008) considers all transportation improvements as opportunities to improve safety, access and mobility for all travelers in California and recognizes bicycle, pedestrian and transit modes as integral elements of the transportation system. Bicycle, pedestrian and transit travel is facilitated by creating “Complete Streets” beginning early in System Planning and continuing through project delivery, maintenance and operations.

SR-23 TCR (2017) Page 23

In addition, California is the nation’s forerunner for bicycle and pedestrian facility investment. The Governor’s Office of Planning and Research has issued changes to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines designed to make bicycle and pedestrian projects easier to permit and construct.

It is the goal of the state to increase the number of trips Californians take by bicycling, walking, and other forms of active transportation in order to help meet the state’s greenhouse gas emissions reduction goals, improve Californians’ health by helping more people be active, and stimulate the economy.

Protected bikeways are part of a vital transportation infrastructure used by many to commute to and from work and other destinations. Unlike trails or pathways used for recreation, protected bikeways provide alternatives to vehicles that otherwise would transport citizens across the state’s roads and highways.

Bikeways are now classified into four distinct types of facilities by AB 1193, the Protected Bikeway Act, and signed by Governor Brown on September 20, 2014. The legislature amended Sections 890.4, 890.6, 891, added Section 885.1, and repealed Section 891.1 of the Streets and Highways Code relating to bikeways.

The four classes of bikeways are:

• Bikeway Class I (Bike Path), • Bikeway Class II (Bike Lanes), • Bikeway Class III (Bike Routes), • Bikeway Class IV (Cycle Tracks/Seperated Bikeway).

Property and businesses adjacent to protected bikeways experience increases in real estate values and sales compared to unimproved streets. Bicycling accounts for 2 million trips every day in California, showing the important role that bicycles play in transportation.

Safe street-level bikeways are proven to reduce bike riding on the sidewalk, wrong-way riding, and other illegal or unsafe bicycling practices.

It is the objective of the state to encourage the planning, design, and construction of protected bikeways, so as to foster bicycling as a means of transportation, in a manner that improves safety for all users, including motorists, transit users, pedestrians, and persons with disabilities, with special attention to the needs of visually impaired persons.

California Vehicle Code and Streets and Highway Code, Section 888, (revised October 4, 2013) states that “the department of Transportation shall not construct a state highway as a freeway that will result in the severance or destruction of an existing major route for non-motorized transportation traffic and light motorcycles, unless it provides a reasonable, safe, and convenient alternate route or such a route exists.”

SR-23 TCR (2017) Page 24

The following map shows Bicycle Access on District 7 freeways and highways. Access Code 1 represents freeway shoulders open to bike travel and Access Code 3 shows expressways and conventional highways open to bicycle travel in District 7. Currently SR-23 is open to bicycle travel from SR-1 to US-101, from Olsen Road to Tierra Rejada Road, and from SR-118 to SR-126.

SR-23 TCR (2017) Page 25

Bicycle Access on SR-23

Bicycle Facility - There are bicycle facilities (Bikeway Class I, II, III and IV) on or in the vicinity of much of SR-23. Although popular with cyclists, the Decker Canyon portion of SR-23 is not a designated bike route and there is no bike path.

Bicycle Facilities in the vicinity of SR-23

County Route Post Miles AC* BAC** DescriptionLA 23 000.00/008.900 E/C 3 Jct SR-1 to LA/Ven Co. Line

VEN 23 000.000/R003.320 E/C 3 LA/Ven Co. Line, Carlisle Rd to S Jct US-101 (Rte Break)VEN 23 R003.339/R208.209 F 2 N Jct US-101 to Olsen RdVEN 23 R008.209/R010.164 F 1 Olsen Rd to Tierra Rejada RdVEN 23 R010.164/R011.432 F 2 Tierra Rejada Rd to Jct SR-118 via New Los Angeles Ave VEN 23 R011.432/T012.260 E/C 3 Jct SR-118 to E Jct SR-118 (Rte Break)VEN 23 R012.900/024.165 E/C 3 W Jct SR-118 (resume SR-23 via Moorpark Ave) to Jct SR-126

BAC = Bicycle Access Code AC = Access Control1 = Freeway Shoulders Open to Bicycle Travel F = Freeway2 = Freeways Shoulders Closed to Bicycle Travel E/C = Expressway/Conventional Highway3 = Expressways & Conventional Highways Open to Bicycle TravelSource -- Statewide Bike Data (GIS)

SR-23 TCR (2017) Page 26


SR-23 TCR (2017) Page 27


http://media.metro.net/riding_metro/bikes/images/bike_map_la.pdf

https://www.goventura.org/travel-ventura/bike

PARK AND RIDE FACILITIES

Four Park and Ride facilities are located in close proximity to this route.

