Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-10-05; Traffic Safety Commission; MinutesMINUTES MEETING OF: DATE OF MEETING: TIME OF MEETING: PLACE OF MEETING: TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION October 5,2009 (Regular Meeting) 3:00 p.m. City Council Chambers CALL TO ORDER: Vice-Chair Roney called the Meeting to order at 3:00 p.m. ROLL CALL: Present: Absent: Staff Members Present: Vice-Chair Guy Roney Commissioner Gordon Cress Commissioner Jairo Valderrama Commissioner Steve Gallagher Chair Jack Gumming Robert Johnson, City Engineer Doug Bilse, Traffic Signal Systems Engineer Jim Murray, Associate Engineer, Transportation Division Lt. Don Rawson, Carlsbad Police Department APPROVAL OF MINUTES: August 3, 2009 ACTION: VOTE: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: Motion by Commissioner Cress, and duly seconded by Commissioner Gallagher, to approve the minutes of the regular meeting held on August 3, 2009, as presented. 4-0-0 Roney, Cress, Valderrama, Gallagher None None There was no Traffic Safety Commission meeting held in September 2009. October 5, 2009 Traffic Safety Commission Meeting Page 2 ITEM 4 - ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None. ITEM 5 - PREVIOUS BUSINESS: Vice-Chair Roney and Commissioner Gordon Cress were each presented with a Resolution of Commendation for service as Chairperson of the Traffic Safety Commission. Robert Johnson, City Engineer, reported that at a previous meeting the Traffic Safety Commission recommended that a stop sign be placed on Davis Avenue (west) at Knowles Avenue. That item was subsequently taken to City Council and Council adopted an ordinance to establish stop control on Davis Avenue (west) at Knowles Avenue. The stop sign, limit line, and stop legend have been installed. ITEM 6 - NEW BUSINESS: ITEM 6A: Carlsbad Residential Traffic Management Program. Mr. Johnson introduced item 6A and Doug Bilse, Traffic Signal Systems Engineer, who provided a verbal presentation with an overview of the current residential traffic management program and issues being considered as part of a proposed program revision. This is the first of several presentations regarding the Carlsbad Residential Traffic Management Program that will be presented to the Commission. Mr. Bilse explained he would review what traffic management is, review the current program, identify the issues that the Commission will be addressing in future presentations, and what the proposed changes are going to look like. Traffic management concepts encourage positive driver behavior in residential neighborhoods by adhering to the speed limit, reduce speeds on residential streets without reducing safety, and encourage citizen involvement through workshops to identify concerns and select traffic calming measures. Traffic management concepts evaluate the public acceptance of the program while integrating (1) education, (2) engineering, (3) enforcement, and (4) enhancement. In general, education and enforcement alone will not lead to long-term solutions to traffic management problems. Traffic management problems require commitment from the community to identify issues and reach consensus on solutions. Engineering works by installing physical measures designed to reduce vehicle speed and cut-through traffic. Measures should be self-enforcing, should not penalize drivers maintaining the speed limit, and should avoid re-routing traffic to other roads unless they are intended to carry diverted traffic. Traffic calming measures must not impede emergency response times. Landscaping enhancement improves effectiveness and safety. Vertical October 5, 2009 Traffic Safety Commission Meeting Page 3 treatments, such as trees, draw attention to upcoming traffic calming measures which improves the environment for non-motorized street users, improves the quality of life for residents, and increases the cost for landscaping and maintenance. Mr. Bilse stated the current Carlsbad Residential Traffic Management Program has three phases called Neighborhood, Study, and Implementation. Eligibility criteria for the phases require that Phase 1 measures have been attempted. The posted speed limit must be 25 or 30 miles per hour and the critical speed must exceed the speed limit by more than 5 miles per hour. Streets cannot be identified as a primary response route, and residents are located on one side of the street, school, or public facility is located on the street. There can be no more than two lanes, and curb-to-curb width cannot exceed 40 feet. Commissioner Gallagher asked for clarification of residents located on one side of the street or school or public facility. That kind of throws him off because it doesn't really sound like a residential street. Mr. Bilse clarified that the slide should just say residents are located on one side of the street or a school is located on the street. Commissioner Gallagher explained that when he looked at that public facility, that seemed to define that street as something as different than just a local street. Mr. Johnson said that often the type of land use on the street generates concerns about pedestrian safety or bicycle safety. Most of the time it is a residential area where people live on one or both sides of the street. There are a number of concerns about school areas which could be a candidate for traffic calming. A public facility that generates pedestrian volumes, such as a senior center, may be a candidate for a particular reason that would be studied and determined that that street needs traffic