Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSafety Commission mins 1990/11/08 . . . MINUTES OF THE SAFETY COMMISSION MEETING CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Thursday, November 8, 1990 7:02 p.m. Council Chambers Public Services Building ROLL CALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Braden, Co-Chair Thomas, Commissioners Arnold, Chidester, Koester, Matacia, Militscher EXCUSED ABSENCES: None. UNEXCUSED ABSENCES: None. STAFF PRESENT: Harold Rosenberg, City Traffic Engineer Matthew Souttere, Assistant I Civil Engineer OTHERS PRESENT: Patrol Division Officer Barry Bennett See attached attendance list. 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MOTION Approve minutes of the October 11, 1990 Safety Commission meeting with correction on page 1, Vice Chair Braden to read Chair Braden. MSUC [Koester/Militscher] 6-0-1, Matacia abs:ained due to absence from last meeting. 2. CONTINUED MATTERS: (2A) Report on Nacion Avenue traffic study in the vicinity of "L" Street Mr. Harold (Hal) Rosenberg, City Traffic Engineer, gave staffs report. This item deals with an accident problem on Nacion AV(;!Lue that is of concern to us and I know, to the Commission and the public as wel1. Nacion Avenue has a history of problems dating back a number of years, even b..:fore I arrived to the City and the street is a residential, narrow winding roadway. There have been a number of dramatic accidents occurring on that roadway, particularly between Naples Street and Telegraph Canyon Road. There is a gentleman, whose name I cannot recall at this moment that lives in the neighborhood, Mr. Matias. I have been informed that he has been in touch with us. He lives on the corler, one block south of Telegraph 1 . Safety Commission Meeting November 8, 1990 Minutes . Canyon Road. He has appeared before the City Council and requested that we take some action to make the road operate more safely. As you recall, we took some action--we painted it with a white stripe in an attempt to channelize the traffic as they traveled up and down that roadway. We also said we would monitor traffic and keep it under observation. Since the stripe was installed, there were two accidents that occurred on that particular section of roadway. The two accidents that occurred, I don't think, could have been prevented no matter what action we took, except for closing the roadway--which is not possible; of course, the people have to get to their homes. However, we are concerned about the speeding of cars and the narrowness of the roadway and the conflicts that still confront us on that roadway. We decided to undertake a comprehensive traffic study to determine the percentage of traffic that is already oriented into the neighborhood versus the traffic that is traveling through the neighborhood. There is a block between Naples Avenue and Telegraph Canyon Road that does not have any access, any driveways onto it. The homes face the cross street. There is a thought that maybe we could barricade that section. Actually, that is the suggestion of Mr. Matias. We are looking into that possibility and when we complete our report we will come back with a recommendation. Of course, you remember that when we tried to do something like this on Country Club Drive and Sierra Way, we had a problem with others in the neighborhood who felt that this imposition--or the diversion of traffic--might impact their street. We will have to deal with that, if in fact that turns out to be our recommendation. I understand there is somebody here to talk on the subject of Nacion Avenue. This concludes our presentation for the time being. Again, we will come back in a month or two with a final report which will include a recommendation. PUBLIC COMMENTS . Marie Johnson, 1248 Nacion Avenue, Chula Vista 92011. I live further south, closer to Palomar Street, than the location under discussion. From Palomar Street to Naples Street we have one massive dip in the road. You pass Oxford Street and then you hit Naples Street. This particular stretch of area I am concerned with, I didn't realize the topic was further north as it was, but we continually have speeders coming down through that dip. There is nothing that breaks them, that stops them. From Palomar Street it is a straight shot down hill and up to Naples Street. We have noticed in the last two and one-half years that we have lived there, that if you are sitting in your car in the street, your car shakes back and forth as they pass. At all hours of the night we have speeders zooming down through there. On weekends, children have to be escorted across the street because the speeders cannot possibly stop in time. Between Oxford Street and Palomar Street there is one little cuI de sac. It is virtually impossible to come out of there in time to keep from possibly being hit by a car zooming down that hill. We have come out of there many times, my mother tried to pull out in a motor home once and could barely get out in time to avert hitting a car head on. I don't know what can be done 2 . Safety Commission Meeting November 8, 1990 Minutes because, like I said, there is only this one cuI de sac. From Naples Street to Palomar Street it is a straight shot. Somehow, along there, it has to be broken up a little bit somehow, a stop sign or something to give them a pause. I am really scared that someone is going to get killed, especially a child. That is all I have. Commissioner Chidester asked if there were any possibility that we could relay word to the Police Department to request extra patrols for the 1200 block and the blocks either way of the 1200 block. Mrs. Johnson stated that not too long ago, approximately three or four months, we had a petition circulated and that is why I came tonight because I thought this was the topic for our area. There was a petition that was brought forward in regard to this area and I think it was to request a stop sign at Oxford Street. I think that after that petition was brought around to us, we did have policeman patrolling the area to observe. But during the daytime the kids are in school, the teenagers aren't out. It is mostly in the evening and late at night that this happens, and on the weekends. . Mr. Rosenberg informed the Commission that staff would take a look at the feasibility of a stop control at East Oxford Street and Nacion Avenue. Officer Bennett has signaled to me that they (the Police Department) are prepared to do selective enforcement for speeding violations and any other right of way violations that may occur. We will come back at our next meeting or two with a report on the results of our stop sign study. Commissioner Arnold stated that he remembers that these same areas were involved in some concerns at an earlier date, some while back. This has been the first that I have heard anything more on that particular problem area, which was pretty much taken care of sometime ago. I suggest that you go back through the records--the area between "L" Street and Moss Street is the business of the zig zag--which is right at the top of the hill--that was a problem