HomeMy WebLinkAbout0226-06-11 TSC Agenda Packet
Date:Thursday, June 11, 2026
Time:6:00 p.m.
Location:Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA
Traffic Safety Commission Regular Meeting
______________________________________________________________________________
In-Person Public Comments: Join us for the Traffic Safety Commission meeting at the time and
location specified on this agenda to make your comments. Each person will be allotted three minutes
to address the Commission, unless otherwise adjusted by the presiding officer.
Electronic Public Comments: At www.chulavistaca.gov/boardmeetings, locate this meeting and click
on the comment bubble icon. Select the item and click on "Leave Comment." The deadline to submit
e-comments or any comments emailed to TSC@chulavistaca.gov will be noon on the day of the
meeting.
Accessibility: Individuals with disabilities are invited to request modifications or accommodations in
order to access and/or participate in a Traffic Safety Commission meeting by contacting the
commission staff at TSC@chulavistaca.gov (California Relay Service is available for the hearing
impaired by dialing 711) at least forty-eight hours in advance of the meeting.
We encourage community participation—sign up at www.ChulaVistaCA.gov/Boards to receive email
notifications when agendas are available.
Pages
1.CALL TO ORDER
2.PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3.ROLL CALL
Commissioners Becerra-Firsht, DeMarco, Galicia, Luke, Marroquin, Orso-Delgado,
and Chair Caudillo
4.PUBLIC COMMENTS
The public may address the Commission on any subject matter within the
Commission’s jurisdiction that is not listed as an item on the agenda. State law
generally prohibits the Commission from discussing or taking action on any issue
not included on the agenda. The Commission may schedule the topic for future
discussion or refer the matter to staff.
5.ACTION ITEMS
Action items are considered individually by the Commission and are expected to
elicit discussion and deliberation.
5.1 RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL REDUCE THE
EXISTING SPEED LIMIT ON F STREET BETWEEN WEST OF
COLORADO AVENUE AND HILLTOP DRIVE FROM 30 MPH TO 25 MPH,
AND THAT SCHEDULE X OF THE REGISTER BE AMENDED
4
Staff Recommendation: Commission adopt resolution.
6.PRESENTATIONS
The following item(s) will be presentations given to the Commission. Action on
these item(s) is typically limited to the Commission receiving the presentation and
providing direction or feedback to staff, as appropriate.
6.1 ATP CYCLE 8 GRANT APPLICATION FOR BAYSHORE BIKEWAY
SEGMENT 6B
9
Staff Recommendation: Commssion hear presentation.
6.2 TRAFFIC CONTROL 101 SERIES: ALL-WAY STOP CONTROL 16
Staff Recommendation: Commission hear presentation.
6.3 POLICE DEPARTMENT TRAFFIC COLLISIONS/CITATIONS UPDATE 30
Staff Recommendation: Commission hear presentation.
6.4 BIKEWAYS & PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES CIP PROJECT UPDATE 37
Staff Recommendation: Commission hear presentation.
7.STAFF COMMENTS
8.COMMISSIONERS' COMMENTS
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
06/11/2026 TSC 2 of 51
9.ADJOURNMENT
to the regular meeting on July 9, 2026, at 6:00 p.m.
Materials provided to the Traffic Safety Commission related to any open-session
item on this agenda are available for public review by contacting the Engineering
Department at TSC@chulavistaca.gov.
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
06/11/2026 TSC 3 of 51
TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION AGENDA STATEMENT
Item __5.1 Meeting Date 06/11/2026
ITEM TITLE: RESOLUTION OF THE TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL REDUCE THE EXISTING SPEED LIMIT ON G STREET BETWEEN WEST OF COLORADO AVENUE AND HILLTOP DRIVE FROM 30 MPH TO 25 MPH, AND THAT SCHEDULE
X OF THE REGISTER MAINTAINED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY
ENGINEER BE AMENDED TO REFLECT THIS SPEED LIMIT SUBMITTED BY: Principal Traffic Engineer
Staff completed a review of roadway segments based on Engineering and Traffic Surveys (E&TS)
prepared in accordance with the California Vehicle Code (CVC) that have since initially expired and may qualify as a residence or business district. According to the CVC, a prima facie speed limit of 25 mph can be posted on road segments in business or residence districts without an E&TS. Therefore, staff recommends that the existing posted speed limit on G Street between West of
Colorado Avenue and Hilltop Drive (the “Segment”) of 30 mph be reduced to 25 mph based on it
being a residence district (see Attachment 1, Location Map). This also supports an application for a grant to fund Phase 2 of the F Street Promenade project, which required the addition of bicycle boulevard routes near F Street, which this reduced speed will help accommodate.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Traffic Safety Commission approve the Resolution
DISCUSSION: The California Vehicle Code (CVC) establishes minimum and maximum prima facie speed limits
for all streets in the state. The minimum default prima facie speed limit is 25 miles per hour (MPH)
and the maximum speed limit is 65 MPH. An engineering and traffic survey (E&TS) is required to change the prima facie limit and/or update various speed limits in the City. The CVC requires that local agencies review changes in local speed limits every five to seven
years to determine whether the existing street segment speed limits require updating due to the age
of the engineering and traffic survey or due to changes in roadway and traffic conditions. In addition, the CVC sets a prima facie speed limit of 25 MPH on roads in business or residence districts.
