HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008/02/12 Item 6
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA STATEMENT
~Y!f::. CITY OF
H ..-=. CHUlA VISTA
SUBMITTED BY:
2/12/08, Item b
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA TO DENY THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE SAFETY
COMMISSION REGARDING THE INSTALLATION OF AN ALL-
WAY STOP CONTROL AT THE INTERSECTION OF OLEANDER
AVENUE AND TAMARACK COURT/STREET AND AFFIRM THE
DECISION OF THE CITY ENGINEER
DIRECTOR OF ENG~\ERING AND GENERAL SERVICESG;;6-
CITY MANAGER ~\)\
ASSISTANT CITY ~ANAGER c.;r-
4/5THS VOTE: YES 0 NO [gJ
ITEM TITLE:
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND
On October 19,2007 a resident of Tamarack Court requested an all-way stop control be installed
at the intersection of Oleander Avenue and Tamarack Court. Staff performed an all-way stop
control warrant study, per Council Policy #478-03, at this intersection and presented a report to
the Safety Commission at the regular meeting of November 8, 2007. Since this intersection does
not meet the requirements warranting all-way stop control, staffs recommendation was to deny
the request to establish all-way stop control at this intersection. However, the Safety
Commission agreed with the concerned residents present at the public hearing and voted to
recommend the requested all-way stop control at this location. In accordance with Council
Policy 478-03, this item is therefore forwarded to the City Council for their consideration.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the project qualifies
for a Class 1 categorical exemption pursuant to Section 15301(c) (Existing Facility) of the State
CEQA Guidelines because it involves installation of an all way stop sign within an existing
intersection. Thus, no further environmental review is necessary.
RECOMMENDATION
1. City Council deny the recommendation of the Safety Commission regarding the installation
of an all-way stop control at the intersection of Oleander A venue and Tamarack Court/Street
and affirm the decision of the City Engineer and concur with staff recommendation to install
the following:
. stop signs for eastbound and westbound traffic on Tamarack Court/Street complete with
limit lines and "STOP" legends
. red curb on Oleander Avenue, south of Tamarack Court and Street, for a distance of25'.
. red curb on east side of Oleander Avenue north of Tamarack Court for a distance of
approximately 160'. 6-1
2/12/08, Item~
Page 2 of 8
BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDA nON
The Safety Commission, at their meeting of November 8, 2007, voted 5-0-2 (Liken/Navarro
absent) to reject staffs recommendation, and instead, recommended the installation of all-way
stop control at the intersection of Oleander Avenue and Tamarack Court. It should be noted that,
at the Safety Commission meeting of November 8, 2007, two citizens attended the meeting,
voiced their opinion about the proposed all-way stop and were in support of the proposed all-way
stop.
The Safety Commission, at their meeting of January 8, 2008, voted 6-0-1 (Perrett absent) to
approve a resolution recommending that City Council review the request for all-way stop control
at the intersection of Oleander Avenue and Tamarack Court/Street and pursuant to Council
Policy 11 0-09(A)(8)( c), order the installation of said all-way stop control at such intersection
based on the below-listed findings in accordance with Council Policy 110-09(8):
. The Safety Commission has taken testimony from the public on 11/08/01, 9/08/05,
10/13/05,12/08/05,10/11/07, and 11/8/07, on traffic concerns along the 1600 block of
Oleander Avenue; and
. There has been a history of speeding, most recently with an 85% speed of 12mph above
the posted speed limit; and
. The residents have expressed strong desire for the all-way stop; and
. Several traffic control measures have not resolved the speeding issue; and
. Existing sight distance is below recommended standards and further degraded by
fluctuating on-street parking conditions.
DISCUSSION
On July 19, 2007, staffreceived a letter from Ms. Evelyn Sanchez requesting the installation of
all-way stop control at the intersection of Oleander Avenue and Tamarack Court. Staff
conducted a preliminary all-way stop warrant study in accordance with Council Policy #478-03,
the results of which are presented below in this report. Staff has also researched previous citizen
requests that were presented to the Safety Commission regarding this segment of Oleander
Avenue. The following is a summary of actions regarding Oleander Avenue between Main
Street and Sequoia Street (please see attachments for copies of meeting minutes regarding each
item):
On November 8, 200 I requests for all-way stop control at the intersections of Oleander Avenue
and Sequoia Street, and Oleander Avenue and Tamarack Court, were brought before the Safety
Commission.
Oleander and Sequoia: An all-way stop warrant study was completed for the intersection of
Oleander Avenue and Sequoia Street and scored 29 out of a possible 100 points. Staffs
recommendation, based on the points awarded in the warrant study, was to deny the installation
of an all-way stop. The Safety Commission disagreed, stating that the sight distance constraints
and proximity to a nearby school were enough to warrant the installation. The Commission
6-2
2/12/08, Item l.JJ
Page 3 of 8
rejected staffs request, and recommended the all-way stop be installed. The all-way stop was
ultimately installed.
Oleander and Tamarack: An all-way stop warrant study was completed for the intersection of
Oleander Avenue and Tamarack Street, and scored 20 out of a possible 100 points. Staff's
recommendation, based on the points awarded in the warrant study, was to deny the installation
of an all-way stop. The Safety Commission agreed and recommended the all way stop not be
installed, citing the intersection's proximity with the recently approved all-way stop at Sequoia,
its distance from any nearby schools, and the lack of any significant accident history.
On September 8. 2005, during oral communications a resident asked staff to evaluate Oleander
A venue to see if stop signs at Tanoak Court were warranted. He stated speeding vehicles
traveling along Oleander Avenue were a hazardous situation for residents of the area. At the
Safety Commission's request, Staff agreed to evaluate Oleander Avenue, and went on to report
their findings at the October 13, 2005 Safety Commission hearing.
On October 13. 2005, staff presented a report to the Safety Commission responding to the
September 8, 2005 request for a stop sign evaluation at Tanoak Court. The report recommended
the installation of traffic calming measures to reduce speeds along Oleander A venue, stating stop
signs were not the best tool to use when dealing with speeding issues. The Safety Commission
agreed with staff s recommendation to install various traffic calming measures, but also asked
staff to evaluate the intersection of Tanoak Court and Oleander Avenue, as well as Tamarack
Court and Oleander A venue, for the installation of stop signs.
On December 8. 2005, responding to a request from the Safety Commission, staff presented a
report regarding traffic calming along Oleander A venue, including the possible installation of
all-way stop control at the intersections of Oleander Avenue and Tamarack Court as well as
Oleander Avenue and Tanoak Court.
Oleander Avenue and Tamarack Court: An all-way stop warrant study was completed for the
intersection of Oleander A venue and Tamarack Court and scored 24 out of a possible 100 points.
Staff's recommendation, based on the points awarded in the warrant study, was to deny the
installation of the all-way stop. The Safety Commission agreed and recommended the all-way
stop not be installed citing that stop signs are not intended to be used as traffic calming devices.
Oleander Avenue and Tanoak Court: An all-way stop warrant study was completed for the
intersection of Oleander Avenue and Tanoak Court and scored 21 out of a possible 100 points.
Staffs recommendation, based on the points awarded in the warrant study, was to deny the
installation of the all-way stop. The Safety Commission agreed and recommended the all-way
stop not be installed, again, citing that stop signs are not intended to be used as traffic calming
devices.