that was considered previously. As far as the area between Naples Street and Palomar Street, I don't remember what the problem was, but it was considered and recommendations were made to correct the situation, which they were. . Mr. Rosenberg responded that staff will check the files and review the data to see if there are any changes in traffic conditions that may warrant some special treatment. With regard to that first section of Nacion Avenue, between "L" Street and Moss Street, that is the one I was referring to earlier. We also will be evaluating that portion Nacion Avenue and come back again with a report. That is the one we were not prepared to talk about tonight because we do not have the results of our study. Chair Braden interjected that if she remembeIed correctly, the speed limit was 3 . . . Safety Commission Meeting November 8, 1990 Minutes lowered and there were one or two stop signs in that long stretch--that are still there, of course; there is such a long stretch. I visit Marie's house quite often and I would not want to be anybody crossing the street. There is just no way you can stop them (the speeders). Ben Johnson, 1248 Nacion Avenue, Chula Vista, 92011. The problem is that it is a transit from Oxford Street to Palomar Street, because Palomar Street crosses over the freeway. There is no feed to it (the freeway), except surface streets. Nacion Avenue being one of them. Everybody trying to get across the freeway, instead of going to Orange Street, is cutting up through our back street, paralle] to the freeway. It is transit people, outside people, not neighborhood people, that are doing this. They are using Nacion Avenue as a short cut from the valley up to that crossover at Palomar Street instead of going all the way to Orange Street. We watch them going up the hill, they turn and cross Palomar Street and go across the freeway. That is the only feed. Commissioner Arnold interjected that they would have to turn and go down to Me]rose Avenue before they can go on to Orange Street. A right hand turn just before you get to Orange Street where you go down to Melrose Avenue and go south before you hit the traffic light. Mr. Johnson said that was true, but to get over that Palomar Street overpass, it has no freeway exits--you cannot get on or off the freeway there at Palomar Street. You can cross over from one residence to the other, and that is how they get there--right down Nacion Avenue. Chair Braden asked Mr. Rosenberg if staff had received the petition. Mr. Rosenberg stated that staff was not aware of it. If Mrs. Johnson would provide us with a petition, it would be helpful. I might point out that one of the problems we have is the fact that Nacion Avenue is a collector street that provides a connection between the major streets of the "L" Streetrre]egraph area and Orange Street. And of course, the bridges that underpass at East Naples Street across 1-5, and Palomar Street over 1-5, provide a convenient connection and a short cut. It is that short cutting that some of the residents in the Moss Street area of Nacion Avenue are complaining about. So if we were to take out a piece of the roadway and not allow the connection, then there would be some hardship on those who now enjoy using that not only as a short cut, but also to access their homes in the southern portion of Nacion Avenue. Commissioner Militscher asked if that was what it was designed to do. Mr. Rosenberg responded yes, but it is an old subdivision and I really can't tell you 4 . . . Safety Commission Meeting November 8, 1990 Minutes whether or not the street system was really intended to continue in that manner. Given the fact that the road is only 36 feet wide and is not a standard collector street width, I would think that maybe it wasn't really designed as a connection between the neighborhoods, that maybe it was just an outgrowth of just the expansion or development at the time the subdivisions were built. Me]rose Avenue is probably the designated connector because it is designed as a full-width collector street. So it may not be. We need to study to find out what the diversion, what the impact would be if we did close a portion of Nacion Avenue. To answer to your question, I am not sure whether it was really intended to be a through route when it was originally built. I don't know what impact the freeway had, not being around at the time that it was built. Commissioner Mi]itscher stated that he thought it just made sense if they put access to pass over or under a freeway, that that was the intent of it. That people should use it for that purpose. I can't see what closing that off is going to do. Mr. Rosenberg acknowledged that staff will come back with a report. Chair Braden noted that perhaps whoever designed it did not realize the population was going to grow like it did. In any case we will wait until next month. There is no action to be taken on this item. 3. NEW BUSINESS (3A) Report on traffic conl!estion on Coltridl!e Lane Matthew Souttere, Assistant I Civil Engineer, gave staff report. Mr. Steve Grisell contacted staff on October 15, 1990, to discuss the parking problem which generally occurs on weekends when they have organized sports in the Bonita Long Canyon Park. The park has a small parking lot which only can hold 24 vehicles, in which two of them are handicapped (parking). The prob]e.n that we are having up there is a congested intersection and people parking on corners, in front of hydrants, and occasional blocking of driveways. Initially, staffs recommendation was different that what we have come to now. We decided to stay with Chula Vista's normal policy of not red curbing on corners. Tonight our recommendation would be just to place red curb 7 feet from the driveway of the parking lot (going toward Corral Canyon Road) and red curb all the way through the pedestrian ramp and 7 feet across, providing only one parking space for a vehicle. Right nov, what is happening, is people are parking in front of the pedestrian ramp and the} are blocking the entrance to the parking lot. 5 . . . Safety Commission Meeting November 8,1990 Minutes Mr. Rosenberg interjected, wanting to point out that the basic problem is that the parking lot is too small to accommodate the demand of cars into that park area. The cars are spilling out into the street and, of course, most of the users of the park want to park as close as they can, they don't want to walk some distance. Unfortunately, even though they are there in an athletic activity, they tend to park up against the driveways and in the curb return. We originally were going to paint the curb red as Mr. Souttere just stated, but I am afraid that would set a precedent. We really don't need to do that since the Vehicle Code is very explicit and says motorists are not to park in intersections, particularly in the curb return. So therefore, we don't think the red curb is necessary, and if we did put it in, someone may go down to the other corner and say, well, there is no red curbing over here, I guess I can park here. We don't want to set that kind of standard. Instead, we