calming. The land uses on a residential street would be candidates if they meet the above criteria. Commissioner Gallagher said he was a little confused where it says "residential traffic calming." He assumed by definition that residential is 25 miles per hour streets. But then the 30 mile per hour street is thrown in and that technically is not a residential street as he interprets the vehicle code. Is that correct? Mr. Johnson remarked that the public often states they live in a residential area and, therefore, they should have a 25 mile per hour speed limit on their street. The Vehicle Code specifies that a residence district is the determining factor if there is a prima facie 25 mile per hour speed limit on the street. In the case of the Carlsbad Residential Traffic Management Program, residential was not October 5, 2009 Traffic Safety Commission Meeting Page 4 intended to only focus on a residence district street, which would have a prima facie 25 miles per hour speed limit. Depending on which street it is, it could be posted with 25 or 30 mile per hour speed limit signs and still be included in the program so that Phase 2 and Phase 3 can be finished. A 30 mile per hour speed limit posting requires that an Engineering and Traffic Survey be prepared. Mr. Bilse stated he would look at the wording and come back with a recommendation on the new plan exactly what streets are involved and which are not. There are some unique places where the resident density is not high enough to establish a residence district because of some other uses like a school, but it makes sense to calm the neighborhood. Returning to his presentation, Mr. Bilse stated traffic calming is the combination of mainly physical measures that reduce the negative effects of motor vehicle use, alter driver behavior, and improve conditions for non-motorized street users. Traffic control devices (notably stop signs and speed limit signs) are regulatory measures that require enforcement. By contrast, traffic calming measures are intended to be self-enforcing. Traffic calming measures rely on the laws of physics rather than human psychology to slow traffic. Street trees, street lighting, street furniture, and other streetscape elements, while complementary to traffic calming, do not directly compel drivers to slow. Route modification measures, such as diverters, street closures, and turn restrictions do not change driver behavior (i.e., speed), but simply modify driver routing options. Mr. Bilse indicated it is necessary to maintain emergency response times. Speed lumps and traffic circles have been found to add as much as 10 seconds per measure to response time. Accommodating emergency response vehicles tends to reduce the benefits of traffic management measures. There is no industry standard for traffic calming measures and there needs to be a rational planning and implementation process to assure police power to manage traffic is not arbitrary, capricious or unreasonable. City Council wants to consider stop signs as a simple and inexpensive way to slow traffic. They want to establish a threshold for funding projects based on a point system. Citizens often request speed bumps that are not included in the current CRTMP program. We will not consider speed bumps, but will discuss with the Fire Department using speed lumps in certain circumstances. Mr. Johnson explained the difference between a speed bump or speed hump and a speed lump. The speed lump has a cut out in the center that matches the width of the wheels of a fire apparatus so that the apparatus can proceed down the street and straddle the speed lump without going over the bump part of it. A speed lump merits discussion; it will depend on what police and fire have to say about the use of a speed lump. Commissioner Cress asked if speed lumps be an example of what is in the Costco driveway. It's an opening that most vehicles hit them, but they look like they have a wider stance. October 5, 2009 Traffic Safety Commission Meeting Page 5 Mr. Johnson mentioned he has not seen the Costco example, but said it sounded like a speed lump. Commissioner Valderrama commented that he has seen different fire truck sizes. Are the wheel bases still the same width? Mr. Johnson answered that for the most part they were. Because it is a truck, the openings in a speed lump are wide enough to accommodate two or three different widths of wheels and that a standard passenger type of vehicle would not be able to straddle it. Commissioner Gallagher asked if the wheel base of ambulances that also respond to the emergency situation are the same width as the fire trucks or are they more in line with the passenger vehicle. Mr. Johnson replied they are more in line with the passenger vehicle. That is the reason there is concern from the Fire Department about the speed lump. Considering how many times an ambulance goes down the residential street with a patient with a back problem getting an IV to how often the residents experience speeding 24/7 on their street and continuously call the police for enforcement, that is the dilemma. That is one of the trade-offs that has to be explored. Staff will have a meeting with fire and police and if it appears that speed lumps are a viable solution, it would be brought to the Traffic Safety Commission with the changes that Mr. Bilse is discussing. Mr. Bilse stated the proposed changes to the Carlsbad Residential Traffic Management Program will include: • Add stop signs as a traffic management tool. • Set a funding threshold for traffic calming plans. • Determine