The definitions for business and residence districts in the CVC have a few caveats, but generally,
the CVC defines a residence district as a road with at least 13 separate dwellings on one side within a quarter mile or at least 16 separate dwelling houses on both sides within a quarter mile.
06/11/2026 TSC 4 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
Page 2, Item _5.1
Meeting Date
Physical Conditions
The following summarizes the conditions along the Segment:
• Classification – Local / Major Collector
• Length/Width – 1.70 miles long
• Average Daily Traffic: 4,068 (2025)
• Number of Lanes: 2 lanes (1 per direction)
• Existing Speed Limit – Posted 30 mph
• Striping – Two lanes of traffic
• Parking – Parking is allowed along entire segment
• Horizontal Alignment – Straight
• Fronting Dwellings per ¼ Mile (111/1.85 mi) – 17.7
• Longest Uninterrupted Segment – 0.33 miles
The Segment includes more than 16 dwellings per quarter mile, which meets the definition of a residence district per the CVC. In addition, because the entire Segment is 40 feet or less wide, has one traffic lane in each direction, and has not more than one half mile of uninterrupted length, it meets the definition of a local road per the CVC. Therefore, the Segment as a residence district cannot be considered a “speed trap” in accordance with the CVC. CONCLUSION: When speed limits are appropriately established the following objectives are achieved:
• Meaningful, unambiguous enforcement
• Voluntary public compliance
• Clear identification of the unreasonable violator
• Elimination of unjustifiable “tolerances” of higher speed travel Should the City Council establish the proposed 25 mph speed limit, Schedule X of the register maintained in the Office of the City Engineer be amended to reflect the speed limit increase:
• G Street, between West of Colorado Avenue and Hilltop Drive, proposed Speed Limit Increase to 25 mph. FISCAL IMPACT:
The establishment of the speed limit would require the posting of new speed limit signs and speed limit pavement legends. This work will be funded by an existing Traffic Engineering Capital Improvement budget.
Attachments: 1. Location Plat
06/11/2026 TSC 5 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
Traffic Safety
Commission
Location Plat
G Street
30 MPH 25 MPH
06/11/2026 TSC 6 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
RESOLUTION NO. TSC 2026-___
RESOLUTION OF THE TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CHULA VISTA COUUNCIL REDUCE THE EXISTING SPEED LIMIT ON G STREET BETWEEN COLORADO AVENUE AND HILLTOP DRIVE FROM 30 MPH TO 25
MPH, AND THAT SCHEDULE X OF THE REGISTER
MAINTAINED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY ENGINEER BE AMENDED TO REFLECT THE REVISED SPEED LIMIT WHEREAS, Section 515 as qualified by Section 240 of the California Vehicle Code
(CVC) generally defines a residence district as a road with at least 13 separate dwelling houses on
one side within a quarter mile or at least 16 separate dwelling houses on both sides within a quarter mile; and WHEREAS, staff determined that G Street between Colorado Avenue and Hilltop Drive
(the “Segment”) meets the criteria to be considered a residence district in accordance with the
CVC; and WHEREAS, Section 22352 of the CVC sets a 25 mph prima facie speed limit for segments that qualify as business or residence districts; and
WHEREAS, Section 40802 of the CVC defines a speed trap that would invalidate a posted speed limit and defines conditions that would not be considered a speed trap; and WHEREAS, the Segment meets the criteria in CVC Section 40802 to not be considered a
speed trap; and
WHEREAS, in a residence district, a 25 mph speed limit on a street can be enforced “prima facie,” which means that the Police Department can use RADAR/LIDAR technology to enforce the speed limit and the burden of proving whether the driver was proceeding at a safe
speed is on the driver; and
WHEREAS, denial of this resolution limits the Police Department such that it will be unable to enforce the posted speed limit using RADAR/LIDAR technology.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Traffic Safety Commission of the City
of Chula Vista does hereby recommend that the City Council reduce the speed limit and that Schedule X of the register maintained in the Office of the City Engineer be amended to reflect the speed limit as follows:
• G Street, beginning at Colorado Avenue and ending at Hilltop Drive, proposed speed limit adjusted to 25 mph.