are going to rely on the Police Department to cite anybody who parks on the corner. Hopefully the word will get around that that is a violation and not worth the price of the ticket. Commissioner Matacia stated that in one of the sketches he noticed that on the west side of Coltridge Lane, just before coming out of the area before you get to Corral Canyon Road, you had planned six or eight parking "Ts" there. Is that right. Mr. Souttere responded that staff was not going to put "Ts" in, what staff did was measure the area and we go by a basis of 20 feet per car, and so we were just showing you how many cars would fit in that area. Commissioner Matacia asked if staff planned to have parking there, that IS a designated parking area. I have a particular reason for asking. Mr. Souttere acknowledged that staff was going to have that as parking. Commissioner Matacia stated that he lived in the area. Coming west on Corral Canyon Road and turning into Coltridge Lane, when there is sports activity going on, particularly if it is ending and the mothers with their vans and numerous wild kids in the back of the van, come out of the parking lot--coming into that area with cars parked along that curb, seems to me would cause a difficulty of seeing people coming out of the parking lot. It is a problem. Commissioner Militscher asked if any thought had been given to enlarging that parking lot. Commissioner Matacia responded that there was nothing there to enlarge. It is just a tiny, little place. Commissioner Militscher asked about (parking) on Corral Canyon Road, near the intersection. 6 . . . Safety Commission Meeting November 8, 1990 Minutes Commissioner Matacia stated that there was no parking part way down on the west side. Mr. Souttere interjected, stating that there was 96 feet from the intersection of Corral Canyon Road and Coltridge Lane, where parking ends. From there, 96 feet away, it starts and there is parking all along the west side of Corral Canyon Road. Commissioner Militscher asked if any thought had been given to making another parking area in the park. Commissioner Matacia noted that the land is quite high there--at the tot lot--and it is a sudden drop off. Again, I do not wish to belabor it, but I wish you would take another look at that eastern portion between the parking lot and Corral Canyon Road blocking the vision of people coming in there, against the kids and mothers and fathers coming out of that parking lot. Mr. Rosenberg informed the Commission that staff was trying very desperately or hard to salvage as much parking nearby, recognizing that there is that demand and the more parking removed in the vicinity of the park, the more intrusion there will be in the residential neighborhoods, but you do have a valid point. It certainly would enhance the safety of that move if parking were removed for this entire length. I have no objection to doing that. I just felt that maybe that was not totally necessary. Commissioner Matacia asked, on the south side of Galveston Way, there are no houses--you see where 1750 is (looking at the view graph)--well, going to south on Galveston Way, for the full length of that lot, it is just a bare street there. I think you have plotted some parking on that side, have you not, maybe eight spaces. Mr. Rosenberg responded that staff had not planned to make any restrictions there, so it would be left open. The point I am making is that we are not designating it-- marking the street. There just is availability of parking spaces. Commissioner Matacia said he was asking if maybe that wouldn't be a better place to park than on the west side of Coltridge Lane. Mr. Rosenberg acknowledged that it was available. We were not intending to restrict parking there, but what we found out in our investigation was that the entire area is covered with parking. People were parking wherever they can, including the curb return because they want to park near the park. Our first priority was to prevent the cars from parking at the intersection because that truly represented an unsafe condition. The second question is, that I think you brought up, is whether or not we should also prohibit the parking between the parking lot and Corral Canyon Road, on the west side. I have no objections in doing that, but it maybe excessive in terms 7 . . . Safety Commission Meeting November 8,1990 Minutes of the shortage of parking. Commissioner Matacia stated that if Parks and Recreation are going to minimize activities there, that might solve a lot of this. When there is league athletics there, that is when the gangs (large groups of people) corne, and particularly where there are two ball diamonds. I understand that Parks and Recreation have recommended that there only be one baseball diamond. That would help tremendously, I would think. Commission Militscher said he thought consideration ought to be given to additional parking. It seems to me that that is the problem, not enough parking spaces to adequately park. Somebody ought to be looking at some of that land that could be used for additional parking and corne up with a plan for it and knock out the parking where it is dangerous. Mr. Souttere noted that the only other space in the parking area that is not on the field, is the toddlers playground, there is a sand pit they play around. Commissioner Militscher asked if that couldn't be moved to another area within the park. Mr. Souttere responded, saying that would have to be decided by Parks and Recreation. Commissioner Militscher said that the Safety Commission could certainly recommend it if we thought that would help with the safety factor. Commissioner Matacia continued, saying one of the proofs of this being sort of a negative situation is that the houses immediately going into Coltridge Lane beyond the parking area, on both sides of the street, have been up for sale. People find it is not a very nice place to live because of the traffic hazards. It is amazing how many houses have been for sale in that little area. Mr. Souttere interjected, saying staff was hoping that our suggestions would help relieve some of the traffic congestion. 