if speed lumps can be used without impacting emergency response times. • Limit use and spacing of certain measures along primary and secondary emergency response routes. • Develop design criteria to reflect Fire and Police Department concerns of traffic circles. • Review the definition for the Project Area of Influence (PAOI), e.g., should PAOI include all required users of the roadway or just residents on the street. Mr. Bilse indicated the new phases of the program could be as follows. Phase 1 - Data Collection - This continues the use of education and enforcement. Phase 2 - Traffic Control Devices - Use of striping and signing (including stop signs). This would require neighborhood support, but may not need an approved neighborhood plan. Phase 3 - Traffic Calming Plan - This must meet point threshold. Workshops need to be held to build neighborhood consensus on proposed measures. The plan results in self-enforcing measures. October 5, 2009 Traffic Safety Commission Meeting Page 6 Phase 4 - Implement Traffic Calming Plan - This is funded by the City Council on a competitive basis. Phase 5 - Route Diversion - This requires Phase 4 completion before Phase 5 is started. DISCUSSION: Commissioner Gallagher asked if the stop signs become part of Phase 2, does that recommendation still come to the Traffic Safety Commission for recommendation. Does that create any problems for the Commission? Mr. Bilse stated the Commission may be brought the unwarranted stop signs before the issue goes to the City Council for recommendation. In response to a question, Mr. Johnson said stop signs on Levante Street were probably put in 20-21 years ago. The residents wanted the speeds reduced at that time. There was no Carlsbad Residential Traffic Management Program for traffic calming. Residents typically think of stop signs as a way to slow traffic. The final details have not been worked out on the stop sign issue, but if it is an all-way stop that meets the criteria under traffic calming, then there is a chance it would not need to come to the Traffic Safety Commission. There is no need to delay the residents on their request by taking a concept to the Commission that has already been endorsed by the City Council. The all-way stop request that would come to the Commission, just as they do now, would be on those streets that would not qualify under a residential traffic calming program. Commissioner Gallagher asked if you put in unwarranted stop signs according to the Traffic Manual, what has been the police experience throughout the State if someone were to run a stop sign that was not legitimately meeting warrants according to the traffic manual. Just like a person who is speeding on a street where the speed limit was not set consistently with the traffic manual guidelines. Lt. Rawson stated that once City Council passes an ordinance for a stop sign, it is enforceable by the Police Department. If it is an unwarranted stop sign, by MUTCD standards, and City Council adopts it, the Police Department can enforce that vehicle code without any reservation about doing so. Over time, drivers who are familiar with the roadway adjust to the traffic measures - warranted or unwarranted - it is part of their roadway. As events happen, accidents, road closures or construction may force new users on those types of roadways that have these unwarranted situations. Some of those things could affect compliance. Commissioner Gallagher said Lt. Rawson stated that if it is an ordinance passed by the City Council, the Police Department would enforce it, which is understandable. If someone ran the stop sign and they challenged it at court, has someone contested that they knew it was an unwarranted stop sign and they were stopped running it? October 5, 2009 Traffic Safety Commission Meeting Page 7 Lt. Rawson replied that everyday in court people make that argument about speeding before the Traffic Commissioner. Regarding a stop sign, he didn't have knowledge but it seemed like a logical argument someone could make. Mr. Johnson said regarding a stop sign, one can think of a traffic signal. Both are official traffic control devices. The law indicates that if an official traffic control device is installed at the direction of the City Council, that official traffic control device must be obeyed. It doesn't say anything about whether it is warranted or not. It must be obeyed because it is an official traffic control device and the ticket would be upheld. There is no discretion on the part of the public. Whether we like it or don't like it or think it should be there or not, a stop sign is an official traffic control device. Commissioner Gallagher replied that when Mr. Johnson explained how a stop sign is automatically enforceable, that answered his question that he was concerned with. If an officer was called out by the residents to cite people who were running that inappropriate stop sign according to the MUTCD, that is going to put more demand on police officers and if they were to go to court to defend it, that is extra time, too. Mr. Johnson's explanation gives him a better comfort zone to know that police officers aren't going to exert any more effort than they are already doing. Mr. Bilse stated there were not enough police officers to enforce all streets. It is not possible to go to all the streets, so they are picking the worst ones, defining a small sub-group of streets that are narrow, residential, and have a speeding problem that they can validate. They can resolve it by putting in a stop sign. If that doesn't