In addition to the all-way stop recommendations, staff recommended the installation of a curve
warning sign (for the southbound direction of travel) with a 20 MPH advisory speed limit for the
curve. The Safety Commission agreed with the recommendation for the curve warning sign.
After some discussion, the Safety Commission also recommended the wattage for a street light
be increased from 100w to 150w. This work was completed in January of2006.
6-3
2/12/08, Item~
Page 4 of 8
On October 11. 2007 a request for all-way stop control at the intersection of Oleander Avenue
and Tamarack Court was brought before the Safety Commission. After some discussion, the
Safety Commission continued the item to the next regularly scheduled meeting so staff could
more thorougWy respond to questions and concerns raised by both the public and commissioners.
The intersection of Oleander Avenue and Tamarack Court / Tamarack Street is a four-legged
intersection. Oleander A venue is a two-lane Class III Collector roadway and is 40' wide curb-to-
curb. Oleander Avenue is striped with a double yellow centerline and parking is delineated with
white painted lines on both sides of the roadway. The total daily approach traffic volume is
1,593, with a posted speed limit of 25 mph, and 85th percentile speeds of 37 mph for both
northbound and southbound directions of travel. East of Oleander Avenue, Tamarack Court is a
two-lane (one lane each direction) residential street, 36' wide curb-to-curb, with parking allowed
on both sides of the street and a total approaching volume of 316 vehicles per day . West of
Oleander A venue, Tamarack Street is also a residential street with two lanes (one lane each
direction), 36' wide curb-to-curb, with parking allowed on both sides of this street. The total
approaching volume for Tamarack Street is 166 vehicles per day. Currently there are no existing
stop signs on either Tamarack Court or Tamarack Street at their intersections with Oleander
Avenue.
When considering an intersection for an all-way stop control, several factors are studied to
determine the need for an installation. Pedestrian and vehicle volumes, accident history, along
with physical factors such as sight distances, vehicle speed, roadway alignment (such as
horizontal and vertical curves), and topography, are all taken into consideration.
A review of the accident history for this intersection shows no reported accidents at this location
within the past three years.
All-Wav Stop Warrant Studv:
Physical Conditions:
The following table summarizes the existing conditions for the streets at this intersection:
Street Oleander Avenue Tamarack Ct./St.
Direction/Width North-South/40' East-West/36'
ADT 1,593 (10/2007) 166 on Tamarack Street
Approaching onlv 316 on Tamarack Court
Exist. Speed limit 25 mph (Posted) 25 mph (prima facie, not
posted)
85th % speed 37 mph (southbound) Unknown
37 mnh (northbound)
Number of Lanes One lane in each direction One lane in each direction
Striping Double yellow centerline & None
parking lane striping 8' off curb
On-Street Parking Allowed Allowed
6-4
2/12/08, Item_
Page 5 of8
Classification
Class III Collector
Residential
Vertical Alignment
NB approach, - 6.93% grade
SB approach + 7.30 % grade
NB: Tangent
SB: 400' Radius, begins 50' north
of the intersection
EB approach, -3.50% grade
WB approach, -3.25% grade
Horizontal Alignment
Tangent
Other conditions
An all-way stop warrant evaluation was conducted and the subject intersection was awarded a
total of 22 points based on the following conditions:
Accident Historv: (0 points assigned out of a maximum of25 points)
o points were assigned because there were no reported, correctible accidents within three years
of the investigation date.
Unusual Conditions: (15 points assigned out ofa maximum 21 points)
5 points were assigned for required sight distance being less than 60%.
3 points were assigned for grades greater than 7% near the intersection.
7 points were assigned for prevailing speed of unstopped approaches being more than 10 mph
higher than the posted or prima facie speed limit.
* * It should be noted that Valle Lindo Elementary School is in the general area, but is not close
enough to warrant any "Unusual Condition" points.
Pedestrian Volume: (4 points assigned out ofa maximum 20 points)
4 points were assigned for observing 8 pedestrians crossing at this intersection.
Traffic Volume: (0 points assigned out of a maximum of24 points)
No points were assigned for this part of the warrant because oflow approach volumes.
Traffic Volume Difference: (3 points assigned out ofa maximum 10 points)
3 points were assigned because of the intersection volume ratio. Tamarack Court and Tamarack
Street approach volumes are 30.3% of the approach volumes on Oleander Avenue.
Intersection Sight Distance:
When investigating sight distance measurements, field measurements are compared to the
required stopping sight distance values, as listed in the City of Chula Vista Design Standard
TR07-A. The following table summarizes our findings:
6-5
2/12/08,Item~
Page 6 of 8
Speed 85th% Measured Measured
Required Sight Sight
Street Direction Limit Speed Sight Distance Distance Adequate
Name of Traffic (Oleander (Oleander Distance (Tamarack (Tamarack
Avenue) Avenue) St.) Ct.)
· Oleander SB 25 mph 37 mph SB 260' +300' 230' No
Avenue NB 37mphNB 260' 206' 132' No
· These vehicles are traveling on Oleander Avenue being viewed from Tamarack Ct. or Tamarack
Street by motorists stopped behind !be curb return or cross gutter.
Motorists traveling westbound on Tamarack Court, wishing to enter Oleander Avenue, have 230'
and 132' of available sight distance when looking toward southbound and northbound traffic,
respectively. Motorists traveling eastbound on Tamarack Street, wishing to enter Oleander
Avenue, have over 300' facing southbound traffic and 206' facing northbound traffic of available
sight distance (a minimum of 260' of stopping sight distance is required). Looking toward
northbound traffic, the available sight distance measured at this intersection is not adequate for
the 85th percentile speed of 37 mph. A contributing factor to this limited sight distance is the on-
street parking spaces located immediately adjacent to Tamarack Court and Tamarack Street,
however, the most limiting factor for sight distance measured from Tamarack Court is the
vertical curve located south of the intersection resulting in the 132' available sight distance
measurement.
The sight distance measurements shown above were performed with no vehicles parked near the
intersection of Tamarack Court/Street near Oleander Avenue. The critical sight distances of 132'
and 206' as shown above will reduce by approximately 40' if vehicles are parked within 25' of
this intersection. Vehicles parked beyond 25' from the curb returns of Tamarack Court/Street on
Oleander Avenue do not significantly affect the sight distance. Therefore, staff recommends the
curbs to be painted on Oleander Avenue, south of Tamarack Court and Street, for a distance of
25'. In addition, the sight distance available to motorists on Tamarack Court looking north, at
times, can be significantly reduced by parked vehicles. Even without the presence of parked
vehicles this line of sight does not meet current sight distance standards. As a result, it is staffs
recommendation that red curb be painted on the east side of Oleander for approximately 160'
north of the subject intersection. While this may reduce available parking spaces in the area, it
will allow the best sight distance possible at all times of the day.
Concerns raised by residents in the area regarding the speed of vehicles traveling along Oleander
Avenue are valid - the 85% speeds measured along Oleander Avenue are 12mph above the
posted speed limit. Review of the previous safety commission reports regarding Oleander
Avenue also shows the speeding problem is not new to the area, and has not gotten any better
since the instaIilition of either the stop sign at Sequoia Street, or the striping/traffic calming
modifications made over the past 6 years. In addition, staff reviewed accident rates at the
intersection of Oleander and Sequoia and determined that there have been no changes in accident
rates as a result of the all-way stop installation.
