Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-02-02; Traffic Safety Commission; MinutesMEETING OF: DATE OF MEETING: TIME OF MEETING: PLACE OF MEETING: TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION February 2,2004 (Regular Meeting) 300 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Jerry Schall called the Meeting to order at 3:OO p.m. ROLL CALL: Present: Absent: Staff Members Present: Chairperson Jerry Schall Vice-Chairperson Gordon Cress Commissioner Steve Dorsey Commissioner Susan Gardner Commissioner Jim Courtney Robert Johnson, Deputy City Engineer, Transportation Division Jim Murray, Associate Engineer, Transportation Division Lt. Mike Shipley, Carlsbad Police Department APPROVAL OF MINUTES: January 5,2004 ACTION: Motion by Vice-Chairperson Cress, and duly seconded by Commissioner Dorsey, to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of January 5, 2004 as presented. VOTE: 4-0-0 AYES: Schall, Cress, Dorsey, Gardner NOES: None ABSTAIN: None Commissioner Jim Courtney arrived at 3:02pm and took his seat on the dais. February 2,2004 TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMlSStON Page 2 ITEM 4 - ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None ITEM 5 - PREVIOUS BUSINESS: None ITEM 6 - NEW BUSINESS: ITEM 6A: Review, provide recommendations, and approve the 2004 Traffic Signal Evaluation Policy and Traffic Signal Qualification List. Referring to an overhead stide, Jim Murray, Associate Engineer, Transportation Division, stated that the agenda item is the biannual Traffic Signal Evaluation Policy update for 2004. He explained that the policy is intended to provide a mechanism for evaluating intersections throughout the City of Carlsbad using the eleven (j9) CALTRANS traffic signal warrants. He noted that the 2004 Traffic Signal Qualification List is provided on page 5 in the Traffic Signal Evaluation Policy report. In addition, Mr. Murray noted that fifteen (15) intersections in the City of Carlsbad met one or more of the eleven (1 1 CALTRANS traffic signal warrants. He mentioned that a total of thirty-five (35) intersections were evaluated in 2003 to determine if traffic signal warrants were met. Mentioning the use of machine traffic counters and the fact that the studies are conducted on Tuesday through Thursday only, Mr. Murray explained the process of the traffic signal warrant evaluations in detail. He noted the minor street traffic volumes data is used to determine whether or not a delay study is required. Delay studies are conducted during the identified peak hour on the minor street. If the location being studied is a school location; a turning movement count is conducted. All of the aforementioned data is used in the traffic signal warrant analysis. Referring to page 4 in the Traffic Signal Evaluation Policy report and noting that the points for the seven (7) assignment factors are based on CALTRANS traffic signal warrants, Mr. Murray discussed the point assignment factors in detail. Mr. Murray mentioned that the following three (3) intersections are new on the list and were not included on the 2002 Traffic Signal Qualification List: Faraday AvenudPriestly Drive La Costa AvenuelLevante Street La Costa AvenueIEsfera Street In conclusion, Mr. Murray stated that the Traffic Safety Coordinating Committee recommends that the Traffic Safety Commission review and provide recommendations regarding the 2004 Traffic Signal Evaluation Policy, including the Traffic Signal Qualification List, and that the policy be submitted to the City Council for adoption of a resolution establishing the 2004 Traffic Signal Evaluation Policy. February 2,2004 TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION Page 3 PUBLIC TESTIMONY: Chairperson Schall opened public testimony. As there was no public testimony, Chairperson Schall closed public testimony and called for Commission discussion. DISCUSSION: Commissioner Gardner requested clarification regarding the cost of traffic control measures. Mr. Johnson replied that the cost for operation, minor administrative work and maintenance of a signal has been tracked and monitored. It has been determined that the cost is approximately $5,000.00 per year per signalized intersection. Commissioner Gardner requested clarification as to how the pedestrian count is detemined in the downtown Carlsbad Village area. Referring to the pedestrian count conducted in the summer at the intersection of Carlsbad Boulevard and Cherry Street, Mr. Murray replied that the count is conducted on a case-by-case basis, depending on where it is known that there may be a higher pedestrian volume. Mr. Johnson stated that staff considered