California 2019-2020 Regular Session

California Assembly Bill AB1633

Introduced
2/22/19  
Introduced
2/22/19  
Refer
3/18/19  
Refer
3/18/19  
Report Pass
4/2/19  
Refer
4/2/19  
Report Pass
4/10/19  
Report Pass
4/10/19  
Engrossed
4/25/19  
Engrossed
4/25/19  
Refer
4/25/19  
Refer
4/25/19  
Refer
5/8/19  
Refer
5/8/19  
Report Pass
6/25/19  
Report Pass
6/25/19  
Refer
6/26/19  
Refer
6/26/19  
Refer
6/27/19  
Refer
6/27/19  
Enrolled
9/5/19  
Enrolled
9/5/19  
Chaptered
10/8/19  
Chaptered
10/8/19  
Passed
10/8/19  

Caption

Regional transportation plans: traffic signal optimization plans.

Impact

The enactment of AB 1633 modifies existing transportation laws by empowering cities in the MTC area to take proactive measures in traffic management. Prior state law required designated transportation planning agencies to develop regional transportation plans that considered various elements including policies and financial strategies but did not specifically allocate power for local traffic signal management. By facilitating cities to optimize their traffic signals, the bill is likely to improve not just local but also regional traffic efficiency, potentially leading to better compliance with sustainability goals outlined in other transportation policies.

Summary

Assembly Bill 1633, authored by Grayson, addresses regional transportation planning by allowing cities within the jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) to create and implement traffic signal optimization plans. The goal of these plans is to enhance traffic flow by reducing travel times, minimizing the number of stops, and decreasing fuel consumption. This bill adds Section 65080.02 to the Government Code specifically for this purpose, thus integrating traffic optimization into broader regional transportation strategies.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding AB 1633 appears largely favorable among stakeholders focused on transportation efficiency and environmental impact. Supporters advocate that localized control over traffic signals aids in addressing specific community needs and enhances overall transit experience. However, there may be concerns regarding the adequacy of local execution and coordination with state departments, as effective optimization will require robust collaboration between the Department of Transportation and individual cities.

Contention

Notable points of contention revolve around the effectiveness of local traffic optimization efforts in harmony with state oversight. Critics may argue that uncoordinated local plans could lead to inconsistent traffic management practices and standards, potentially undermining the regional approach to transportation development. Additionally, discussions may touch upon the necessary resources and budget allocations required for successful implementation at the city level, as well as the potential resistance from local governance structures.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA AB2851

Lead exposure: abatement.

CA AB1730

Regional transportation plans: San Diego Association of Governments: housing.

CA AB902

Transportation projects: barriers to wildlife movement.

CA AB350

Regional transportation plans: Sacramento Area Council of Governments.

CA SB475

Transportation planning: sustainable communities strategies.

CA AB1147

Regional transportation plan: Active Transportation Program.

CA SB146

Regional transportation plans: sustainable communities strategies: procedural requirements.

CA AB2262

Greenhouse gases: zero-emission vehicle charging or fueling infrastructure: statewide assessment and zero-emission readiness plans.