Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994-10-25; City Council; 12918; ESTABLISH A PRIMA FACIE 25 MILE PER HOUR SPEED LIMIT UPON CHATHAM ROAD FROM CARLSBAD VILLAGE DRIVE TO TAMARACH AVENUE** m o\ c\l I m z d z Q) g FI k a L) .rl a 0 Q) ; -a k o c, G .rl r-l *r( 2 2 u z 0 i= 0 a d z 3 0 0 i I c^ I- - mTY OF CARLSBAD - AWDA BILL -- AB# /2!Gl/8 TITLE: ESTABLISH A PRIMA FACIE DEPT. MTG. 10/25/94 25 MILE PER HOUR SPEED LIMIT UPON CITY i CITY 1 GHATHAM ROAR FROM GARLSBAD VILLAGE DRIVE TO TAMARACK AVENUE bEPT. BE RECOMMENDED ACTION: Introduce Ordinance No. li/S-d85to establish a prima facie 25 mile per hour spe upon Chatham Road from Carlsbad Village Drive to Tamarack Avenue. ITEM EXPLANATION: Chatham Road is a local street approximately 0.30 miles long located in a mut residential area north of Carlsbad Village Drive and west of Tamarack Avenue. I curvilinear alignment with 200 foot centerline radii curves which conforms to minimL street standards. Staff received a citizen request to investigate establishing a prima facie speed lin Chatham Road between Carlsbad Village Drive and Tamarack Avenue. Chathar provides the only public access to a condominium complex. Because it connects C Elementary School. A school crossing exists at Tamarack Avenue and some pare this area as a drop-off and pick-up location for school children. Sections 22357 and 22358 of the California Vehicle Code authorizes local autha establish a prima facie speed limit on the basis of the results of an Engineering an1 Survey. The Engineering and Traffic Survey considers such factors as the nul collisions that have occurred on the road segment, roadway features, traffic VI pedestrian volumes, adjacent land uses, driveway locations, critical speed, conditic may not be readily apparent to the driver, horizontal and vertical alignment, stoppi distance and superelevation. The horizontal curves on Chatham Road were evalui criteria in the Caltrans Traffic Manual and 25 miles per hour was found to be the m "comfortable speed" for the roadway. Staff presented the results of the Engineering and Traffic Survey to the Traffic Commission at their August 1, 1994 meeting. By a 3-0 vote, the Corn recommended that a prima facie 25 mile per hour speed limit be establishe Chatham Road from Carlsbad Village Drive to its intersection with Tamarack Ave Village Drive to Tamarack Avenue, it is used by some as an alternate route tl FISCAL IMPACT: Installation of two (2) speed limit signs will cost approximately $250.00. EXHIBITS: 1. Location map. 2. Ordinance No. A/S-R% to establish a prima facie 25 mile per hour speed lir Chatham Road from Carlsbad Village Drive to Tamarack Avenue. 1 0 0 HOPE ELEMENTARY Ill 11~1lllll~Allll 1 I~~~II11I~II~IlIllII~~~~ ~ll~~l~llll !I I" Ill r i 1 2 3 EXHIBIT 2 m e ORDINANCE NO. NS-295 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSEA CALIFORNIA, AMENDING TITLE 10, CHAPTER 10.44, OF THE CARLSBI MUNICIPAL CODE BY THE ADDITION OF SECTION 10.44.480 TO ESTABLISC- PRIMA FACIE 25 MILE PER HOUR SPEED LIMIT UPON CHATHAM ROAD FRC 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 l3 '* 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DRIVE TO ITS INTERSECTION WITH TAMARACK AVENU WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, hereby ordains t SECTION 1: That Title 10, Chapter 10.44, of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is by the addition of Section 10.44.480 to read as follows: '10.44.480 Chatham Road: Upon Chatham Road from Carlsbad Village Drive to its intersection with Avenue, the prima facie speed limit shall be twenty-five miles per hour.' EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall be effective thirty (30) days after its adc the City Clerk, City of Carlsbad, shall certify to the adoption of this ordinance and cau published at least once in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Carlst: fifteen (15) days after its adoption. INTRODUCED AND FIRST READ at a regular meeting of said City Council h 25th day of OCTOBER , 1994, and thereafter, PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Carlsbad Ci held on the day of , 1994 by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: CLAUDEA. LEWIS, Mayor ATTEST: . ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ, City Clerk (SEAL) L a. e. 7 1' L July 26, 1994 TO : Traffic Safety Commission FROM : City Attorney CHINQUAPIN AVENUE/HIGHLAND DRIVE INTERSECTION The purpose of this memorandum is to discuss the Traffic Safet Commission recommendation of May 2, 1994 regarding sight distanc mitigation on the Jubb property located at the reference intersection. Mr. Jubb has cut down the pine tree and no furthe action will be required regarding removal of vegetation. There are circumstances throughout the City where vegetation c trees are growing in the ownerls perceived '*front yard" but, j reality, is in the public right-of-way. If a complaint is receivc about limited sight distance, the problem is resolved. Howevei all the vegetation in the right-of-way, or "perceived front yarc is not removed to achieve sight distance. Generally, once tl vegetation is removed to achieve corner sight distance per Cil standards, no additional trimming or removal is necessary. To c so would result in unnecessary expense on the part of the City wii very limited public benefit. Excessive removals certainly wou: cause much consternation on the part of the property owner, and tl question as to why this individual is being singled out for speci: and unusually harsh treatment could be raised. We do not expec the public right-of-way in front of a home to be free of vegetatic or trees throughout Carlsbad. A harmonious balance must I achieved between the homeowners' tranquility and the public neet for safety. The Caltrans Highway Design Manual states in Section 405.1 tha "In some cases the cost to obtain 7% seconds corner sight distan may be excessive. High costs might include right-of-way, buildi: removal, extensive excavation, or environmental costs such as tr removal, avoidance of wetlands, historic, and archaeological site In such cases, a lesser value for corner sight distance may used, but the minimum value shall be the stopping sig distance..." The above is based upon a driver setback of 15 feet from the ed of the traveled way. Recognizing the unique aspects of stre corners in the City of Carlsbad, and all the urban forms of livi associated with corners that include trees, vegetation, wall utility boxes and other fixed structures, City standards allow t edge of pavement to be used to determine driver setback on loc residential roads. In this case, the position of the driver wou be eight feet from the edge of pavement. Roadways with a higk circulation element classification are evaluated more stringent] of course. b 1. 0. e@ Staff has checked the corner sight distance after the tree was CUI based upon the referenced City standard for a local residentia: additional vegetation removal is necessary. The Traffic Safety Commission recommendation would allow for i higher standard of mitigation than necessary for a local roac intersecting a collector road. Because City of Carlsbad standardr are achieved at this location, our duty to protect the public health, safety, and welfare has been met. Only in specia: circumstances would we want to exceed City standards. I have, therefore, advised the City Clerk to cancel the appea: request, refund the appellant's fees and take no further action 01 the matter at this time. Should you have any questions regarding the above, please do noi hesitate to contact me. road, Corner sight distanse is achieved and exceeded and nc P RONALD R, BALL City Attorney rmh c: City Manager City Clerk Community Development Director City Engineer Traffic Engineer 6"- 1-73- RECEIF JUL 13 I! m 0 Jim Murray WGlNEERiM Traffic Operation Section OEPARTMEt 2075 Las Palmas Dr. Carlsbad, Calif. 92009-1576 Dear Mr. Murray, To date, I have received no notification about a meeting to hc the issue of my corner of Highland and Chinquapin. It has be( over 6 to 8 weeks which I feel is sufficient. Therefore, I am requesting the return of my $120. deposit. Thank you for your time and consideration about this issue. 2iy, ~, William &&&.W S. Jub 3993 Highlan Carlsbad, alif. 92008 7120194 Note to File: According to staff (Jim Murray), this matter has been resolved, and the item will not go forward to the City Council. has requested that his appeal fee be refunded. Therefore, the appellant Karen Vendor No. 0 REQUEST FOR REFUND 0 ' Account No. 001-810-0000-8839 Amount of Refund $120.00 Fee Paid For: Appeal of Traffic Safety Commission Deci Date Fee Paid: 5110194 ree Paid By: William Jubb Facts supporting Request: The matter has been resolved and will not go to Council. Appellant has requested that the appeal fee be refunded. Name of Applicant: Wi11iam Jubb Address: 3993 Highland Dr., Carlsbad, CA 92008 Street City State Zip Telephc _______-_____ . --- __ ______c____-__ ---.___- _- ---- ---. - --. .. '\ .. -, .. CITY OF CARLSBAD 1200 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 434-2867 DESCRIPTION NOT VALID UNLESS VALIDATED BY CASH REGISTER @ Printed on recycled paper 0 0 c-'. 