HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-10-08; City Council; 21396; Citizen Presentation Las Flores Safety ReportCITY OF CARLSBAD - AGENDA BILL 13
AB#
MTG.
DEPT.
21.396
10/8/13
CM
CITIZEN PRESENTATION FROM ROY HARDY
REGARDING LAS FLORES TRAFFIC SAFETY
REPORT
DEPT. DIRECTOR
CITY ATTY.
CITY MGR.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
To receive a presentation from Roy Hardy regarding Las Flores Traffic Safety Report.
ITEM EXPLANATION:
The City Council provides an opportunity for citizens and organizations to tiave an item placed on a City
Council Agenda by submitting a request to the City Manager. Attached is a request from Roy Hardy
(Exhibit 1) requesting that the City Council receive a presentation regarding concerns with the Las Flores
Traffic Safety Report.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT:
Pursuant to Section 15061 ofthe CEQA Guidelines, the activity is covered by the General Rule that CEQA
applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment.
Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a
significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA.
EXHIBITS:
1. July 25, 2013 letter to the City Manager from Roy Hardy.
DEPARTMENT CONTACT: Morgen Fry 760-434-2821 Morgen.Fry@carlsbadca.gov
FOR CLERK USE.
COUNCIL ACTION: APPROVED • CONTINUED TO DATE SPECIFIC •
DENIED • CONTINUED TO DATE UNKNOWN
CONTINUED • RETURNED TO STAFF •
WITHDRAWN • OTHER - SEE MINUTES
AMENDED • REPORT RECEIVED X
Morgen Fry
Subject: FW: City Council Agenda Request - "Concerns with the Las Flores Traffic Safety Report"
From: Donna Heraty On Behalf Of City Clerk
Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2013 1:44 PM
To: Morgen Fry
Subject: FW: City Council Agenda Request - "Concerns with the Las Flores Traffic Safety Report"
Hi Morgen,
One for the CM's office below.
Thanks,
Donna.
From: rovhardv@aol.com lmailto:rovhardv(a>aol.com1
Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2013 1:32 PM
To: City Clerk; Bryan Jones; John Kim; Skip Hammann Jr; rovhardv(S),aol.com
Subject: City Council Agenda Request - "Concerns with the Las Flores Traffic Safety Report"
Hello City Clerk,
I would like to present the attached white paper called "Concerns with the Las Flores Traffic Safety Report" at a meeting
of the Carlsbad City Council. I will need time to read the 2-page narrative at the beginning of the report and answer any
Council questions. Would you provide me the procedure to get this item on the Council agenda?
Also, 1 believe it would be courteous to provide a heads-up to the traffic department Staff so that they can digest the
contents ofthis report before the Council meeting. Would you coordinate with them about scheduling so that they can be
present to either rebut or agree with the "Concerns?" I've copied them on this email, but Bryan Jones appears to be the
key guy that should attend. My schedule is usually open.
Is there equipment to project this report overhead? Do I bring this this report on a flash drive or are the attachments
sufficient for you? Do I need to bring paper copies?
Also attached is the Traffic Department's original report for that may be needed for Council reference.
PIz advise, -Roy
* All Receive - Agenda item # J3
For the Information of the:
CITY COUNCIL . r , -^r 7A10 ACM ^yc^ ^ CC^ 25,2013
Narrative Datet(?prcity Manager OC^
City Governments and business organizations rely on Staff to provide accurate, fair and
impartial assessments based on the scientific method, rather than a subjective judgment. To
be termed scientific, a method of inquiry must be based on empirical and measurable
evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning.^
It appears that, in the case of installing new stop signs on Las Flores at Pio Pico, Staff first
started with a conclusion then filled In the Traffic Safety Report (TSR) with information that
supported this conclusion. Staff omitted information that did not support their conclusion.
Installing an All-Way stop at the intersection of Las Flores and Pio Pico was a bad idea. The
TSR did not mention Staff was ignoring California and City guidelines.^'^ A biased and
misleading report was submitted to City Council for approval.
• The original 2-Way stop worked exceptionally well for over 30 years.
• The TSR reported no collisions at this intersection, [ref. TSR page 1, para.4]
• TSR traffic counts support not having an All-Way stop. Section 2B.07 of the
California MUTCD^ states: "Multi-way stop control is used where the volume of traffic
on the intersecting roads is approximately equal." Las Flores has double the traffic.
• The TSR reports [ref. TSR page 3, para. 1] a "significant pedestrian activity" as a
justification for an All-Way stop. The TSR fails to report that a crossing guard is
present during the peak hours that staff selected for measurement. Well, every
person Is "significant" so does this methodology Justify an All-Way stop at every
intersection in our City?
• The TSR fails to report the pedestrian walkway and tunnel under Las Flores that is
open during school hours.[ref. Figure 2]
• Carlsbad's traffic departments own web page® warns that: "A school crossing may
look dangerous for children to use, causing parents to demand a stop sign to halt
traffic. "... An intersection which previously was not busy now looks like a major
intersection. It really isn't - it Just looks like it. It doesn't look safer and it usually
isn't." [ref. Figure 1]
• The TSR reports "sight distance conditions" as Justification for an All-Way stop.
