Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-04-07; Traffic Safety Commission; MinutesMINUTES MEETING OF : DATE OF MEETING: TIME OF MEETING: PLACE OF MEETING: TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION April 7,1997 (Regular Meeting) 3:OO p.m. City Council Chambers CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Blake called the Meeting to order at 3:OO p.m. ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioners Allen, Blake, and Green Absent: Courtney and Gilfillan Staff Members Present: Bob Johnson, Traffic Engineer Please note: Although absent at Roll Call, Commissioner Gilfillan arrived 3:08 p.m., during the Staff Report, and was in attendance throughout the remainder of the meeting. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: None ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None PREVIOUS BUSINESS: Traffic Engineer, Bob Johnson, reported that the speed zone issue regarding Batiquitos Drive (and previously discussed by this Commission), will be heard by the City Council on Tuesday, April 8,1997. In addition, the prima facie speed limits, on Kestrel Drive and Calle Acervo, will be before the Council for their consideration on Tuesday, April 15, 1997. NEW BUSINESS: 6A. Tamarack Avenue and El Camino Real Intersection - Request to eliminate eastbound “Right Turn Only” lane and convert to a THROUGWRIGHT shared lane. Traffic Engineer Bob Johnson presented an in-depth staff report based on the results of a recently completed traffic study at the intersection of Tamarack Avenue and El Camino Real. Mr. Johnson pointed out that this item was considered by this Commission in April 1994 at the request of Commissioner Bud Green, and at that time, the Commission recommended, by a 3-2 vote, that no changes were necessary. To date, Tamarack Avenue is designated as a Secondary Arterial and peak hour Level of Service (LOS) counts taken during the months of July and August, in the years 1992 through 1996, have been incorporated into this study. Mr. April 7, 1997 TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION Page 2 Johnson stated that staff has observed this intersection, extensively, during the past four months and these observations indicate that all through vehicles “clear” the intersection on each signal cycle and no operational problems exist. Staff studied the mid-block collision history for this intersection which showed the absence of any collisions on the west leg, suggesting that the intersection is operating satisfactorily with the current configuration. Mr. Johnson pointed out some of the negative results that could occur with the changing the right hand only lane to a through lane, such as wasted fuel due to longer waits, increased air pollution while idling at the intersection, and increased “right hand turn” driver frustration. Mr. Johnson concluded his report by stating that while they will continue to monitor the intersection, staff has found that it is operating at a high level of efficiency and that no safety or queuing problems exist and therefore staff recommends that the eastbound RIGHT TURN ONLY lane remain in its current configuration and that it NOT be converted to a shared THROUGWRIGHT turn lane. Chairperson Blake asked why all of the traffic counts were taken in the afternoodevening and none taken in the morning, and if that is because business in that area has diminished. Mr. Johnson stated that, after studying some previous traffic movement studies, they concluded that if there were going to be any problems they would probably occur in the p.m.’s and consequently only recorded the heavier traffic movements in the afternoodevening. Chairperson Blake asked how long the peak right turn use lasts. Mr. Johnson responded that “peak hour” changes, depending on volumes. He added that his staff determines the “peak hour” from the Growth Management reports and explained how the Growth Management studies are accomplished. Commissioner Green, regarding Exhibit 2, pointed out that the “through lane” on the west leg does not line up with the 2 lanes on the east side of the intersection and he has observed that when a eastbound motorist comes down the hill and realizes that he is in the “right turn only” lane, he often proceeds straight across and creates a dangerous situation because it is inconvenient to merge into the through lane. He went on to point out, however, that the accident survey only reports on the approach to intersection and not on the intersection, where (in his opinion) there is a higher likelihood of accidents occurring. Mr. Johnson stated that if staff is studying an intersection, they would only look at the statistics of that intersection. On the other hand, if they are studying a road segment, they would only look at the statistics regarding that segment. Commissioner Green stated that a driver in the existing through lane