Address Lot Name Spaces Cost265 S. Rancho Road Thousand Oaks (Transit Center) Park & Ride Lot 1 272 FreeJanss Road & SR-23 Thousand Oaks Park & Ride Lot 3 83 Free

Moorpark Park & Ride Lot 2 300 High Street (Metrolink Station) 270 FreeMoorpark Park & Ride Lot 1 Los Angeles Avenue & Collins Drive 88 Free

http://media.metro.net/riding_metro/bikes/images/bike_map_la.pdf

https://www.goventura.org/travel-ventura/bike

SR-23 TCR (2017) Page 28

TRANSIT FACILITIES

The transit component for SR-23 embodies a multi-modal system including carpooling, local and express transit service, and light rail. Multiple transit agencies operate along this route and provide the following services. TCR TRANSIT INFORMATION – DISTRICT 7 Source: Office of Mass Transportation and Transit Operators

EXISTING SERVICE ON SR-23

Notes: Metro Bus 161 operates from the Thousand Oaks Transit Center to the Chatsworth Metrolink Station (Metro Orange Line) INTERMODAL TRANSIT CENTERS AND STATIONS LOCATED ON OR NEAR SR-23 CORRIDOR

FREIGHT

On December 4, 2015, President Obama signed into law a five-year, $305 billion surface transportation bill, the FAST Act, which authorized funding for core highway and transit programs that were already established in MAP-21. The FAST Act created two new freight programs – a formula based National Highway Freight Program funded at $1.2 billion per year, and a discretionary grant program, the National Significant Highway and Freight Projects Program (NSHFP), funded at an average of $900 million per year. Both are funded by the Highway Trust Fund. Prior to the FAST Act, the U.S. did not have a coordinated freight strategy or a freight investment program. By establishing a dedicated, committed funding source, significant advances

Route From/To Operator Rt # Name/Description Service Type Service Span Notes23 Charles St.-SR-23/118 Moorpark Transit 1,2,Saturday Moorpark Community Monday-Saturday 1-2 hr. Frequency23 SR-118-Westlake Blvd VISTA East County East County Local Monday-Saturday 60-90 min. Frequency23 Moorpark Ave-Olsen Rd Thousand Oaks Transit Metrolink Metrolink Local Weekdays Peak 3 trips23 Janns Rd-Hillcrest Dr Thousand Oaks Transit 2 Green Local Monday-Saturday 60 min. Frequency23 US-101-Agoura Rd Thousand Oaks Transit 3,4 Red,Blue Local Monday-Saturday 60 min. Frequency

Route Location City Operator Transit Service Service Type Service Span Notes23 Moorpark Metrolink Station Moopark City of Moorpark Metrolink Ventura County Line Commuter Rail Weekdays Free Parking

Amtrak Pacific Surfliner Intercity Rail 7 DaysMoorpark Transit 1,2,Saturday Local Monday-SaturdayThousand Oaks Transit Metrolink Local Weekdays PeakVista East County Local Monday-Saturday

23 Thosand Oaks Transit Center Thousand Oaks City of Thousand Oaks LADOT 422,423 Commuter Express Weekdays Free ParkingMetro 161 Local 7 DaysVista East County Local 7 DaysVista Conejo Connection Local Weekdays PeakThousand Oaks Transit 1,2,3,4, Local Monday-SaturdayMetrolink Weekdays Peak

SR-23 TCR (2017) Page 29

in public policy were made creating an underlying message to all of the importance of freight movement and freight supporting infrastructure to the U.S. economy.

The FAST Act creates a National Multimodal Freight Network (NMFN), which includes a National Highway Freight network that includes all Interstate Highways, an additional Highway Primary Freight Network identified under MAP-21 and will include Class I freight rail lines (the Surface Transportation Board classifies railroads with railroads having an annual gross revenue over $250 million), public ports with over two million short tons per year, the inland and intra-coastal waterway system, the 50 biggest cargo airports and other strategic freight assets. The NMFN is to be designated by the U.S. Secretary of Transportation within one year of enactment of the FAST Act. Currently, SR-23 would not qualify to be on the NMFN.

http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/FREIGHT/infrastructure/ismt/state_maps/states/california.htm

FREIGHT MODE PROFILES Trucks: SR-23 is a part of the Surface Terminal Access Route (STAA) truck network from US-101 to SR-118. Its truck volumes in 2012 range from 1.6 percent of annual average daily traffic (AADT) to 20 percent of the AADT in Ventura County at Grimes Canyon Road (due to agriculture). Regionally, truck traffic in Southern California is expected to grow significantly through 2035, using an increasing share of the regions’ highway capacity. Truck vehicle-miles-traveled (VMT) on regional highways is projected to grow by 80 percent between 2016 and 2040, an increase from 6.8 percent to over 10 percent of the total VMT. (Source: SCAG’s On the Move: A Comprehensive Regional Goods Movement Plan and Implementation Strategy; December 2012)

http://www.freightworks.org/DocumentLibrary/CRGMPIS%20-%20Final%20Report.pdf

SR-23 Freight Summary

Freight Elements Yes/No CommentsMajor Import/Export Hub NoDistribution Center(s) YesIndustrial Parks YesCargo Airports NoAgriculture YesCommunity Issues NoIntermodal NoGrade Separations YesTruck Lanes NoRailroads Yes Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR)Primary Freight Network (PFN) NoProximity to Major Routes Yes US-101, SR-1Proximity to Marjor Rail Yes UPRRWeigh-in-Motion Station (WIM) No

http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/FREIGHT/infrastructure/ismt/state_maps/states/california.htm

http://www.freightworks.org/DocumentLibrary/CRGMPIS%20-%20Final%20Report.pdf

SR-23 TCR (2017) Page 30

SR-23 is not officially designated as a Goods Movement route in District 7. It is used mostly for local commute traffic.

Seaports: The Port of Hueneme is the major port in the region, and the only deep water port between Los Angeles and San Francisco. This niche port moves over $9 billion of cargo every year, trading with Austria, Brazil, Canada, Costa Rica, China, Ecuador, Germany, Great Britain, Guatemala, Japan, Korea and Mexico.

