Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-04-07; Traffic Safety Commission; MinutesMEETING OF: DATE OF MEETING: TIME OF MEETING: PLACE OF MEETING: TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION April 7,2003 (Regular Meeting) 3:OO P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Jim Courtney called the Meeting to order at 3:Ol p.m. ROLL CALL: Present: Chairperson Jim Courtney Vice-Chairperson Bob Mertz Commissioner Jerry Schall Commissioner Gordon Cress Absent: None Staff Members Present: Robert Johnson, Deputy City Engineer, Transportation Brandon Miles, Associate Engineer, Transportation Lt. Mike Shipley, Carlsbad Police Department APPROVAL OF MINUTES: March 3,2003 ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Mertz, and duly seconded by Commissioner Schall, to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of March 3, 2003 as presented. VOTE: 3-0-1 AYES: Courtney, Mertz, Schall NOES: None ABSTAl N : Cress March 3,2003 TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION Page 2 ITEM 4 - ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None ITEM 5 - PREVIOUS BUSINESS: None NEW BUSINESS: ITEM 6A Repeal and amend sections of the Carlsbad Municipal Code with respect to crosswalks and pedestrian crossings Robert Johnson, Deputy City Engineer, Transportation Division, stated that item 6A is a continued item from the March 3, 2003 Traffic Safety Commission regular meeting. The Commission, at the request of staff, continued this item so that additional discussion by staff could take place. The requested action is to repeal and amend certain sections of the Carlsbad Municipal Code with respect to crosswalks and pedestrian crossing. Mr. Johnson stated that California Vehicle Code Section 21 prohibits cities from enacting or enforcing an ordinance on any matter covered by the Vehicle Code unless the Vehicle Code expressly authorizes a local agency to enact that ordinance. The legal principle is known as the preemption doctrine. Continuing, Mr. Johnson stated that the Carlsbad City Attorney’s office informed staff that recently in the City of Oakland the First District Court of Appeals invalidated a provision of the Oakland Municipal Code regarding pedestrians as they stand in the roadway. Mr. Johnson noted that the Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 10.36.040 contains an identical provision. The recommendation of the Traffic Safety Coordinating Committee is that the section be repealed on grounds of preemption because the First District Court of Appeals determination would be applicable to Section 10.36.040 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code in the opinion of the City Attorney. Mr. Johnson addressed several other aspects of Chapter 10.36. California Vehicle Code Section 21961 does allow cities to enact ordinances that prohibit pedestrians from crossing roadways at other than crosswalks. He informed the Commission that in the context of the vehicle code, the “crosswalk” term includes both marked and unmarked crosswalks. However, the public at large may not understand the aspect of an unmarked legal non-striped crosswalk at an intersection. Mr. Johnson mentioned that staff has had many discussions over the years with the public regarding this situation. In addition, referring to the Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 10.36.020, he noted that it only requires pedestrians to cross at a crosswalk in business districts. The California Vehicle Code specifically defines what a “business district” is. The context of the Carlsbad Municipal Code suggests that the term “crosswalks” means only marked crosswalks. Carlsbad Municipal Code 10.36.020 requires pedestrians to cross in crosswalks only when located in business districts. Clarification is needed so that the term “crosswalks” means both marked and unmarked. Therefore, the ordinance would be applicable in a business district whether or not a striped crosswalk exists. March 3,2003 TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION Page 3 Mr. Johnson discussed the issue of a pedestrian only being allowed to cross ... e street in a crosswa... being applied citywide. Staff suggests that an ordinance should not be put into place that requires pedestrians everywhere in the City to only cross at intersections where crosswalks exist. Hence, the Traffic Safety Coordinating Committee recommends that this provision should not be placed into the Carlsbad Municipal Code. In summary, Mr. Johnson reiterated that the Traffic Safety Coordinating Committee recommendation that the Carlsbad Municipal Code be amended or additions made as summarized below: Section 10.36.005 Add language that a “crosswalk means either a marked or unmarked crosswalk and specifically define a “marked and “unmarked crosswalk. Section 10.36.01 