HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991-09-10; City Council; 11340; APPEAL OF TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION REGARDING THE INSTALLATION OF TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES AT THE RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD/QUESTHAVEN ROAD INTERSECTIONa a, 6' .r( u El 0 c)
VJ
(d 3
k
u a,
u 2
s a,
E-l
4
1 m
0 4 \ m z 0
..
6 a
0 d
I 3 0 0
r GAHL~BAU .-
AB# I/, 390 TLEAPPEAL OF TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION DEPT.
TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES AT THE RANCHO CITY b
?ku MTOm 911 0191 MMENDATION REGARDING THE INSTALLATION OF
I DEPT.h I SANTA FE ROADIQUESTHAVEN ROAD INTERSECTION lcln \ t I I
1
- ~~~~-
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The Traffic Safety Commission and staff are recommending that the City Council de
appeal.
ITEM EXPLANATION:
On August 5, 1991 the Traffic Safety Commission considered a citizen request to
traffic control devices at the intersection of Rancho Santa Fe Road and Questhaven
Currently, Questhaven Road is controlled by a STOP sign and no traffic control dc
have been installed on Rancho Santa Fe Road (RSF). The citizen requested that
signs be installed on RSF to establish an ALL-WAY STOP intersection or that a
signal be installed at the intersection.
The RSF/Questhaven Road intersection has existed in its current location in Carlsb
a number of years. In the future, Rancho Santa Fe Road will be relocated and c
proposed development activity in the City of San Marcos, Questhaven Road will al
reconstructed and relocated to intersect RSF southerly of the existing intersectior
specific date for this relocation is known at this time.
In the vicinity of Questhaven Road, Rancho Santa Fe Road exists as a rural, twc
roadway with additional lanes provided at the intersection (Exhibit 2). The ro
designated as a prime arterial roadway on the City of Carlsbad Circulation Ele
Questhaven Road is a two-lane roadway that provides access to the County landfi
Elfin Forest with eventual access into the City of Escondido. It is designated
secondary arterial on the Circulation Element of the City of San Marcos.
A draft environmental impact report (DEIR) for the RSF realignment has been prel
and is being circulated for public comment. The City of Carlsbad Local Fac
Management Plan Numbers 11 and 12 have identified the need for improving Ra
Santa Fe Road.
Land adjacent to and easterly of the RSF/Questhaven Road intersection is undevel
and is located in the City of San Marcos. A large parcel of land at this location, kl
as University Commons, is in process for discretionary approvals in San Marcos.
draft EIR for University Commons is also out for public comment and has ider
improvement, realignment and signalization issues for the RSF/Questhaven intersec
Intersection channelization and various traffic control devices have been install(
facilitate the movement of traffic at this location and to reduce conflicts. Because (
large daily volumes of traffic on Rancho Santa Fe Road as compared to Questh
Road (20,532 vs 2,445), low intersection collision rate and roadway geometrics
alignment of RSF at this intersection, the Traffic Safety Commission was relucta,
recommend that an ALL-WAY STOP intersection be established. Generally, an ALL-
STOP is considered when traffic volumes on each leg of the intersection
approximately equal. Installing STOP signs on Rancho Santa Fe Road was
recommended by the Commission since rear-end collisions would be expected to c
due to the northbound downgrade, one through traffic lane in each direction, high t
volumes on RSF and relatively high speed of traffic.
>
PAGE TWO OF AB# ,1,3Cta 0
The Commission did recognize that this intersection meets traffic signal warrants i
ranked Number 2 on the 1990 City of Carlsbad Traffic Signal Qualification List. Hov
at this time a funding source has not been established to install the traffic signal.
The decision to install a traffic signal should not be based solely upon war
Evidence of the need to assign the right of way should be demonstrated. In adc
intersection operations also must be evaluated based upon the existing geor
constraints and the feasibility of implementing significant improvements to c(
deficiencies.
