The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2011-11-08; City Council; 20738 POWERPOINT; LA COSTA AVE STRIPINGLa Costa AvenueDoug Bilse, T.E. La Costa AvenueEl Camino Real to Rancho Santa Fe Road Staff Recommendation•Adopt a resolution approving the La Costa Avenue Interim Striping Plan As‐Built Plans•First reading of ordinance to reduce speed limit on La Costa Avenue from 45 mph to 40 mph•Adopt a resolution to accept the La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan What will be covered in presentation•Background information•Interim Striping and Parking Plan•Proposed 40 mph speed limit•“Before and After” study results•La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan What will be covered in presentation•Background information•Interim Striping and Parking Plan•Proposed 40 mph speed limit•“Before and After” study results•La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan Background Information•Direct driveway access along La Costa Avenue established before annexation in 1972•Current City standards prioritize wider streets to maximize traffic flow•Lawsuit settlement created a clear understanding that traffic safety issues along La Costa Avenue needed immediate resolution•General Plan will introduce complete street concepts Traffic Issues Along La Costa Avenue•Secondary arterial•Residential frontage•Speed•Safety•Emergency response•Bikes and pedestrians•Enforcement Two Simultaneous ApproachesInterim Striping and Parking Plan= Short Term Solution•Address sight distance at driveways•Maintain on‐street parking and left turn access to driveways•Establish enforceable speed limit•Did not include public planning processLa Costa Avenue Improvement Plan= Long Term Solution•Address residential character of road•Improve service to all modes of traffic•Self‐enforcing roadway design•Driven by public planning process What will be covered in presentation•Background information•Interim Striping and Parking Plan•Proposed 40 mph speed limit•“Before and After” study results•La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan Interim Striping and Parking Plan Objectives:Short‐Term Solution•Change the character of the road to enhance driver safety at residential driveways•Interim solution that is quick and cost effective•Reduce critical speed so that an enforceable speed limit can be adopted Interim Striping and Parking Plan•Install speed feedback signs•Install warning signs for hidden driveways•Convert one travel lane into a bike lane + buffer to increase sight distance and improve driveway access Interim Striping and Parking Plan Measuring Success•The interim plans were successfully implemented and changed the character of La Costa Avenue•All driveways now have adequate sight distance for a 40 mph speed zone (i.e., 300 feet)•The critical speed was reduced from 48 mph to 46 mphso that an enforceable speed limit can now be established What will be covered in presentation•Background information•Interim Striping and Parking Plan•Proposed 40 mph speed limit•“Before and After” study results•La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan 40 mph speed limit•The changed character of La Costa Avenue led to a re‐evaluation of the speed limit •Enforceable speed limit= 45 mph•Option for 5 mph reduction to speed limit for conditions not readily apparent to the driver•40 mph speed limit proposed because limited sight distance from driveways not readily apparent to driver•Recommended speed limit is consistent with court findings of an unsafe condition related to limited sight distance Recommended Posted Speed Limit= 40 MPH What will be covered in presentation•Background information•Interim Striping and Parking Plan•Proposed 40 mph speed limit•“Before and After” study results•La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan 3rd‐Party Review of Traffic Impacts:“Before and After” Study•Variations in traffic volumes are not significant enough to indicate that any diversion of traffic has occurred.•The study intersection and study roadway segments operate at acceptable levels of service.