Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-05-02; Traffic and Mobility Commission; MinutesSee also June 6, 2022, Traffic and Mobility Commission meeting for further proceedings on all these items. TRAFFIC AND MOBILITY COMMISSION Minutes May 2, 2022, 4 p.m. CALL TO ORDER: 4 p.m. ROLL CALL: Perez, Linke, Penseyres, Fowler, Proulx and Newlands Coelho joined the meeting via teleconference PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Chair Perez led the Pledge of Allegiance. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Minutes of the Regular Meeting held March 7, 2022. Council Chambers 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive Carlsbad, CA 92008 Motion by Vice-Chair Linke, seconded by Commissioner Fowler to approve the minutes for the March 7, 2022, meeting as presented. Motion carried, 6/0/1 (Abstain: Commissioner Newlands) Minutes of the Regular Meeting held April 4, 2022. Motion by Vice-Chair Linke, seconded by Commissioner Fowler to approve the minutes for the April 4, 2022, meeting as presented. Motion carried, 7 /0 PUBLIC COMMENT: Gary Nissin requested an update on the Grand Promenade Study and requested that staff work with Ca/trans to remove the exiting ramp on Carlsbad Village Drive from /-5 North and move it to Pio Pico Drive. It will improve mobility and it would be safer for pedestrians and bicyclist. CONSENT CALENDAR: This item was pulled for discussion by Vice-Chair Steve Linke 1. PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR AVENIDA ENCINAS COASTAL RAIL TRAIL AND PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS Receive and consider public comments for Avenida Encinas Coastal Rail Trail and Pedestrian Improvements, CIP Project No. 6004 that were inadvertently omitted from the April 4, 2022, meeting of the Traffic & Mobility Commission. Vice-Chair Linke mentioned the public request for a pedestrian facility at the railroad track overpass where the lagoon trail ends south of Avenida Encinas. He asked if there was an update on this request. City Traffic Engineer Kim responded that this area was looked at by the consultant for a pedestrian crossing and it was established that the south portion is a public trail, but the north portion is a private property trail. As such we will not install a marked crosswalk at this location. Vice-Chair Linke inquired about Portage Way and the public request to focus pedestrian improvements in this area. There is currently a high visibility crosswalk going in this area. Are there any additional safety measures that could be implemented in this area? Page 1 of 8 City Traffic Engineer Kim responded that they have done many enhancements at this location over the years including enhancing the signs, flashing rapid beacons, and now will be adding the high visibility crosswalk. Vice-Chair Linke inquired about the same intersection but over where the shopping center driveway is and pedestrians are crossing at the Chase Bank. A suggestion is to have a pedestrian facility in this location. City Traffic Engineer Kim replied that staff met with the consultant to go over the public comments, they could not establish that there was any pedestrian access from the community to Avenida Encinas at that location and to the south. The main access vehicular and pedestrian is at the San Carlos location where there is a marked crosswalk. For this project a marked crosswalk at the southern driveway is not appropriate. Vice-Chair Linke mentioned that another public comment expressed concern over the reduction of Avenida Encinas to a single vehicle lane in each direction due to future and current congestion. Will there be a traffic study to look at vehicle traffic in that area? City Traffic Engineer Kim replied that there was an analysis performed and it was included in the last staff report. In his experience he does not believe the volume of traffic on this roadway will create congestion. There will be an adjustment to two lanes on Avenida Encinas going Southbound at Poinsettia Lane to account for the dual left turn lanes. Chair Perez asked when the single lane conversion was done on Avenida Encinas between Cannon Road and Palomar Airport Road? Also, has there been any post traffic analysis of the area since the lane reduction? City Traffic Engineer Kim responded that he does not have the exact date, but he believes it was a few years ago as part of a recycle water facility that went through the area and dug up the roadway. There has not been any post traffic analysis of the area but from observation the area is functioning fine. Motion by Vice-Chair Linke, seconded by commissioner Penseyres to receive the public comments for Avenida Encinas Costal Rail Trail and Pedestrian Improvement. Motion carried: 7 /0 DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS: 2. POLICE REPORT REGARDING TRAFFIC & MOBILllY RELATED MATTERS DURING THE MONTH OF APRIL 2022 -(Staff Contact: Lieutenant Jason Jackowski, Police Department) Staffs Recommendation: Receive a presentation Lieutenant Jackowski presented the report and reviewed a PowerPoint presentation (on file in the Office of the City Clerk) 3. FISCAL YEAR 2020-21 GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN/ GENERAL PLAN ANNUAL MONITORING REPORT CIRCULATION SECTION. ADOPTION OF GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN FINDINGS. DETERMINATION OF DEFICIENT STREET FACILITIES -Support staffs recommendation to City Council to: Page 2 of 8 1. Receive and file the attached Growth Management Plan, or GMP,/General Plan Annual Monitoring Report Circulation Section, prepared pursuant to Carlsbad Municipal Code, or CMC, § 21.90.130(d) and Gov. Code § 65400. 