8 . Safety Commission Meeting November 8,1990 Minutes PUBLIC COMMENTS . Stephen J. Grisell, 1735 Coltridge Lane, Bonita, 92002. On organized sports day, mom and dad come and drop their kids off. There is only one way in and out of this park. Once the parking lot is full, they come off of Corral Canyon Road, slide in here (the parking lot) try and turn around (they can't) they have to back out onto Coltridge Lane. They park as close as they can, then they overflow into the neighborhood. Coltridge Lane is the only entrance and exit to and from the neighborhood. You can't go out a back way. AJ] the residents flow in and out through Co]tridge Lane. AJ] of the traffic for organized sports flows in and out Co]tridge Lane also. This is the major congestion point. There are no crosswalks, no traffic lights, and there are all kinds of kids on organized sports activities day. I have called the police out there on organized sports activities day to write tickets. And, in fact they haven't written tickets where I have asked them to on the curb bends in accordance with the City's ordinance. I think this is a great idea here (east side of Coltridge Lane, from the parking lot down to Corral Canyon Road), but there is a fire hydrant right here (east side of Coltridge Lane, approximately directly across from the north end of the parking lot) and in accordance with the City ordinance, 30 feet of that would be non-parking anyway. We would have to have someone sitting out there writing tickets continually, because they park there now. I have witnessed it. I really don't think the answer is to call the police every time we, the residents, see a parking violation. The real crux of the problem out there is that that is a passive park, it should be used as a passive park. The very fact that there is limited parking, it is off-street parking, it has a child playing area right next to the traffic flow, this is where kids come and play. It should be redesignated and used only as a passive park. It should not be an organized sports park. If you go out and look at the way it fits, the way it is configured, it screams out to you that that is the problem. My recommendation is to redesignate it, from a City standpoint, and if the Safety Commission has to get together with the Parks and Recreation Commission to make that recommendation, that would be my recommendation. That would solve the problem. It would move the organized sports out. The reason I bring it up is, I am not sure because I am not privy to information, I am not sure how many future parks we are going to get into this City in the next ten years. You never have enough parks, so I can see if the Safety Commission would make a statement, basically, that that is an unsafe situation that needs to be re-evaluated, it would prevent--in the future--when we don't have enough parks--to say using this, again, as well, let's fall back to Colton Trails and use it as a park again. I just don't think that is appropriate for organized sports activities. Chair Braden asked Mr. Grisell where all of these people could go, what is their alternative. . 9 . Safety Commission Meeting November 8,1990 Minutes Mr. Grisell responded, stating that there is Rhor Park, there are all of the schools in the area that don't get used on weekends. That is one of the problems that Parks and Recreation has even admitted--that school playgrounds are sacred cows on weekends. Organized sports have a difficult time getting to use them on weekends; yet they sit and stare at the sky. Yet it (using Colton Trails Park for organized sports activities) creates a traffic congestion, and safety problem out here. Pete Schultz, 1743 Coltridge Lane, Bonita, 92002. My house is one house away from the park. Yes, I have noticed a lot of the congestion and I propose to the City Council and/or to Traffic that this be blocked as far as making it a red zone all the way through. I realize there are parking problems. What about putting "T" markers on Corral Canyon Road, I do realize there is a bike lane down both sides, put the "T" markers on the north side and install a pedestrian crossing. That wouldn't pose any problem. He asked if staff had any question about that. Mr. Rosenberg responded, stating that people could park there now if they so desire- -it is open parking. . Mr. Schultz said true, but there isn't--I for one, if I don't live in the area I don't know that there is any "T" markers over there, I wouldn't park there and cross there (Corral Canyon Road), first of all there isn't any pedestrian lane that I would like to cross on. You would have children crossing there, and it gets pretty crazy--especially in the afternoon--and, by the way, it is not only on weekends we have organized sports, we have them on the week days too, after school hours. We have practice over there, practice of softball and/or soccer. So it is not only on a weekend basis. Thank you. Chair Braden made the comment that it looked like the Parks and Recreation Commission would have to get in on this. . Mr. Rosenberg stated that he would recommend that the Safety Commission direct staff to work with the Parks and Recreation Department so as to identify the issues and seek alternatives perhaps that might include changing the activities as the gentleman (Stephen Grisell) suggested, or even redesigning the parking lot--perhaps expanding it with access to Corral Canyon Road, if that is feasible, the topography may not lend itself to that, but we could look at that. In the interim, I think we could request the Park and Recreation Department to not designate one of those stalls at the end of the lot as a parking space so that persons who enter the parking lot would have an opportunity to turn around and not have to back out of the parking lot. So if that is the direction of the Safety Commission, staff will pursue this as I have outlined. 10 . Safety Commission Meeting November 8, 1990 Minutes Commissioner Militscher stated he would like to put that in the form of a motion. The Chair informed the members that there was one more member of the public who wished to address the Commission. . Charles D. Smith, 534 Trailridge Drive, Bonita, 92002. My residence happens to be about two blocks away from the park in question. However, I drive by the park every day; when they have those activities I drive very cautiously, I might add, because it is a very dangerous situation. I would like to say, without reiterating what Mr. Grisell said, I totally support everything he has said to us here tonight. I would like to add one other thing, or another suggestion, because I feel that even though the Parks and Recreation Department does have the authority, I suppose, to change from an active to a passive park, which I think is the real issue here. I think that your Commission probably has the right and perhaps the responsibility to make the recommendation based on safety. I use the park frequently myself. I happen to have watched it develop. It could be that new and additional parking could be provided if Parks and Recreation would address the problem, because there is nothing that would preclude them from relocating the tot lot that staff had just mentioned earlier about, into another area of the park. It would probably increase the parking in this area by at least double, maybe triple. Secondly, there is a lot of unused park area--which would be to the west, northwest-- which could be used. It's a beautiful view up there. All it is is sod and grass and you can see Point Lorna and San Diego Bay and Mexico and most of Southern California from that area. The point is that there is a lot of unused open space adjacent to the park that is undeveloped, which would be off of Corral Canyon Road, which might be further considered for additional parking, either close to Corral Canyon or perhaps up on the higher level ground to the southwest. Those are issues that I think need to be addressed. But more specifically, it is not designed for an active park like they have been using it. There will be new park facilities in the