"Although sight distance could be increased by a prohibition of parking, staff cannot
support removal of available parkmg due to the high demand for on-street parking."
[ref. TSR page 3, para. 2] Staff did not count parking spaces. There are curb spaces
for available for well over 100 cars. There is always curb parking available.
• The TSR does not have a traffic speed study.
• The Carlsbad Residential Traffic Management Program (CRTMP)* addresses the
issue of where stop signs are appropriate and states: "Characteristics of such a
Concerns with the Las Flores Traffic Safety Report - RoyHardy@aol.com Page 1
July 25,2013
desirable neighborhood include: streets that do not penalize drivers traveling at the
posted speed limit." These additional stop signs create an unnecessary 3536 delays
per day for bicyclists and motorists. The 3536 daily delays work out to over 106,000
delays a month. Staff has stated that it does not consider these traffic delays
"significant." [ref Bryan Jones email of Jun 24, para.4]. How can it be that 106,000
stops a month is not significant? Others may say that these delays are unnecessary,
dangerous, and primarily impact law abiding citizens.
A Safety Hazard is created from the New Stop Signs - Just as the Traffic
Department web page predicted, the implementation ofthe All-Way stops also
appears to have negatively altered the traffic flow in the neighborhood. It appears
more traffic is being diverted into quiet residential areas with narrower streets and
dangerous conditions for pedestrians, bicyclists and cars [ref. Figures 1, 3 and 4]
Email correspondence with Bryan Jones, Deputy Transportation Director
Bryan states that they do not perform a traffic flow study to install a stop sign. [ref. email
dated May 13, para.1]
Although not mentioned in the TSR, Bryan states in the May 13 email: "...we were more
concerned as were others in the area that requested it with the speed ofthe drivers adjacent
to a school and all the school aged children crossing the streets." Why was a possible
"speeding issue" omitted from the TSR? Why was there no speed study to support this
subjective opinion? Was it omitted because it conflicted with city and state guidelines? [ref
Figure 1]
Bryan describes himself as an "expert" on traffic affairs [ref. email dated Jun 24, para.2].
Bryan states that the California traffic guidelines do not have to be followed. An engineer can
utilize his own Judgment, [para.3]. Others might define that a "Judgment" Is subjective when
no empirical or scientific data supports their opinion.
Finally, "We are very satisfied with our evaluation of how the all-way stop sign at Las Flores
and Pio Pico is operating. At this time we will not be removing the all-way stop." [para.10]
ACTION: Carlsbaci City Council should agendize this item and
rescind their approval of the TSR. This intersection should be
restored to its prior condition that worked exceptionally well for
over 30 years.
Concerns with the Las Flores Traffic Safety Report - RoyHardy@aolcom Page 2
fuiy25.2013
Concerns with the Las Fiores Traffic Safety Report
Scope
This report discusses discrepancies and omissions in Traffic Safety Commission Staff Report
(February 4, 2013) concerning the intersection of Las Flores Drive and Pio Pico Drive.
Summary
The TSR to City Council recommended installing an All-Way stop on March 26, 2013. The
two additional stop signs were subsequently installed on Las Flores in May, 2013.
Installing these additional stop signs has created a bottleneck to the smooth flow of traffic and
created a safety hazard due to unintended consequences. See Figures 1, 3 and 4.
This Traffic Safety Report (TSR) did not inform City Council that Staff had taken exceptions to
California Traffic Policy and Carlsbad Traffic Safety Guidelines. The Staff TSR also omitted
existing safety precautions surrounding this intersection that did not agree with Staffs
recommendations.
The evidence suggests that the Staff decision does not reflect the guidelines described in the
California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, Sections 2B.04 and 2B.07 (MUTCD^).
It appears that the methodology employed by Staff was to begin with a subjective conclusion
(that the extra stop signs were needed) then use information that supported this conclusion
and disregard all information that did not support this conclusion.
Recommendations
1. Carlsbad City Council should rescind its approval of this TSR and return this
intersection to its prior condition that worked exceptionally well for over 30 years.
2. Staff should perform speed studies required by the CRTMP"* before making changes to
existing intersections. After any changes, the speed studies need to be repeated to
determine if the change was positive. Side streets should also be evaluated for
unintended consequences after changes as traffic issues may have been diverted into
more residential neighborhoods.
3. Future TSRs should require a quality control check-list of State and Carlsbad City
Guidelines. Each line item ofthis check-list should have a "yes" or "no" response to
these items. An explanation should be required If a "does not comply" is noted. This
may help to clarify reasoning in TSRs that go against guidelines.