0 Insert the word “marked” prior to crosswalk. Section 10.36.030 Repeal this section Section 10.36.40 Repeal this section Chairperson Courtney asked if there were questions of staff. Commissioner Cress requested clarification regarding repealing Section 10.36.030 crossing at right angles. Mr. Johnson stated it was necessary due to skewed crosswalks in some areas. Although it is a minor item, it needed to be clear that the crosswalk did not have to be absolute right angles. Chairperson Courtney requested clarification on the distance of State Street between Carlsbad Village Drive and Grand Avenue. He mentioned several streets in the city with marked crosswalks in the middle of the intersection that might not meet requirements in length. Mr. Johnson replied that he did not know the exact length of the block mentioned, but a midblock crosswalk exists. Chairperson Courtney recommended that all of the streets with mid-block crossing that might be less than the required length be mentioned in the ordinance. Mr. Johnson replied that he would have staff double check the length of the streets to ascertain if the streets with the mid-block crossings are in compliance as it relates to length. As there were no additional questions of staff Chairperson Courtney opened public testimony. PUBLIC TESTIMONY: As there was no public testimony, Courtney closed public testimony and called for a discussion. March 3,2003 TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION Page 4 DISCUSSION: As there was no discussion, Chairperson Courtney closed discussion and called for a motion. MOTION: ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Mertz, and duly seconded by Commission Schall, to accept the recommendation of the Traffic Safety Coordinating Committee, that the Carlsbad Municipal Code be amended or additions made as summarized below: Section 10.36.005 Add language that a “crosswalk” means either a marked or unmarked crosswalk and specifically define a “marked” and “unmarked crosswalk. Section 10.36.010 Insert the word “marked prior to crosswalk. Section 10.36.030 Repeal this section. Section 10.36.040 Repeal this section VOTE: 4-0-0 AYES: Courtney, Mertz, Schall, Cress NOES: None ABSTAIN: None Mr. Johnson stated that the City Council would be required to adopt an ordinance to implement the recommended revisions/deletions to the Carlsbad Municipal Code. ‘ ITEM 6B: Request to submit a project for consideration of receiving funding from the Transportation Development ActrrransNet Funding Program Brandon Miles, Associate Engineer, Transportation Division, stated that agenda item 6B is a request pursue funding through the Transportation Development AcVTransNet Funding Program administered by SANDAG. He noted that a portion of roadway under construction on Poinsettia Lane east of Black Rail Road is 1,400 feet in length and it will have new sidewalks on the north and south side, a total of 2,800 feet containing sidewalk, and there will be an eight-foot bike lane on both sides of the road. March 3,2003 TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION Page 5 Referring to an overhead slide, Mr. Miles commented that the request was for funding of a five-foot portion of the bike lane and five and a half feet for the sidewalk, which makes a total of 2,800 feet. The funding request is for $78,467 for the bike lane and sidewalk portion of the project. In summary, the Traffic Safety Coordinating Committee is recommending that a funding request for the project be submitted for FY 2003/2004 Transportation Development Act KransNet funds in the amount of $78,467 for the bike lane and sidewalk portion of Poinsettia Lane Reach C. Mr. Johnson mentioned that this is an item that comes before the Commission on an annual basis. Staff aggressively seeks funding via the Transportation Development Act for various projects and has been quite successful in securing funds. Chairperson Courtney asked if there were questions of staff. Chairperson Courtney asked why funding for only five feet of the eight-foot bike lane was being requested. Mr. Miles replied that funding is only available for a five-foot bike lane and pointed out on the overhead exhibit of the roadway cross-section where the portion of the bike lane was located. In addition, he advised the Commission that funding is available only for new projects. Commissioner Cress requested clarification on the normal width of bike lanes. Noting that it is more desirable to have wider bike lanes when possible, Mr. Miles reported that bike lanes are typically 6-8 feet wide. Mr. Johnson interjected that Poinsettia Lane on the Circulation Element is a major arterial roadway. He stated that on major arterials and primary arterials an eight-foot bike lane/emergency-parking lane is designated. On a secondary arterial or collector street