6-6
2/12/08, Item 10
Page 7 of8
Accident reports are generated by the City of Chula Vista Police Department for every reported
accident, and then are submitted to the State of California. The data ultimately is organized and
downloaded on a quarterly basis by City of Chula Vista Traffic Engineering Staff for analysis
and data gathering purposes. According to the data downloaded from the State of California,
there have been no accidents reported at the subject intersection. Although staff has determined
there are sight distance limitations at this intersection, after reviewing the accident history it
would appear that motorists recognize these limitations and take appropriate levels of caution
when turning onto or off of Oleander Avenue at this intersection.
As part of the all-way stop warrant analysis, a pedestrian count was taken in an attempt to
determine the number of pedestrians crossing either road during what is typically the peak hour
for pedestrian activity. In this case, staff observed the intersection on October 31 from 2:30 -
3 :30p.m. This time was chosen in order to see if there were a large number of students walking
home from school that cross Tamarack Street, Tamarack Court, or Oleander Avenue. Staff
counted 8 pedestrians during this "peak hour." This does not indicate a heavy amount of
pedestrian activity at the subject intersection.
The overall volume of traffic utilizing Oleander Avenue has increased over the past six years by
approximately 10%. While there has been recent development in the area that may have affected
traffic volumes along Oleander Avenue, this development has been completed for a long enough
period of time to assume any changes in traffic patterns along Oleander A venue have already
taken place. The City has set thresholds for major roadways in Chula Vista regarding acceptable
levels of service. These thresholds, or levels of service (LOS), are based on the average delay a
motorist can expect as a result of traffic volumes, and are reported as letter grades A through F
with A being the best grade possible. For major arterials, the delay motorists experience is
measured on an annual basis by City staff that drives these streets, recording the time it takes to
get from "Point A" to "Point B." Their results are then reported to the City's Growth
Management Oversight Committee (GMOC) which requires major arterials operate at a LOS C
or better. Levels of service can also be estimated for smaller streets using the City of Chula
Vista Street Capacity Standards that are based on the volume traveling along a particular
classification of roadway. According to the street capacity standards a Class III Collector such
as Oleander Avenue operates at LOS C if the average daily volume (ADT) of the roadway is
7,500 trips/day or less. As measured in October of 2007, Oleander Avenue currently handles
1,593 trips/day, resulting in an estimated LOS A. While levels of service are typically not
assigned to local, or residential roads, they are designed with a certain capacity in mind.
According to the City subdivision manual, a residential road is designed to accommodate 1,500
ADT. As measured in October of 2007, both Tamarack Street and Tamarack Court are well
within their designed capacities.
CONCLUSION
The intersection of Oleander A venue and Tamarack Court/Street received a total of 22 points out
of a possible 100 points, where a minimum of 45 points are required to justify the installation of
an all-way stop control. Therefore, in accordance with Council Policy 478-03 and based on 1)
the points awarded by the warrant study, 2) the lack of a significant accident history, 3) the low
pedestrian usage, and 4) the estimated LOS A along Oleander A venue, staff does not recommend
the installation of all-way stop control at this intersection. However, staff has additional
recommendations regarding this intersection.
6-7
2/12/08, Item~
Page 8 of8
City Engineering staff, when reviewing new developments, typically requires developers to
install stop signs on residential streets at intersections with collector streets. In order to maintain
consistency across the City, it is staffs recommendation that stop signs be placed on Tamarack
Court and Tamarack Street at Oleander Avenue, complete with limit lines and pavement legends.
Recognizing the sight distance limitations, speeding issues that continue on Oleander Avenue,
and residents concern for safety, staff further recommends painting the curbs red on Oleander
Avenue south of Tamarack Court and Tamarack Street for a distance of 25' to prevent the
obstruction of available sight distance by parked vehicles for the motorists wishing to enter
Oleander Avenue. Furthermore, we recommend painting the curb red on the east side of
Oleander Avenue, north of Tamarack Court, for a distance of approximately 160' in order to
guarantee the maximum amount of sight distance possible at this location. These improvements
amount to a decrease in available parking along Oleander Avenue by approximately seven
parking spaces, however, staff does not believe this will have a significant impact to the
surrounding area. Lastly, Traffic Engineering staff will continue to coordinate with the Police
Department to provide more speed enforcement along Oleander Avenue, and to deploy the
portable radar feedback signs more often along Oleander Avenue in an effort to reduce speeds in
the area.
DECISION MAKER CONFLICT
Staff has reviewed the property holdings of the City Council Members and has found no property
holdings within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property which is the subject of this action.
FISCAL IMPACT
The estimated cost for installing two stop signs, painting limit lines, "STOP" legends, and red
curb, at this intersection is $1,000.00, and can be accommodated by the Public Works operating
budget. The estimated cost for the all-way stop installation at this intersection is $1,000.00,
which will be funded by the Public Works operating budget.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Location Map
2. Letter of Request
3. All-Way Stop Control Warrant Study
4. Past Safety Commission/Council Meeting Minutes
5. Safety Commission Resolution
Prepared by: Hasib Baha, Associate Civil Engineer, Engineering and General Services Dept.
M:\Engineer\AGENDA \CAS2008\02.12~08\RESO-Oleander _Tamarack _ A WS.doc
6-8
(' T
:oil:
~fJl~~'
::; . ~:S
~I U~
u,
July 16, 2007
ATTAC'WtNT '2.;
CEIVED
R-
JUL 19~~EIVt
, fJ7 /)
. I
9 2007
Principal Civil Engineer
City of Chula Vista - Traffic Engineering
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Principal Civil Engineer,
This is my second letter to the City of Chula Vista formally requesting the
installation of a 4-way stop sign at the intersection of Tamarack Court and Oleander
Avenue.
This intersection is located at the top of a hill and is a blind intersection for drivers on
Tamarack Court and Oleander Avenue. It is very common for drivers on Oleander Avenue
to drive at excessively high speeds, well above 25 mph.
I purchased my home in November 2005, located on the southwest comer of this
intersection. Since that time I have had numerous near-misses attempting to back out from
my driveway and one of our vehicles parked in front of our house was rear-ended (hit and
run) by a driver turning onto Tamarack Court from Oleander Avenue at an excessively high
speed.
As a parent, I am also concerned for is the safety of the children in this neighborhood.
Valle Lindo Elemetary School is located a few blocks from this dangerous intersection
where children are seen regularly walking to and from school every day. Children regularly
play in this neighborhood, oftentimes in the street.
There is nothing slowing down motorists on Oleander Avenue and that is the real problem.
Please help our neighborhood!
502 TAMARACK COURT
CHULA VISTA, CA 91911-6010
(619) 421-9971
6-10
ATTACHMENT
:3
ALL-WAY STOP WARRANT SUMMARY
LOCATION Oleander Ave. / Tamarack Court
DATE 10/24/2007
POLICY NUMBER 478-03 I EFFECTIVE DATE 103/06/2001
GENERAL
PAGE
10F6
Points are assigned to each of these warrants. The total points possible are 100. The installation of an all-way
stop control is justified with a minimum of 45 points, unless:
Case 1:
If Caltrans' criteria is met, the point system is not applicable.