Concerns with the Las Flores Traffic Safety Report - RoyHardy@aoLcom Page 3
July 25,2013
Staff Comments on the topics described in this Report
"Las Flores is a collector which is much lower on the hierarchal scale of roadways in
Carlsbad and is closer to a residential street. And 3,536 vehicles is not a significant or high
volume roadway." BJ
On the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) - "an engineer does
not have to follow a should recommendation and can utilize engineering judgment." BJ
"We are very satisfied with our evaluation of how the all-way stop sign at Las Flores and Pio
Pico is operating. At this time we will not be removing the all-way stop." BJ
Staff email from May 13 states "...we were more concerned as were others in the area that
requested it with the speed of drivers on Las Flores adjacent to a school..." -JK. (Please
note that MUTCD, section 2B.04, states "YIELD or STOP signs should not be used for speed
control. Staff has provided no traffic speed studies to indicate that there was ever a speed
Issue.
The complete email correspondence with Staff is found at the bottom ofthis report.
Discussion
The Facts:
1. There have been NO collisions at this Intersection per fhe TSR.
2. This neighborhood has had no new developments in over 30 years to increase traffic
flow since the original study of this area.
3. MUTCD, section 2B.07, states "In most cases, the roadway carrying the lowest volume
of traffic should be controlled A YIELD or STOP sign should not be installed on the
higher volume roadway unless justified by an engineering study. There has been no
engineering study. Las Flores has always been a major collector road for this
neighborhood. The Staff Report shows a traffic volume on Las Flores of 3536 per day.
Traffic volume on Pio Pico is 1706 per day.
4. MUTCD, section 2B.04, states " YIELD or STOP signs should not be used for speed
control.
The omissions from Staff Report
1. The TSR counts pedestrians during peak school hours. The TSR fails to report that a
volunteer crossing guard is present at this intersection during school hours. Crossing
guards are used at other schools, such as Jefferson Elementary. The Las Flores
crosswalk gets minimal use the other 22 hours ofthe day and night and even less on
weekends. However, law abiding citizens remain impacted by these stop signs.
2. The TSR map fails to show the underground school crossing tunnel located between
Forest Ave and the center of the school. This tunnel has been in place since the
Concerns with the Las Flores Traffic Safety Report - RoyHardy@aol.com Page 4
July 25,2013
neighborhood and school were first built and provides a safe crossing method for
school children, [ref. Figure 2]
3. The TSR fails to show the safety fence surrounding the school and soccer field that
protects the children from passing vehicles, [ref. Figure 2]
4. The dangerous trench (see Figure 4) on Pio Pico was not noted in the TSR. Perhaps
Staff did not consider this adjacent trench relevant to their study. However, the Staff
recommendations for the extra stop signs appear to have diverted additional traffic
through this area and created a City liability hazard.
Additional issues with the TSR - Sight Distance and Ample Curb Parking
The TSR states "Although sight distance could be increased by a prohibition of
parking, staff cannot support removal of available parking due to the high demand for
on-street parking." Staff does not state that there are over 100 parking spots within a
block of this intersection (see Figure 2). The removal of 2 or 4 spots to accommodate
Staff visibility concems seems more reasonable than an All-Way stop. See photos 1
and 4 in the TSR and the mark-up sketch in Figure 2 below.
Concerns with the Las Flores Traffic Safety Report - RoyHardy@aol.com Page 5
'-ome > City Services > Transportation Department > Traffic Operations > Stop Signs
Stop Signs
A stop sign is one of the most valuable and
effective control devices when used at the right
place and under the right conditions. It is
intended to help drivers and pedestrians at an
intersection decide who has the right-of-way.
One common misuse of stop signs is to
arbitrarily interrupt through traffic, either by
causing it to stop, or by causing such an
inconvenience as to force the traffic to use
other routes. When stop signs are instaiied as
"nuisances" or "speed breakers", a high incidence of intentional vioiation can result. In those locations where
vehicles do stop, the speed reduction is effective only in the immediate vicinity ofthe stop sign, and
frequently speeds are actually higher between intersections. For these reasons, stop signs should not be
used as speed control devices
A school crossing may look dangerous for children to use, causing parents to demand a stop sign to halt
traffic, A vehicle which had been a problem for 3 seconds while approaching and passing the intersection
now becomes a problem for a much longer period. A situation of indecision is created as to when to cross
as a pedestrian or when to start as a motorist. Normal gaps in traffic through which crossings could be made
safely no longer exist. An intersection which previously was not busy now looks like a major intersection. It
really isn't - it just looks like it. It doesn't look safer and it usually isn't.
Most drivers are reasonable and prudent with no intention of maliciously violating traffic
regulations. However when an unreasonable restriction is imposed, it may result in flagrant violations. In
such cases, the stop sign can sense a false sense of security in a pedestrian and an attitude of contempt in
a motorist. These two attitudes can and often do conflict with potentially tragic results.