the trip generator to determine the time frame when traffic volumes, turning movement counts or pedestrian counts should be gathered. In addition, traffic counter hoses are used to gather data on a 24-hour basis to determine peak hour traffic volume time frames. Noting that she would like Carlsbad to be bicycle friendly, Commissioner Gardner questioned if bicycles were counted on the traffic counter hoses. Mr. Johnson responded that bicycles are counted whenever they drive over the traffic counter hoses. Assuming that most bicycles drive in the bike lane, he noted that in order to get an exclusive bicycle count, short traffic counter hoses are occasionally placed in the bike lane only. He informed the Commission that bicycles are counted in the traffic volumes and turning movement surveys as vehicles. Noting that the traffic manual mentions crossing distance of 300 meters versus 600 feet, Commissioner Gardner referring to policy factor four, School Area Traffic Signals, she requested clarification regarding the allowable nearest control crossing distance. Mr. Johnson replied that 600 feet is approximately the distance a pedestrian will walk to a controlled intersection and the distance is used in the special factors as part of the policy. He noted that the CALTRANS traffic manual and warrant for traffic signal uses a different distance measurement. Mr. Johnson stated that staff could took at the control crossing distance specification to determine if changes should be made, e.g. making all distances the same or leave as is. He asked the Commissioners to comment on whether or not revisions should be made in the policy update that will be done in 2006. Mr. Johnson discussed in detail the criteria used to determine whether or not a traffic control device or traffic signal should be installed and asked the Commissioners if there are any locations not mentioned in the report that they believe should be studied and subsequently taken before the City Council. Commissioner Cress requested clarification regarding the total non-recurring cost as it related to the installation of a traffic signal. February 2,2004 Traffic Safety Commission Page 4 Mr. Johnson replied that in the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) budget each four-leg traffic signal is budgeted for $21 0,000.00 and each T-intersection is budgeted at $1 90,000.00. This cost typically covers design, installation, inspection and administrative paper work related to the traffic signal. Mr. Johnson noted that an award for a traffic signal at Alga Road and Xana Way is going before the City Council tomorrow night. He stated that the $210,000.00 did not cover the entire construction cost because of high bids, therefore an additional appropriation of funds will be requested. He mentioned that costs related to the traffic signal operations has been reduced by the conversion to the LED indications, which are very energy efficient. Commissioner Dorsey requested clarification regarding how intersections are selected for traffic signal evaluation. Mr. Johnson replied that the history of the traffic signal list dates back to the late 1980’s. Staff was directed by the City Council to create a traffic signal evaluation policy including the traffic signal qualification list to assist the City Council to objectively evaluate a candidate location based upon volumes, pedestrians, collision history, or unusual circumstances. Commissioner Courtney mentioned in detail the formula and point system used to determine if a traffic signal should be installed at a particular intersection. Commissioner Courtney requested clarification regarding the ranking of intersections last year. Mr. Murray responded that Alga Roadmana Way is on the list being designed or constructed and it was #I2 on the 2002, Calle BarcelondPaseo Aliso also is on the list being designed or constructed and it was #4 on the 2002 list, and Camino de 10s Coches/Calle Acervo was not on the 2002 list. Noting that a number of variables determine whether an intersection is considered for being included on the traffic signal qualification list, Mr. Johnson mentioned that due to the very close proximity to the high school Camino de 10s CocheslCalle Acervo had several traffic collisions that will be addressed with installation of a traffic signal. Mr. Murray mentioned that Carlsbad Village Drivelchatham Road and Carlsbad Village Drive/Glasgow Drive are on the list of being designed and constructed due to the anticipation of the opening of College Boulevard. Mr. Johnson noted that the Four-way STOP at Highland at Tamarack was removed from the 2004 traffic signal list after staff evaluated