City at Rancho del Rey, with Olympic design and styled facilities for people like this. It isn't that we're not in favor of youth activities, we are. In fact, I encourage it. But, unfortunately, most of the active use of that park is being used by people from many other areas of the City and County other than the residents of Bonita Long Canyon. Frankly, I understand, there are new developments occurring, at sometime what is called Rhor Park, that should, in my opinion, be utilized for activities such as this, where they have the proper parking available for the people. This little park does not. COMMISSION COMMENTS . I spent quite a bit of time out there this afternoon, the park itself is on a slope, it tilts towards Coltridge Lane. Both screens (of the baseball diamonds) are at the back of the area and point in different directions. I noticed in the packets we received before the meeting, that one of the concerns was the fire hydrants being blocked. That is 11 . . . Safety Commission Meeting November 8, 1990 Minutes right at the end of the gradius of the corner of Ga]veston Way. Across from the driveway of the parking lot. It is painted yellow. I suppose that is the one being referred to, because the other one is further down (near Corral Canyon Road). It is quite a distance up the hill from Corral Canyon Road to the parking lot of the park. It seems that there is enough space on Corral Canyon Road to accommodate parking and still allow cyclist to get by safely. AT THIS POINT THE COMMISSIONERS CARRIED ON A CONVERSATION AMONGST THEMSELVES. AS THEIR MICROPHONES WERE NOT TURNED ON, THEIR COMMENTS WERE NOT PICKED UP ON THE RECORDING DEVICE. The Chair was advised to inform the Commissioners to turn on their microphones so that we could record their discussion. Commissioner Matacia stated that it seemed to him that we are talking about two subjects: 1) that we no longer have an organized athletic program at the park--which I think is the ideal. That would solve virtually all the prob]ems,--whether that is going to happen or not, that is another thing; 2) if that doesn't happen, we corne to the second question--how do we live with it. At this point I think we are talking about how we live with it as opposed to the ultimate because Parks and Recreation at this point are not bending. I am sure you have found that out. If we can get them to bend that would be fine. MOTION Commissioner Militscher made the motion that the Traffic Engineering and the Parks and Recreation Department sit down at a meeting with the idea of increasing parking, making this a safe parking area--the one that exists, and perhaps revise the playground area to accommodate more parking and corne back with a plan that they recommend that would increase parking, and help enhance safety in this area. MSUC, [MilitscherlKoester) 7-0, approved. Mr. Rosenberg asked for clarification of the motion--are you directing staff also to proceed with the painting of the curb adjacent to the parking lot and the ramp to the south. Chair Braden responded that it would seem to me that perhaps you could meet with Parks and Recreation before you do anything. Would it take very long to arrange a workshop. Mr. Rosenberg stated that he would recommend that we at a minimum paint that curb red in the area where motorists may tend to block the wheelchair ramp. That would be an initial safety precaution and then we will work with the Parks and 12 . . . Safety Commission Meeting November 8,1990 Minutes Recreation staff and do as directed in your motion. Commissioner Chidester asked the Chair if it would be feasible for the Traffic Engineer to explore the possibility of Parks and Recreation transferring those activities out of there to nearby schoo]s--exp]oring the possibility of doing that. Mr. Rosenberg stated that was outside his purview. AI] I can do is refer to them the concerns of the Safety Commission and request that they respond to what you have asked us to do. Commissioner Chidester repeated his statement--to explore the avenues of transferring these activities to schools playgrounds, even if it is a Saturday and they have to open the schoo] lots. MOTION That the Safety Commission accept staffs proposal. MSUC, [Thomas/Braden] 7-0, approved. (3B) Report on revised all-wav stop policv Mr. Rosenberg gave staffs report. This is an item that is of concern to the City Council. It deals with the policy for the installation of all-way stops that I am sure you recognize as a problem that we have to wrestle with from time to time. Our Council policy, actually it is not a Council policy, it is a department policy--it has not been adopted by the City Council by resolution; although we do call it a policy. It uses a point system for the installation of stop signs, all-way stops. When we get a request for an all-way stop installation, we look at numerous factors that are shown in this report--accident data, traffic volumes, the difference in traffic volumes, pedestrian activities, unusual conditions such as the curvature of the roadway hilIside, and using what we call empirical Engineering Traffic judgment, we apply a point system. When you reach 30 points you qualify the location for an all-way stop. The City Council felt that, often times when we make our presentation, that while it appears to be a very technical and sound way of evaluating the need for all-way stops, it doesn't take into consideration the exceptional cases in residential neighborhoods. For example, the one that we recently installed on Oleander Street. Therefore, they asked us to research and maybe even change state legislation. Actually we don't have to change state legislation because enabling laws allow us to develop our own criteria for determining when an all-way stop is needed. So therefore, Traffic Engineering staff reviewed the policy and made some adjustments. In particular, we made an adjustment in the area where an unusual conditicn(s) which would allow staff to use a little bit more judgment in determining whether or not an all-way stop would apply. The point system here would not necessarily apply if in the judgment of the Traffic 13 . . . Safety Commission Meeting November 8, 1990 Minutes Engineer, me, determined that there was extraordinary situations in that particular location that would warrant an all-way stop. For example, a playground separated by a street on one side where there were high density developments, lots of children, a combination of schools, church, parks and recreation center, and the like; and, it is basically the gist of the report. Additionally, the warrant system that uses the number of cars that enter the intersection would also change slightly, to also provide a little more flexibility in the justification for an all-way stop. Rather than get into the real details and the specifics of the numbers, which are again, very empirical, the basis of the all-way stop warrants is to ensure that we aren't forced into putting all- way stops at every intersection. Otherwise, traffic wouldn't move at all and motorists would just learn to disrespect the stop sign because