Case 2:
If any of the five criteria is met to the extent of 100% an all-way stop control intersection may be warranted even
though the minimum number of points is not accumulated.
Case 3:
If the following conditions are met:
(a)The street to be controlled is within a residence district as defined in Section 515 of the California Vehicle
Code, and No
(b)The street to be controlled is classified a collector or is functioning as a collector, and Yes
(c)The subject intersection is not within 600 feet from the nearest controlled intersection along the collector, and
Yes
(d)There is a parallei arterial highway that can be used as an alternative route, then Yes
The subject intersection shall receive a bonus of 10 points.
POINTS:
o
ALL-WAY STOP POINT SYSTEM CRITERIA:
1) ACCIDENT WARRANT: (25 points)
Five Points are assigned for each accident susceptible to correction by an all-way stop control during any 12-
month period prior to the investigation date.
Total number of accidents correctible by all-way stop: 0
( Maximum 25 points)
2) UNUSUAL CONDITION WARRANT: (21 points)
1) Adjacent to school, fire station, piayground, senior center and/or amusement park.
(7 points maximum)
a) within 100' of the intersection.
b) between 101'-250' from the intersection. 0 pts
c) between 251 '-400' from the intersection.
d) within 500' of the intersection.
7 points
5 points
3 points
1 point
6-11
I ALL-WAY STOP WARRANT SUMMARY II
LOCATION Oleander Ave. I Tamarack Court PAGE
DATE 10/24/2007 2 OF 6
POLICY NUMBER 478-03 1 EFFECTIVE DATE 103/06/2001
2) Any visibility obstruction including horizontal and/or vertical curves which result in limited stopping sight distance
based on either the posted speed limit or the 85% tile speed, whichever is higher.
(7 points maximum)
132
260
x 100 =
~-,_..
5pts
a) provides for less than 40% of the required sight distance.
b) provides for less than 50% of the required sight distance.
c) '~W~*l<l~~!lQ!!!!~~~'I~~ffi!!~Q~!6fill1Ei,tEi~Oi(~~!~!gl1l!~I~~iJ9~!
d) provides for less than 70% of the required sight distance.
e) provides for less than 80% of the required sight distance.
f) provides for less than 90% of the required sight distance.
g) provides for less than 100 % of the required sight distance.
',:::.;C>;
;,,~...,...., '"
7 points
6 points
, 5p6ints
4 points
3 points
2 points
1 point
3) An intersection leading to an arterial from an interior (circular) collector.
Opts
2 points
4) Intersection with steep grades within 500' from the intersection on the downhill approach.
a) greater than 9% grade
b) greater than 8% grade Oleander = 7.30% 3 pts
c)!grEiatei!tl1~q1%,rgracte'. ' ," Tatitarack Ct. ~Str"~ =3:5%'&3":25% "' "
d) greater than 6% grade
7 points
5 points
. ",' 3 points:
1 point
5) Intersection is on "Suggested Route To School" and no other controlled crossing is located within 600'.
(7 points maximum)
a) intersection is 300' from school grounds.
b) intersection is 400' from school grounds.
c) intersection is 500' from school grounds.
d) intersection is 600' from school grounds.
+ 1,000' from Valle Lindo Elementary School
Opts
7 points
5 points
3 points
1 point
6) High approach speeds.
a) prevailing speeds are up to 5 mph higher than posted speed.
b) prevailing speeds are up to 10 mph higher than posted speed.
c) ~r,e;vai!irigjsplilE!a~arEi,rrid~ethan 10 mphhig~erlhar\po$~\l"~i?eedf!
7pts
1 point
4 points
" 7 points
Speed limit (Oleander Ave.) = Posted at 25 mph (85th %tile of _ mph)
Approach Speeds (Tamarack Ct./Str.): Unknown (prima facie of 25 mph)
7) Adjacent to bus stop
Public mailbox
School bus drop-off
2 poi nts
2 points
Opts 7 points
( Maximum 21 points)
POINTS: 15
6-12
I ALL-WAY STOP WARRANT SUMMARY I
LOCATION Oleander Ave. / Tamarack Court PAGE
DATE 10/24/2007 30F6
POLICY NUMBER 478-03 I EFFECTIVE DATE 103/06/2001
3) PEDESTRIAN VOLUME (20 points )
Consideration is given to large numbers of pedestrians crossing the major street during the busiest hour of an
average day.
Peak Hour: 2:30 - 3:30 pm Number of Pedestrians: .:..
Pedestrians crossino maior street. Total durino the oeak oedestrian hour
Volumes: 1-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-0VER
Points: 4 8 12 16 20
( Maximum 20 points) POINTS: 4
(E) = Estimated
4) TRAFFIC VOLUME (24 points )
Points are dependent upon the magnitude of vehicular volumes entering the intersection during the eight busiest
hours of an average day.
Traffic Counts (circle eight highest hour volumes):
DIRECTION 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000 TOTAL
NB 20 76 32 22 24 32 43 54 51 58 54 76 62 29 29 0
SB 37 113 88 33 43 51 45 58 51 61 50 55 49 36 19 0
SUBTOTAL 57 189 120 55 67 83 .88 112 102 119 104 131 11:1 65 48 0
EB 5 23 8 9 4 6 9 8 14 9 9 23 12 6 9 0
WB 19 30 26 14 19 16 8 20 15 17 4 11 24 18 15 0
SUBTOTAL 24 53 34 23 23 22 17 28 29 26 1.3 34 36 24 24 0
TOTAL 81 242 154 78 90 105 105 140 131 145 117 165 147 89 72 0
i : ! I .
POINTS I I . : I
. : . : I
.
-3 POINTS ARE ASSIGNED PER HOUR WHEN TOTAL ENTERING VEHICULAR VOLUMES EXCEED 500
AND MINOR STREET VOLUMES (INCLUDING PEDESTRIANS) EXCEED 200.
-2 POINTS ARE ASSIGNED PER HOUR WHEN TOTAL ENTERING VOLUMES EXCEED 500 BUT MINOR
STREET VOLUMES ARE LESS THAN 200, BUT MORE THAN 100.
-1 POINT IS ASSIGNED PER HOUR WHEN TOTAL ENTERING VEHICULAR VOLUMES EXCEED 500 BUT
MINOR STREET VOLUMES ARE LESS THAN 100.
-1 POINT IS ASSIGNED PER HOUR WHEN TOTAL ENTERING VEHICULAR VOLUMES DO NOT MEET 500,
BUT MINOR STREET VOLUMES EXCEED 200.
In residence districts as defined by Section 515 cve, if the 85th percentile approach speed of the major street
exceeds 35 miles per hour, the minimum vehicular volume warrants is 70% of the above requirements.