Nicknamed “The Port the Farmers Built,” California produce is exported from the Port of Hueneme and tropical fruits are imported. In support of California agriculture, this port also handles the importing of liquid fertilizer.

Additionally, Port Hueneme is an important west coast port for the import and export of automobiles and other rolling stock.

District 7 Freight: Highways

SR-23 TCR (2017) Page 31

District 7 Freight: Rail

SR-23 TCR (2017) Page 32

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS

Nearly all transportation projects have some effect on air quality. On-road motor vehicles are the major source of air pollutant emissions contributing to violations of most air quality standards. Projects that affect the capacity or location of major roads or other elements of the transportation system can cause both adverse and beneficial air quality impacts. The National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and the California Ambient Air Quality Standards have been established for transportation-related criteria pollutants that have been linked to potential health concerns. The NAAQS and state standards are set at levels that protect public health with a margin of safety and are subject to periodic review and revision.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has designated planning areas throughout the country. Areas are classified as being in "attainment" for a given pollutant if they meet the prescribed standards. If an area persistently does not meet the standard, it is designated as a "nonattainment" area for that pollutant. Areas that were previously designated as non-attainment areas but have now met the standard (with U.S. EPA approval of a suitable air quality plan) are called "maintenance" areas. In nonattainment or maintenance areas, transportation conformity applies if projects are to be funded by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Federal Transit Administration (FTA), or any agency that has been delegated project approval by these agencies. Transportation conformity is a way to ensure that Federal funding and approval only goes to those transportation activities that are consistent with air quality goals. Although state air standards for some pollutants are more stringent than federal standards, there is no conformity process under the state law.

Below is the latest attainment/nonattainment status of the Los Angeles County portion of the SR-23 Corridor which is located within the South Coast Air Quality Management District.

Segment 1 (Los Angeles County from SR-1 to the Los Angeles/Ventura County line)

*Source: Air Resources Board 2016: National Area Designations

Pollutants National DesignationOzone NonattainmentCarbon Monoxide Unclassified/AttainmentPM 2.5 NonattainmentPM 10 Attainment

SR-23 TCR (2017) Page 33

Below is the latest attainment/nonattainment status of the Ventura County portion of the SR-23 corridor which is located within the Ventura County Air Polution Control District.

Segments 2 - 6 (Ventura County from the Los Angeles/Ventura County line to SR-126)

*Source: Air Resources Board 2016: National Area Designations

CAP AND TRADE

The California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, (AB 32, Nunez), is a multi-year program to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in California to 1990 levels by 2020. One key strategy to achieve this goal is a ‘cap and trade’ market system. Cap and trade is both a program and a strategy. It is a key element of California’s Climate Change Scoping Plan (ARB, 2008). The ‘cap’ creates a limit on carbon dioxide equivalent emissions, while a corresponding number of allowances within the cap can be ‘traded.’ The allowances are purchased by utilities and businesses at quarterly auctions. Over time, as the cap lowers, businesses that aggressively reduce emissions can trade their surplus allowances to firms that find it more expensive to reduce emissions. Cap and Trade proceeds reduce GHG emissions while maximizing job creation, public health and other so-called co-benefits, and directing investment towards the most disadvantaged communities and households in the state.

The Governor’s Administration is in full support of the California Global Warming Solutions Act. It is considered to be the most dramatic climate change policy of any state in the nation

CLIMATE CHANGE

Climate change is defined by EPA as “any significant change in the measures of climate lasting for an extended period of time” and “it includes any major changes in temperature, precipitation, or wind patterns, among other effects, that occur over several decades or longer.” California is leading the nation with its approach to climate change. In 2015, Governor Brown further reaffirmed California’s commitment to reducing GHG by issuing Executive Order B-30-15 which established a target to reduce GHG emissions by 80 percent from 1990 levels by 2050.

According to the EPA, for land based transportation, “higher temperatures can cause pavement to soften and expand, create rutting and potholes, particularly in high-traffic areas and can place stress on bridge joints” and “(it) can also limit construction activities, particularly in areas with high humidity.” Because climate change is “projected to concentrate rainfall into more intense storms,

Pollutants National DesignationOzone NonattainmentCarbon Monoxide Unclassified/AttainmentPM 2.5 Unclassified/AttainmentPM 10 Unclassifed

SR-23 TCR (2017) Page 34

heavy rains may result in flooding, which could disrupt traffic, delay construction activities, and weakens or washes out the soil and culverts that support roads, tunnels, and bridges.”

California’s coastline is vulnerable to a range of natural hazards including storms, extreme high tides, rising sea levels and erosion. Major highways in coastal areas serve as critical evacuation routes which need to be protected from flooding and damage so that they can be used for emergencies. However, drought could increase the likelihood of wildfires, reduce visibility and threaten roads and infrastructure.

On September 25, 2016, California’s legislators, with the Governor’s approval, passed AB 2800 “Climate change: infrastructure planning,” (Chapter 580, September 24, 2016) which addresses climate change and infrastructure planning. The bill requires “state agencies to take into account the current and future impacts of climate change when planning, designing, building, operating, maintaining, and investing in state infrastructure.” Furthermore, the bill states that “the Legislature finds and declares…the impacts of climate change are already being felt in California and include record-breaking drought, wildfires, flooding, sea level rise, coastal erosion, and heat waves. These impacts are projected to worsen with a future punctuated by what are now considered extreme weather events.”