•“Therefore, the reduction in capacity on westbound La Costa Avenue does not result in significant traffic impacts on the study intersection or roadway segments.” Before and After Traffic Volumes: A.M. PeakLa Costa Avenue56%Levante St4%Calle Barcelona40%A.M. BeforeLa Costa Avenue56%Levante St4%Calle Barcelona40%A.M. After Before and After Traffic Volumes: P.M. PeakLa Costa Avenue56%Levante St6%Calle Barcelona38%P.M. BeforeLa Costa Avenue56%Levante St8%Calle Barcelona36%P.M. After What will be covered in presentation•Background information•Interim Striping and Parking Plan•Proposed 40 mph speed limit•“Before and After” study results•La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan:Long‐Term Solution Developinga Community Vision•Previous work concluded “road diet” not feasible•Staff reframed issue •Include all stakeholders and all modes of transportation•Re‐evaluate previous report to regain credibility•Reaching consensus more important than finding a technically superior solution Study Objective Approved by City CouncilDevelop a cost effective, community‐preferred plan to address traffic speeds and safety on La Costa Avenue in a way that respects the residential character and arterial function of the roadway La Costa Avenue Planning Process•Community survey (mail and on‐line) engaged community and defined issues•City Website was good tool to keep public updated •3 community workshops developed vision based on stakeholder input•Transparent decision making leads to credible outcome Planning Objectives from Workshops•Increase safety for all users•Design a roadway in keeping with the residential neighborhood•Don’t divert traffic to other residential streets•Develop a cost effective plan Design Options that Meet Planning Objectives•Road Diet (i.e., reduce the number of lanes to one through lane in each direction) to accommodate all modes•Use roundabouts at intersections rather than traffic signals•Use medians and bulb outs to create a curvilinear design to reduce vehicle speed and improve pedestrian safety Design Options (continued)•Maintain on‐street parking in front of residential units where possible•Include bike lanes in both directions•Use landscaping to change the character of the street and reduce speeds•Complete missing sidewalk links West End of Project Area East End of Project Area Photo Simulation of Curb Bulb‐out and Raised Median Photo Simulation of Roundabout Benefits of RoundaboutsSafety•Fewer conflict pointsEnvironment•Lower vehicle emissions/improved air quality Quality of Life•Constant traffic flow promoting self‐enforcing speed limit•Attractive landscaped featureCity Budget•Reduced capital, energy, and maintenance costs ($5,000 per Signal) Roundabouts34 Cost of Improvements and Phasing •The draft plan represents an ultimate vision for La Costa Avenue (Fairway Land –to‐Levante Street)•The estimated cost for the ultimate plan is approximately $3.5‐4.5 million•The city currently has $1 million allocated in CIP for improvements on La Costa Avenue•Additional funding may be available through grants or other funding sources•Improvements could be phased as funding becomes available Phase I:What would a $1M Project Look Like•Entrance statements at each end of corridor•Road diet between Fairway Lane and Levante Street•Re‐alignment of roadway lanes from Romeria Street to Levante Street to restore on‐street parking•A roundabout at Villa Castilla Way Maintenance Costs for Phase I•Annual cost to maintain 4 traffic signals= $20,000•Roughly same maintenance costs of Phase I landscaping Project Status of La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan•La Costa community supports final plans, but there are stakeholders concerned about traffic impacts•Traffic Safety Commission reviewed plan and unanimously recommends City Council approval•City Council acceptance of plan needed•Environmental review required before plan is implemented•Vision needs to be incorporated into General Plan update (e.g., new standards for “complete streets”) Staff Recommendation•Adopt a resolution approving the La Costa Avenue Interim Striping Plan As‐Built Plans•First reading of ordinance to reduce speed limit on La Costa Avenue from 45 mph to 40 mph•Adopt a resolution to accept the La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan Questions Samples of E‐Mail Comments•“With the new lane change, my view east is so much better. I can pull out into the parking lane and see through the curve for hidden cars.”•“We would like to thank you for your efforts in making our street safer and more pleasant to live on… it’s a lot easier to get in and out of our driveway.”•“I am very pleased about the long term proposal for La Costa Ave being reduced to two lanes…”•“Thank you so much for all the hard work you've done on the La Costa Ave road project.” E‐Mail comments (con’t)•“The Speed Advisory signs seemed to be very effective...”•“Just a short note to say THANKS… it is so easy to be in and out the driveway now since we have the bike lane and the half lane space!!!”•“Wow! We can back out all the way and not worry...”•“This is just a note to thank you and your Department very, very much for reducing the traffic and speed...”