Well-developed, nationally recognized guidelines help to indicate when such controls become
necessary. The City of Carlsbad utilizes the guidelines found within the California Manual on Uniform Traffic
Control Devices (MUTCD), These guidelines take into consideration, among other things, the probability of
vehicles arriving at an intersection at the same time, the length of time trsffic must wait to enter the
j mtersection, traffic volumes and the avaiiability of safe crossing opportunities.
Figure 1 - The City of Carlsbad Transportation Department position on stop signs and speed
control [ref, http://www.carlsbadca.qov/services/traffic/operations/Paqes/stop-siqn,aspx ]
Concerns with the Las Flores Traffic Safety Report - RoyHardy@aol,com Page 6
July 25,2013
Figure 2 - Detailed sketch of surrounding area. Black dot shows the Las Flores/Pio Pico
intersection. It appears there are 194 parking spots for visitors to the soccer field. Exact
count was estimated as parking lines are not painted on the street but observations show
there always seem to be many open spaces.
The TSR reported: "Although sight distance could be increased by a prohibition of parking,
staff cannot support removal of available parking due to the high demand for on-street
parking." How many parking spaces does Staff require?
Concerns with the Las Flores Traffic Safety Report - RoyHardy@aol.com Page?
July 25/2013
PROPOSED STOP LOCATION
S) EXISTING TRAFFIC SIGNAL
Figure 3 -Sketch indicating the All-Way stops appear to have negatively altered the traffic
flow in the neighborhood. It appears more traffic is taking a shorter route into quiet residential
areas with narrower streets and dangerous conditions for pedestrians, bicyclists and cars [ref.
Figure 4]
Concerns with the Las Flores Traffic Safety Report - RoyHardy@aol.com Page 8
Figure 4 - Photo of over two-foot deep, open concrete trench on Pio Pico. There are no
street lights in this section of Pio Pico. The jogger is running south towards the Las Flores
intersection. It appears more traffic has been unintentionally diverted onto Pio Pico due to
the new stop signs on Las Flores. Note if two cars are going in opposite directions a
pedestrian or bicyclist may be forced into this trench and be injured or killed. The
surrounding impacts to the changed environment should be part of any traffic "safety" study.
This trench may create liability issues for our City.
Concerns with the Las Flores Traffic Safety Report - RoyHardy@aol,com Page 9
July 25,2013
Email Collaboration with Staff
Mon, Jun 24, 2013 3:49 pm
RE: Traffic Safety Commission Staff Report of Feb 4, 2013 concerning the intersection of Las
Flores Drive and Pio Pico Drive
From Bryan Jones Bryan.Jones@carlsbadca.gov
To royhardy royhardy@aol.com
Skip Hammann Jr Skip.Hammann@carlsbadca.gov, John Kim
John.Kim@carlsbadca.gov, royhardy royhardy@aol.com
Dear Roy,
Thank you for your email regarding Las Flores Drive and Pio Pico Drive. You have obviously
done a lot of research into your email and I can appreciate your position and concern. We
appreciate you getting involved in community affairs. Public input is very important and we
listen to each and every one in our community and do our best to provide the best
transportation system. To be better connected to the City of Carlsbad please sign up for our
free emails from city hall or like us on facebook. This will allow you to know upcoming items
on agendas. 1 did review your email and issues with a pragmatic and unbiased thought
process.
Just so you know, I serve on the statewide committee often members called the California
Traffic Control Devices Committee that makes the decisions for the California Manual on
Uniform Traffic Control Devices. 1 was appointed by the Director for the State of California
Department of Transportation (Caltrans) to represent bicyclist, pedestrians and transit users
statewide. They created two new positions in 2012 to better reflect complete and livable
streets statewide mandate on this committee. And Carlsbad has quickly become a leader in
livable streets by looking at our roadways differently and making them safer for people and
not just vehicles.
The California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices is used on all types of roadways
from freeways to residential streets. So some of its recommendations are for higher speed
and volume roadways. And in that document "should" and "shall" have distinct meaning. In
this case "should" is a recommendation/suggestion for consideration and "shall" is a
mandate. An engineer does not have to follow a should recommendation and can
utilize engineering judgment.
And on streets like El Camino Real we would try to minimize the use of stop signs. However
on La Flores it is closer to a design and traffic volume that we would find in a residential
area. Las Flores is not a defined major arterial in the City of Carlsbad. Las Flores is a
collector which is much lower on the hierarchal scale of roadways in Carlsbad and Is closer
to a residential street. And 3,536 vehicles is not a significant or high volume roadway. A
high volume roadway would have tens of thousands of vehicles. We have some residential
Concerns with the Las Flores Traffic Safety Report - RoyHardy@aoI.com Page 10
July 25,2013
neighborhood streets that handle 3,536 vehicles. A major arterial would be El Camino Real or
Palomar Airport Road which carry between 45,000-60,000 vehicles per day.
Our City Council in 2011 adopted the Carlsbad Residential Traffic Management Program
whereby we utilize stop signs for traffic speed management when speeds on residential
streets exceeds 32 MPH. And each of our stop sign installations goes through the public
hearing process ofthe Traffic Safety Commission and City Council for ordinance adoption to
install stop signs. That is the time to dispute the decision of policy makers. A local Jurisdiction
has the authority by ordinance to Install and enforce stop signs.