Several development scenarios are currently proposed that will result in the ex
intersection being relocated southerly. In addition, other studies are underway thi
result in a modification of the circulation system in the RSF/Questhaven vicinity, {
of these proposals will be evaluated through the environmental impact report prc
currently underway and others will be evaluated through technical studies.
Commission was concerned that installation of a traffic signal at this time would rc
the signal to be removed when roadway realignment and intersection relocation o(
possibility in a very short time frame.
A summary of issues and technical studies currently in progress are summarized b
1. Rancho Santa Fe Road Realignment and Mass Grading Draft EIR.
The EIR discusses potential environmental impacts from the proposed
acre mass grading and road realignment project within a larger 768
Assessment District. It may be possible that grading of the site (
begin during 1992.
2, University Commons Specific Plan Draft EIR.
The University Commons Specific Plan consists of two discontinl
pieces of land situated in San Marcos, the easterly portion of Carlsbac
in some unincorporated potions of the County of San Diego. The sit1
encompass 450 acres and includes the realignment of RSF and reloc;
of the RSF/Questhaven intersection.
3. Rancho Santa Fe Road/Questhaven Road Intersection.
This intersection has been considered for a grade separation due to
high turning movement volumes projected in the future. The City 01
Marcos will contract with a consultant to examine this issue and coord
findings and decisions with the City of Carlsbad.
4. Mid-County Technical Committee.
For the past several years, SANDAG has coordinated this study of
County circulation issues and has included the participating citie
Carlsbad, Encinitas, Poway, Dei Mar, Solana Beach, City of San Diego
the County of San Diego. One major issue is the future dispositic
Melrose Drive, currently on the Circulation Element of the City of Carls
> I e PAGE THREE OF AB# 11; 3y0 0
and expected to continue into Encinitas. However, the City of Enc
has eliminated Melrose Drive from their Circulation Element. Thr
County Technical Committee is examining two alternatives east€
Rancho Santa Fe Road that would provide an alternative north.
roadway from SR 78 to SR 56. The new alignment impacts the
Rancho Santa Fe Road and Questhaven Road intersection, The c
of the intersection is a major consideration due to the volumes that
be expected to use a new north-south roadway easterly of Rancho
Fe Road.
5. SA-680 Connection to Rancho Santa Fe Road.
The City of Encinitas is preparing a Supplemental EIR to addres
Melrose Drive extension into Encinitas and the need for SA-680 connc
to Rancho Santa Fe Road. This EIR and decisions therefrom will ir
the RSF corridor, including the RSF/Questhaven intersection.
Within four to six months, more detailed information will be available regardir
development potential of the area, potential resolution of circulation issue
time schedules, the possibility of reconstructing Rancho Santa Fe Road ar
feasibility of relocating the Questhaven Road intersection. The above disc1
corridors changes will occur.
studies result in many uncertainties at this time as to if and when roi
Although this intersection experiences heavy daily volumes the collision h
does not indicate deficiencies to be immediately corrected by a traffic signal
that reason, the Traffic Safety Commission, by a 5-0 vote, recommended th
action be taken at this time regarding the installation of a traffic signal i
RSF/Questhaven Road intersection. However, the Commission did unanim
recommend that this item be reconsidered by the Traffic Safety Commission
months when, hopefully, additional information will be available and the rt
of many of the studies will be known.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No impact if a traffic signal is not installed.
EXHIBITS;
1. Vicinity Map.
2. Condition Diagram.
3. Minutes of August 5, 1991 TSC meeting.
4. Appeal form dated August 13, 1991 from Linda Ankrom.
5. Letter from Linda Ankrom dated May 26, 1991.
e 0
VICINITY MAP
Ln I
I”.