•“…you have made the bicycle lane much safer for the bikers...” Project Status of La Costa Avenue Interim Striping Plan•February 8, 2011 City Council directed staff to implement interim striping plan•June 6, 2011 Traffic Safety Commission recommends City Council approval of interim striping plan•June 28, 2011 City Council approves interim striping plan and directs staff to implement plan•July‐August, 2011 staff implements interim striping plan•City Council needs to approve as‐built plans La Costa Avenue Improvement Project (Carlsbad City Council) Steve Linke http://sites.google.com/site/lacostacommuters SLINKE.CLC@GMAIL.COM November 8, 2011 SPEED LIMIT REDUCTION •Sight distance allegedly insufficient at 7-10 driveways –Tight-radius curves (red areas) –Small isolated areas •Likely only ~10% below recommended distance •Staff does not have (or will not share) detailed results •Numerous warning signs installed, including speed advisories, at the locations Motorcycle accident Speed limit reduction •Federal Highway Administration speed limit guidelines –The design speed is NOT the maximum safe speed. –Posted speeds should almost always be within 5 mph of the 85th percentile speed. –Reducing the posted speed without other changes is likely to result in a small reduction in operating speeds (i.e., significantly less than the amount of the posted speed change). –The posted speed should not be established based on an isolated restrictive feature (e.g., sharp curve or limited sight distance) within a segment. The use of an advisory speed should be considered at these locations. •Reduction to 40 MPH  53% more violators •The existing advisory speed signs appear to be the more appropriate solution IMPROVEMENT PLAN •City Council goals? –Cost-effective plan to enhance safety and reduce liability •Staff’s written objective –Develop a cost effective, community-preferred plan to address traffic speeds and safety on La Costa Avenue in a way that respects the residential character and arterial function of the roadway” Objective: traffic speeds and safety •Already addressed in a cost-effective manner (~$50,000) without further work or traffic disruption. Safety/liability issues resolved Signage Safety/liability issues resolved Single traffic lane in front of residential driveways (wide buffer) Objective: cost-effectiveness •Plan fails to be cost-effective –Installation estimated at $3.1-$4.7 million –Cost overruns? –Annual maintenance of landscaping •Taxpayer funded –Gas tax –Grants –Property tax assessments •Funds better spent elsewhere –Other safety/liability issues? (Cadencia Street?) Objective: respect arterial function •Reduction to single lane of travel •Thousands of daily commuters have to unnecessarily slow to ~10 MPH at multiple roundabouts •Diversion to Calle Barcelona? •Unreliable and misleading traffic impact studies Unnecessary implementation of roundabouts •Roundabouts are useful to keep traffic moving, reducing average delay at intersections with significant cross-traffic •>90% of traffic at proposed intersections is on LCA •Roundabout less than a block away from a traffic signal •Roundabouts on LCA will unnecessarily increase delay 91% 97% Drawbacks of roundabouts (Romeria St) •Pedestrians –No longer regulated by light –More dangerous for children and sight impaired •Bicycles –Increased accident rates in roundabouts “Carlsbad” segment LOS method is faulty A B C D E F A B C D E F A-C D E F A-C D E F Peak hour “Level of Service” by volume (vehicles per lane per hour) Validated methods Nueva Castilla Way New roundabout LOS method is faulty •SIDRA software contains fudge factor called “environment factor” –“An environment factor of 1.2 should be used to match US roundabout research”  ~1,100 vplph •Staff falsely claims that their LCA analysis is based on US roundabout research –Used environment factor of 1.0  ~1,450 vplph •Nueva Castilla roundabout fails LOS test when proper parameters are used Objective: community-preferred? •La Costa Avenue opinion survey –90% of respondents who took a position on elimination of travel lanes were opposed –Only 27 of the >900 respondents stated that they favored roundabouts •Plan preferred by local residents—not broader community of commuters •Staff had preconceived vision of full road diet and roundabouts •Dissenting opinions/design options ignored as inconsistent with objective Objective: respect residential character •Plan achieves objective, but road has always been an arterial, so there should be no expectation of conversion into a local residential street Plan fails to meet objectives •Addresses traffic speeds and safety? YES, but already addressed •Respects residential character? YES, but road has always been an arterial •Cost-effective? NO •Respects arterial function? NO •Community-preferred? NO •PLAN DOES NOT SATISFACTORILY MEET OBJECTIVES •Survey broader community again now that specific plan has been developed