it would be more of a nuisance and there wouldn't be an apparent need why they have to stop at an intersection. That is the end of my report on this subject. I welcome any questions you might have on what I just said. Chair Braden called a recess at 7:55 p.m. The Chair called the meeting back into session at 8:05 p.m. Commissioner Koester noted that one paragraph on this item mentions the (Chapter 2, Traffic Signs, Signals, and Markings) use of metric system designations. We aren't going to put anything like that on signs are we. Mr. Rosenberg responded, stating that was a section out of the Vehicle Code. No, we are not required to do that, nor are we contemplating doing that. Mr. Rosenberg stated that what he would like to do on this itemnthis is an action itemnwhat I would like is the Safety Commission to approve the report. If you have any concerns about it, about the technical data in it, you can at least give me a motion to approve it in content. MOTION That the Safety Commission approve the content of staffs report. MSUC, [BradenlKoester] 7-0, approved. Commissioner Matacia asked if the all-way stop policy was designed to slow traffic down, because I find so many intersections--particularly in the new area, where Bonita Long Canyon areanwhere there is so little cross traffic that it seems unnecessary for everybody to stop 24 hours a day at a street, unless it is really designed to slow traffic down. Mr. Rosenberg responded no, to answer your question, it is an emphatic no. However, often times we are directed to put stop signs in for that purpose. Because of the motions and the perception of the public that feel that the stop signs, in fact, 14 . Safety Commission Meeting November 8,1990 Minutes do control speed, we reported numerous times to other members of the Safety Commission, and I know you are new so you aren't familiar with some of the previous reports that we have made, but for your benefit, there have been studies to show that, yes, stop signs do slow traffic down because they require motorists to stop. But as soon as they leave the stop sign, they are frustrated and they speed up and we find that speeds between stop signs actually is higher than they were before the stop signs were installed. Stop signs are generally used, Commissioner Arnold just mentioned (stop signs as precursor to installation of a traffic signal device), but generally speaking, we wouldn't recommend a traffic signal unless there were a demand or a recognized need--in other words, there was cross traffic. So, what we try to do is put an all-way stop in where the traffic is generally balanced, so that there is a recognized need for the right of way through the intersection. All-way stops are really only intended to designate right of way, so people can alternate their time as they go through the intersection. 4. TRIAL TRAFFIC REGULATIONS: . (4A) Parkin!! prohibited for vehicles over 6 feet in hei!!ht on East Flower Street Mr. Rosenberg gave staffs report. The trial traffic regulation is an item that we found to be necessary to prevent large vehicles from parking in an area where there is a visibility problem. We had a fatality accident at this location and when the accident occurred, there were a number of campers (vehicles) parked adjacent to the driveway. We felt that the installation of a new provision of the Vehicle Code was appropriate here, which would prohibit vehicles in excess of 6 feet in height from parking. Generally speaking, you can see through automobile windows if they are parked adjacent to a driveway. The sight visibility at this particular driveway location is adequate if you don't have these large vehicles parked in that area. Using our powers vested in us through ordinance for trial traffic regulations, I ordered the installation and prepared a report to the City Council telling them why I was doing this. The signs are now up. We will return to the City Council in six months and give them a report and ask them to pass a resolution making them final. Commissioner Militscher (looking at a view graph of the area) asked just what did staff do at that point there. . Mr. Rosenberg responded, noting that staff added a sign that says "no parking, vehicles over 6 feet in height". It begins at one location (pointing to a location on the view graph) and ending the other side of the driveway. Between those two driveways you cannot park the large vehicles. Staff will apply this elsewhere too; wherever we find that there is a preponderance of large vehides. Because what happens here, some people who own these large vehicles, they don't realize the sight problem they 15 . . . Safety Commission Meeting November 8,1990 Minutes cause and they park them right adjacent to intersections. We don't want them to do that. The Code says we can prohibit up to 100 feet from an intersection. Driveways are considered intersections. Chair Braden asked if she were correct in assuming the 72 hour parking regulation (before being cited or towed) would not apply here. Mr. Rosenberg said she was correct. You cannot park a large vehicle there at all. This sign supersedes that other provision. Commissioner Arnold stated that he did not see any sign like the one Mr. Rosenberg just described when he was out to the site this afternoon. There was only a sign with a P enclosed in a circle, with a line through it. There was a vehicle 8 to 10 feet high parked there this afternoon. Mr. Rosenberg said that it was probably blocking the sign and that was why he did not see the sign. Mr. Rosenberg introduced Patrol Division Officer Barry Bennett to Chair Braden and the other Commissioners who had not had the privilege of meeting him at previous meetings he had attended. 5. STAFF REPORTS (5A) C.I.P. Status Report FY 1990.91. Commissioner Chidester asked what does the C.I.P. stand for. Mr. Rosenberg informed him that it stood for Capital Improvement Program. It is a document that the City produces every year to outline the projects that they intend to construct. It could include public buildings, but in our particular area it only includes streets and highways. Commissioner Chidester noted that the item at the top of the report where it says street lights Broadway/"I"-Moss. Does that mean we are going to synchronize the stop lights from "I" Street south to Moss Street to allow free flow of traffic. Also, the next to bottom item where it says traffic signal modification, Broadway!'I" Street. Mr. Rosenberg responded, saying that the latter was a modification for left turn phasing. They would be installing left turn arrows. Commissioner Chidester asked what provisions aJ e built into this to synchronize stop 16 . Safety Commission Meeting November 8, 1990 Minutes lights with "H" Street, "I", "J", "K", "L" and so forth down Broadway to expedite the flow of traffic. Mr. Rosenberg said the City of Chula Vista has a computerized traffic control system. About two or three years ago it was determined that that system was getting a little worn; it was built a number of years ago. The City Council appropriated $2,000,000 to upgrade it and all the