HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/02/2007, C8 - BASE YEAR TRAFFIC MODEL DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, SPECIFICATION NO. 90796 - REFER TO EMAIL BE HAND STAF I
Mam¢Due
councilOctober 2, 2007
j, acenba nepont '�Nb�
CITY O F SAN LUIS OBISPO
FROM: Department Head: Jay Walter, Director of Public Works
Prepared By: Jake Hudson,Engineer III - Traffic
SUBJECT: BASE YEAR TRAFFIC MODEL DEVELOPMENT SERVICES,
SPECIFICATION NO.54.7�r
RD 7q 4o 9 he.- �4a�
CAO RECOMMENDATION r
1. Approve notice requesting proposals for base year traffic model development services.
2. Authorize the CAO to execute an agreement with the selected consulting firm.
DISCUSSION
In support of the City's major transportation planning activities, the Public Works department
maintains a traffic model for forecasting traffic volumes based on projected land use scenarios.
The current traffic model is based largely on demographic and travel information that is
significantly out-of-date, being over fifteen years old. Staff is proposing the development of a
new up-to-date model which reflects more recent travel information, demographics, multi-modal
(travel modes other than single occupancy vehicle) variables and traffic assumptions, which are
the basis for the predictive output of the model.
Development of a new base year traffic model is essential for any meaningful update of the
Circulation Element, impact analysis of new development and infrastructure proposals, and
among many other immediate benefits, the ability to predict potential congestion points and the
means to developing traffic congestion relief solutions. In addition, completing a City base year
model at this time would coincide with the recent completion of the regional base year model by
the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG). Completing both of these models at
approximately the same time would maximize compatibility between the City's local and the
County's regional forecasting tools.
FISCAL IMPACT
This project is identified in the 2007-09 Financial Plan (page D-67) and Appendix A (pages 68-
69) with $200,000 allocated for contract services in conjunction with this project.
ALTERNATIVE
The Council may wish to defer this RFP until a later date. If this project does not proceed, major
Council goals and community priorities will not be addressed. The City's model will become
increasingly outdated and the City may not be ready to initiate the Circulation Element update in
the next few years.
L tr
Base Year Traffic Model Development Services, Specification No. 90677 Page 2
ATTACHMENT
A copy of the notice requesting proposals is available for review in the Council reading file.
G:\Staff-Reports-Agendas-Minutes\ CAR\2007\Transporraion\Traffic\90796 Traffic Model Update\Council Agenda Report-Template.DOC
er
i
O'Connor, Julie
From: Hooper, Audrey
Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2007 8:23 AM
To: O'Connor,Julie
Subject: RE: Council Consent Item 10-2-07
Julie,
I hope I understood Pam's request, but if I didn't just let me know ...
No, it doesn't make a difference- we can just consider this a grammatical change.
Please let Pam know that we cannot use the corrected staff report for any of our purposes. We cannot
replace a document that has already been released and made public, so we cannot use the agenda report
she sent over.
I am comfortable changing the number in the minutes (I'll add a Clerk's note reflecting that correction) and
you should file a copy of this e-mail with the agenda packet and/or manually change the project number on
the agenda and agenda report,and initial both (or I can)- but we can't do more than that. It doesn't look
like a resolution was approved so that's not an issue.
Audrey
-----Original Message-----
From: O'Connor,Julie
Sent:Wednesday, October 03,2007 353 PM
To: Hooper,Audrey
Subject FW: Council Consent Item 10-2-07
FYI... Does this make a difference when it was approved by Council on 10/2?
Julie
-----Original Message-----
From: Hudson,Jake
Sent: Wednesday, October 03,2007 252 PM
To: IGng, Pam;O'Connor,Julie
Subject Council Consent Item 10-2-07
Julie,
The project number for the "BASE YEAR TRAFFIC MODEL DEVELOPMENT SERVICES" RFP was incorrect on
the staff report. The number on the report was 90677,the number should be 90796. 1 have attached the
report council approved with the corrected project number.
Jake