CORRIDOR PERFORMANCE

Segment 1 – The AADT in 2012 was 1,220 and it is forecasted to be 1,500 by the year 2040 according to the modeling data. The segment currently operates at LOS A during the period of peak congestion.

Segment 2 – The AADT in 2012 was 2,100 and it is forecasted to be 2,400 by the year 2040 according to the modeling data. The segment currently operates at LOS A during the period of peak congestion.

Segment 3 – The AADT in 2012 was 14,700 and it is forecasted to be 17,200 by the year 2040 according to the modeling data. The segment currently operates at LOS C during the period of peak congestion.

Segment 4 – The AADT in 2012 was 24,900 and it is forecasted to be 26,000 by the year 2040 according to the modeling data. The segment currently operates at LOS C during the period of peak congestion.

Segment 5 – The AADT in 2012 was 85,000 and it is forecasted to be 96,400 by the year 2040 according to the modeling data. The segment currently operates at LOS D during the period of peak congestion.

Segment 6 -- The AADT in 2012 was 7,600 and it is forecasted to be 9,600 by the year 2040 according to the modeling data. The segment currently operates at LOS C during the period of peak congestion.

SR-23 TCR (2017) Page 35

Source: Caltrans 2012 Truck Volume Book

Segment AADT 2012 AADT 2040 LOS 2012 LOS 2040 VMT 2012 VMT 20401

SR-1 to Los Angeles /Ventura County Line 1,220 1,500 A A 10,600 13,100

2 Los Angeles/Ventura County

Line to Portrero Rd 2,100 2,400 A A 2,600 3,0003

Portrero Rd to Triunfo Canyon Rd 14,700 17,200 C C 11,300 13,200

4 Triunfo Canyon Rd to U.S.

101 24,900 26,000 C C 23,400 24,4005

U.S. 101 to SR-118 85,000 96,400 D D 618,400 701,4006

SR-118 to SR-126 7,600 9,600 C C 85,200 107,600* Source: 2016-2040 RTP/SCS model data For LOS definitions -- see Appendix B

Basic System Operations

Annual Average 5 + Axle AnnualDaily Traffic Trucks Daily Truck Average Daily Truck 5 + Axle Trucks

Segment (2012 AADT) (2012 AADT) Percent Traffic (AADTT) (% of AADTT) 1

SR-1 to Los Angeles /Ventura County Line 1,220 20 1.60% 20 100.00%

2 Los Angeles/Ventura

County Line to Portrero Rd 2,100 50 2.47% 45 85.50%3

Portrero Rd to Triunfo Canyon Rd 14,700 440 2.96% 300 68.60%

4 Triunfo Canyon Rd to U.S.

101 24,900 450 1.82% 275 60.30%5

U.S. 101 to SR-118 85,000 3,870 4.55% 3055 79.00%6

SR-118 to SR-126 7,600 1,000 13.15% 225 22.50%* Source: Caltrans Truck Volume Book

Truck Traffic

SR-23 TCR (2017) Page 36

CORRIDOR CONCEPT

CONCEPT RATIONALE

The transportation concept describes the operating conditions and physical facilities required to provide those conditions that could exist on SR-23 after considering the conclusions, priorities and strategies discussed in the DSMP, SCAG’s 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS), and other planning documents. The route concept represents what could reasonably be accomplished to facilitate the mobility of traffic desiring to use the route. It assumes that management improvement strategies and system operation improvements to maximize the efficiency on SR-23 will be implemented.

The transportation concept is composed of a Level of Service (LOS) and a facility component. The concept facility is the facility that could be developed to maintain or attain the concept LOS.

PLANNED AND PROGRAMMED PROJECTS AND STRATEGIES

* Part of SR-23 is on the Caltrans list of recommended routes for relinquishment. This TCR is only reflecting Caltrans desire to relinquish non-primary routes to the local jurisdictions. All issues and concerns will have to be negotiated and agreed to by all concern parties before any relinquishment proposal is finalized.

Project CostSegment County Post Miles Project Description Source ($K)

1 LA 1.3

IN LA Co SR-23 PM 1.3/1.7 Decker canyon road north of decker edison road - Slope repair (roadway protective betterment)

2017 Ten-Year SHOPP 5,150

1 LA 0-8.9Decker Cyn Road - SR-1 to U.S. 101 (LA/VEN) (Caltrans Recommended Relinquishment)*

2017 DSMP Project List

1-6 VEN 0-24.16On multiple routes at various locations. Crosswalk enhancement, Install HAWK systems (collision


1-6 VEN 0-18.6CALLEGUAS CREEK (SANTA MONICA BAY) WATER SHED (storm water/mandates)


1-5 VEN 1-9

IN VEN Co SR-23 PM 1/9 - Erosion control, Rock fall, Debris flow mitigation (roadway protective betterment/roadway preservation)


2-3 VEN 1.48-1.73In Los Angkes county on SR-23 and U.S. 101 (drainage system restoration/roadway preservation)


2-3 VEN 0-3.32Decker Cyn Road - SR-1 to U.S. 101 (LA/VEN) (Caltrans Recommended Relinquishment)*

2017 DSMP Project List

5 VEN R3.56

br rail upgrade In VEN Co route 023 pm R3.56 52 0417F THOUSAND OAKS BLVD UC (bridge rail replacement/upgrage)


5 VEN 3.79-6.78

In Ventura County, from End Hillcrest Dr UC to NB of Sunset Hills Blvd - Replace/Repair damaged culverts (drainage system restoration)

2017 Ten-Year SHOPP 845

SR-23 TCR (2017) Page 37

SCAG’S SUSTAINABILITY PROGRAM PLANNING GRANT PROGRAM Note: Caltrans reproduced the Sustainability Program information directly from SCAG’s website. (http://www.sustain.scag.ca.gov)

The Sustainability Program’s goal is based upon the principles of mobility, livability, prosperity and sustainability.