- Both Tamarack Cl. & Tamarack Str. are within the "Residential District"
( Maximum 24 points) POINTS: 0
POINTS: d
6-13
ALL-WAY STOP WARRANT SUMMARY
LOCATION Oleander Ave. / Tamarack Court
DATE 10/24/2007
POLICY NUMBER 478-03 EFFECTIVE DATE 03/06/2001
5) TRAFFIC VOLUME DIFFERENCE ( 10 POINTS)
PAGE
40F6
All-way stops operate best when the major and minor street approach traffic volumes are nearly equal. Points
shall be assigned in accordance with the following table:
*24-Hour Minor SI. A roach Volumes
*24-Hour Major SI. Approach Volumes
x 100 =
482
1,593
x 100 =
PERCENTAGE
95-100
85-94
75-84
65-74
55-64
45-54
35-44
POINTS
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
15-24
5-14
0-4
2
1
o
(Maximum 10 points)
POINTS:
3
*For T-intersections, the percent is the ratio of the minor street approach volume to the highest single leg
approach volume on the major street multiplied by one hundred. Minor Street appraosh volume Is estimated.
CAL TRANS CRITERIA Cha ter 4 CalTrans Traffic Manual
ny of the following conditions may warrant a multi-way STOP sign installation, regardless of the point system:
1) Where traffic signals are warranted and urgentiy needed, the multi-way stop may be an interim measure that can
be installed quickly to control traffic while arrangements are being made for the signal installation.
2) An accident problem, as indicated by five or more reported accidents within a 12 month period of a type
susceptible to correction by a multi-way stop installation. Such accidents inciude right- and left-turn collisions as
well as right-angle collisions.
3) Minimum traffic voiumes - The total vehicular volume entering the intersection from all approaches must average
at least 500 vehicles per hour for any 8 hours of an average day, and the combined vehicular and pedestrian
volume from the minor street or highway must average at least 200 units per hour for the same 8 hours, with an
average delay to minor street vehicular traffic of at least 30 seconds per vehicle during the maximum hour, but
when the 85th percentile approach speed of the major street traffic exceeds 40 miles per hour ( ** ), the
minimum vehicular volume warrant is 70 percent of the above requirements.
( **) This speed applies only to CalTrans Criteria
6-14
ALL-WAY STOP WARRANT SUMMARY
LOCATION Oleander Ave. / Tamarack Court
DATE 10/24/2007
POLICY NUMBER 478-03 EFFECTIVE DATE 03/06/2001
PAGE
50F6
ALL-WAY STOP SUMMARY
INTERSECTION:
Oleander Avenue
(Major)
Tamarack CourllTamarack St.
(Minor)
DATE INVESTIGATION WAS COMPLETED:
October 24, 2007
TOTAL SCORE: 22 points out of a possible 100.
The minimum required to justify an all-way stop control is 45 points.
INTERSECTION DIAGRAM:
6-15
I ALL-WAY STOP WARRANT SUMMARY
LOCATION Oleander Ave. / Tamarack Court
DATE 10/24/2007
POLICY NUMBER 478-03 I EFFECTIVE DATE 103/06/2001
RECOMMENDATIONS:
PAGE
6 OF 6
This intersection received a total of 22 points of a possible 100 points, where a
minimum of 45 points are required to justify the installation of all-way stop control.
Therefore, this intersection does not warrant the installation of an all-way stop
control.
REMARKS:
J:lErigineerfTrafficlStaff/Susanm/AII-Way Stop Studies/A-W Stop (Oleander - Tamarack Ct)Revised.xls
6-16
SpeedSlatHour-736 Page 1
MetroCount Traffic Executive
Speed Statistics bv Hour
atasets :
te:
irection:
Jrvey Duration:
entifier:
ata type:
[Oleander] Between Tamarack - Main
5 - South bound A>B, North bound B>A., Lane: 0
12:00 Tuesday, October 30,2007 => 15:09 Wednesday, October 31,2007
E7500ZKX MC56-6 [MC55] (c)Microcom 02103/01
Axle sensors - Paired (Class, Speed, Count)
rofile:
Iter time: 13:00 Tuesday, October 30,2007 => 13:00 Wednesday, October 31,2007
eluded classes: 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12
peed range: 6 - 99 mph.~'
irection: 7 North (bound)
eparation: ' All - (Headway)
cheme: Vehicle classification (ARX)
nits: Non metric (It, mi, flIs, mph; Ib, ton)
I profile: 713 Vehicles
Speed Statistics bv Hour
escription:
i1ter time:
Between Tamarack - Main
13:00 Tuesday, October 30,2007 => 13:00 Wednesday, October 31,2007
13 Vehicles
,sted speed limit ~ 25 mph - Exceeding ~ 641 (89.90%)
",ted speed limit + 10 ~ 35 mph - Exceeding ~ 164 (25.81%)
. .xlmum ~ 52.1 mph, Minimum ~ 8.6 mph, Mean ~ 31.5 mph
;% Speed ~ 36.7 mph, 96% Speed ~ 41.2 mph, Median ~ 31.3 mph
l mph Pace ~ 27 - 37, ~umber in Pace ~ 484 (67.88%)
3rtance ~ 32.93, Standard Deviation ~ 5,74 mph
our Bins
ime I Bin I Min. I Max. I Mean I Median I 85% I 95% I >25 m"h I >35 m'Ph
000 ! 2 0.3% \ 40.2 ! 41.1 ! 40.7 ! 40.0 40.9 ! 40.9 I 2 100.0% ! 2 100.0%
100 I 1 0.1% I 35.5 I 35.5 I 35.5 I 35.3 35.3 I 35.3 I 1 100.0% I 1 100.0%
200 I 1 0.1% I 32.7 I 32.7 I 32.7 I 32.7 32.7 I 32.7 I 1 100.0% I 0 0.0%
300 I 1 0.1% I 29.7 I 29.7 I 29.7 I 29.5 29.5 I 29.5 I 1 100.0% I 0 0.0%
400 I 3 O.H I 8.6 I 33.8 I 22.2 I 23.9 33.8 I 33.8 I 1 33 .3% I 0 0.0%
500 I 3 O.H I 27.6 I 36.2 I 31.5 I 30.6 36.0 I 36.0 I 3 100.0% I 1 33.3%
600 I 20 2.8% I 18.3 I 45.3 I 31.6 I 32.4 36.2 I 44.3 I 16 80.0% I 6 30.0%
700 I 76 10.n I 12.6 I 42.8 I 31.2 I 31.1 36.7 I 39.6 I 65 85.5% I 20 26.3%
800 I 32 4.5% I 21.0 I .44.7 I 31.1 I 30.6 34.9 I 38.7 I 29 90.6% I 6 18.8%
900 I 22 3.1% I 21. 7 I 39.3 I 30.1 I 29.8 35.3 I 38.9 I 19 86.H I 4 18.2%
000 I 24 3.H I 20.8 I 43.2 I 32.6 I 31.5 37.6 I 41.2 I 23 95.8% I 8 33.3t
100 I 32 4.5% I 20.2 I 38.5 I 30.1 I 29.8 34.9 I 36.0 I 27 84.4% I 6 18.8%
200 I 43 6.0% I 23.4 I 49.2 I 34.1 I 32.4 41.8 I 44.7 I 39 90. n I 20 46.5%
300 I 54 7.6% I 17.3 I 42.8 I 31.2 I 30.4 36.9 I 40.3 I 49 90. n I 14 25.n
400 I 51 7.2% I 13.6 I 43.6 I 32.8 I 32.9 37.6 I 41.6 I 48 94.1% I 15 29.4%
500 I 58 8.1% I 19.6 I 43.8 I 31.7 I 31.3 34.9 I 37.4 I 56 96.6% I 10 17.2%
600 I 54 7.6% I 14 .3 I 42.2 I 31.3 I 30.9 36.9 I 39.4 I 47 87.0% I 16 29.6%
700 I 76 10.n I 21.0 I 41. 8 I 31. 9 I 31.3 36.7 I 38.9 I 73 96.1% I 19 25.0%
800 I 62 8. n I 12.7 I 41. 5 I 29.7 I 29.5 35.1 I 40.0 I 56 90.3% I 10 16.1%
900 I 29 4.1% I 12.3 I 43.2 I 32.6 I 32.9 39.6 I 41. 6 I 27 93.1% I 10 34 .5%
000 I 29 4.1% I 13.7 I 37.3 I 30.2 I 31.5 35.1 I 36.9 I 26 89.7% I 5 17.2%
100 I 16 2.2% I 13 .2 I 44.2 I 30.9 I 31. 8 38.3 I 39.4 I 12 75.0% I 4 25.0%
200 I 23 3.2% I 15.8 I 52.1 I 30.9 I 31.3 3S .3 I 42.3 I 19 82.6% I 6 26.1%
00 I 1 0.1% I 36.7 I 36.7 I 36.7 I 36.7 36.7 I 36.7 I 1 100.0% I 1100.0%
I 713 100.0% I 8.6 I 52.1 I 31.5 I 31.3 36.7 I 41.2 I 641 89.9% I 184 25.8%
6-17
atasets:
ite:
IputA:
Iput B:
urvey Duration:
lentifier: .
