Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-05-06; Traffic Safety Commission; MinutesMEETING OF: TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION DATE OF MEETING: May 6,2002 (Regular Meeting) TiME OF MEETING: 3:M) P.M. PLACE OF MEETING: ClTy COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER: Acting Chairperson Courtney called the Meeting to order at 3:02 p.m. Acting Chairperson Jim Courtney welcomed new Traffic Safety Commissioner, Howard Heffner. ROLL CALL: Present: Acting Chairperson Jim Courtney Commissioner Bob Mertz Commissioner Jerry Schall Commissioner Howard Heffner Absent Commissioner Keith Gillfillan staff Members present: Robert Johnson, Deputy City Engineer, Transportation Lt. Mike Shipley, Carfsbad Police Department Sgt. Kelly Cain, Carlsbad Potice Department APPROVAL OF MINUTES: April 1,2002 ACTION: VOTE: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: Motion by Commissioner Schall, and duly seconded, to apCKove the minutes of the regular meeting of April 1,2002 as presented. 3-0-1 Courtney, Mertz, Schall None Heffner Commissioner Keith Giltfillan anived at 3:05pm taking his place on the dais. -4 May 6,2002 Page 2 ITEM 4 - ORAL COMMlJNtCATIOffS: None ITEM 5 9 PREVIOUS BUSINESS: Robert Johnson, Deputy Ci Engineer, Transportation noted that the Ambrosia Lane prima facie speed limit, that was discussed at the regular Traffic Safety Commission meeting on April 2, 2002, is tentatively scheduled to go before the City Council on Tuesday, May 14,2002. NEW BUSINESS: tT€M 6A hnta Avenue - Request for instaltation of a streetlight Robert Johnson, Deputy City Engineer, Transportation, stated that agenda item MA is a request for installation of a street light on Branta Avenue. Ms. Celeste Tonai a resident of Branta Avenue initiated this item. Ms. Tonai contacted staff approximately five months ago inquithlg about getting a streetlight installed on Bmnta Avenue. At that time staff suggested to her that she might want to discuss the matter wlth her neighbors that would be affected by a streetlight installation. Staff was concerned that the installation of a streetlight at this location couM be controversial, in the sense that some residents may want the streetlight, white others do not. Ms. Tonai did canvas the neighbors on Branta Avenue and Black Swan Place. In addiiion, she circulated a petition to determine the sentiment of the neighborhood regarding a streetlight and discwered that thee was opposition to the concept of having the streetlight instalied on Branta Avenue. Refenjng to an OV8mead s", Mr. Johnson commented that Branta Avenue is B short residential street, approximately 500 feet in length, when measured centerline of Black Swan Plam to centerfine of Aviara Drive, and it is located in the Cantata development in Aviara. At the time of construction and development of Cantata it was considered to be Phase One - Unit E of Aviara development. Branta Avenue was shown on improvement plan drawing 295.2, sheet 4 of 23. The subdivision design was CT-85-35. The improvement plans are construction plans that the developer uses when a contractor is hired to install infrastructure. Typically shown on an improvement plan is the road atiinment, both horizontal and vertical, curb and gutter, sidewalks, driveways, sewer lines, waterlines, storm drains and streettiihts. In the case of Branta Avenue, the City Engineer signed the subdivision improvement plans on June 4, 1901 and subsequently the subdivision and the roads were constructed. A streetlight was not shown on the approved improvement plans for Branta Avenue, hence a streetlight was not constructed. Continuing, Mr. Johnson noted that Ciy standards do require streetlights on residential streets. In the case of a residential street of local street, as it is designated, the spacing should be 500 feet measured on each side with 250 feet staggered, e.g. a streetlight is installed on one side of the street and then 250 feet further down the road another street tight is installed on the opposite side of the street, then another 250 feet a streetlight is installed on the opposite side of !he street, hence the staggered effect of streetlights. Mr. Johnson mentioned that the distance is not necessarily always exactly 250 feet apari. He noted that to the greatest extent possible, the City attempts to place the streetlights on property lines so that they do not interfere with driveways or other locations in front of the residences. Streetlights usually meet the 250 foot staggered, 500 foot distance requirement. May 6,2002 - rRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION page 3 Mr. Johnson noted that in the case of Branta Avenue a streetliht should have been shown on the improvement ptan and installed at a mid-block location. For some unknawn reason, the streetlight was overlooked in the design process and also overlooked in the plan check process that was conducted by the City. Referring to Exhibit 2 in the Commissionsr's packet and on the overhead slide, he stated that them are other streetllghts in the neighborhood. Mr. Johnson commented that the petiin that Ms. Tonai submitted included those individuals that wre in favor of the streetlight on Branta Avenue and those opposed. Reasons sited for installation of the streetlight Indubed: o Branta Avenue is a dark street that invites theft and crime o Danger for pedestrians walking down the street or crossing in the middle of #e street o Taxes have been paid for