work, then traffic calming plans can be considered. Vice-Chair Roney said that based on what Mr. Bilse stated, is the City going to actually go out and look for these areas and then apply this policy, or are they waiting for a citizen to come in and request it. Mr. Bilse replied that the citizens come in to request it, and staff gathers the information and responds. It is the staff response to a community issue. Vice-Chair Roney stated over the last four years, in the Montero and Calaveras Hills developments, the builders put in some calming measures and they did that on their own. Mr. Johnson indicated that in Calavera Hills when some of the developments went through the discretionary review process, they were requested or required to put in some traffic calming measures. Robertson Ranch also has some traffic calming measures that have been built. With the newer developments, including the Villages at La Costa, staff has been trying to get some of those traffic calming measures included and constructed with the developer's money to help mitigate future problems. Vice-Chair Roney asked what ever happened to Sierra Morena Avenue and Donna Drive? October 5, 2009 Traffic Safety Commission Meeting Page 8 Mr. Johnson replied those were both in process currently for traffic calming. They are both very near the end of going through the development of the conceptual plan. It would then go to City Council. However, both streets may be on hold until they get revisions to the Carlsbad Residential Traffic Management Program to include stop signs. Individuals on both streets have indicated that if they could have stop signs then they think their problems go away. They even mentioned they wish they could have speed lumps. The traffic calming program will be revised, taken to City Council, receive approval, and then meetings with the residents of both streets will be held to determine if they want to make any changes. The reason staff is talking with the Commission today is that revisions to the Carlsbad Residential Traffic Management Program requires that it come to the Commission for a recommendation before it goes to City Council. Staff is following the process that the City Council approved in the program for traffic calming. Vice-Chair Roney asked if the Commission would have the opportunity or is expected to offer input on revisions to the Traffic Management Program. New landscaping is going to cost money. Is there any allocation for additional funds to be set up to accommodate any sort of traffic calming plan that might be implemented? Mr. Johnson indicated the Commission would not be expected to make recommendations based on future funding available for any kind of a program, whether it is including landscaping or a large number of traffic calming measures on the street. The Commission would offer their input into the changes that are being proposed to the traffic calming program and that is what would go to City Council. If staff was recommending a particular change and the Commission disagreed, the Commission recommendation would be presented to City Council. The input of the Commission is very important and they should not factor in the cost aspect of a traffic calming measure. Vice-Chair Roney asked if the Commission looks at the traffic calming plan being proposed, do any of the Commissioners have the opportunity to make recommendations regarding additions. For example, on road maintenance he understands there is no cost involved, but when you see those lumps, they have to be removed if you're going to be repaying the roads. Should these be things, that as Commissioners, be aware of or think about or just ignore it and let the staff handle those issues? Mr. Johnson indicated staff would give the Commission the pros and cons of each type of traffic calming measure. That would also be included in the program as it is now, so that the public has an understanding of what the advantages and disadvantages are and how that may play into a future acceptance of aparticular calming measure. Staff would not expect the Commission to try to figure out all of the details, but staff would welcome ideas and would recommend inclusion of those ideas if the Commission agreed. The Commission may recommend something that staff is opposed to, whether it is engineering staff, police or fire. That opposing viewpoint would be presented to City Council, and then City Council would have to make the decision. October 5,2009 Traffic Safety Commission Meeting Page 9 Mr. Johnson stated that when talking about the PAOI that Mr. Bilse addressed, a street where people live on may be a situation where residents on the next block or the adjoining street are included, so they would be part of the voting. When that was the case on Donna Drive, the complaints were about the linear nature of Donna Drive, but the PAOI includes some adjacent streets and residents that will also be voting. It isn't always just the people living on the street where the problem is that are the only ones to vote on a traffic calming program. ITEM 7: REPORT FROM TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSIONERS None. ITEM 8: REPORT FROM TRAFFIC ENGINEER Mr. Johnson informed the Commission that the next regularly scheduled Traffic Safety Commission meeting will be held on November 2, 2009 at 3:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. ADJOURNMENT: By proper motion, Vice-Chair Roney adjourned the Regular Meeting of October 5,2009 at 4:06 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Ruth Woodbeck Minutes Clerk