OLIVENHAIN RD,
PROJECT NAME: RANCHO SANTA FE RD, AND EXHIl
QUESTHAVEN RD, INTERSECTION 1
@ 0
I CUNDITILIN DIAGRAM
LEGEND
A. 6” A,C, BERM
B. 4” SOLID WHITE EDGE LINE C, 4” DOUBLE YELLOW MEDIAN LINE
D. 4” SOLID WHITE LANE LINE E. TYPE IV ARROWS
F, 8” SOLID WHITE (L) CHANNELIZING LINE
G. LT. TURN CENTER MEDIAN DIVIDER H. RT, TURN MEDIAN DIVIDER I. 12” STOP BAR
J. “STOP“ PAVEMENT LEGEND
STOP (SIGN)
TRUCK ROUTE W/ARROW
SPEED CHECKED BY RADAR
NO TRUCK (SYMBOL)
OVER 7 TUNS (SIGN)
R-20B R-20D I
P d
FIELD REVIE‘
JULY 18 , 19‘ 6bb & 6h
PROJECT NAME; RANCHO SANTA FE RD, EXHI: AND QUESTHAVEN RD, 2
0 MINUTES.
Meeting of: TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION
Time of Meeting: 3:OO p.m.
Date of Meeting: August 5, 1991
Place of Meeting: City Council Chambers y o,,
COMMISSIONERS * Q
Chairman Fuller called the Meeting to order at 3r00 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Commissioners Fuller, Blake, Melideo, Rifkin and
Stachoviak.
Absent: None.
Staff Members Present: Bob Johnson, Traffic Engineer
Sgt, Don Metcalf, Police Department
Chairman Fuller welcomed Commissioner Rifkin, who was
appointed to replace Commissioner O'Day.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
The Minutes of the Regular Meeting held June 3, 1991, were
approved as amended on page 2 under New Business, second
paragraph to state that Chairman Fuller asked the question.
Fuller
Blake
Melideo Rifkin
Stachoviak
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: I I
There were no requests to address the Commission on a non-
agenda item.
OLD BUSINESS: I I
Bob Johnson gave an update on Pontiac Drive, stating this
matter was appealed to the City Council. Staff was directed
to return with an ordinance to place an all-way stop sign at
the Victoria and Spokane Way intersections. The Ordinance
was adopted July 9, 1991, and will take effect Thursday,
August 8, 1991, and the work order has been issued for the
signs.
Mr. Johnson congratulated Commissioner Fuller on his
reappointment to the Commission for a two-year term and
Commissioner Mark Rifkin on his appointment to the
Comiss ion.
NEW BUSINESS:
A. Rancho Santa Fe RoadIQuesthaven Road Intersection -
Request to establish an ALL-WAY STOP or to install a
traffic signal.
I
Bob Johnson gave the staff report, stating Linda Ankrom
had requested this matter be brought before the
Commission. A transparency was used to show the
vicinity and slides were shown of the intersection. He
stated that the data included in the packet was
complete and he had nothing to add to that. There is
heavy traffic at this intersection at the present time,
but the collision rate is low. Traffic signal warrants
are met at this location.
e MINUTES!
\ \'
August 5, 1991 TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION Page 2
COMMlSSlQN€RS
However, since that intersection is proposed for
relocation and a grade separation is being considered,
staff did not feel funds should be spent on a signal
for an interim period. Therefore, staff recommended
the request be re-considered by the Traffic Safety
Commission in six months.
Chairman Fuller stated that it would probably be a year
before a signal would be installed there, as staff
indicated the funding would have to be appropriated.
Linda Ankram, 20089 Elfin Forest Lane, Elfin Forest, a
Member of the Elfin Forest Town Council, presented
photographs taken this morning at 10:30 a.m. and gave
them to the Commissioners for their perusal. Ms.
Ankrom explained how this intersection presents blind
turns and how the trash trucks have difficulty making
the sharp turn. She also stated the arrows are not
brightly painted anymore and the merge area involves
vehicles that are traveling 50 or 60 m.p.h. Ms. Ankrom
said that two stop signs with lots of warning could
help all the lanes.
In reply to Commission query as to the responsibility
for this intersection, Mr. Johnson stated it is
entirely Carlsbad's responsibility.
Chairman Fuller stated there is no "quick fix" for this
intersection, as any installation of signals would be a
construction scenario.
!
I
The Traffic Safety Commission approved the Traffic
Rifkin at Rancho Santa Fe RoadfQuesthaven Road in six months.