would expect to be able to use either of the two lanes because the lane on the eastbound side appears to be right in the middle of the two and equally accessible, and in his opinion, creates a dangerous situation for which this change should be considered. Commissioner Green challenged the criteria for leaving the “right turn only” lane, as it is, by citing the intersection at El Camino Real and Carlsbad Village Drive. He pointed out that the distance between Amberwood Court and El Camino is 2 15’ (considered to be too short a distance to have a shared throughhight turn lane) is longer than the distance between the driveway and El Camino Real (1 53 feet) on westbound Carlsbad Village Drive, which currently has a left turn lane, a through lane, AND a shared througldright turn lane. Mr. Johnson responded by stating that has been no report of any side-swipes at Tamarack and El Camino and the concept of a dangerous, confusing, deceiving, etc., situation, is not being reflected in the field. He also pointed out that this is primarily a “commute7’ route and the drivers know how the intersection works. Commissioner Green then stated that the duty of the Commission is to take action to avoid potential problems and he April 7, 1997 TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION Page 3 believes that this remains a potential problem, particularly with the increase in density and traffk. Commissioner Allen asked if there is a “right turn only” or “must turn7, lane from northbound El Camino to eastbound Tamarack. Mr. Johnson stated there is no dedicated turn lane there. Commissioner Allen, referring to the studies of 3/6,3/13, and 3/18, pointed out that out of 90 cycles observed, there were only 2 situations where cars went straight across the intersection when they should have turned right. Mr. Johnson corrected the Commissioner’s interpretation of the studies by explaining that the numbers he was referring to, indicates the number of cars in line to make the right turn and the subsequent number of cars that were able to make the turn on a red light and does not reflect the number of cars that may have gone straight through. Commissioner Green asked how they can be sure that the number of vehicles indicated to be in the right lane on red, actually turned right on the green. Mr. Johnson stated that this study was done in the manner he described and then stated that if they want to determine how many go straight through, they would have to do turning movement count and make the proper notations as to how many went straight through. Commissioner Gilfillan, for clarification, asked if the other legs of the intersection have the same level of service (LOS) as was mentioned previously. Mr. Johnson stated that this LOS represents the entire intersection. Commissioner Gilfillan also asked if, on this particular leg, there is a problem with allowable green time for pedestrians at the crosswalk and also if there is a crossing guard. Mr. Johnson pointed out that this is a school location, with an adult crossing guard, and there is plenty of additional green time to allow a very large number of children ample time to cross. Commissioner Gilfillan asked if there is signage and striping to indicate the various directions of movement, in the appropriate places, for that intersection and was answered affirmatively. Commissioner Gilfillan also asked if the exit at Amberwood Court is designated as a “right turn only” Mr. Johnson stated that it is not and that it is a full access entrancelexit. Commissioner Gilfillan also inquired as to whether that area is at “build out” Mr. Johnson stated that it is not at “build out” and there is a vacant parcel on the southeast comer with the potential of becoming some type of commercial project. Commissioner Gilfillan then asked that, if and/or when that parcel is developed, does the possibility exist that the City will condition the development with improvements to the intersection. Mr. Johnson stated that if and when a project comes in, they would be responsible for roadway improvements. Chairperson Blake stated that he drove through that section in the evenings, for many years, and has observed more cars queued in the straight through lane during the later hours as opposed to the earlier hours of the evening and has also April 7, 1997 TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION Page 4 observed several vehicles going straight through from the “right turn only” lane as well. He also stated that in his opinion, if the intersection at Carlsbad Village Drive and El Camino functions without incident with a shared through/right turn lane, then he sees no reason why a like intersection at Tamarack and El Camino can’t function in the same manner. By the same token, he stated that he feels it is unnecessary to restrict the flow of through traffic just to accommodate a little