traffic signals around the City--108 locationsn have been retro fitted and we are in the process of finalizing the computer software. Actually most of the signals are already in a system of synchronization, but I want to point out to you that there are some problems in providing the coordination that you would like to see, because every time you introduce a left-turn phase it takes that particular intersection out of sequence with the other signals. It is possible to get coordination where you can drive from one end (of the City) to the other and pass through every signal, but on the intersections that have the left-turn phase, you can only do that on every other phase. Half of the time you will have to stop, and the other half you get to go through. . Commissioner Chidester asked if "L" Street were going to be included in that synchronization, because the way it is set up now, Broadway is disconnected from Fifth Avenue and "L" Street, and Fifth Avenue and "L" is disassociated with Fourth Avenue and "L" Street, and Third Avenue and "L" Street is an equal opportunity light. It stops everybody; it's also out of phase with Second Avenue and "L" Street. Are any plans in the work to get "L" Street moving again. Mr. Rosenberg stated that he would hope so. The system is designed to provide that service. I would welcome your observations. I will have to check and see where we are at on "L" Street and then report to you and then maybe you can give me your observations at the next meeting or anytimenjust call me. As a matter of fact, you are welcome to come down to the office and I will show you--I personally am not totally familiar with the computer system, but my staff iso-if you would like an explanation and a tour, anybody on the Commission as a matter of fact, it is quite impressive. We have a display panel and we can show you what actually is occurring out in the field in a display panel in our office. Chair Braden requested that the Commission make this a group endeavor, perhaps in the morning. . Mr. Rosenberg suggested the Commissioners make the visit latter in the day. We could start the next meeting early, say 6:00 or even 5:30 and invite you in late in the afternoon and continue afterwards with the meeting. Mr. Rosenberg stated that he would make the arrangements and send out the announcements if it were not too early for the Commission to meet at 5:00 or 5:30 p.m. 17 . . . Safety Commission Meeting November 8, 1990 Minutes Chair Braden noted that there had not been a budget report for quite some time. Mr. Berlin Bosworth, the Recording Secretary, said that item could be placed on the next agenda. Chair Braden said that the Dinner Workshop could be held in January or February 1991. Mr. Rosenberg said that since we are speaking about the Safety Commission's budget, that staff did spend some of the money. Mr. Souttere informed the Commission that subscriptions for one year were entered in each Commissioner's name to Westemite magazine, which is published monthly by the Institute of Traffic Engineers for the western part of the United States. They have worthwhile reports on activities and the installation of various traffic controls, some are technical and some are very general in nature. I think you will find it interesting. (5B) Chula Vista Police DeDartment Traffic Summary for Ausmst and SeDtember 1990 Commissioner Koester noted that there were nine fatal accidents in 1990. Officer Bennett replied that he had made a note to check on this as he was one of five traffic investigators that do these and our count in our office-- I hate to say this, is 15. We can't figure out why there is a difference. I am going to go research all the reports to try to find the discrepancy. I believe that it actually lists 10 killed, it lists nine fatal accidents because one of them involved two fatalities in the same collision. We come up with the number 15, we could be off. There are only five of us that do these and we are called in teams of the sergeant and two officers. I will check on this and have a report for the next time. 6. COMMUNICATIONS (6A) Public Remarks None. 18 . Safety Commission Meeting November 8, 1990 Minutes (6B) Commissioner Comments Commissioner Arno]d said that at the northbound exit of I-5 at "L" Street you come off and make a right hand turn and come into Industria] Road at a T intersection. The traffic on Industria] Road is pretty heavy. I don't recall off the top of my head what signs are on the posts that are to your right looking south toward Moss Street. The traffic sometimes gets pretty well tied up there because of the people coming off the freeway, it also depends upon what time of day as to how much traffic is backed up. I was wondering if it would be practical to look into that particular location and run some counts on who takes what turns there during the high traffic periods of the day. Is that Ca]Trans' prerogative or can the City Traffic Engineer do something about it. . Mr. Rosenberg responded that we could do something about it. If there is a problem we could bring it to the attention of Ca]Trans. It is their jurisdiction. The ramps belong to them. However, it is no different than the problem we had at Palomar Street and the ramps. We recognized that we had an accident problem and we asked them to assist us, and they did finally decide to help us with improvements of that interchange. We could take a look and make an assessment of what the problem is. Is it one of congestion or is it an accident problem that you are concerned with. Commissioner Arnold stated that as far as the signs posted to your right as you are holding to turn left onto Industria] Road to go up toward "L" Street, you can't see the traffic going north and a couple of times recently I've gotten trapped, so to speak, because these signs were blocking the visibility. You are watching for traffic coming up on your left, and all of a sudden you see a break coming from the left and you start to go because the last time you looked to the right there wasn't anything there. The distance between Moss Street and the intersection is relatively short and there is quite a bit of traffic coming off of Moss Street going either onto the freeway at that intersection or going up to "L" Street and going over the freeway and then going north on the frontage road on the west side of the freeway. Mr. Rosenberg said that staff would come back at the next meeting and give you a report on the traffic conditions in that area. Commissioner Arno]d had an additional comment relative to the freeway. I would like to commend them for putting in the steel grading for the crossing at "L" Street. The one at "J" Street is pretty rough, depending at what speed you hit it. . Mr. Rosenberg asked if he were referring to the MTDB crossing. We prepared a report some months ago on the conditions of their grade crossings at the request of now Mayor-e]ect McCand]iss and we gave the report to the MTDB in hopes that they would put that in their order of work to be done fur upgrading the tracks. I can't tell 19 . . . Safety Commission Meeting November 