Project: Kanan Road/Thousand Oaks Boulevard Intersection Pedestrian Evaluation Location: Agoura Hills, Los Angeles County Timeframe: 2012-2013 The project focused on conducting technical studies and drafting conceptual designs in order to improve saftey and mobility ofor all road users at and around the intersection of Kanan Road and Thousand Oaks Boulevard in the City of Agoura Hills.

Goals: • Improve safety, convenience and comfort for pedestrians and bicyclists • Promote walking and bicycling as efficient and safe multimodal transportation • Develop concepts for pedestrian and bicycle improvements

The core study area is defined by a 1.200 foot radius from the Kanan Road/Thousand Oaks Boulevard intersection. The area encompasses approximately 120 acres including three shopping centers, multifamily and single family housing, as well as borders Agoura High School, Chumash Park, and Medea Creek. Currently the location is dominated by automobile traffic. However, there are also many pedestrians and bicyclists travelling within the study area, and potentially many more living in the nearby residential neighborhoods. The healthy mix of land uses withing the study site makes the intersection a prime candidate for multi-modal accomodations.

Project CostSegment County Post Miles Project Description Source ($K)

5 VEN 4.82-7.39

In Ventura County, Between Wilbur Rd UC and Erbes Road UC - Replace and Repair Culverts (drainage system restoration)


5 VEN 4.9-11.2

TMS Upgrades: On Ven 23 PM 4.9/11.2 from Ven 101 to Ven 118, on LA 101 PM 7.8, on LA 2 PM R18.7, on LA 405 PM 48.48


6 VEN T11.54-24.16In Ventura County, On SR- 23, from SR-118 to Jct St 126 (CAPM/Pavement)


6 VEN T12.6 Interchange improvements PSR-PDS 13,000

6 VEN 13.10-13.6

From 3rd St to Casey Rd widen from 1 lane in each direction to 1 lane NB and 2 lanes SB. Realign First St/Poindexter intersection and upgrade rail crossing SCAG 2013 FTIP 2,095

http://www.sustain.scag.ca.gov/

SR-23 TCR (2017) Page 38

Results:

• Traffic data collection and analysis for the intersection of Kanan Road and Thousand Oaks Boulevard

• Collected collision data within a 0.5 radius of the intersection • Developed concept designs for on-street bicycle facilities, streetscape

enhancements, a Class I trail along Medea Creek Channel, and suggested enhancements for pedestrian and bicycle access and mobility to and from the area’s shopping centers

• Developed pedestrian/bicycle user demand projections for Medea Creek Multi-Use Trail

• Analyzed the level of service impacts of the proposed Medea Creek Multi-Use trail crossing

The Sustainability Program’s goal is based upon the principles of mobility, livability, prosperity and sustainability.

Project: City of Fillmore (Business Park) Location: City of Fillmore Timeframe: 2007 For this project, Compass Blueprint (now known as the Sustainability Program) worked with the City of Fillmore to analyze the financial feasibility of a proposed business park proposed to achieve more balanced employment and housing opportunities. The feasibility of any development hinges upon current market and regulatory circumstances that will critically shape a development.

Goals:

• Determine economic feasibility of proposed site plan or baseline • Develop two variations on development baseline • Estimate number of jobs using results of economic feasibility analysis • Estimate net effect on Fillmore’s workforce-housing balance using economic

feasibility analysis results

Fillmore currently is a housing-rich city and the business park is expected to substantially improve the City’s jobs-to-housing balance. The Los Angeles real estate looks to the Inland Empire and north along Interstate 5 for new industrial space ant the demand for office space. The Southwest Fillmore Business Park is cognizant of this demand and will provide employment opportunities by attracting clean, business park style development. The city will enhance employment opportunites and reduce commuting outside of the city.

SR-23 TCR (2017) Page 39

Over the course of the project, three pro-forma development secenarios were modeled to include regulations and market conditions.

Results:

• Study area comprised 87 acres • Business Park will enable 1.3M sq. Ft. of commercial space • Scenario One: add over 2.000 jobs and improve the city’s ratio by 42 percent,

from 0.70 to 1.20 jobs per housing unit • Variations compared the effects of additional density and parking costs to the

baseline feasibility

SR-23 TCR (2017) Page 40

CONCLUSION Traffic volume is forecasted to increase on SR-23 and along the corridor due to the growth in population, housing and employment along this route and throughout the region. Growth in the region will continue to create mobility challenges and put additional stress on our transportation system. Southern California is not only an important component of California’s economy; but, it is also vital to the U.S. and the world’s economies. It is critical that mobility be maintained and improved in order to sustain the economic growth that is expected. In addition to sustaining the economic vitality of the region, mobility is also an important component in enhancing the quality of life for the residents in this region. SR-23 is only one component of the transportation infrastructure; but, it plays a critical role in providing mobility for the region. In order to improve mobility, additional capacity will be required beyond those planned and programmed in the SCAG’s 2016-2040 RTP/SCS to maintain an acceptable level of service through 2040.