'ata type:
rofile:
i1ter time:
,cheme:
Inits:
1 profile:
MetroCount Traffic Executive
Event Counts
[Tamarack] West of Oleander
2 - East bound. - Added to totals. (1)
o - Unused or unknown. - Excluded from totals. (0)
12:00 Tuesday, October 30, 2007 => 13:53 Wednesday, October 31,2007
E943AN2C MC56-6 [MC55] (c)Microcom 02103/01
Vehicle sensors - Separate (Count)
13:00 Tuesday, October 30,2007 => 13:00 Wednesday, October 31,2007
Count events divided by two.
Non metric (ft, mi, ftIs, mph, Ib, ton)
. 166 Events
--
Tuesday, October 30,2007=98 (Incomplete) ,15 minute drops
0000 0100 0200 0300 0400 0500 0600 0700 0800 0900 loao 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 18DO 1900 2000 2100 2200 2300
a 14 9 9 23 12 6' 9 " .2 .2
123012221010
622293130200
1 7 0 6 10 " .2 3 .2 0 0 0
034133111010
. Nednesday, October 31, 2007=68 (Incomplete) , 15 minute drops
0000 0100 0200 0300 0400 0500 0600 0700 080e 0900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000 2100 2200 2300
o 0 0 0 0 4 5 23 8 9 4 Ii 9
0000002741202
0000010313121
0000010412125
0000023923021
I.M Peak 0700 - 0800 (23). AM PHF=O.64
~ ~ {{P(p
1.1(J,;;::~
~~'1,
z.. 48'1,
6-18
SpeedStatHour-739 Page 1
MetroCount Traffic Executive
Speed Statistics bv Hour
Itasets:
.:iite:
Direction:
Survey Duration:
Identifier:
Data type:
[Oleander] Between Tamarack - Main
5 - South bound A>B, North bound B>A, Lane: 0
12:00 Tuesday, October 3D, 2007 => 15:09 Wednesday, October 31,2007
E7500ZKX MC56-6 [MC55] (c)Microcom 02103/01
Axle sensors - Paired (Class, Speed, Count)
Profile:.
Filter time: 13:00 Tuesday, October 30,2007 => 13:00 Wednesday, October 31, 2007
Included classes: 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12
Speed range: 6 - 99 mph. ./
Direction: -7'South (bound)
Separation: All - (Headway)
Scheme: Vehicle classification (ARX)
Units: Non metric (ft, mi, Ills, mph, Ib, ton)
In profile: 880 Vehicles
Speed Statistics bv Hour
Description: Between Tamarack - Main
Filter time: 13:00 Tuesday, October 30, 2007 => 13:00 Wednesday, October 31, 2007
880 Vehicles
Posted speed limit = 25 mph - Exceeding = 800 (90.91 %)
,sted speed limit +10 = 35 mph - Exceeding = 228 (25.91%)
.aximum = 51.4 mph, Minimum = 8.3 mph, Mean = 31.7 mph
85% Speed = 36.9 mph, 95% Speed = 39.8 mph, Median = 31.5 mph
10 mph Pace = 27 - 37, Number in Pace = 598 (67.95%)
Variance = 30.70, Standard Deviation = 5.54 mph
Hour Bins
TiJne Bin Min. Max. Mean Median 85% 95% >25 mph >35 mph
0000 4 0.5% 27.8 I 39.6 34.1 30.2 38.5 39.6 4 100.0% 2 50.0%-
0100 3 0.3% 30.6 I 41.8 35.8 34.9 41.6 41.6 I 3 100.0% 2 66.7%
0200 4 0.5% 20.8 I 29.6 26.7 27.1 29.3 29.5 I 3 75.0% 0 0.0%
0300 1 O.H 37.0 I 37.0 37.0 36.9 36.9 36.9 I 1 100.0% 1 100.0%
0400 5 0.6% 17.2 I 41.1 28.3 29.1 31.5 40.9 I 3 60.0% 1 20.0%
0500 26 3.0% 14.1 I 42.7 32.8 32.4 38.7 39.6 I 25 96.2% 10 38.5%
0600 37 4.2% 17.7 I 45.3 31.2 31.1 37.4 39.8 I 32 86.5% 12 32.4%
0700 ll3 12.8% 17.3 I 45.6 33.4 33.1 38.0 41.6 I 108 95.6% 39 34.5%
0800 88 10.0% 16.4 I 51.4 33.1 33.1 37.4 42.9 I 84 95.5% 25 28.4%
0900 33 3.8% 23.0 I 44.5 32.9 32.2 37.1 42.1 I 30 90.9% 9 27.3%
1000 43 4.9% 18.7 I 42.9 31. 5 30.4 36.7 39.1 I 39 90.7% 10 23.3%
llOO 51 5.8% 9.5 I 44.6 30.5 30.2 36.0 39.8 I 43 84.3% II 21. 6%
1200 45 5.H 16.7 I 45.4 32.6 32.9 36.9 41.2 I 42 93.3% 15 33.3%
1300 58 6.6% 8.3 I 41. 5 30.9 31.1 35.8 38.7 I 54 93.H 12 20.7%
1400 51 5.8% 16.5 I 44.2 30.6 29.5 34.7 39.4 I 46 90.2% 8 15.7%
1500 61 6.9% 11.4 I 42.0 30.5 30.4 35.1 38.5 I 54 88.5% II 18.0%
1600 50 5.7% 17.4 I 48.7 30.7 30.2 36.5 37.6 I 43 86.0% 14 28.0%
1700 55 6.3% 17.8 I 45.8 30.4 31.5 34.4 37.4 I 45 81.8% 8 14.5%
1800 49 5.6% 10.9 I 39.5 30.8 30.9 35.8 38.0 I 46 93.9% 10 20.4%
1900 36 4.H 14.1 I 45.4 32.9 32.9 36.9 38.9 I 34 94.4% II 30.6%
2000 19 2.2% 18.7 I 45.1 31.5 30.4 37.4 41.8 I 16 84.2% 6 31.6%
21.00 18 2.0% 27.6 I 37.8 32.6 31.3 36.2 37.4 I 18 100.0% 4 22.2%
"l.'200 26 3.0% 22.8 I 41.3 31. 0 28.6 37.1 40.0 I 23 88.5% 7 26.9%
300 4 0.5% 27.4 I 32.3 28.9 27.3 28.2 32.2 I 4 100.0% 0 0.0%
880 100.0% 8.3 I 51.4 31.7 31.5 36.9 39.8 I 800 90.9% 228 25.9%
6-19
Eventcount-737 Page 1
MetroCount Traffic Executive
Event Counts
ltasets:
.:iite:
Input A:
Input B:
Survey Duration:
Identifier:
Data type:
[ramarack] Between Oleander and .Dlive
4 - West bound. - Added to totals. (1)
. 0 - Unused or unknown. - Excluded from totals. (0)
12:00 Tuesday, October 30, 2007 => 15:04 Wednesday, October 31,2007
E944KPW MC56-6 [MC55] (c)Microcom 02103/01
Vehicle sensors - Separate (Count)
Profile:'
Filter time:
Scheme:
Units:
In profile:
13:00 Tuesday, October 30,2007 => 13:00 Wednesday, October 31, 2007
Count events divided by two.