8,1990 Minutes you the disposition of it. The track belongs to them. They are responsible for any repairs that need to be done on it. Chair Braden interjected, saying that the MTDB is responsible for the track, but the fact that you shake the devil out of your car--and 1 cross that rail track twice a day. Mr. Rosenberg continued, stating that if the Safety Commission would want to take an action on this matter and direct staff to write to the MTDB and express your concerns we will do that. MOTION That staff communicate with the MTDB to do something about the rail crossing on "J" Street. MSUC, [BradenlKoester] 7-0, approved. Chair Braden said, this again, is probably not the City's responsibility, but if you are going on 1-5 south, and you want to get onto Palomar Street to go east, the cars are backed up almost to "L" Street. At this exit intersection, traffic is moving three ways- -you are trying to make a left turn, people want to get on to 1-5 south and people want to go straight through. I am amazed, and maybe you have had accidents there. Mr. Rosenberg informed the Commission that staff brought this item to the attention of CalTrans and so that it is under design and we are going to put signals at those two ramps. Hopefully we will get them in before June 1991. Chair Braden mentioned that she called Frank (Rivera, Assistant Civil Engineer- Traffic Engineering) about the elderly people from the Chula Vista Inn who walk down Garrett Avenue to the Garden Farm Store. He said he was going to talk to Hal (Rosenberg) about it. Mr. Souttere informed Chair Braden that staff has written a letter on this but have been unable to get in touch with the home to get the manager's name. Chair Braden said she would go to the home and get the name. There are an awful lot of elderly people who go to that market. You talk about speed--between Third Avenue and Fourth Avenue there is nothing to stop that traffic. 1 have seen twice kids knocked off their bicycles into the street. Mind you, they weren't killed, thank God. But that has happened. Somebody is going to get hurt there, very badly. It is too close to a stop light to put a stop sign, 1 don't know--other than enforcement, 1 don't know what the answer is. But 1 was thinking about it and it has buthered me for so long, that 1 finally called Frank because I thought if somebody gets badly hurt there and 1 haven't opened my mouth then I'll really feel guilty. 1 felt the City staff would have more oomph to their request than 1 would. I'll see if 1 can find out the 20 . . . Safety Commission Meeting November 8, 1990 Minutes name of the manager and I'll call Matt (Souttere). 7. WRITIEN CORRESPONDENCE: Commissioner Militscher quoted from the Shell Oil Company letter regarding temporary repairs to Bonita Glen Drive. MOTION That the Safety Commission ask the City to repair that street (Bonita Glen Drive) and bill Shell Oil Company for the repairs. Commissioner Matacia asked if that when Commissioner Militscher said repair, does he mean put the concrete in. Commissioner Militscher replied no. What I mean is fill the pot holes. Just like they did in the past, the four or five times they did it before. Commissioner Matacia asked if he could address himself to the letter (the October 19, 1990 letter from Shell Oil Company signed by T.A. Runnels) and I know I am going to sound severe. But I think about and if I had written a letter like this, to my boss, with some of these weasel phrases like "barring any unforeseen problems" and "in the first quarter of next year" and "as expeditiously as possible". I loose faith in people who write things like that. I don't think they mean what they say. Why, at this time, and I am, obviously, new here, but in reading all the documents we get, this has been going on for a long time. Commissioner Militscher stated that was the purpose of the motion, to get the thing repaired right now because he does not think they are going to perform on this. Commissioner Matacia said that his discussion really was to broaden the motion. Commissioner Militscher replied that all we need is to have the street repaired and then we have to wait until the first part of next year. Commissioner Matacia said that is what he disagreed with. I think we are sort of getting a little ole pat on the back. I don't think they are sincere people. Why don't they go ahead and do it. Chair Braden interjected, saying that at the last meeting they told us it takes time to draw plans, it takes time to go through the red tape, to work with the City, to get everybody to approve it, they have to do surveying, and whatever. Mr. Lippitt (Director of Public Works) was here and he said that was a-okay. In the meantime, 21 . . . Safety Commission Meeting November 8, 1990 Minutes my understanding was that the City was going to fix the asphalt and bill Shell for every last penny. In the first quarter of next year they are supposed to lay down the concrete. In the meantime they are drawing up their plans and getting the approvals. MOTION That the Safety Commission ask the City to repair that street (Bonita Glen Drive) and bill Shell Oil Company for the repairs. MSUC, [Militscher/Braden] 7-0, approved. Commissioner Thomas stated that, in response to your question, (Commissioner Matacia) I was on the subcommittee that worked with Shell for one and one-half years with Frank Rivera. The City Council has also been monitoring this for a year and one-half. I sincerely believe--the people signing this letter, they are the heavy hitters in Anaheim, they are the people that are the decision-making body--that there has been so much negotiating back and forth and the possibility of closing off that driveway, that if this does not happen in the first quarter (of 1991) that the Safety Commission and also the City Council, because of everything working backwards, would close off that entrance. I sincerely believe that. We have been working for one and one-half years, and then have finally gotten this letter. I feel that they are aware that if this does not happen, then it (the driveway) will be closed. Commissioner Matacia stated that he did not want to see it closed because that is where he buys his gas and gets his car washed. Commissioner Thomas responded that Shell won't let it happen either. But I believe that we prepped the City Council that we'll close it. So I think it will happen. Commissioner Arnold said he thinks the letter is only a confirmation of discussions that we had here before. Commissioner Militscher commented that the first part of next year Shell is committed to pave (concrete) their portion of that road. Also, Shell is paying for the repairs (asphalt), the City is not out a nickel. 8. RECESS TO REGULAR MONTHLY WORKSHOP SESSION: None scheduled. 22 - ....... . . Safety Commission Meeting November 8, 1990 Minutes 9. ADJOURNMENT TO REGULAR SAFETY COMMISSION MEETING OF THURSDAY, DECEMBER 13, 1990 MOTION That we adjourn this meeting. MSUC, [Koester/Militscher] 7-0, approved. The meeting was adjourned at 9:40 p.m. '-&L ,/ ~ Berlin D. Bosworth, Recording Secretary [SC5\A:NOV -90.MIN] 23