District 7 employs a variety of strategies to address current congestion challenges including:

• High Occupancy Vehicle Lane (HOV) • High Occupancy Toll Lane (HOT) • Ramp Metering • Congestion Pricing (Toll Lanes) • Changeable Message Signs (CMS) • TSM&O • Reduction of VMT • Reduction of GHC • Enhancing multi-modal transportation options

Constructing an HOV or managed lane system continues to be a priority. Incorporating TSM&O strategies into the planning process will help to support Caltrans mission to “provide safe, sustainable, integrated and efficient transportation system to enhance California’s economy and livability.”

Considerations of future projects should refer to available information resources, including but not limited to SCAG’s 2012-2035 RTP/SCS Environmental Justice and Program Environmental Impact Report.

SR-23 TCR (2016) Page A-1

APPENDIX A

ACRONYMS

AB Assembly Bill

AADT Annual Average Daily Traffic

AADTT Annual Average Daily Truck Traffic

ADA Americans with Disabilities Act

ADT Average Daily Traffic

APPNS Applicants

AQMD Air Quality Management District

ARB Air Resources Board

ATDM Active Transportation Demand Management

BNSF BNSF Railway

CALSTA California Transportation Agency

CALTRANS California Department of Transportation

CEQA California Environmental Quality Act

CFR Code of Federal Regulations

CMP Congestion Management Plan

CMS Changeable Message Sign

CO County

CSMP Corridor System Management Plan

CTC California Transportation Commission

CTCSP Coastal Transportation Corridor Specific Plan

DD Deputy Directive

DP Deputy Policy

DEIR Draft Environmental Impact Report


DOT Department of Transportation

DSMP District System Management Plan

EPA Environmental Protection Agency

FAST Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act

FEIR Final Environmental Report

FHWA Federal Highway Administration

FTA Federal Transit Administration

GIS Geographic Information System

GHG Greenhouse Gas

GHGE Greenhouse Gas Emission

HOV High Occupancy Vehicle Lane

HOT High Occupancy Toll Lane

I Interstate

IC Interchange

ICM Integrated Corridor Management

ICTF Intermodal Container Transfer Facility

IGR Inter-Governmental Review

IRRS Interregional Road System

ITIP Interregional Transportation Improvement Program

ITS Intelligent Transportation System

ITSP Interregional Transportation Strategic Plan

LA Los Angeles

LATC Los Angeles Transportation Center

LAX Los Angeles International Airport

LD Local Development

LOCAL APPNS Local Application


LOS Level of Service

LRTP Long Range Transportation Plan

MAP-21 Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act

MND Mitigated Negative Declaration

Metro Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority

MF Mixed Flow Lane

MFE Mixed Flow Equivalent

ML Managed Lane

MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization

N/A Not Applicable

NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act

NHFP National Highway Freight Program

NMFN National Multimodal Freight Network

NOP Notice of Preparation

NSHFP Nationally Significant Highway and Freight Projects

PL Public Law

PM Post Mile

PM Particulate Matter

POLA Port of Los Angeles

ROI Return On Investment

RMDP Ramp Metering Development Plan

RTP Regional Transportation Plan

RTIP Regional Transportation Improvement Program

RTPA Regional Transportation Planning Agency

SB Senate Bill


SCAG Southern California Association of Governments

SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District

SCIG Southern California International Gateway

SCH State Clearing House

SCS Sustainable Communities Strategy

SHOPP State Highway Operation Protection Program

SHS State Highway System

SR State Route

STAA Surface Transportation Assistance Act

STIP State Transportation Improvement Program

SUPPL Supplemental

TA Terminal Access

TCR Transportation Concept Report

TDM Transportation Demand Management

TOD Transit Oriented Development

TSM&O Transportation System Management and Operations

UPRR Union Pacific Railroad

US United States

USDOT United States Department of Transportation

V/C Volume to Capacity Ratio

VCAPD Ventura County Air Pollution Control District

VCTC Ventura County Transportation Comission

VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled

WIM Weigh-in-Motion

SR-23 TCR (2016) Page B-1

APPENDIX B

DEFINITIONS

Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) - AADT is the total volume for the year divided by 365 days. The traffic count year is from October 1st through September 30th.

Bikeway Class I (Bike Path) – Provides shared use paths which provide a completely separated right-of-way designated for the exclusive use of bicycles and pedestrians with crossflows by motorists minimized.

Bikeway Class II (Bike Lanes) – Provides a restricted right-of-way designated for the exclusive or semiexclusive use of bicycles with through travel by motor vehicles or pedestrians prohibited, but with vehicle parking and crossflows by pedestrians and motorists permitted.

Bikeway Class III (Bike Routes) – Provides a right-of-way on-street or off-street, designated by signs or permanent markings and shared with pedestrians and motorists.

Bikeway Class IV (Cycle Tracks/Separated Bikeway) – Provides for cycle tracks or separated bikeways for exclusive use of bicyclists which promotes active transportation and provides a right-of-way designated exclusively for bicycle travel adjacent to a roadway and which protects bicyclists from vehicular traffic. Types of separation include, but are not limited to, grade separation, flexible posts, inflexible physical barriers, or on-street parking.

Corridor System Management Plan – A Corridor System Management Plan (CSMP) is used to outline the multi-jurisdictional and multi-modal management of a corridor experiencing delay due to congestion. A CSMP results in a listing and phasing plan of recommended operational improvements, Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) strategies, and system expansion projects to preserve or improve performance measures within the corridor. CSMPs are required for all projects receiving Proposition 1B (2006) Corridor Mobility Improvement Account (CMIA) funding.