06/11/2026 TSC 7 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
Resolution No. TSC 2026-___ Page 2
ACTION by the Traffic Safety Commission of the City of Chula Vista, California, the 11th day of June 2026, by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners:
NOES: Commissioners: ABSENT: Commissioners:
__________________________________ Rodney Caudillo, Chair
ATTEST:
____________________________________
Florence Picardal, Secretary
06/11/2026 TSC 8 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
Bayshore Bikeway
-Segment 6B
June 11, 2026
06/11/2026 TSC 9 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
Regional Bayshore Bikeway
06/11/2026 TSC 10 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
Bayshore Bikeway –Segment 6
06/11/2026 TSC 11 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
Segment 6B (Lagoon Dr –H St)
06/11/2026 TSC 12 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
HAWK Traffic Signals
06/11/2026 TSC 13 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
•Overall Project Cost Estimate: ~$7M
•Active Transportation Program –Cycle 8 Grant
If awarded:
•Preliminary Engineering/Environmental/Design
Fall 2027 -Late 2029
•Begin Construction: Early 2029
Project Budget & Schedule
06/11/2026 TSC 14 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
Questions?
06/11/2026 TSC 15 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
06/11/2026 TSC 16 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
Traffic Safety Commission
Agenda
What is it?
Where is it warranted?
What is required?
06/11/2026 TSC 17 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
Traffic Safety Commission
What is it?
Device for assigning right-of-way at an intersection
CVC 22450. All vehicles must make a complete stop at
a limit line, a crosswalk, or the entrance to the
intersecting roadway where there is a stop sign
before proceeding (paraphrased)
CVC 21800. Must yield to any vehicles already in the
intersection. Generally, the vehicle on the left yields
to the one on the right if both approached the
intersection at the same time (paraphrased, there are
also nuances to right-of-way laws depending on road
geometry, vehicle movements, etc.)
CVMC 10.32 Through Streets and Stop Intersections06/11/2026 TSC 18 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
Traffic Safety Commission
Where is it warranted?
City Council Policy 478-03
Point-based criteria
May be considered without enough points if:
1.CAMUTCD criteria are met
2.If any category of the point criteria received maximum points
10 Bonus Points: If the street to be controlled is in a residence district per CVC 515, is classified or functions as a collector, and the nearest intersection is at least 600 feet away
06/11/2026 TSC 19 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
Traffic Safety Commission
Where is it warranted? –Points Criteria
Need at least 45 out of 100 points to warrant
Engineering judgment still plays a role
Collision History (25 maximum):
5 points for each collision susceptible to correction by AWS in
prior 12 months
Unusual Conditions (21 maximum):
Near school, fire station, playground, senior center, amusement
park (500 ft to within 100 ft, more points for closer; 7 max)
Existing visibility obstruction including horizontal/vertical curves
resulting in limited stopping sight distance based on posted or
prevailing (85th percentile) speed (more points for less visibility;
7 max)06/11/2026 TSC 20 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
Traffic Safety Commission
Where is it warranted? –Points Criteria (Continued)
Unusual Conditions (21 maximum; Continued):
Intersection leading to an arterial from an interior collector (2
points)
Existing steep grades within 500 feet of intersection (more points
for steeper grade; 7 max)
Intersection is on a Suggested Route to School and no controlled
crossings with 600 feet (more points for closer to school; 7 max)
How much more prevailing speed is than posted speed (more
points for larger difference; 7 max)
By bus stop (2 points); By public mailbox (2 points); by School
bus drop-off (7 points)
06/11/2026 TSC 21 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
Traffic Safety Commission
Where is it warranted? –Points Criteria (Continued)
Pedestrian Volume (20 maximum):
How many pedestrians cross the major street during the busiest hour of an average day (ranges from 4 points for one pedestrian to 20 points for at least 41 pedestrians)
Traffic Volume (24 maximum):
During 8 busiest hours of an average day:
3 points per hour when at least 500 vehicles or pedestrians total enter intersection and at least 200 entered from minor street
2 points per hour when at least 500 total enter but 100 to 200 entered from minor street
1 point per hour when at least 500 total enter but less than 100 entered from minor street
1 point per hour when less than 500 total enter but at least 200 entered from minor street
In residence districts, if prevailing speed is at least 35 mph, the thresholds can drop by 30%06/11/2026 TSC 22 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
Traffic Safety Commission
Where is it warranted? –Points Criteria (Continued)
Traffic Volume Difference (10 maximum):
Approach volumes of major and minor streets are compared
More points are given the closer the volumes are to being equal
06/11/2026 TSC 23 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
Traffic Safety Commission
Where is it warranted? –CA MUTCD 2B.07 Criteria
A.Crash Experience –4 leg intersection: at least 5 addressable in prior 12 months or 6 in prior 36 months; 3 leg: at least 4 in prior 12 months, 5 in prior 36 months
B.Sight Distance –inadequate sight distance to cross the major road
C.Transition to Signal or Roundabout
D.8-Hour Volume (Vehicles, Pedestrians, Bicycles) –at least 8 hours of 300 approaching on major street and at least 200 approaching on minor street for same 8 hours; if prevailing speed is at least 40 mph, can discount thresholds by 30%
E.Other Factors –need to control left turn conflicts, improved operations on two collectors of similar design, pedestrian and bicyclist movements support installation
Mostly yes or no questions. All “yes” suggests that the AWS may be considered.06/11/2026 TSC 24 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
Traffic Safety Commission
Warrant criteria matter
Misconception: Stop signs effectively reduce speed
Actually: MUTCD explicitly states Stop signs should not be used
for speed control
Why: Multiple studies have shown stop signs only reduce speed
in the ~100 before the sign, but vehicles tend to speed up more
to “make up for lost time”
Misconception: Stop signs that are requested by a community, even
if not warranted, are effective
Actually: Research consistently demonstrates that Stop signs
that don’t meet warrant criteria are often ignored,
disregarded, or at a minimum, rolled through, which can lead
to higher potential for collisions
Why: Warrant criteria intend to direct stop signs to locations
where road users would be compelled to stop (similar cross
street design, volume), not just because the sign is there. If
users “disagree” with the sign, they tend to disregard it
06/11/2026 TSC 25 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
Traffic Safety Commission
What is Required?