Melideo consider this request for a Stop sign or traffic signal
Blake Safety Coordinating Committee recommendation to re-
Fuller
Stachoviak
B.
Bob Johnson ed the Commiss
Resolution o ndation for fo issioner Pat
The Traffic Safety C opted the Resolution of
Commendation for for ioner Pat O'Day.
Fuller
Blake
Melideo
Ri f kin
Stachoviak
C.
choviak was unanimou
er Melideo was unanimously electe
son for the coming year,
* e
1200 ELM AVENUE
hK"BAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 l>i ! \ I r: _._I \.'. 'I (619) 434-
Office of the City Clerk
L. , ... ' : ,:.,I,. .! . . ,,..?!.\ I . . ' l.,.-i..{ ('.,I ',,j ,'i ', \' .\ 1- . TELEPH(
n\ ;y', 13 ; /, _. .' !
,., . ! 1,;. r? a
.I
(jJifM af aarlabdb :;::- !;;,;.;! .s:.)fi,!>
APPEAL FORM
1 (we) appeal the following decision of the "Praf s;c S&+J
cow bIiss;on to the City Counc
Project Name and Number (or subject of appeal): anch, San+a Fe
Date of Decision: k~s.5-t- T, Ig9l
Reason for Appeal : hi3 ;S an drerncz-lv d4r?q~d~~ ;yl+~.~c
a;+; 9VO 5ix ! morlths IS -q 'c ustrq-t-i 03 an
$.9A.+m;n 9 . TI& +pq+Xtc acc;dm+- C~~YI+ ~pe-
J
t
\ I~CM+& dye b ST, mqn q 44mcr &S rvQdin4. Z'W
Plod rescard in a e IS5M 4 * 1
x- ls-41 &4d Date Signature
Lid4 An kraq Name (Please Print)
Loo87 ElS;, F0res-b )-<ne Address
EK. 6re5'f' I , CA ?262?
356-5360
Tel ephone Number
1.
.w i \+ e.
MAY 2'9 1991
EERING ~~~A~~~~~~ May 26, l!:
Mr. Bob Johnson - Traffic Safety Engineer
City of Carlsbad -
1200' Carlsbad Village Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008 i! Rick & Linda Mkrorn \ . -. . .tnws~ E\nn For& we \', I mn Forest, CA 92029
I Dear Mr. Johnson,
We have been traveling Rancho Santa Fe Road and Questhaven Road f
eleven years. It is now extremely dangerous and impossible to fc
safe while utilizing this intersection. For the following reasor please install a signal or stop signs as soon as possible.
.. . ,_... .. - .. .
1. The traffic count warrants a signal.
2. The traffic often exceeds 55 M.P.H..
3. ' The heavy truck traffic blocks views both to the nor
and south.
4, Driver behavior cannot be predicted due to confusion ov
the short stretch of musual FAST/SLOW and SLOW/FA lanes (the southbound left lane on Rancho Santa Fe Ro
is the slow lane for autos turning onto the road, and t
right lane is for traffic which is already traveling
high speed).
5, Drivers are passing within the intersection by utilizi the merge lane.
6. It is very difficult to estimate the speed of northbou
traffic approaching the intersection because most ca
are accelerating while coming down the hill.
7. Numerous trucks have overturned due to excess speed, t
terrain, and perhaps confusion at this intersection.
8. Southbound traffic on Rancho Santa Fe Road is n beginning to back up to the Melrose intersection due
the large number of trucks turning left onto Questhavl
Road but must wait for right-of-way.
1
. -. .
-e P 0 e
*
9. Recently, I have been frightened, frustrated a
endangered when turning south behind the Coast Was
Management Trucks. Many times, the trucks immediate
went to the right "FAST" lane. This creates a re
dangerous situation. I am correctly utilizing the S1
left lane, so we both block the fast traffic in the rip lane. If this is difficult to understand, try drivi it!
I am writing this with a positive attitude, hoping that stop sig and warning lights will be installed immediately as an inter
solution until developers' funds will finance signal lights. Th intersection is chaotic! Please help us to avoid furth
accidents.
