HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-02-07; Traffic Safety Commission; MinutesMINUTES
MEETING OF: TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION
DATE OF MEETING: February 7,2005 (Regular Meeting)
TIME OF MEETING: 3:OO p.m.
PLACE OF MEETING: Faraday Center
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Cress called the Meeting to order at 3:OO p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Present:
Staff Members Present:
Chair Gordon Cress
Vice-Chair Steve Dorsey
Commissioner Guy Roney
Commissioner Bonnie Bradshaw
Commissioner Susan Gardner
Robert Johnson, Deputy City Engineer, Transportation
Lt. Don Rawson, Carlsbad Police Department
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
January 3,2005
ACTION: Motion by Vice-Chair Dorsey, and duly seconded by Commissioner
Roney to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of January 3,
2005 as presented.
VOTE: 4-0- 1
AYES: Dorsey, Roney, Gardner, Bradshaw
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: Cress
ITEM 4 - ORAL COMMUNICATIONS:
There were no requests to address the Commission on any non-agenda items.
February 7,2005 Traffic Safety Commission Meeting Page 2
ITEM 5 -PREVIOUS BUSINESS:
Robert Johnson, Deputy City Engineer, addressed the Commission stating that he had several items
to report that the Commission recommended to the City Council. First is the stop sign on Morada
Street at Garboso Street that the Commission recommended a stop sign on Morada Street. At their
last meeting, the City Council introduced the ordinance to establish a stop sign upon Morada Street.
Tomorrow night the Council will adopt the ordinance. In addition, tomorrow night the Council will
take action to consider introducing the ordinance for the stop sign on Unicornio Street at Rancho
Cortes, which the Traffic Safety Commission recommended on January 3,2005.
ITEM 6 -NEW BUSINESS:
ITEM 6A. Present an information item to the Traffic Safety Commission about a future
resolution that will be taken to the City Council to have the Council adopt the
FHWA Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) 2003 Edition as
amended by the MCrrCD 2003 California Supplement.
Mt. Johnson stated that this item is an informational item only for the Traffic Safety Commission.
There have been several instances where staff has mentioned to the Commission the Manual on
Uniform Traffic Control Devices which Caltrans uses now, adopted as of May 20,2004. The Traffic
Safety Coordinating Committee was discussing one item with respect to the Traffic Signal
Evaluation Policy and the need to incorporate references to the MWCD into that policy. Out of that
discussion, it was determined that the City Council should adopt the resolution incorporating the
MUTCD as the document that is used in lieu of the Caltrans Traffic Manual for all traffic control
devices in Carlsbad.
Mi. Johnson explained that on May 20,2004 the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
adopted the Federal Highway Administration Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, 2003
edition, as amended by the MUTCD 2003 Supplement. Even though Caltrans adopted the MUTCD,
there is a California Supplement with some minor variations.
The action taken by Caltrans was pursuant to provisions of the California Vehicle Code, Section
21400, and it was also taken on the recommendation of the California Traffic Control Devices
Committee (CTCDC) to prescribe the uniform standards and specifications for all official traffic
control devices in California. The CTCDC is made up of a number of agencies that include the
following:
Caltrans
California Highway Patrol
California State Association of Counties
League of California Cities
California State Automobile Association
February 7,2005 Traffic Safety Commission Meeting Page 3
Automobile Club of Southern California
Those member agencies get together periodically on a monthly or bi-monthly basis to review matters
of traffic control devices throughout the state of California. One of the more major actions that they
took was the recommendation with respect to the MUTCD. As a result, it was adopted last year.
Prior to May 20,2004, the Caltrans Traffic Manual was used as the official document to provide
guidance on most of the traffic control devices placed on public streets in California. On many
occasions, staff made reference to the Caltrans Traffic Manual regarding warrants or various signs
and striping that was going to be recommended as part of an action. The adoption of the MUTCD
will lead to greater uniformity of traffic control devices in California with respect to what is being
done throughout the United States.
As an example, Mr. Johnson stated that California was using the ‘Wot A Through Street” sign if
there was a cul-de-sac and a driver could not see the end of the cul-de-sac. Throughout the United
States the sign that is used says “Dead End.” Staff will be installing signs on cul-de-sacs that read
“Dead End” and staffwill no longer be putting up the ‘Not a Through Street” signs.
As mentioned at the top of the meeting, Mr. Johnson stated that the Traffic Safety Coordinating
Committee (TSCC) discussed the Carlsbad Traffic Signal Qualification List. The discussion at the
TSCC ensued because staff is currently updating the Traffic Signal Qualification List, which is the
list contained in the Traffic Signal Evaluation Policy. By the end of the year, staff will have that
study completed and it will be brought to the Commission early next year. The Traffic Signal
Evaluation Policy will reference the MUTCD.
Mr. Johnson stated that another example of the use in changing to the MUTCD is that the MUTCD
contains eight Mic signal warrants, whereas the Caltrans Traffic Manual contains eleven. Staffwill
be using the MUTCD in the traffic signal warrants evaluation.
Staff previously discussed warrants and criteria for the removal of an unwarranted adult crossing
guard at a Traffic Safety Commission meeting. Warrants for adult crossing guards also are contained
in the MUTCD.