2. Recommend that the City Council adopt resolutions to: A. Determine the following street facilities to be deficient pursuant to CMC § 21.90.130(c) because they do not meet the vehicular level of service, or LOS, component of the city's circulation performance standard in the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan, or CFIP: 1. Eastbound Aviara Parkway between Manzanita Street and El Camino Real 2. Westbound Aviara Parkway between El Camino Real and Manzanita Street B. Determine the following street facilities to be built out and exempt from the vehicular LOS performance standard, in accordance with General Plan Mobility Element Policy 3- P.9 and the CFIP Circulation Performance Standard: 1. Eastbound Aviara Parkway between Manzanita Street and El Camino Real 2. Westbound Aviara Parkway between El Camino Real and Manzanita Street (Staff Contact: Nathan Schmidt Staffs Recommendations: Take public input and support staffs recommendations. Transportation Planning & Mobility Manager Schmidt presented the report and reviewed a PowerPoint presentation (on file in the Office of the City Clerk) Commissioner Newlands inquired if staff is requesting the exemption, but has plans for other measures to mitigate the problem. Transportation Planning & Mobility Manager Schmidt replied that due to the methodology that the City of Carlsbad uses to determine vehicle level of service at the facility level, it is essentially the short distance between the two intersections that is ca using it to fail. For this specific case staff does not see a feasible way to mitigate this deficiency. If we added another lane of travel in each direction, it would still operate at a level of service F because of the short segment. Commissioner Proulx inquired what prompted the recommendation for exemption of the listed street facilities that are found to be deficient. She also asked ifother facilities been exempted before? Transportation Planning & Mobility Manager Schmidt responded that this is the first time that this facility has been evaluated due to the monitoring report. Other facilities have been exempted before due to the same circumstances of the short segment length. Commissioner Fowler asked about the implication and impact on the growth management if a facility is found deficient, but the city cannot exempt it. Could there be a moratorium of development? Is this allowed by State Law? Transportation Planning & Mobility Manager Schmidt responded that could be an action but that is not something that is being proposed today. He agreed they would have to evaluate the State law in regards to that action. Assistant City Attorney Contreras responded that the part that is impacted by State Law is the residential moratorium which was stated in the VHCD letter from the Spring of 2022. Commissioner Fowler asked if this has any connection to the decision that only arterials and industrial areas will be evaluated. Also, what about residential streets? When will those be evaluated? Page 3 of 8 Transportation Planning and Mobility Manager Schmidt responded that was how the General Plan was written and it is all based on that policy. Local residential streets will not be evaluated for vehicle level of service. They will be evaluated for other modes of travel such as bicycle and other pedestrian modes. Commissioner Penseyres commented that the bike lane from the shopping center onto Aviara Parkway going westbound runs into the curb and the bicyclist then needs to move left into the traffic lane to avoid hitting the curb. This is for both leaving the shopping center and for those that are continuing straight down Aviara Parkway. This situation needs to be addressed with Multimodal Level of Service, or MM LOS, and this intersection should fail. Vice-Chair Linke commented that according to the General Plan exemptions can apply to any street that is prioritized for any mode of travel can be exempted from the prioritized mode. He also commented that these are the 32 and 33 exempted facilities and whenever a facility fails, we are just exempting it. Next year we may see a lot of facilities up to E and F again and more will need to be exempted. The City has been applying a Transportation Demand Management, or TDM, plan to address these issues that was created for a different situation. Transportation Planning & Mobility Manager Schmidt replied that when the Vehicle Level of Service, or VLOS, methodology was developed during a different time. We are now focusing on complete street improvements and VLOS sometimes conflicts with the goals of complete streets. Adding capacity does impact other modes, so we are often trying to seek a balance between all of the various modes for these facilities. This is why we have to justify some of these exemptions to meet the needs of all users. Vice-Chair Linke commented that in 2015 many promises were made regarding exemptions, transit improvements and modes of service and since then many of these promises have been broken. He encourages everyone to go back and review the implementation process of the General Plan to see that everything he mentions is accurate. Also, he is hesitant to accept the GMP Monitoring report because it does not include MM LOS. The MM LOS system has completely failed, as according to the General Plan, developers are supposed to contribute to MM LOS, but the city claims it never intended to enforce the minimum MM LOS level Don any pre-existing facility. The city has a Capital Improvement Program, or CIP, to fund projects, but the Growth Management Plan, or GMP, and the General Plan have been thrown out. Transportation Director Frank commented that we may see more exemptions in the future as roads get more congested and more development occurs. Some of these facilities may not be meeting the current level of standard during peak hours, but otherwise are operating fine. We do not want to recommend a CIP for an issue that only occurs during peak hours. Vice Chair Linke