Non metric (ft, mi, ftls, mph, Ib, ton)
.316 Events
/
. Tuesday, October 30,2007=156 (Incomplete) , 15 minute drops
0000 0100 0200 0300 0400 0500 0600 0700 aaoo 0900 1000 1100 1200 1300
20
2
2
.
10
1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000 2100 220a 2300
15 17 4, 11 24 18 15 24 6 :I
1903232600
2111866702
9 4. 2 6 3 0 3 6 4. 0
3 3 1 1 11 9 -4 5 2 0
o
o
o
o
Wednesday, October 31,2007=160 (Incomplete) ,15 minute drops
000 0100 0200 0300 0400 0500 0600 0700 OBOD 0900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 IBOO 1900 2000 2100 2200 2300
Q 1 :3 4. 8 12 19 30 26 14 19 16 B
00002027143581
o 0 1 2 3 4. 11 10 11 5 4, 3 J
o 0 1 0 0 1 :3 1 .0 6 4. 0 2
01123731.210652
AM Peak 0730 e 0830 (38), AM PHF=O.68
WE>;;::- ")/{,
6-20
~w
o~~ '
Ii.
I
o /
{kM~
,/1
1/1/ B "
T1tfl11rfl.i1cfc-
cr
II
c
PEDESTRIAN COUNTS
DATE: ItJ-.3/-o? LOCATION:
TIME (PM) A A B B C C D D
School Age Adult A~e School Age Adult A~e School Age Adult Age School Age Adult Age
28~ / I
2:45' 4 -Z
-
-
TOTAL I 4 2 /
REMARKS:
-
.
TOTAL
6-21
SPEED LIMIT - ENGINEERING/TRAFFIC SURVEY
STREET: Oleander Avenue
LIMITS: E Palomar Street Main Street
Length of Segment (ft): 7950' (! .506 miles)
Existing Posted Limit (mph): 25 mph
ROADWAY CHARACTERISTICS
Width (ft): 40' curb to curb
Total No. of Lanes: 2 (one in each direction)
Horizontal Alignment: 350' radius over lene:tb. of 190.75' South of Olympic Pkwv
Verti!=aIAlignment: 280' vertical curve +1.60% to +9.97% at Satinwood producing a design
speed of32 mph.
TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS
Average Daily Traffic: 7375 (year 2001)
On-Street Parking: Allowed on both sides of street over entire segment
Special Conditions: Valle Lindo Elementarv School on East side of segment 300' south of
Satinwood. Access and School Crossings for Parkview Elementarv School
south of East Palomar St.
Accident History: The accident rate at this segment (0.247 per million vehicle miles) is lower
than the average accident rate (2.95 per m.il1ion vehicle miles) for similar
roadways in the State of Califomia.
SUMMARY OF SPEED SURVEYS
Segment: E Palomar St -
Olympic Pkwy
Date Taken: 10/30/2001
No. of Vehicles on Sample (cars) 100
85th Percentile (mph) 31
Range of Speeds Recorded (mph) 20-44 mph
Olympic Pkwy -
Sequoia St
10/23/2001
100
34
12-44 mph
Sequoia St -
Main St
10/23/2001
100
34
20-50 mph
SURVEY RESULTS
Study was Prepared by:
Date:
Recommendation:
Date Recommendation Approved:
By:
Approved Speed Limit (mph):
Per CVC 40803, Survey Expires:
Nino Abad
10/31/2001
Retain 25 mph speed limit due to
roadway characteristics. and per
City Council Ordinance #1537
ad~tedon~e 11 1974.
// / D/ '2 I
M ed A. A1-Gh~. P.E..T.E.
25 mph
10/23/2008
6-22
Excerpt from meeting of:
1. 11/I/01
2. 9/8/05
3. 10/13/05
4. 12/8/05
5. 1/12/06
6. 10/11/07
7. 11/18/07
SAFETY COMMISSION
MEETING MINUTES
6-23
ATTACHMENT L
e~turt fu\~
I f/15' {O l M\Vl7
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE CHULA VISTA SAFETY COMMISSION
November 8, 2001
6:30 p.m.
Council Chambers
Public Services Building
CALL TO ORDER
1. Roll Call:
Meeting was called to order at 6:31 p.m.
Present:
Chair Liken; Vice Chair McAlister; Commissioners Acton, Lopez, and White
Absent:
Commissioner Gove
Also present:
Ralph Leyva, Senior Civil Engineer; Majed AI-Ghafry, Civil Engineer; Patrick
Moneda, Assistant Civil Engineer; Sgt. Scott Arsenault; and Florence
Picardal, Recording Secretary
MSC (Liken/Acton) to excuse the absence of Commissioner Gove. (5-0-1, Gove absent)
-
2. Pledoe of Allealance/Silent Praver
3. ODenina Statement
Opening statement read by Chair Liken.
4. ADDroval of Minutes. October 11. 2001
There were no minutes.
MEETING AGENDA
5. Oral Communications
None.
1A
6.
ReDort on Reauest for an AII-Wav StoD at the intersection of Oleander Avenue with Seauoia
Street
Staff received an e-mail request from Chula Vista resident Aurora Nerat to install an all-way stop control at the
intersection of Oleander Avenue with Sequoia Street. She cited the need of the all-way stop because motorists
travel at excessive rate of speed on Oleander Avenue in the vicinity of Valle Lindo Elementary School. She
was also concerned about the safety of the children who live in the area.