the intersection and determined the traffic signal was not a viable option due to the crest vertical curve, the high turning movement counts, the school pedestrian crossings, and the narrow street width of the intersection. He mentioned that after additional evaluation the intersections at State and Carlsbad Boulevard and La Costa Avenue and Calle Madero were pulled off of the 2004 traffic signal list. Mr. Johnson reiterated that traffic signals or STOP signs do not prevent traffic collisions. Chairperson Schall mentioned that part of the funding for traffic signals is covered by land developers in the area. Commissioner Courtney commended staff for a job well done and expressed his support for the recommendation of the Traffic Safety Coordinating Committee about the 2004 Traffic Signal Evaluation Policy. Chairperson Schall closed discussion and called for a motion. February 2,2004 MOTION: TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION Page 5 ACTION : Motion by Commissioner Courtney, and duly seconded by Commissioner Cress, to accept the recommendation of the Traffic Safety Coordinating Committee, as it relates to the 2004 Traffic Signal Evaluation Policy, including the Traffic Signal Qualification List, and that the policy be submitted to the City Council for adoption of a resolution establishing the 2004 Traffic Signal Evaluation Policy and Traffic Signal Qualification List. VOTE: 5-0-0 AYES: NOES: None ABSTAIN: None Schall, Cress, Courtney, Dorsey, Gardner Robert Johnson, Deputy City Engineer, Transportation Division, mentioned that City Council approval and adoption, by a Resolution, of the 2004 Traffic Signal Evaluation Policy, including the Traffic Signal Qualification List, will be required. ITEM 'I REPORT FROM TRAFFIC COMMISSIONERS Commissioner Courtney asked if anything can be done to eliminate bottlenecked areas at various locations were development is taking place, e.g. Hillside and Highland. He wanted to know if developers or landowners could be conditioned to improve the aforementioned roads to full width to eliminate the bottlenecks when the roads widen and narrow. Mr. Johnson stated that when development causes narrowing or widening, typically the engineers in the land development section will get a Neighbor Improvement Agreement (NIA) from the developer or property owner. Noting that when enough NIA's are on file for a particular block, the City may request that the property owners fulfill their obligation per the Neighbor Improvement Agreement and widen the street. As an example, Commissioner Courtney mentioned the problem at the senior home on El Camion Real at the top of Madonna Hill located at Cougar Drive. Mr. Johnson replied that particular location, as well as several other locations along El Camino are in the Capital Improvement Program for 2004. Unfortunately it is a fiscal impact situation and all of El Camino Real cannot be widen. He noted that there are locations where future landowners will be responsible for costs related to the widening of the street. Commissioner Courtney asked if legislature could be passed which gave the City the authority to make the improvements now and place a lien on the property for reimbursement once the land is sold. Mr. Johnson replied that there are ways of forcing an assessment district that can be considered. He noted that the travel time studies conducted by staff on El Camino Real and also Palomar Airport Road did reflect bottleneck locations and €he travel time results were presented to City Council last week at their annual two-day workshop. February 2,2004 TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION Page 6 ITEM 8 REPORT FROM TRAFFIC ENGINEER Noting that the next regular meeting of the Traffic Safety Commission would take place on Monday, March 1, 2004 at 3:OO p.m., Mr. Johnson stated that a request from citizens has been received asking that ALL-WAY STOPS be installed on Avienda Encinas at the intersections of Windrose Circle, Portage Way/Marlin Lane and Dory LanelMeridian Way. Staff has studied the three intersections and the data will be presented to the Traffic Safety Commission. He noted that the citizens requested that the aforementioned be slotted as an agenda item specifically at the March 1, 2004 meeting, thereby allowing for maximum citizen presence and participation. Chairperson Jerry Schail suggested that each Commission drive the aforementioned areas before the next regular meeting of the Traffic Safety Commission. ADJOURNMENT: Chairperson Jerry Schall adjourned the Regular Meeting of February 2,2004 at 352 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Dianna Scott Minutes Clerk