Sincerely,
J >$& Q&Ld
Linda Ankrom
.. . ,_ . "_ .- . . . .. - . . . - . . __ . - . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . , . - . - .
2
&-k ww 2- of. tk+ & c';cv c. W,,,'aPdAk. & 6 dzJ*'
a &* September 10, 19!
(2.1 7% ma
7 A* +y?&%&a~+ "%-
Wb .)(pe+,&&C;+&
City Council F -*
City of Carlsbad Y+"
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008 #TL&
Dear City Council Members,
After studying the decision of the Traffic Safety Commission a]
the situation? it seems that the key issues are; (1) the cost (
the signal, and (2) who bears the cost of installation.
The Traffic Safety Commission has identified this intersection 2
the #2 priority for a signal. However, they would prefer to wai
for developers to pay for the installation. Waiting for tl University Commons or Fieldstone develapments will take a minim7
of three-to-five years. This is simply too long to wait.
The intersection in question is located in the spheres of Carlsbac
San Marcos, and the unincorporated area of the County of San Diegc
There are potentially many sources of revenue to help pay for th: signal such as; (1) Fieldstone, (2) University Commons, (3) S; Elijo Ranch, (4) San Marcos Landfill expansion mitigation fund, ar
(5) Encina Cornposting Plant mitigation fund. It would seem thz
the signal could be installed now with financing provided by tl
City of Carlsbad, and repayment to the City of Carlsbad would 1
made in the future by various sources as development progresses
I request you to take one or more of the following actions:
- Direct staff to install the signal by establishing a repayme:
- Direct staff to investigate potential sources of repayment a1
- Direct staff to organize a meeting with the City of San Marcc
account.
report back to the City Council within 30 days.
and the County of San Diego to discuss the shared expense 4 installing the signal and report .back to the Cit ,o.uu
within 30 days. FOR THE INFORMMIOE Y THE CIN cow
&
Sincerely? -1- CIM MA!
Linda Ankrom
20089 Elfin Forest Lane
Elfin Forest, CA 92029
0
September 13, 1991
TO: CITY MANAGER
OR THE INFOF;MAT:ON OF
a4 *%
FROM: Traffic Engineer
APPEAL, OF TSC RECOMMENDATION - RSF/QUES"HA.
I spoke with Linda Ankrom on September 11, 1991 over the telephone about the lette
requesting a continuance of. her appeal. She indicated that she definitely wants to haw
the appeal heard by the City Council. She further indicated that a meeting in Octobe
would be acceptable to her. I asked her to send you a letter when she is prepared t
address the'city Council and that you would schedule the matter at a future meeting. Sh
understood it would be several weeks after she sends a letter before the item would appe:
on the City Council agenda and that you would schedule the matter at an approprial
meeting when all Council Members are present.
e!*v"LL- h"
ROBERT T. JO SON, JR., P.E.
Traffic Engineer
RTJ:rz
c: Community Development Director
City Engineer
* && $2 "&y" "+w
~.&.'&v/ng(A& &L t uA%#J&/
A++
LI r$l /IIWi C~7"t/ e/e
7 tp4&k&&wLwfi 7- " * &+r;&&&+ fi axrz. #- September 10, 1991
City Council r- -. City of Carlsbad r'
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008 /Y-
Dear City Council Members,
After studying the decision of the Traffic Safety Commission and
the situation, it seems that the :key issues are; (1) the cost of
the signal, and (2) who bears the cost of installation.
The Traffic Safety Commission has identified this intersection as
the #2 priority for a signal. However, they would prefer to wail
for developers to pay for the i.nstallation. Waiting for tht
University Commons or Fieldstone developments will take a minimum
of three-to-five years. This is simply too long to wait.