streetlights o Omission of City standards needs to be corrected o Tot lot area, which is approximately where the streetlight should have been installed, is a dark area Residents opposed to the streetliht also gave reasons why the streetlight should not be installed at this time: o Streetlight would shine into the bedrooms and backyards of some of the homes o The righting of the tot lot could potential\y attract people to gather at this location at niQM o Individuals purchased their homes knowing that there was no streetlight on Branta Avenue o Street light would impact privacy o Unfair to change a situation that has existed on Branta Avenue and in the neighborhood for the past eight years Mr. Johnson commented that because there were disagreements between the neighbors regarding the installation of the streetlight on Branta Avenue, staff held a neighborhood (community) meeting at the Faraday Center on Monday, April 8, 2002. Are8 residents affected by the proposed installation of the streetlight were invited to the meeting. In addition to Mr. Johnson and Sgt Kelly Cain, residents from seven homes in the area attended the meeting. The purpose of the meeting was to dww options, and listen to the concerns of residents opposed to as well as those in favor of the instaltatiin of the streetlight. The meeting lasted approximately an hour and a half; both sides having ample time to express their viewpoints. Unfortunately, there was no consensus reached at the meeting. Options for other types of streetlights, e.g. mission bell style liht, or lamppost light, rather than the standard cobrahead light, were discussed but rejected by the residents. Other alternatives discussed at the meeting and rejected by residents that were either in favor of or opposed to the street light included: o Inmased hardscape lighting o Install perimeter lighting in yard o Instalt motion detector lighting o Turn on porch fights o Establish a Neighborhood Watch program The polarity of the neighboffmd was steadfast and no compromise solution could be achieved. Upon conclusion of the meeting, residents agreed that they could not agree on having a streetlight installed on Branta Avenue. The residents were informed that a recommendation would be obtained from the Traffic Safety Commission with a final decision by the City Council, MF. Johnson stated that because there was no middle ground on the issue, the Traffic Safety Coof7linaflng Committee recommends that a standaa, Ctty of Carlsbad highmast street light be installed on Branta Avenue and that it be placed on the east property line of the tot lot that is located on the north side of the street. He noted that a shield could be installed on the backside of the streetlight to help minimize the light that may intrude on the nearby homes. Mr. Johnson mentioned that six letters submitted from individuals not able to attend this meeting were received and forwarded to each Commissioner. Letters were received from the following individuals: Jayna Regan 141 7 Branta Avenue Catisbad, CA Rick and Susan Peterson 1416 Branta Avenue Catisbad, CA Luigi Simone 141 5 Branta Avenue Cartsbad, CA Maggie Lee 141 1 Branta Avenue Cartsbad, CA Dick and Jane Sanders 1409 Branta Avenue Carlsbad, CA Joe and Ann O'Brien 141 3 Branta Avenue Cartsbad, CA Acting Chairperson Courtney asked if there were questions of staff. Commissioner Giltfillan asked if the letters were in favor or opposed to the instaliation of the streetlight. Mr. Johnson stated that all of the letters were in favor of the instailation of the streetlight on &anta Avenue. Commissioner Schall requested clarificatSon regarding the shield to block liht. Mr. Johnson stated that the aluminum shieM or plate is placed on the backsMe of the streetlight and the shield helps to keep some of the lighting from invading nearby backyards and bedrooms. He stated that the placement of the shield is not done on a regular basis because the streetlights are designed with a 'cut-off luminaire" and therefore over abundance of light should not be a problem. Some individuals do believe that the shield does help eliminate unwanted light and where it can be done staff does accommodate the request and install shields. Commissioner Schall asked if in Mr. Johnson's opinion shielding the light on the badrside was an effective method. Mr. Johnson said that no complaints have been received in the locations where the shields have been installed. Commissioner Hsffner noted that residents opposed to the installation of the streetlight live on both sides of the street. He wondered if a shield cwld be installed on both sides of the liht, thus satisfying all residents. Mr. Johnson commented that this is probably a situation where not everyone will be satisfied. He noted that the shield could be installed on the backside of the streetlight. In addition, he mentioned that there are options to the standard cobrahead type streetlight as mentioned previously. Mr. Johnson advised the Commission that they could make a recommendation to consider alternative streetlight options. May 6,2002 Page 5 Acting Chairperson Courtney stated that limited success has been obtained by shietding some streetlights on the backside, but noted that this has only been done on lights in parks adjacent to residential areas and questioned if shietds have been placed on streetlights in residential areas. Mr. Johnson stated that shields have been placed on the backside of streettights in residential