District System Management Plan – The DSMP is a long range (20 year) strategic and policy planning document that presents the long range goals, policies and programs the district intends to follow in maintaining, managing and developing the transportation system. It serves as a resource for informing federal, state, regional and local agencies, and the public and private sector of the plans the district intends to follow in its partnership role with local and regional agencies.

Facility Concept – Describes the facility and strategies that may be needed within 20-25 years. This can include capacity increasing, state highway, bicycle facility, pedestrian facility, transit facility, non-capacity increasing operational improvements, new managed lanes, conversion of existing managed lanes to another managed lane type or characteristic, Traffic Monitoring Station (TMS) field elements, transportation demand management, and incident management.


Interregional Road System (IRRS) – IRRS was first identified by statute in 1989 as part of the Blueprint Legislation (a 10-year transportation funding package including AB 471, SB 300, and AB 973). It is a subset of the entire 265 SHS routes that provides connectivity among all of California’s regions. There are currently 93 statutory IRRS routes (page 3 and Appendix E, page 101 Interregional Transportation Strategic Plan – October 2013). The IRRS was conceived as part of the larger effort to address the critical transportation system funding and development needs of the State. The implementation of IRRS improvements is dependent on prioritization of State transportation revenues. Most interstates are included in the IRRS. SB 45 requires that the ITIP include a specific allocation of funds to be programmed on IRRS routes in non-urbanized areas.

Interregional Transportation Strategic Plan (ITSP) – The ITSP is a Caltrans document that provides guidance for the identification and prioritization of interregional transportation improvements to be funded in the Interregional Transportation Improvement Program (ITIP). The 2015 ITSP expanded the analysis from focusing on ITIP investment in interregional highways and intercity rail to analyzing the entire interregional transportation system regardless of funding source. The purpose of the plan is to be a guiding document for all investment in the interregional transportation system.

Lane Mile – A pavement measuring one mile long and one lane wide. A mile stretch of a two-lane road equals two lane miles. A segment of road one mile long and four lanes wide is four lane miles. This is the unit of measure used to develop the total cost of pavement projects.

Level of Service (LOS) – It is a qualitative measure describing operational conditions within a traffic stream and their perception by motorists. A LOS definition generally describes these conditions in terms of density, speed, travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruption, comfort and convenience. LOS can be categorized as follows:

LOS A describes free flowing conditions.

LOS B also indicative of free flow conditions. Average travel speeds are the same as in LOS A, but drivers have slightly less freedom to maneuver.

LOS C represents a range in which the influence of traffic density on operations becomes marked. The ability to maneuver with the traffic stream is now clearly affected by the present of other vehicles.

LOS D demonstrates a range in which the ability to maneuver is severely restricted because of the traffic congestion. Travel speed begins to be reduced as traffic volume increases.

LOS E reflects operations at or near capacity and is quite unstable. Because the limits of the level of service are approached, service disruptions cannot be damped or readily dissipated.


LOS F is a stop and go, low speed conditions with little or poor maneuverability. Speed and traffic flow may drop to zero and considerable delays occur. For intersections, LOS F describes operations with delay in excess of 60 seconds per vehicle.

Main line – The main line that includes travel way for through traffic but not freeway to freeway interchanges, local road interchanges, ramps, or auxiliary lanes.

Peak Hour – The hour of the day in which the maximum volume occurs across a point on the highway.

Peak Hour Volume – The hourly volume during the highest hour traffic volume of the day traversing a point on a highway segment. It is generally between six percent and 10 percent of the Annual Daily Traffic (ADT). The lower values are generally found on roadways with low volumes.

Post Mile (PM) – A post mile is an identified point on the State Highway System. The post mile values increase from the beginning of a route within a county to the next county line. The post mile values start over again at each county line. Post mile values usually increase from south to north or west to east depending upon the general direction the route follows within the State. The post mile at a given location will remain the same year after year. When a section of road is relocated, new post mile (usually noted by an alphabetical prefix such as “R” or “M”) are established for it.

Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Community Strategies (RTP/SCS) – is a long range visioning plan that balances future mobility and housing needs with economic, environmental and public health goals. SCAG is the MPO for the region and is responsible for producing the RTP/SCS.

Rural – Fewer than 5,000 in population designates a rural area. Limits are based upon population density as determined by the U.S. Census Bureau.

SHOPP – The purpose of the SHOPP is to maintain and preserve the SHS and its supporting infrastructure. Projects included in the program shall be limited to capital improvements relative to maintenance, safety, and rehabilitation of state highways and bridges that do not add a new traffic lane to the system.

STAA Truck – The Surface Transportation Assistance Act (STAA) of 1982 allows large trucks to operate on the Interstate and certain primary routes collectively called the National Network. These trucks, referred to as STAA trucks, are longer than California legal trucks. As a result, STAA trucks have a larger turning radius than most local roads can accommodate.

Terminal Access Routes (TA) – Terminal Access Routes are portions of state or local highways that Caltrans or a local government granted access to STAA trucks. The purpose of TA routes is


to allow STAA trucks to travel between National Network routes, reach a truck’s operating facility, or reach a facility where freight originates, terminates, or is handled in the transportation process.