inquired about whether there is a plan to create a TDM program that will meaningfully address congestion in response to exemptions. Transportation Planning and Mobility Manager Schmidt responded that we are working to update the TDM program to address exemptions. Vice Chair Linke asked if it is accurate that it is the City's choice to not put a commercial moratorium. Assistant City Attorney Contreras brought up a comment from earlier about a legal argument and about being locked into certain pre-existing deficiencies. There are two citations to our GM P ordinance that speaks to what we do when new projects come before the city. The citations are 21.90.010 A3 and 21.90.0453. They stand for the proposition that there may be existing deficiencies and when new Page 4 of 8 development comes forward, those facilities that are going to be affected will need to be brought up to standards concurrent with the need created by new development. Our GMP provides this and has been in effect since 1987. As we get a new project, you look at that project and what that project will do to the street, and traffic flow. The developer is only required to address what that development would add to the surrounding area. These two citations exist, staff interpret them to apply prospectively to development on a project-to-project basis. Chair Perez brought up the Aviara Parkway and mentioned that the area is gridlocked during school drop off and pick-up from the middle school. This is a large area with a healthcare facility, business and more. If we exempt this location, what is the plan to address congestion. Can we get this situated with the TDM or traffic signaling? This still needs to be addressed even if we exempt this location. Transportation Director Frank replied that if we do a monitoring report and find that a segment is deficient then we do look at traffic operations and we look at the MM LOS issues as well. We will address the traffic report issues and bring the report to City Council. Commissioner Proulx asked how often this data is reviewed? Also, are new projects approved even if we know that they will end up being exempt? With the other modes of transportation in these exempt areas, is there a way to track if developing better routes for bicyclists, etc would make an impact in taking cars off the road? Transportation Planning and Mobility Manager Schmidt replied that the data is reviewed annually. During this process we do not review and remove facilities out of exempt status. When a project comes in, as part of a scope study we ask the projects to identify which exempt segments they would be adding trips to. They would then need to do a TDM plan for their project to adjust these exemption points. Commissioner Fowler explained that during a briefing on State Regulations by the City Council the impact of the Regulations on Growth Management was mentioned. It was clear that the idea was that developers are responsible for the facilities. At this point the streets are what they are, and they can only be improved to an extent with the city programs. Transportation Director Frank replied that they always try to condition developers to make improvements to the best of their ability. We conform with the General Plan and the State Laws and we do our best to move people in the safest and fastest way possible. Motion by Vice-Chair Linke, seconded by commissioner Penseyres to recommend that the City Council adopt resolutions to: Determine the following street facilities to be deficient pursuant to CMC § 21.90.130(c) because they do not meet the vehicular level of service, or LOS, component of the city's circulation performance standard in the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan, or CFIP: 1. Eastbound Aviara Parkway between Manzanita Street and El Camino Real 2. Westbound Aviara Parkway between El Camino Real and Manzanita Street B. Determine the following street facilities to be built out and exempt from the vehicular LOS performance standard, in accordance with General Plan Mobility Element Policy 3-P.9 and the CFIP Circulation Performance Standard: 1. Eastbound Aviara Parkway between Manzanita Street and El Camino Real 2. Westbound Aviara Parkway between El Camino Real and receive the public comments for Avenida Encinas Costal Rail Trail and Pedestrian Improvement. Motion carried: 7/0 Page 5 of 8 Motion by Chair Perez, seconded by Commissioner Newlands to receive and file the attached Growth Management Plan, or GMP/General Plan Annual Monitoring Report Circulation Section, prepared pursuant to Carlsbad Municipal Code, or CMC, § 21.90.130(d) and Gov. Code§ 65400. Motion carried: 4/3 (No: Vice-Chair Linke, Commissioner Penseyres and Commissioner Newlands) Vice-Chair Linke and Commissioner Penseyres requested that the minutes reflect that they do not approve this motion because of the non-inclusion of the Multi Modal Level of Service monitoring in the annual Growth Management Plan monitoring report. 