areas. Typtcaftv, the front side is not shlekled because that tight needs to be directed into the roadway. Commissioner GitlfHtan asked if there was a homeowners assocfation for this neighbomood? Mr. Johnson replied yes. Commissioner GiMttan noted that as a homeowners association nothing precluded the residents from instatling an ornamental light in the tot lot. Mr. Johnson mentioned that the WA could install riming on mate property only. He noted that Branta Avenue is a public street. As there were no additlonat questions of staff, Acting Chairperson Courtney opened public testimony. Valerie Thomas, 7318 Black Swan Ptace, Cartsbad, CA 92009, said she has Wed at this address for nearly eight years. She noted that the rear of her house! faces a passive use park and Branta Avenue. She mentioned that the home was purchased in the first phase of the devetopment and that they had the choice of lots. In choosing tot 22, one of the most important factors considered was the reasonabie degree of prtvacy afforded by the street layout and lighting at the time of purchase. She noted that her residential lot backs up to what the builder referred to as a meditation park and has a lovety and peaceful view of the park, driving range and the La Costa hiltsides. Mrs. Thomas feels that the instaltation of an additional streetfight on Branta Avenue, etght years after the oomptetion of this development, would result in loss of privacy, diminished quality of tife and enjoyment of her home. She noted that once instalted, a streetlight on Branta Avenue would shine directty into her backyard and bedroom. She mentioned that Branta Avenue has been the site of many day and night hdiday celebrations without incident or complaint and that Carisbad potice statistics wit1 show no history of crime or accidents on Branta Avenue. Mrs. Thomas requests that if a streetlight must be instatted, the City should carefutty consider street layout and homeowners privacy issues and therefore install a I~tevel 8 to 10 foot high streetlight with front shielding towards the park and surrounding homes. In addition, she suggested that the city fund the cost for the installation of addkionat trees for the pertmeter of the park, which wwkt btock unwanted light and stilt attow desiraMe views. Conctuding, Mrs. Thomas invited the Commissioners to her home to experience how the installation of the standard streetlight would negatively affect her home and family. Acting Chairperson Courtney requested that Mrs. Thomas indicate on the overhead slide of the development, exadty where her home was located. Mrs. Thomas pointed to the comer lot on the northeast corner of the Black Swan Place/Branta Avenue intersection. Uay 6,2002 Page 6 Celeste Tonai, 1414 Branta Avenue, Carlsbad, CA, stated that she was requesting that a streetlight be placed on Branta Avenue. She mentioned that Branta Avenue does not wmpty with the minimum standards for streetlight spacing placement for the CPy of Carlsbad. Branta Avenue is approximatety 500 feet long and has no streetright. A streetlight should have been placed in the middle of Branta Avenue to comply with the minimum standard when the area was first developed. For reasons unknown the streetlight was not installed. In candusion, Ms. Tonai requested that Brant8 Avenue conform to City standards for streetlight placement, thus affording the residents on Branta Avenue the same sense of safety and security that the other residents in the CantatalAviara area presently enjoy. Commissioner Gilffitlan requested that Mrs. Tonai indicate on the overhead sfii of the develcipment, exactly where her home was located. Mrs. Tonai pointed to her home. David Thomas, 7318 Black Swan Place, Carfsbad, CAI stated that this was not a traffic issue, but a security issue, and a neighborhood issue with adverse impacts. It is not the same as deciding whether or not to install a STOP sign or STOP light. He noted that there are issues that affect the quality of fife for the homeowners. If the streetlight is installed where recommended by staff it would shine into the backyards and bedrooms of several homes. Mr. Thomes noted there are alternatives availabie; he befieved that putting in a streetlight at the proposed location was irreversibie and not something that could be turned off at 10 pm when one goes to sleep. He mentioned that 8 ’win-win’ solution should reached, so that al of the neighbors would be satisfed and suggested that tandscape lighting or turning on the porch lights or using flashlights while walking cauM be viable options. Noting that the intended use of the park on the City’s master pt8n was passive use, he feared that the installation of a streettiiht would increase the intensity of the use of the park. In addition, he expressed concern that the installation of a streetfight could potentially cft?ate an attractive nuisance by drawing people to the area at night. He noted that the installation of a streettight could also potentially create 8 view obstruction from several of the homes. In conclusion, Mr. Thomas stated that the installation of a standard cobrahead streettight would prevent residents in the area from enjoying their homes with a reasonable expectation of privacy and suggesteU that alternative lighting such as a mission bell style or 10 faot high streetlight or lamppost be considered. Noting that there is a streetlight in front of the Thomas residence, Commissioner Me& ask& if he found this streetlight objectionabte. Mr. Thomas