Sign R1-1
(typically on
post)06/11/2026 TSC 26 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
Traffic Safety Commission
What is Required?
06/11/2026 TSC 27 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
Traffic Safety Commission
Beacons can help primarily for rural
locations
06/11/2026 TSC 28 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
06/11/2026 TSC 29 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
Traffic Safety Commission Meeting
June 2026
Chula Vista Police Department
Traffic Division
06/11/2026 TSC 30 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
06/11/2026 TSC 31 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
06/11/2026 TSC 32 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
06/11/2026 TSC 33 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
06/11/2026 TSC 34 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
06/11/2026 TSC 35 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
Questions?
06/11/2026 TSC 36 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
June 2026
06/11/2026 TSC 37 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
06/11/2026 TSC 38 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
Safety Commission
TRF0415
3
Project to construct a new raised median to restrict westbound left-turns out of Old Telegraph
Canyon Road and provide U-turn pocket and traffic signal modification at Telegraph Canyon
Road & Medical Center Drive.
06/11/2026 TSC 39 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
Safety Commission
TRF0411
4
Project will construct a pedestrian mid-block uncontrolled crosswalk on Quintard Street for
Castle Park Middle School.
06/11/2026 TSC 40 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
Safety Commission
TRF0426
5
Project will expand
the existing advanced
traffic signal system
along Telegraph
Canyon Road & Otay
Lakes Road
06/11/2026 TSC 41 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
Safety Commission
STM0386/STM0388
6
STM0386 -Project will complete the Heritage Road bridge improvements on Heritage Road from
Entertainment Circle North (Amphitheater) to Main Street intersection crossing the Otay River
STM0388 –Main Street widening from Nirvana Avenue to
Heritage Road & Main Street intersection
May 706/11/2026 TSC 42 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
Safety Commission
TRF0429
7
Project will incorporate concrete
curb “bulb-outs” to provide
additional sidewalk space for
pedestrians, shortening the crossing
distance on the crosswalk. The
project will also install pedestrian-
activated rectangular rapid flashing
beacons (RRFBs).
06/11/2026 TSC 43 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
06/11/2026 TSC 44 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
Safety Commission
TRF0416
9
*Estimated advertisement in Summer 202606/11/2026 TSC 45 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
Safety Commission
TRF0422
10
06/11/2026 TSC 46 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
Safety Commission
TRF0436
11
Project includes upgrades to
existing flashing beacon crossing
at Fourth Avenue & Orsett Street
in front of Lauderbach
Elementary School to a
pedestrian hybrid beacon
*Estimated advertisement in Summer 202606/11/2026 TSC 47 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
Safety Commission
TRF0441
Valle Lindo Elementary School Mid-Block
Pedestrian Crossing
12
Project will construct curb extensions at the pedestrian crossing located in the
vicinity of Valle Lindo Elementary School.
*Project advertisement
estimated for Summer 2026
06/11/2026 TSC 48 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
Safety Commission
TRF0443
L Street & Industrial Blvd Intersection
Improvements
13
Project will upgrade traffic signal hardware, install accessible pedestrian signal
equipment and install ADA curb ramps.
*Project advertisement
estimated for Spring 2027
06/11/2026 TSC 49 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
Safety Commission
STL0464
*Project currently undergoing consultant
selection for design services06/11/2026 TSC 50 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission
06/11/2026 TSC 51 of 51
City of Chula Vista Traffic Safety Commission