4. NORTH COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE MULTI MODAL CORRIDOR PLAN -(Staff Contact: Nathan Schmidt, Public Works) Staffs Recommendation: Receive a presentation and provide input to staff on the plan. Transportation Planning & Mobility Manager Schmidt presented the report and reviewed a PowerPoint presentation (on file in the Office of the City Clerk) Vice-Chair Linke noted that different roadways on the presentation show inconsistencies in which type of bike lane will be used. He inquired about whether El Camino Real, Palomar Airport Road or College Boulevard are candidates for Class IV bike lanes and intersections? Transportation Director Frank replied that if there is a corridor with many intersections and transition points it does not warrant a Class IV bike lane. When they list Class IV, they also put in parenthesis that it could be a buffered Class II bike lane. A long stretch with no intersections would warrant a separate bike lane Class I or Class IV. Commissioner Penseyres commented that he spoke with the bike coalition representative regarding their comments about Avenida Encinas. The bike coalition claims they will not push their recommendation as they have not personally been in the area. He recommends that where we cannot put a Class IV bike lane we should consider the Class I bike lane which allows you to combine pedestrians and bicyclists. If we provide a Class I or Class IV bike lane we are required to provide something on the street for the cyclists that don't want to use these lanes. We need to keep the bike lane for those cyclists who want to continue to use the bike lanes. Motion by Commissioner Penseyres, seconded by Commissioner Proulx recommending the following: 1. The report should clarify inconsistencies within the document between the recommended bikeway facility types such as Class-II versus Class-IV bikeways 2. Provide additional consideration on the recommended use of flex lanes specifically on Palomar Airport Road and if they are considered request that provide reasonable justification that they will improve operations along the corridor. 3. Request to provide more detail on the proposed pedestrian crossing improvement recommendation and consider that they may impact other modes. 4. Ensure that College Boulevard remains as a mobility corridor and part of the Capital Improvement Program. 5. Provide additional consideration on the recommended use of flex lanes specifically on Palomar Airport Road and if they are considered requestthat provide reasonable justification that they will improve operations along the corridor. Page 6 of 8 6. Consider context when recommending conceptual design of bikeway facility types and ensure that all facilities are well vetted by the public. Motion carried: 7/0 CITY TRAFFIC ENGINEER COMMENTS: City Traffic Engineer Kim clarified that the Aviara Parkway at Manzanita Street section does not have a curb extension. This is the beginning of a cutout for a right turn only lane. Even though it is unstriped, there is also width for the bike lane. He will double check this and get back to the commission at the next meeting. Staff received comments about speed and congestion on plum tree road. They are working with the community to provide more parking on Hidden Valley Road to accommodate the influx of parking caused by TGIF events. TRAFFIC AND MOBILITY COMMISSION COMMENTS: Vice-Chair Linke asked staff to reply to the public comment from the start of the meeting in regard to the Grand Promenade. He asked about the timeline of the Transportation Impact Analyses, or TIA, guidelines update that has been pending. He also asked about the timeline of the TDM program update. Transportation Planning and Mobility Manager Schmidt replied that they will be bringing the TDM update to the Commission in July. The TIA guidelines are being worked on and will be brought back sometime this summer hopefully. Vice-Chair Linke mentioned that they met with the Carlsbad Tomorrow group, and they set some ground rules on what topics will be discussed and some of the Commissioners will be attending that group monthly. Commissioner Penseyres made a comment about the Grand Promenade. He spoke with CALTRANS and they said they would be able to put in a bike lane under the highway 78 but they would have to level the slope to make it Accessible Disability Act compliant. This project would cost nearly $20 million dollars and they won't move forward with the project unless the city asks for it. Highway 1-5 cuts the community in half. This would allow the people from the east side to get to the west side without driving a vehicle. This would really improve the Grand Promenade. Commissioner Coelho asked about eliminating left turn arrows in certain intersections. He asked if there has been any movement on those projects. Transportation Director Frank said that he does not believe this project made it into the draft CIP budget for this year. The traffic team is studying this and will potentially bring forth protective permissive signals next year. Traffic Engineer Kim said that San Diego County and Carlsbad have adopted left turn specific phasing so it would be a trade-off. You will get an increase in efficiency with the protective permissive signals, but you may get more collisions. We are looking at areas where accident potential can be reduced. Commissioner Fowler commented that everyone should watch the stream of the City Council workshop. He also commented on rules of order that are specific to Carlsbad meetings. Page 7 of 8 Assistant City Attorney Contreras mentions that we have chapter 1.20 that speaks to meetings and procedures. He invites everyone to review the municipal code to answer any questions about procedure. Commissioner Penseyres gave an update on the Local Roadway Safety Committee and has been providing information to the Commission ahead of meetings. He is trying to look at crash data differently and to separate the solo crashes from the ones that include bicycles. He is putting together spreadsheets to support the notion that we need to focus on the car-bike crashes. Bicyclists want to learn how to avoid being hit by a car. We need to reduce the number of the car-bicyclist crashes. Many take smart cycling classes, and we focus on the issue in the class. Chair Perez says that he agrees that vetting with the community is great and appreciates that comment from Transportation Director Frank. He takes pride in how well the city works with the community to vet projects and receive feedback. ADJOURNMENT: Chair Perez adjourned the Traffic & Mobility Commission Meeting on May 2, 2022, at 6:58 p.m. Eliane Paiva, Minutes Clerk Page 8 of 8