In addition, in 2012 the City Council identified Complete and Livable Streets as a strategic
focus area to allow our transportation system to be in better alignment with the community
values identified in the Envision Carlsbad public engagement process from 2008-2011 to help
us update our General Plan for the next twenty years.
Neither of your identified omissions from the staff report would change the decision of the
Public Works Department. We are aware of both of those and they do not change the
outcome.
As for inadequate sight distance caused by parked vehicles; we received a number of
complaints regarding this issue from motorists. Some of which are your neighbors.
Regardless of how often a car is parked there the sight distance is still limited when a vehicle
is parked there which often occurs when some of our most vulnerable users are in close
proximity. We also installed a stop sign on Pio Pico between Las Flores and Carlsbad Village
Drive for this very reason.
According to the California Vehicle Code we cannot install a posted 15 MPH speed limit. The
State of California has very specific rules on how a posted speed limit is created by the local
jurisdiction. These rules are created by lawmakers at the state level. We can also not just
lower a posted speed limit because it is requested by one motorist. OthenA/ise it is not
enforceable.
We are very satisfied with our evaluation of how the all-way stop sign at Las Flores
and Pio Pico is operating. At this time we will not be removing the all-way stop.
We have a plaque in our council chambers with the following quote "What's popular for
Carlsbad is not always good; what's good for Carlsbad is not always popular". In this case
what we believe to be good for Las Flores is not popular with you and we are going to have to
agree to disagree on this issue.
Please feel free to call to discuss this further.
Respectfully,
Bryan Jones, TE, FTP, AlCP
Deputy Transportation Director
City Traffic Engineer
Concerns with the Las Flores Traffic Safety Report - RoyHardy@aol.com Page 11
July 2 5,2013
Public Works Department
City of Carlsbad
(760) 602-2431
From: Bryan Jones
Sent: Friday, June 21, 2013 2:32 PM
To: rovhardv(5)aol.com
Cc: Skip Hammann Jr; John Kim; rovhardv(S^aol.com
Subject: Re: Traffic Safety Commission Staff Report of Feb 4, 2013 concerning the
intersection of Las Flores Drive and Pio Pico Drive
Roy,
I will be responding to you. You have a lot of information and I have been working through all
of It. Please expect an email by close of business on Monday.
Bryan
On Jun 21, 2013, at 2:09 PM, "rovhardv(a>aol.com" <rovhardv{a)aol.com> wrote:
Hello Skip,
It's been 10 days and there has been no response from Bryan, John or you on the
discrepancies and omissions In Traffic Safety Commission Staff Report of Feb 4, 2013
concerning the intersection of Las Flores Drive and Pio Pico Drive.
One of staffs main points is that the City Council voted to approve the all-way stop signs. 1
contend that the City Council was originally presented a staff report with relevant omissions
and misrepresented data.
The other point by staff was that the intersection is being significantly utilized by pedestrians.
1 would contend that many streets in Carlsbad are much more utilized by pedestrians and
have a lack painted crosswalks and/or stop signs, (i.e. Tamarack, Carlsbad Blvd, the Barrio
and Garfield cross streets to the beach) One could argue that one person using a crosswalk
"is significant."
I plan to reformat the emails below into a white paper and present this report before the City
Council. 1 want to be sure that no one is blindsided by my actions. Is there anyone else in the
Traffic dept that should be made aware ofthese open issues before 1 go through with this
action?
Please advise, -Roy
From: Skip Hammann Jr <Skip.Hammann@carlsbadca.gov>
Concerns with the Las Flores Traffic Safety Report - RoyHardy@aol.com Page 12
July 25,2013
To: royhardy <royhardy@aGl.com>
Cc: Bryan Jones <Bryan.Jones@carlsbadca.gov>; John Kim <John.Kim@carlsbadca.gov>
Sent: Tue, Jun 11, 2013 9:48 am
Subject: RE: Traffic Safety Commission Staff Report of Feb 4, 2013 concerning the
intersection of Las Flores Drive and Pio Pico Drive
Roy,
1 have copied Bryan Jones and John Kim so they can provide a response to your comments.
Thanks for taking the time.
Skip
—Original Message—
From: John Kim <John.Kim@carlsbadca.gov>
To: royhardy <royhardy@aol.com>
Sent: Wed, May 15, 2013 10:12 am
Subject: RE: Requesting Traffic Study
Hi Roy,
The staff report that was presented to the Traffic Safety Commission included turning
movement counts at the subject intersection. The turning movement counts reported that the
intersection is being significantly utilized by pedestrians to cross Las Flores Drive at Pio Pico
Drive, in spite of the existence of an underground pedestrian structure in the vicinity. In
response to the documented pedestrian activity at this intersection, the Traffic Safety
Coordinating Committee, the Traffic Safety Commission and, ultimately. City Council voted to
approve the installation ofthe ALL-WAY STOP at this intersection.