extra traffic in the mornings. Mr. Johnson pointed out that it is not just a two hour period in the mornings that is of concern, but with the tight geometrics of the area, it is a twenty-four hour concern. Commissioner Green asked where the “Right Turn Only” sign is located on eastbound Tamarack at El Camino and would Mr. Johnson agree that the sign is much closer to El Camino Real than to Amberwood Court. Mr. Johnson indicated that the sign is between Amberwood Court and El Camino Real and is about half-way in between the two and clearly visible. Commissioner Green stated that the sign is considerably closer to the intersection and does not allow enough time to move into the proper lane. Mr. Johnson maintained that the sign is clearly visible and gives enough time to make the proper lane change. Commissioner Green cited the fact that the “right turn only” sign gives drivers in the through lane a false sense of security thinking that they will have safe passage into either of the lanes ahead and when drivers choose to ignore the “right only” sign, that would take away the sense of security from the other drivers. Commissioner Allen pointed out that drivers making a right turn onto Tamarack, eastbound off of El Camino, use the far right lane that would be used by through traffic, if the intersection were changed. He also asked if there are arrows in the lanes to indicate the proper direction of travel. Mr. Johnson indicated that the striping (arrows) is shown in Exhibit 2 and the pavement arrows supplement the signs. ACTION: The motion by Commissioner Allen, and duly seconded, to approved the recommendations of the Traffic Safety Coordinating Committee for Item #6A, as presented, failed by a tie vote and will again be brought before this body at a time when a 111 Commission is present. AYES: Allen and Gilfillan - NOES: Blake and Green Commissioner Green suggested that a study be done at Carlsbad Village Drive and El Camino (westbound) to see what percentage of cars turning right from the #2 lane is. Mr. Johnson stated that there are many such intersections in the City and it would take an inordinate number of man hours to study them all. Commissioner Green pointed out that Carlsbad Village Drive and El Camino are very close to the intersection at issue. Commissioner Allen stated that prior to the widening of the intersection of Alga Road and El Camino, there was a right turn lane (northbound) and when the street was widened, the right turn lane was eliminated. As a result, as many as 25 to 30 cars have been backed up, most of which are waiting to make that turn. April 7,1997 TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION Page 5 6B. AVENIDA ENCINAS, CARLSBAD BOULEVARD TO POINSETTIA LANE - Request to establish a prima facie speed limit. Traffic Engineer, Bob Johnson, presented the staff report and indicated that the northerly portion of Avenida Encinas (north of Poinsettia) has an established prima facie speed limit of 35 miles per hour. Now that Avenida Encinas is completed and because the southerly portion dqes not have a posted speed limit, staff conducted an engineering and traffic survey, the purpose of which was to establish a speed limit. The results of those surveys indicate that a 35 mile per hour speed limit is warranted. Based on those results, the Traffic Safety Coordinating Committee recommends that a 35 mile per hour prima facie speed limit be established on the southerly section of Avenida Encinas. Commissioner Gilfillan asked if the design curves are within the city standards and was answered affirmatively. He also asked if the road would, at build-out, match the section north of Windrose Circle. Mr. Johnson explained that the studies show that, even at build-out, it will not require four lanes and therefore the road will remain in it’s current configuration. ACI’ION: On motion by Commissioner Gilfillan, and duly seconded, the TraEc Safety Commission approved Item 6B, as presented, to establish a prima facie speed limit of 35 miles per hour, on the subject portion of Avenida Encinas between Carlsbad Boulevard and Poinsettia Lane. AYES: Blake, Allen, Green and Gilfillan REPORT FROM TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSIONERS: Commissioner Green stated that he has one undeveloped picture of a city maintenance truck, parked on a sidewalk, and will bring it to a meeting after it is developed. REPORT FROM TRAFFIC ENGINEER: Mr. Johnson reminded the Commissioners of the training session to be held on April 29, 1997, and urged each to attend, if possible. He also announced that those who are interested in attending the Commissioners’ training session in San Diego in May, will get information on that meeting, in the mail. ADJOURNMENT: By proper motion, the Regular Meeting of April 7, 1997, was adjourned at 356 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Minutes Clerk