there is only room to stripe a five-foot wide bike lane. Commissioner Cress asked if the bike lane on Palomar Airport Road was eight-feet in width. Mr. Johnson replied that although a small portion of Palomar Airport Road has not been widen to its full width, e.g. Melrose Drive vicinity where a five-foot bike lane exists, in most places it is eight-feet wide. Mr. Johnson specified that when additional right and/or left turn lanes are added the width of the bike lane is reduced. Chairperson Courtney remarked that bike lanes are measured from the curb outward. The Commission discussed the width of bike lanes in detail and the method in which they are measured. As there were no additional questions of staff Chairperson Courtney opened public testimony. PUBLIC TESTIMONY: As there was no public testimony, Chairperson Courtney closed public testimony and called for a discussion. March 3, 2003 TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION Page 6 DISCUSSION : As there was no discussion, Chairperson Courtney closed discussion and called for a motion. MOTION: ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Schall, and duly seconded by Chairperson Courtney, to supplement project funding for Poinsettia Lane Reach C via a funding request for FY 2003/2004 of the Transportation Development Act /TransNet funds in the amount of $78,467 for the bike lane and sidewalk portion of the project. VOTE: 4-0-0 AYES: Courtney, Mertz, Schall, Cress NOES: None ABSTAIN : None Mr. Johnson mentioned that the City Council will be required to adopt a resolution requesting the funding that will be forwarded to SANDAG. ITEM 6C: Review, comment upon, and approve the Traffic Safety Commission rules and procedures, and adopt Traffic Safety Commission Resolution No. 2003-1 Mr. Johnson stated that agenda item 6C, review and approval of the Traffic Safety Commission rules and procedures is an annual item. He noted that the rules, procedures and Traffic Safety Commission Resolution No. 2003-1 were included in the staff report. If changes are required based upon needs identified at meetings in the previous 12 months, changes can be incorporated into the Commission rules and procedures. Mr. Johnson reported that the Traffic Safety Cornmission rules and procedures document is a Commission document, not a City Council document. In summary, he stated that Traffic Safety Commission Resolution No. 2003-1 is provided for Commission action. Chairperson Courtney asked if there were questions of staff. As there were no questions of staff, Chairperson Courtney opened discussion. March 3,2003 TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION Page 7 DISCUSSION: Chairperson Courtney mentioned in the time he has served on the Traffic Safety Commission, the Traffic Safety Commission rules and procedures have been revised on two occasions, e.g. replaced all gender sensitive items. As there was no further discussion, and no revisions suggested, Chairperson Courtney closed discussion and called for a motion. MOTION: ACTION: Motion by Chairperson Courtney, and duly seconded by Commissioner Schall, to adopt a Traffic Safety Commission Resolution No. 2003-1. VOTE: 4-0-0 AYES: Courtney, Mertz, Schall, Cress NOES: None ABSTAIN: None Mr. Johnson stated that no City Council action is required for this item. ITEM 7 REPORT FROM TRAFFIC COMMISSIONERS Commissioner Cress ask if southbound motorist turning right from El Camino Real should obey the red light or YIELD sign at the El Camino Real/College Boulevard intersection. Mr. Johnson explained that at this location it was a free right turn and a free right turn can be made from El Camino Real when the traffic signal is red, but drivers must YIELD to any through traffic on College Boulevard. Commissioner Mertz requested clarification on the completion of date of Poinsettia Lane Reach C and if traffic signals will be installed. Referring to an overhead slide, Mr. Johnson stated that Reach C should be completed by early 2004 and a traffic signal will be installed on Ambrosia Lane at the Poinsettia Lane intersection. In addition, in the 2004/2005 CIP a traffic signal is proposed at the Black Rail Road and Poinsettia Lane intersection. ITEM 8 REPORT FROM TRAFFIC ENGINEER Mr. Johnson reported that Cannon Road Reach 2-8 is scheduled for dedication on April 30, 2003. Cannon Road will be opened from Faraday Road to Frost Avenue, which in affect will open Cannon Road from Interstate Highway 5 to El Camino Real. March 3,2003 TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION Page 8 Mr. Johnson mentioned that the next regular meeting of the Traffic Safety Commission would take place on Monday, May 5,2003. ADJOURNMENT: By proper motion the Regular Meeting of April 7,2003 was adjourned at 3:27 p.m. Respectfully submitted, a< Dianna Scott Minutes Clerk