The intersection in question is located in the spheres of Carlsbad,
San Marcos, and the unincorporated area of the County of San Diego'
There are potentially many sources of revenue to help pay for this
signal such as; (1) Fieldstone, (2) University Commons, (3) Sar Elijo Ranch, (4) San Marcos Landfill expansion mitigation fund, an(
(5) Encina Composting Plant mitig,ation fund. It would seem thai
the signal could be installed now with financing provided by tht
City of Carlsbad, and repayment to the City of Carlsbad would bt
made in the future by various sources as development progresses.
I request you to take one or more of the following actions:
- Direct staff to install the signal by establishing a repaymen-
account.
- Direct staff to investigate potential sources of repayment anc
report back to the City Council within 30 days.
- Direct staff to organize a meeting with the City of San Marco:
and the County of San Diego to discuss the shared expense o installing the signal and report back to the City Counci
within 30 days,
Sincerely,
&A &
Linda Ankrom
20089 Elfin Forest Lane
Elfin Forest, CA 92029
August 22, 1991
Linda Ankrom
20089 Eltin Forest Lane
Elfin Forest, CA 92029
APPEAL OF TSC REXO"F.NDAnON
Your appeal filed with the City Clerk regarding the Traffic Safety Commission (TSC)
recommendation for the RSF/Questhaven intersection has been fGrwarded to me for action.
This matter has been tentatively scheduled to be considered by the City Council at their
September 17, 1991 meeting.
The City Council meeting begins at 6:OO P.M. arid is held in the Council Chambers located
at 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive (Elm Avenue). To address the City Council on this item you
must M out a Request to Speak form at the meeting. To confirm that this matter is on the
agenda of September 17,1991 you can contact the City Clerk's office on Friday, September
13, 1991 or myself.
If you have any questions please call me at 438-1161, extension 4394. p/ D ,;+--?" ! -&ii...... d ,.I &,
ROBERT T. JOHNSON, m., P.E.
Traffic Engineer
RTJ:rz
c: Community Development Director
City Engineer City Clerk
2075 Las Palmas Drive - Carlsbad, California 92009-1519 - (619) 438-1 161
0 0
1
1200 ELM AVENUE TELEPHf CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 (619) 434-
Office of the Citv Clerk Mifa Df Marlsttab ~~~~~
d.
DATE : 8/13/91 AUG 14 1991
!L.p! * Ty 6 1 (+$I: rTfhy ~*.~,%k$;$~..& I f~ p 3 p PC? rp rr ur$@&xg!p$G ~~&,&~"<pr
L L LAG k I;= c , <&yjL
TO : Bob Johnson, Traffic Engineer
FROM : Karen Kundtz, Assistant City Clerk
RE : Rancho Santa Fe Rd/Ouesthaven Rd Intersection
THE ABOVE ITEM HAS BEEN APPEALED TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
According to the Municipal Code, appeals must be heard by the City Council
within 30 days of the date that the appeal was filed. (REMINDER: The item
will not be noticed in the newspaper until the agenda bill is signed off by
- all parties.)
Please process this item in accordance with the procedures contained in the
Agenda Bill Preparation Manual. If you have any questions, please call.
.......................................
The appeal of the above matter sh cheduled for the City Council
Meeting of Sf?-?i%fiEEK
L(.I"T. I
pcz p-.
Signature L Date I I '.
jz& 0?Th
&e &/ 4f fi?+,
0. 0
1200 ELM AVENUE
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008
Oflice of fhe City Clerk aitp luf aarlsbnb
DATE : 8/13/91
TECEPH
(6 19) 434-
TO : Bob Johnson, Traffic Engineer "
FROM : Karen Kundtz, Assistant City Clerk
RE : Rancho Santa Fe RdlQuesthaven Rd Intersection
THE ABOVE ITEM MS BEEN APPEALED TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
According to the Municipal Code, appeals must be heard by the City Council
within 30 days of the date that the appeal was filed. (REMINDER: The item
will not be noticed in the newspaper until the agenda bill is signed off by
all parties.)
Please process this item in accordance with the procedures contained in the
Agenda Bill Preparation Manual. If you have any questions, please call.
......................................