reptied no, because it is in the front of his house. He noted that the reason he objeds to the installation of the streetfiiht at the proposed tocation is due to the shape of his lot and the fad that the proposed streetlight would shin8 into his backyard and master bedroom. Commissioner Cilffillan asked the elevation of Mr. Thomas lot in relation to the tot lot. Mr. Thomas stated slight betow, appraxtmately 3 feet. As there were no additional pubtic comments, Acting Chairperson Courtney dosed public testimony. - TRAFFIC SAFETY CWSSION Page 7 Addressing Sgt Cain, Commissioner Heffner requested information regarding any probtern incidents on Branta Avenue. Sgt Cain replied a petty-theft incident occurred within a btock of Branta Avenue, but no traffic incidents. Commissioner Sctratt noted that when he drove the area at night, the streetlight tocateel on Aviara Drive does not provide adequate light on Branta Avenue. He suggested that the streetlight shoutd not be placed on the tot lot but should be ptaced one tot doser to Aviara Drive on the north side of the street. Viewing the area location map on the overfwad slide, the Commissioners discussed Commissioners Schatt recommendation in detait. As there was no additional discussion, Adtng Ch8irpeWn Courtney closed discusion and called for a motion. Noting that the effediveness of the tighting on Aviara Drive is minimal, to help Branta Avenue, Commissioner Me& concurred with Commissioner Schall. Commissioner GIHitlan noted that from a safety and security perspective a streetlight is needed on Branta Avenue. Noting that the proposed streetli should be installed on the lot further to the east of the tot lot, he concurred with Commissioners Schatl and wlertz. As the City is tiable if someone gets hurt on the street due to improper righting, Acting Chairperson Courtney stated that the Commission had no choice; a streettiiht must be instatfed on Branta Avenue to conform with Ci poticy and standards. In additimn, he reiterated that every homeowner that fronts on Branta was in favor of the instaltation of the streetlight. In condusion he stated that darkness breeds loitering and unsavory type characters and soggests that the light be instalted in the tot tot to fQM the park area as the Traffic Safety Coordinating Committee recommended. Commissioner Schatt commented that the tighting from Black Swan Place illuminates the tot tot adequately. As he just returned from vacation, Acting Chairperson Courtney mentioned that he has not been to the area at night. Addressing Mr. Johnson, Commissioner Heffner requested clarification on the tess obtrusive tiihting options. Stating that a consensus could not be reached at the neighborhood (community) meeting, on type of streetlight, Mr. Johnson reinterated that the cobrahead styte streettight was the City standard and was recommended by the Traffic Safety Coordinating Committee. He mentioned that the lamppost style streettight was the tess obtrusive and usuatty done for decorative purposes. He noted that when used, the lamppost spacing is doser than the cobrahead style. There would be some light provided by a lamppost styte, but not as much as one woutd get with the City standard cobrahead style streetlight. Acting Chairperson Courtney asked Mr. Johnson if it was feasibte for staff to revisit the area to determine the most optimum location for the instattation of the streetlight. Mr. Johnson repffed this coutd be done if that was the Commission recommendation. Acting Chairpetson Courtney’s recommendation was discussed in detail. May 6,2002 c TRAFFIC SAFETY CC)"ISSION A Page 8 Commissioner sctlati asked if the Traffic Safety Coordinating Committee looked at the area at night. Mr. Johnson stated the staff is famitiar with the situation, he visited the location at night, but he did not know if staff visited the area at night. Commissioner Gilfitfan asked if it would be an appropriate action for the Cornmission to recornmen0 the stmetlight be instaltd, and the Wion subject to the consensus of the neighborhood. Mr. Johnson stated that it was an action that the Commission could take, but he was not at ail sure that the neighborhood residents coutd read a consensus since the neighbor%aod meeting failed in this attempt in Aprit. Acting Chairperson Courtney stated that he could not support Commissioner Giltfillan's recommendation. As there was no further discussion, Acting Chairperson Courtney dosed discussion and called for a motion. MOTION: ACTtON: Motion by Commissioner Mea, and duly seconded, to adopt the recommendation of the Traffic Safety Coordinating Committee, that a standard streetlight be instalfed, with the exception that the Commission recommends installing the standard streetlight on the lot iine between parcels 22 and 23, which is one lot northeast of the recommended position made by the Traffic Safety Coordinating Committee and that it be placed on the north side of the street. VOTE: 4-1 -0 AYES: Giltfittan, Mea, Schatt, Heffner NOES: Courtney ABSTAiN: Nom Acting Chairperson Courtney mentioned that this item would go before the City Council for the finat detenninaiion regarding if a streetlight should be instatted on Branta Avenue. ITEM 7 None ITEM 8 None REPORT FROM TRAFFIC COMMISSIONERS REPORT FROM TRAFFtC ENGINEER May 6,2002 / TRAFFIC SAFETY CoklMISSION -\ ADJOURNMENT: By proper motion the Regular Meeting of May 6,2002 was adjourned at 353 p.m. ad Respectfully submitted, c Dianna Scott Minutes Clerlr