'c ' A, 1200 ELM AVENUE TELEF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 (619) 4: 0,fice of the Cify Clerk Mitu of Mnrlsbab DATE : May 10, 1994 TO : Bob Johnson, Traffic Engineer FROM : Karen Kundtz, Assistant City Clerk RE : Traffic Safety Commission Decision Re Tree and Shrubs on corner of Chinquapin and Highland e 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 b - all parties.) Please process this item in accordance with the procedures contained in th 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 3 UAe 7, /99+ I 5 //9.& Date I" I 0 0 1200 ELM AVENUE TELEPI- CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 (619) 434 Office of fhe City Clerk @Q af Marlabab DATE : May 10, 1994 TO : Bob Johnson, Traffic Engineer FROM : Karen Kundtz, Assistant City Clerk RE : Traffic Safety Commission Decision Re Tree and Shrubs on corner of Chinquapin and Highland . 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 should be scheduled for the City Council Meeting of Signature Date 0 0 William S. Jubb of 3993 Highland Drive in Carlsbad is requesti that the full City Council review and find null and void an action rendered by the Traffic Safety Commission on May 2, 199 for plant removal on Highland Drive. x I# ' " /- / --- #*.# &*' William S. Jubb 3993 Highland Drive Carlsbad, Calif. 92008 Page , of9 0 0 Short Form Statement of Salient Issues; Re: Invalid Traffic Safety Commission Decision Rendered on the Pine Tree and shrubs on the corner of Chinquapin and Highland. The decision rendered by the Traffic Safety Commission was bas on spite, bias, an invalid original complaint, unreasonable expansion of City requirements, done in a purely vindictive manner and designed for harassment only; thus the decision and vote of the Traffic Safety Commission to remove the pine tree other shrubs from the Highland site is invalid and should be overturned. The decision is invalid for the following reasons: 1. One of the board members accused me of having concrete my property "four" years ago that he thought it was removed at the expense City of Carlsbad . This had nothing to do with th issue before the Traffic Safety Commission. This Board member continued to pursue this issue even after my statement to the contrary. 2. The staff from the City of Carlsbad stated that the si requirement for a field of vision is 275 feet. One of the members of the Traffic Safety Commission then stated that he f that code was not sufficient and that he wanted to increase it beyond what is normally required. This site expansion was neb discussed and I had no opportunity to object to this line of thought. (I had come to the meeting to discuss one pine tree two rocks and now the Board wants me to re-landscape the High1 side of my property.) This Board member then placed this inva motion on the floor and had it voted upon. The board then vote to increase the field of vision beyond what was normally required. The City Codes were not changed to encompass this r field of vision requirement. 3. A Board member stated that traffic on Highland goes "fast" and that is the reason for the increased site requireme It is prima facia that this is a residential area. The speed requirement and the field of vision is sufficient to comply wi is unnecessary and unreasonable. (If the Board is aware of increased speeds in the area; maybe the Board should work tow2 the reduction of the speed in that area and not the removal of plants. 1 City requirements. Any further expansion of these requirement Page tof 9 0 4. I requested information on individual that had filed t complaint about the pine tree and the field of vision. I stat that I have lived in the property for over ten years and I hav never had any such complaint. I was then informed by a member the Board that he had filed the complaint, I received no copy the complaint. I believe that I should have received a copy o the complaint if a member of the board files the complaint and that individual is going to sit in judgement on the issue. The individual that filed the original complaint is a board member This board member then voted on the decision. I went to the Traffic Safety Commission to get a fair and impartial decision about a pine tree on Highland and find that the individual tha file the complaint is on the Traffic Safety Board, he puts a large amount of input into the decision making process and the he does not abstain from voting. 