Therefore, staff cannot support your request to reinvestigate this matter at this time. Thank
you again for your concerns.
JOHN T. KIM, P.E., T.E.
From: rovhardv@aol.com [rovhardv@aol.com1
Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2013 5:17 PM
To: John Kim
Cc: Belinda Guzman; Craddock Stropes; Bryan Jones; ieffDiro@sbcqlobal.net;
rovhardv@aol.Gom
Subject: Re: Requesting Traffic Study
Hello John,
Concerns with the Las Flores Traffic Safety Report - RoyHardy@aol.com Page 13
July 25,2013
First off, thank you for responding to my request for further information about the new stop
signs on Las Flores.
I did not find a mention ofthe existing pedestrian walkway that goes under Las Flores and
exits near the middle ofthe school. Should this have been part ofthe traffic-pedestrian
analysis? This differs from any other school you describe in the report and I believe the
underpass was built to address crossing Las Flores during school hours.
This school, in fact this entire neighborhood of "Olde Carlsbad", was been developed over
30-50 years ago. Housing density, and I believe traffic patterns, have not changed. Has there
ever been an accident reported at this intersection?
Las Flores is a major arterial for the homes above Highland to get to downtown and to the 1-5.
I believe that the additional stop signs create a restriction to the safe and free flow of traffic.
Las Flores seems similar in scope to Tamarack between Jefferson and the railroad tracks.
There is an elementary school near Tamarack on Jefferson. Tamarack is also a major arterial
off 1-5. There is no pedestrian underpass under Tamarack even though this area has had
much high density development. Will the City be adding stop signs at the two intersecting
streets on Tamarack between Jefferson and the railroad tracks? I hope not, as this will impact
the safe and free flow of traffic to the neighborhoods off Garfield and the beach.
How do citizens get the traffic department to re-investigate the Las Flores intersection
after learning about the pedestrian underpass for the schooi children and the original
design Intent ofthe neighborhood?
Thanks in advance for your help, -Roy
—Original Message—
From: John Kim <John.Kim@carlsbadca.aQv>
To: royhardy <rovhardv@aol.com>
Cc: Belinda Guzman <Belinda.Guzman@carlsbadca.aov>: Craddock Stropes
<Craddock.Stropes@carlsbadca.aov>: Bryan Jones <Brvan.Jones@carlsbadca.aQv>
Sent: Tue, May 14, 2013 1:19 pm
Subject: RE: Requesting Traffic Study
Roy,
Attached please find the staff report for the Traffic Safety Commission meeting of February 4,
2013, in which staff recommended the installation of ALL-WAY STOP control at Las Flores
Drive and Pio Pico Drive. After presentation ofthe staff report and hearing testimony from the
members of the public that were in support of staffs recommendation, the Traffic Safety
Commission voted unanimously to support the ALL-WAY STOP at Las Flores Drive and Pio
Pico Drive. City Council approved the introduction ofthe ordinance for this ALL-WAY STOP
on March 26, 2013.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me via email or by phone at (760) 602-
2757. ^ ^
JOHN T. KIWI, P.E., T.E.
Associate Engineer
Transportation Department
City of Carisbad
1635 Faraday Avenue
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Phone: (760) 602-2757
Sent: Monday, May 13, 2013 8:15 AM
To: rovhardv@aol.com
Concerns with the Las Flores Traffic Safety Report - RoyHardy@aoLcom Page 14
July 25,2013
Cc: John Maashoff; John Kim; Doug Bilse
Subject: RE: Requesting Traffic Study
Dear Roy, . . . * ^
Thank you for contacting the City of Carlsbad. We appreciate your inquiry into the requested
stop sign by residents that live at or near the intersection of Las Flores and Pio Pico along
with parents of students that walk to school through this intersection. The traffic study for
which you are asking for below to "optimize traffic flow in the city based on real-time data is
for our traffic signal program and not for stop signs installation. So we wouW not have done
analysis of traffic flow based on real-time travel data to install a stop sign. We utilize that
optimize traffic flow process when coordinating traffic signals along a corridor like El Camino
Real or Palomar Airport Road. I can however have John Kim contact you to further discuss
the reasoning for the installation of an all-way stop at this intersection.
In the area of Las Flores at Pio Pico we were more concerned as were others in the area that
requested it with the speed of drivers on Las Flores adjacent to a school and all the school
aged children that were crossing the streets.
Bryan Jones
Deputy Transportation Director
City of Carlsbad
From:rQyhardv@aol.com [mailto:rovhardv@aol.com1
Sent: Saturday, May 11, 2013 2:28 PM
To: Transportation-Internet
Subject: Requesting Traffic Study . .u u ^
1 would like to get a copy of the traffic study used to "optimize traffic flow in the city based on
real-time data."
The intersection I am interested in is the new stop sign additions on Las Flores at Pio Pico.