Terrain – Caltrans documents two types of terrain: the topography of the route corridor and the profile of the roadway. The terrain data in the TCR describes the topography of each route segment and is characterized subjectively as “Flat,” “Rolling,” or “Mountainous.”

Transportation Concept Report – Each Caltrans district creates a Transportation Concept Report (TCR) for each State route within that district, which provides a long term (20 years or more) plan for that route. A TCR identifies current operating conditions, future deficiencies, a target level of service (LOS) for each segment in that route, and improvements needed to sustain or reach those targets.

Truck Designation – The “California Truck Network” Route List provides the state route segments and their truck access designations (such as National Network, Terminal Access, California Legal, Advisory, or Restricted) with each segment’s beginning and ending post miles, and beginning and ending cross streets.

Urban – 5,000 to 49,999 in population designates an urban area. Limits are based upon population density as determined by the U.S. Census Bureau.

Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) – Is the total number of miles traveled by motor vehicles on a road or highway segments.

SR-23 TCR (2016) Page C-1

APPENDIX C RESOURCES/WORKS CITED

2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy. (2016). Southern California Association of Governments. http://rtpscs.scag.ca.gov/Pages/2016-2040-RTP-SCS.aspx.

2015 Federal Transportation Improvement Program. (2014).Southern California Association of Governments. http://ftip.scag.ca.gov/Pages/2015/adopted.aspx.

2015 State Highway Operation and Protection Plan Program (SHOPP). (2015). Caltrans. http://www.dot.ca.gov/docs/2015_Ten-Year_SHOPP.pdf.

Air Designation Maps/State and Federal. (2016). California Air Resources Board (ARB). http://www.arb.ca.gov/desig/adm/adm.htm.

California Transportation Plan 2040: Integrating California’s Transportation Future (2016). Caltrans. http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tpp/californiatransportationplan2040/Final%20CTP/FINALCTP2040-Report-WebReady.pdf.

Caltrans Strategic Management Plan 2015-2020. (2015). Caltrans. http://www.dot.ca.gov/perf/library/pdf/Caltrans_Strategic_Mgmt_Plan_033015.pdf

Complete Streets – Integrating the Transportation System. Deputy Directive-64-R1 (2008). Caltrans. http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tpp/offices/ocp/complete_streets_files/dd_64_r1_signed.pdf.

First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan. (2014). ARB. http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/document/updatedscopingplan2013.htm.

Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act). (2015). Pub. L. No. 114-94). December 4, 2015. http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/fastact/legislation.cfm.

Governor’s Executive Order B-30-15, Greenhouse Gas Reduction Target, (2015). https://www.gov.ca.gov/news.php?id=19046.

Interregional Transportation Strategic Plan. 2015, Caltrans, http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tpp/offices/omsp/system_planning/documents/Final_2015_ITSP.pdf

Mobility Plan 2035, An Element of the General Plan. 2016. (Adopted January 20, 2016). Los Angeles Department of City Planning, City of Los Angeles, http://planning.lacity.org/documents/policy/mobilityplnmemo.pdf

Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21, P.L. 112-141), (July 6, 2012). 112th Congress of the United States. https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112hr4348enr/html/BILLS-112hr4348enr.htm.

On the Move: A Comprehensive Regional Goods Movement Plan and Implementation Strategy, (2012). Southern Association of Governments. http://www.freightworks.org/DocumentLibrary/CRGMPIS_Summary_Report_Final.pdf.

http://rtpscs.scag.ca.gov/Pages/2016-2040-RTP-SCS.aspx

http://rtpscs.scag.ca.gov/Pages/2016-2040-RTP-SCS.aspx

http://ftip.scag.ca.gov/Pages/2015/adopted.aspx

http://www.dot.ca.gov/docs/2015_Ten-Year_SHOPP.pdf

http://www.arb.ca.gov/desig/adm/adm.htm

http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tpp/californiatransportationplan2040/Final%20CTP/FINALCTP2040-Report-WebReady.pdf

http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tpp/californiatransportationplan2040/Final%20CTP/FINALCTP2040-Report-WebReady.pdf

http://www.dot.ca.gov/perf/library/pdf/Caltrans_Strategic_Mgmt_Plan_033015.pdf

http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tpp/offices/ocp/complete_streets_files/dd_64_r1_signed.pdf

http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/document/updatedscopingplan2013.htm

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/fastact/legislation.cfm

https://www.gov.ca.gov/news.php?id=19046

http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tpp/offices/omsp/system_planning/documents/Final_2015_ITSP.pdf

http://planning.lacity.org/documents/policy/mobilityplnmemo.pdf

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112hr4348enr/html/BILLS-112hr4348enr.htm

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112hr4348enr/html/BILLS-112hr4348enr.htm

http://www.freightworks.org/DocumentLibrary/CRGMPIS_Summary_Report_Final.pdf

SR-23 TCR (2016) Page C-2

Policy Statement on Bicycle and Pedestrian Accommodation Regulations and Recommendations. (2010). United States Department of Transportation. http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/guidance/policy_accom.cfm.

Sustainability Planning Grant Program (formerly known as Compass Blueprint Grant Program). (2013). Southern California Association of Governments. Http://www.ustaini.scag.ca.gov

Transportation Concept Report Guidelines (2012). Caltrans. http://dot.ca.gov/hq/tpp/offices/omsp/system_planning/tcr.html.

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/guidance/policy_accom.cfm

http://www.ustaini.scag.ca.gov/

http://dot.ca.gov/hq/tpp/offices/omsp/system_planning/tcr.html