The appeal of the above matter should be scheduled for the City Council
Meeting of
Signature Date
* 0 0
1200 ELM AVENUE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008
I. - . .~ .. . ,... - -.
. ." , I <" $ .."... . -1 : I . . '1 .. : TELEPH ,;. ; i, : .;.-.: -.'. ._ .. - .- -. (619) 434-
:-, ! -7 5 : 'Z f 4 1.
.. ..
.. -. ~ . .. -. ,~ 32 r.
Office of the Citv Clerk . .= . -1. , ... . . - - A/ '
QJitn df aarlBfi.ga- ::; -.: ; :-; :';; -s3$:Q
APPEAL FORM
I (We) appeal the following decision of the TpaCq;~ Sa$e+\
C~M wiss;dn to the City Counc
Project Name and Number (or subject of appeal): un~he, 5ah-t-a Fe
bad ues+havexl Road xn+evsect-;on - Reo ues + +e
J
~S+~\O:<EG\ aa AL-L-WAY SOP ep to inst.al[ Q Pa<% c
Date of Decision: uak.:+ T, 1441
Reason for Appeal : IT IS ~n &rem& d4a20erus ;n-kr.~ t
*I 1-t-l.no svlo+b six unar(th is &'ou&ra"rioa 4nd
$r\ah?mi n 9 . %e ?rQF-F'ic acccdm+ ~t,an+ seem
\r\car-p& due b s 'o man u samCr es r-n "d ;oq. X'W
r
MbH) ~esearch in a e E5lA e.
53- 13-41 &?& r& Date Signature
r
Lid4 An kram Name (Please Print)
200 8 7 EI% Forest- kne
Address
Ers;, 6res-k , c/ct 9.aslP
3%-5360
Telephone Number
4 _” ~
.& -r RECE~~ED i)
MAY 2’9 1991
CITY OF CARLSBAD ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT May 26, 19
Mr. Bob Johnson - Traffic Safety Engineer
City of Carlsbad
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive
-
Carlsbad, CA 92008 ~
!\ ____ .-*k&mmkmm m €\tin F& Lane 92029 \’; w Forest, CA , Dear Mr. Johnson,
We have been traveling Rancho Santa Fe Road and Questhaven Road f
eleven years. It is now extremely dangerous and impossible to fe
safe while utilizing this intersection. Forthe following reason
please install a signal or stop signs as soon as possible.
._” . .. ” . _”.- .
1. The traffic count warrants a signal.
2. The traffic often exceeds 55 M.P.H..
3. The heavy truck traffic blocks views both to the nor
and south.
4. Driver behavior cannot be predicted due to confusion ov
the short stretch of unusual FAST/SLOW and SLOW/FA
lanes (the southbound left lane on Rancho Santa Fe Ro
is the slow lane for autos turning onto the road, and t
right lane is for traffic which is already traveling high speed).
5. Drivers are passing within the intersection by utilizi
the merge lane.
6. It is very difficult to estimate the speed of northboc
traffic approaching the intersection because most c8
are accelerating while coming down the hill.
7. Numerous trucks have overturned due to excess speed, t
terrain, and perhaps confusion at this intersection.
8. Southbound traffic on Rancho Santa Fe Road is r
beginning to back up to the Melrose intersection due
the large number of trucks turning left onto Questha1 Road but must wait for right-of-way.
1
c /.
4 -4 e e
9. Recently, I have been frightened, frustrated a
endangered when turning south behind th.e Coast Was
Management Trucks. Many times, the trucks immediate
went to the right "FAST" lane. This creates a re
dangerous situation. I am correctly utilizing the S1
left lane, so we both block the fast traffic in the rig
lane. If this is difficult to understand, try drivi
it!
I am writing this with a positive attitude, hoping that stop sig and warning lights will be installed immediately as an inter
solution until developers' funds will finance signal lights. Th
intersection is chaotic! Please help us to avoid furth
accidents.
Sincerely,
J1;L idL &Ld
Linda Ankrom
.. . .~ . ."_ ." . - . . . . ". ." -. .~ """. ,_.,._ ". . . - - _. - .". . . . .
2