Mr. Johnson stated that warrants for stop signs would also be based on the MUTCD. One of the
differences with respect to the all-way stop signs in the MUTCD as compared to the Caltrans Traffic
Manual is that formerly, 500 vehicles fiom all four legs of an approach averaged over eight hours
had to meet the 500 vehicles. The MUTCD requires 300 vehicles over eight hours, but just on the
major street. Guidance for the installation of signs and striping will be based on the MUTCD.
Most of the traffk control devices placed under the old Caltrans Traffic Manual may remain in place
until the end of their useful service life. Using the example of the ‘Wot a Through Street” sign that
he gave previously, staff is not compelled to immediately go out and replace all of the “Not a
Through Street” signs with the “Dead End” signs. Staff can wait until the signs are at the end of their
useful life, becoming faded, vandalized, or have lost their night reflectivity. Typically signs can last
February 7,2005 Traffic Safety Commission Meeting Page 4
up to fifteen years before they need to be replaced, depending on their orientation with the sun,
weather elements, and so on.
More than likely, between now and fifteen years fiom now, all of the signs that are not MUTCD
compliant will be replaced. However, the California Traffic Control Devices Committee has
recommended that certain signs be phased in earlier and staffhas received a memo about those signs.
In general, the old word signs now would be replaced with symbol signs. For instance, the
international symbol sign would replace a ‘No Right Turn” sign. In some cases, one type of symbol
sign will be replaced with another type of symbol sign. For the most part, the old signs will be
phased out by January 1,2015, although there are some that need to be phased out by January 1,
2007,20 10, or 20 1 1. Staff will be watching those dates and make sure all of the signs are replaced in
Carlsbad and become MUTCD compliant by the due date.
Mr. Johnson said that no action is required by the Commission on this item today. The City Council
will be asked to adopt the Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) Manual on Uniform Traffic
Control Devices (MUTCD) 2003 Edition as amended by MUTCD 2003 California supplement by
resolution.
DISCUSSION:
Commissioner Bradshaw asked if all jurisdictions are going with the MUTCD.
Mr. Johnson stated that all jurisdictions in California are and that there are a few states that had their
own tra.fEc manual similar to what California did. They are also in the process of adopting the
MUTCD and will be using that document. It will truly be a nationwide document. Over the next few
years, Caltrans will phase out the California Supplement so that they will no longer have their own
supplement, which is almost like still having the Calm Traffic Manual. When that occurs, it will
be strictly 100% MUTCD that will be used in California.
Commissioner Bradshaw asked in terms of warrants, there was mention of an all-way stop in the
Caltrans Traffic Manual being 500 vehicles and in the MUTCD it is 300 vehicles on the major
streets. In the City of Carlsbad, will more locations be warranted then for all-way stops? If so, is that
going to have a financial burden or some kind of a backlash on the City?
Mr. Johnson stated that staffhas not had an opportunity to analyze this yet. The financial impact of
implementing an all-way stop that includes a stop sign, a limit line, and the stop legend is roughly
$500 per any one leg of the intersection. If staff were to create an all-way stop, it would be
approximately $2,000. In some cases on the major street a “Stop Ahead” sign and Stop Ahead
legend would be installed. In many cases where an all-way stop is established, the two side streets
already have stop signs, limit lines, and stop legends.
February 7,2005 Traffic Safety Commission Meeting Page5
Commissioner Bradshaw stated she understood, but in terms of efficiency, if you have every street
that has an all-way stop and you are trying to get traffic from Point A to Point B in terms of
efficiency, that might be a problem. It is not only a monetary burden, but there might be an
efficiency burden. It might be safer, but at what cost?
Mr. Johnson agreed. There are guidelines and engineering judgment always must be used. That is
where staff comes to the Commission with a recommendation. The Traffic Signal Qualification List
has a listing of future traffic signals, but staff is not recommending that they all immediately be
installed. An official traffic control device is not necessary at every intersection. Just meeting
warrants doesn’t mean a tsaffic control device has to be installed.
ITEM 7: REPORT FROM TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSIONERS
Commissioner Bradshaw asked why the Commissioner training seminar date keeps changing.
Mr. Johnson replied that the workshop/seminar she was referring to is for Boards and Commissions
and it is sponsored by the local section of the Institute of Transportation Engineers. They have had a
low response to the RSVP so far. When the seminar chair was asked when it would be held, he
thought perhaps it would be in the Spring, but more likely in the Fall. They are realizing that perhaps
it would be better to get on a two-year cycle to hold the workshop because in many cases there isn’t
always a turnover in Commissioners that would be dealing with trflic matters. So perhaps every
two years would yield a better attendance. In addition, they need to vary the topics a little more to
attract more attendees. The seminar organizers need at least thirty attendees, and fell a little short of
that number.
ITEM 8: REPORT FROM TRAFFIC ENGINEER
Mr. Johnson reported that next month’s regular meeting of the Trac Safety Commission would be
held on March 7,2005. The Council Chambers are still under construction and the Commission may
need to at the Faraday Center again next month. If the meeting is held at the Faraday Center again
next month, it will be in the room right behind the partitions in this room, Room 173A. The meeting
room location will be on the agenda that will be mailed to the Commissioners. In addition, a
memorandum will be sent to the Commission as a reminder.
February 7,2005 Traffic Safety Commission Meeting
ADJOURNMENT:
Chair Cress adjourned the Regular Meeting of February 7,2005 at 3:20 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Ruth Steckdaub
Minutes Clerk
Page 6