6. Board members continued to pursue the concept of "owne expense" in a vindictive manner after I had assented to the pi tree removal. This issue expanded from the pine tree to the entire side of my yard without justification. The City staff stated what was normal and members of the Board still continue the "owner expense" issue as a punishment and as a harassment. 7. If the street was in alignment, my pine tree would not in issue. The south side of Highland comes 2 to 4 feet furthe into the roadway. (See the attached photos.) 8. A Board member stated that on Saturday, April 30, 1994 he had been inconvenienced by 3 (three) yard sales in my area that plant removal would help. My plants have nothing to do k my neighbor's yard sales. It would seem that because of this statement and others, that this Board member came to the heari predisposed because of his inconvenience. For the reason stated infra; spite, bias, erroneous expansion the complaint, invalid expansion site maintenance above what i required by the City, and improper use of review powers by members of the Board, I am requesting that the original complaint, the findings and the vote and action required by tk Board be found null and void. This is a short form statement and should more action be required, I would like to expand my statement in the future. William S. Jubb 3993 Highland Drive Carlsbad, Calif. 92008 z e& t , a e Reason For Wanting To Retain Vegetation. Since the opening Carpi Development, there has been a dramatic increase in traffic and noise on Highland at all hours of the as motorist head toward the freeway on ramps; the vegetation alone Highland is there €or a reason. The four main reasons are as follows: 1. Noise abatement from cars. 2. Light abatement from car head lights entering the hous 3. Form a natural wall for car speeds around the cornor. 4. Inhibit the parking of automobiles near the cornor of Chinquapin and Highland. Removal of all the plants ar shrubs from the site will create more parking on Highland. Highland Drive is know for the trees and plants. PageFof w 0 e *. February 9, 1994 Jim Murray City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Dr. Carlsbad, Calif. 92009-1576 Re: Pine Tree on Highland and Chinquapin Corner Dear Mr. Murray, Your letter of Jan. 25, 1994 for the removal of my pine tree o the corner of my lot; I want to question this finding. I beli the tree has been of no problem for the ten or more years that has been in that location. Therefore, I requesting that the Traffic Safety Commission to consider this issue. Photos of the site will be forwarded up0 request. I do not want the tree removed. I am also requesting the identification of the individual that has requested the removal of the tree. Thank you for your time and consideration about this issue. William S. Jubb 3993 Highland Carlsbad, Calif. 92008 Page 4 of pjp (RJ OQ Action Statelnent. It will be my intent 'io remove the pine tree on the cornor of Chinqv.apin an6 Highiand. permitted at this time. I believe that there is sufficient merit on this question that have to be resolved. No further plant removal wiil be William S. Gubb 3993 Highiand Drive Carlsbad, Calif. 92008 Page gof e e L Pp d9 c g d- e 0 '. MEETING NOTICE AND AGENDA CITY OF CARLSBAD TRAFFIC SAFGI71 COMMISSION MQNQAI! MAY 2j 1m CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS - 3:OO P.M. 1200 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DRIVE ............................................................................ 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLLCALL 3 APPROVAL OF MINUTES 4, ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Comments from the audience on items not listed in the agenda will be heard at time; however, no action will be taken by the Commission until the matter is pla on a future agenda. Please limit your comments to three (3) minutes. A total of [5] speakers will be heard. Fifteen minutes is provided for the public corn portion of the Agenda. 5. PREVIOUS BUSINESS 6. lTWiV 3usmm A. Highland Drive and Chinquapin Avenue Intersection - Request for s distance mitigation. Loker Avenue West: Palomar Airport Road to El Fuerte Street - Reque: B. establish a prima facie speed limit. C. Loker Avenue East: El Fuerte Street to Palomar Airport Road - Reque: establish a prima facie speed limit. 7. REPORT FROM TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSIONERS 8. REPORT FROM TRAFFIC ENGINEER CEFfTIFlCATE OF POSTING 1 do hereby certify that a copy of the fore8 agenda Chambers was atjyde PO ted on the door of the cou 9. ADJOURNMENT pm/L ZG, /frp Date Signature #