Is this report available on-line or can you email it to me?
Thanks, -Roy
References
1. Wikipedia, Scientific Method described.
2. City of Carlsbad Traffic Safety Reports available from Bryan.JonesCS^carlsbadca.qov
3. California MUTCD Traffic Guidelines http://mutcd.fhwa.dQt.aov/htm/20Q9/part2/part2bhtm#section2B04
4. CARLSBAD RESIDENTIAL TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
http://www.carlsbadca.aov/services/traffic/transportation-
enaineerinq/PaQes/default.aspx
5. City of Carlsbad web page on stop signs
http7/www carlsbadca.aov/services/traffic/operations/Paaes/stop-siqn.aspx
-END-
Concerns with the Las Flores Traffic Safety Report - RoyHardy@aol.com Page 15
CITY OF CARLSBAD
TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
COMMISSION MEETING OF: February 4,2013 ITEM NO. 6A
LOCATION: Intersection of Las Flores Drive and Pio Pico Drive
INITIATED BY: Greg & Cathy Berry
1290 Las Flores Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
REQUESTED AaiON: Investigate the need to establish an ALL-WAY STOP at the
intersection of Las Flores Drive and Pio Pico Drive.
BACKGROUND:
The subject Intersection serves the adjacent residential neighborhoods In the northwest
quadrant of the city and Is located between the 1-5 freeway and Buena Vista Elementary
School (see Exhibit 1). During the school year, this Intersection can be congested with
pedestrians, bicyclists and vehicles.
DATA:
Both Las Flores Drive and Pio Pico Drive are unclassified In the Circulation Element ofthe
General Plan but function as collector streets. Las Flores Drive features curb and gutter,
sidewalk and street lights on both sides of the street. It has a curb-to-curb width of 40
feet with a single travel lane in each direction, separated by a painted center line. On-
street parking Is allowed on both sides of Las Flores Drive. South of Las Flores Drive, Pio
Pico Drive features curb and gutter, sidewalk and street lights on both sides ofthe street
south of Las Flores Drive. It has a curb-to-curb width of 40 feet, with a single travel lane
in each direction, separated by a painted center line. On-street parking is allowed on
both sides of the street with some red curb prohibiting parking. North of Las Flores
Drive, Pio Pico Drive is largely unimproved with a curb-to-curb width of approximately
24 feet.
Due to the proximity of Buena Vista Elementary School, school area signage and
pavement legends are present on both Las Flores Drive and Pio Pico Drive. Yellow
school crosswalks have been painted across the north, east and south legs of the subject
intersection. Currently, traffic on Pio Pico Drive Is STOP-controlled at Las Flores Drive
while Las Flores Drive Is uncontrolled.
As part of this request, staff conducted an analysis to establish an ALL-WAY STOP at the
subject intersection. The analysis is based on Section 28.07 of the California Manual on
Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), which specifies the consideration of different
factors to determine whether or not an ALL-WAY STOP Is justified at a particular
location. Collision records indicate that no collisions were reported at the subject
intersection during the period from 2008 through 2012. A 24-hour approach count was
conducted on November 7,2012, the results of which are shown on Table 1.
Pagel
LOCATION MAP
^ PROPOSED STOP LOCATION
"s) EXISTING TRAFFIC SIGNAL
YOUREU.
FOREST
LAS FLORES
BUENA VISTA
ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL
BUENA VISTA WY.
CYNTHIA m.
KNOWLES AVE.
NOT TO SCALE
PROPOSED ALL-WAY STOP AT
LAS FLORES DRIVE AND PiO PICO DRIVE
EXHIBIT
cmr OF CARLSBAO
TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
COMMISSION MEETING OF:
(continued)
February 4,2013 ITEM NO. 6A
Table 1: 24-Hour Traffic Count Summary at Las Flores Drive and Pio Pico Drive
Las Flores Drive Pio Pico Drive Total
Time Eastbound Westbound Subtotal Northbound Soutlibound Subtotal Volume
0000-0100 10 3 13 1 1 2 15
0100-0200 4 0 4 1 0 1 5
0200-0300 4 0 4 2 1 3 7
0300-0400 1 0 1 1 1 2 3
0400-0500 3 5 8 7 6 13 21
0500-0600 22 21 43 11 11 22 65
0600-0700 65 61 126 20 33 53 179
0700-0800 191 120 311 68 72 140 451
0800-0900 166 110 276 103 68 171 447
0900-1000 147 61 208 38 46 84 292
1000-1100 123 63 186 39 41 80 266
1100-1200 137 70 207 76 42 118 325
1200-1300 161 81 242 87 48 135 377
1300-1400 144 62 206 68 45 113 319
1400-1500 201 116 317 89 47 136 453
1500-1600 187 93 280 82 45 127 407
1600-1700 208 86 294 86 51 137 431
1700-1800 192 92 284 103 63 166 450
1800-1900 139 49 188 31 50 81 269
1900-2000 94 29 123 29 17 46 169
2000-2100 71 23 94 20 12 32 126
2100-2200 48 21 69 8 11 19 88
2200-2300 30 5 35 4 12 16 51
2300-2400 14 3 17 4 5 9 26
Totals 2362 1174 3536 978 728 1706 5240
The intersection of Las Flores Drive and Pio Pico Drive did not meet the California
MUTCD criteria based on minimum traffic volumes or collision history.
As part of the analysis, staff conducted turning movement counts to quantify the
pedestrian volumes on a typical school morning and school afternoon. The turning
movement counts were conducted on October 30,2012 and the results are summarized
In Table 2 and 3.
Table 2: Turning Movement Count, 7:15 a.m. to 8:15 a.m.
Roadway Approach Entering Vehicles Pedestrians
Northbound 95 6 (2 adults a 4 children)
Southbound 74 2(1 adult &1 child)
eastbound 226 1 adult
Westbound 120 7 (4 adults & 3 children)
Page 2
OTY Of CARLSBAO
TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
COMMISSION MEETING OF: February 4,2013 ITEM NO. 6A
(continued)
Table 3: Turning Movement Count, 2:30 p.m. to 3:30 p.m.
Roadway Apinroach CHrectfon Entering Vehicles Pedestrians
Northbound 91 16 (6 adults & 10 children)
Southbound 28 1 child
Eastbound 188 none
Westbound 131 13 (5 adults and 8 children)
Our studies indicate that there Is significant pedestrian activity that occurs at the subject
intersection that is In conflict with vehicular traffic, not only during school times but
during events when the school ball fields are used for events. Section 2B.07 of the
California MUTCD allows consideration of an ALL-WAY STOP when there Is a "need to
control vehicle/pedestrian conflicts near locations that generate high pedestrian
volumes/' An elementary school can be considered a location that generates high
pedestrian volumes and the city has Installed ALL-WAY STOPs at other locations nearby
school locations as a result of similar analyses. These locations Include Paseo Aliso and
Via Adelfa near El Camino Creek Elementary School, Camino de las Ondas and Hidden
Valley Road adjacent to Pacific Rim Elementary School, Calle Acervo adjacent to
Olivenhain Pioneer Elementary School and Calle Acervo near La Costa Canyon High
School, and at Monroe Street and Gayle Way adjacent to Carlsbad High School.
Staff conducted fleld measurements of the existing sight distance conditions at the
subject intersection. The posted speed limit on Las Flores Drive is 30 miles per hour and
the minimum stopping sight distance required for 30 miles per hour is 200 feet. Sight
distance from the south leg ofthe Intersection was measured to be 110 feet looking to
the east (Figure 1) and 125 feet looking to the west (Figure 2). Sight distance from the
north leg was measured to be 75 feet looking to the west (Figure 3) and 125 feet looking
to the east (Figure 4). The California MUTCD recommends consideration of an ALL-WAY
STOP when there are ''locations where a road user, after stopping, cannot see conflicting
traffic and Is not able to reasonably safely negotiate the Intersection unless conflicting
cross traffic is also required to stop" Although sight distance could be increased by the
prohibition of parking, staff cannot support removal of available parking due to the high
demand for on-street parking.
Pages
CITY OF CARLSBAD
TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
COMMISSION MEETING OF:
(continued)
February 4, 2013 ITEM NO. 6A
Figure 1; Sight Distance from South Leg (looking east)
Page 4
CtTY OF CARLSBAD
TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
COMMISSION MEETING OF:
(continued)
February 4, 2013 ITEM NO. 6A
Figure 3- S'.'r^'t Distance from North Leg {logl<i"&wgst)
Figure 4- Sight Distance from North Leg (looking east)
X,
PageS
CITY OF CARLSBAD
TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
COMMISSION MEETING OF: February 4,2013 ITEM NO. 6A
(continued)
RECOMMENDATION:
Based on the findings contained in this report, the Traffic Safety Coordinating
Committee recommends the installation of an ALL-WAY STOP at the Intersection of Las
Flores Drive and Pio Pico Drive.
NECESSARY CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
The City Council must adopt an ordinance to establish the stop control as
recommended.
Page 6
Las Flores Traffic Safety Report Concerns
Stop signs added to Las Flores in May based on a
flawed Traffic Safety Report to City Council
Las Flores has been a safe collector street for this
neighborhood for over 30 years
The TSR said no incidents and no speed studies
The TSR did not include pre-existing safety features
Staff does not mention why City and State stop sign
guidelines in the TSR were ignored
Safety of adjacent neighborhoods were not addressed
The signs now force 106,000 extra stops per month
Estimated cost penalty to lawful citizenry is $10,600 a
month, with what appears to be a negative safety
benefit
“Pay for Performance” bonuses should be based on
“Cost versus Benefit” to citizenry, not a metric like
stop sign count
The City Council can control some of the costs to its
citizenry, especially traffic costs
Will City Council remove the Las Flores stop signs?
RoyHardy@AOL.COM