Mr. AI-Ghafry presented staff report and Powerpoint presentation. He stated that 2 calls were received. One
was in favor of the all-way stop control and 1 was opposed.
Staff Recommendation: That the Safety Commission concur with staffs recommendation to deny the
installation of all-way stop control at the intersection of Oleander Avenue with Sequoia Street based on the
location receiving 29 points of a possible 100 points pursuant to Council Policy Number 478-03.
Public hearing opened.
The following person spoke in opposition to staffs recommendation:
6-24
Safety Commission Minutes
November 8, 2001
Page 2
1. David R. Garcia, 1540 Olive Ct., Chula Vista, CA
Public hearing closed.
Commissioner Acton asked if there were crossing guards at that intersection. A member of the audience
stated no. Chair Liken asked how sight distances are determined. Mr. A1-Ghafry stated that the driver's
eyesight (3-1/2 ft., per CalTrans guidelines) is positioned about 7-1/2 ft. from the stopbar (per CalTrans
guidelines). then you project approx. 2-1/2 ft. inside the double yellow line (or an imaginary line). Sight
distance is a straight line tangent to the next visible object. He stated that staff goes to the position of the
driver regardless of the barrier. Staff measures an object that Is 6 inches high off of the pavement and the
possibility of seeing that object. If staff sees the object through a transparent barrier, that is okay. Problems
arise when there is heavy density (hedges, fences, parked vehicles), which play an Important factor in
measuring sight distances. The photos were reviewed again and discussion ensued regarding sight distance.
Commissioner Acton had concerns about the hedges at the intersection. Mr. AI-Ghafry stated that the
property owner has been asked to trim their hedges. Chair Liken explained the City's All-Way Stop Policy. He
stated that the sight distances are not sufficient at this intersection. He stated that there are some
circumstances when the Commission must look beyond the point system and justify for safety's sake the
installation of a stop sign.- He stated once again that there is a visibility problem at this intersection and would
like to see a stop sign, slow down the traffic and help the residents enter/exit their driveways. Vice Chair
McAlister concurred with Chair Liken and added that children crossing and visibility problems, in this case,
warrant the installation of a stop sign.
MSC (Liken/McAlister) to not concur with staffs recommendation and install an all-way stop control at the
intersection of Oleander Avenue with Sequoia Street based on sight distance and speed probl.ems. (5-0-1,
Gove absent)
~7.
Staff has received an e-mail request from Chula Vista resident Aurora Nerat to install an all-way stop control at
the intersection of Oleander Avenue with Tamarack Street. She cited the need of the all-way stop because
motorists travel at excessive rate of speed on Oleander Avenue in the vicinity of Valle Lindo Elementary
School. She was also concemed about the safety of the children who live in the area.
ReDort on Reauest for an AlI-Wav StOD at the intersection of Oleander Avenue with Tamarack
Street
Mr. AI-Ghafry presented staff report and Powerpoint presentation. He stated that 3 calls were received. Two
were in favor of the all-way stop control and 1 was opposed.
Staff Recommendation: That the Safety Commission concur with staffs recommendation to deny the
installation of an all-way stop control at the intersection of Oleander Avenue with Tamarack Street based
on the location receiving 20 points of a possible 100 points pursuant to Council Policy Number 478-03.
Public hearing opened.
The following person spoke in opposition to staffs recommendation:
1. David R. Garcia, 1540 Olive Ct., Chula Vista, CA
Public hearing closed.
Commissioner White stated he was not in favor of the all-way stop due to the following: 1) The Commission
just approved an all-way stop for an intersection in close proximity to this location, 2) it is not in proximity to a
school, and 3) there have been no accidents at this intersection.
6-25
Safety Commission ~nutes
November 8, 2001
Page 3
MSC (McAlister/White) to concur with staffs recommendation and deny an all.way stop control at the
intersection of Oleander Avenue with Tamarack Street based on the location receiving 20 points of a possible
100 points pursuant to Council Policy Number 478"()3. (5"().1, Gove absent)
8. Report on Reauest for an A11-Wav Stop at the intersection of North Greensview Drive and
Eastridae Loop I Golfcrest Loop
Commissioner McAlister abstained from discussionlvoting on this item due to the close proximity of his
residence to the subject intersection.
Staff received a request from Chula Vista resident Cecelia Moreno-Meed to install an all-way stop coptrol at
the intersection of North Greensview. Drive and Eastridge Loop I Golfcrest Loop. She was concerned about
the increased traffic volumes in the area because of recent developments. She also indicated that her pet was
hit by a speeding motorist in the vicinity of the intersection.
Mr. A1-Ghafry presented report and Powerpoint presentation. He stated that 11 phone calls were received, 4
in favor and 7 against the installation of an all-way stop at the intersection of North Greensview Drive and
Eastridge Loop/Golfcrest Loop.
Staff Recommendation: That the Safety Commission concur with staffs recommendation to deny the
installation of an all.way stop control at the intersection of North Greensview Drive and Eastridge Loop I
Golfcrest Loop based on the location receiving 18 points of a possible 100 points pursuant to Council
Policy Number 478.03.
Public hearing opened.
The following person spoke in favor of staffs recommendation (deny installation of all-way stop control):
1. Tom Davies, 1059 Park Meadows Road, Chula Vista
The following persons spoke against staffs recommendation (approve Installation of all.way stop control):
1. Sam Walling, 2455 Eastridge Loop, Chula Vista
2. Bert Creighton, 2453 Eastridge Loop, Chula Vista
3. Cecelia Moreno-Mead, 2444 Eastridge Loop, Chula Vista
The following items were brought up:
1. There is considerable pedestrian and bicycle traffic to Augusta Park during the evening hours and on
the weekends. Staff was not present to observe this occurrence when conducting the study.
2. There is a school bus stop at the subject intersection that generates considerable pedestrian
crossings twice per day for pickup and drop off of school age children.
3. Residents of the community are required to walk to the park since there is no parking of vehicle
available at the park. This condition was placed on the development by the City as a means of
encouraging residents to walk to neighborhood facilities instead of driving their vehicles.
4. Residents living in the vicinity of the park want the Increased safety of the all.way stop for themselves
and their children.
5. Residents who do not live near the subject intersection, but must pass through it during their normal
travel, are opposed to the signs. Some residents living near the subject intersection object to the
noise generated by vehicles stopping and starting.
6-26
1ho~rrt w~ qlglo~M~~;
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE CHULA VISTA SAFETY COMMISSION
September 8, 2005
6:00 p.m.
Council Chambers
Public Services Building
CALL TO ORDER
Meeting called to order at 6:00 p.m.
1. . Roll Call:
Present:
Chair White; Vice-Chair Perrett; Commissioners A1-Ghafcy,
Gove, and Lopez (late)
Absent:
Commissioners Rosario and Willett
Also present:
Frank Rivera, Principal Civil Engineer
Benjamin Guerrero, Jr., Engineering Technician
Lindsey Walters, Recording Secretary
MSC (White/Gove) to excuse the absence of Commissioners Rosario and Willett. (4-0-3). (Lopez
late, but called ahead to Vice-Chair Perrett)
2. Pledae of Alleaiance/Silent Prayer
3. ODenina Statement
Opening statement read by Chair White.
4. ADDroval of Minutes for Julv 14. 2005
There was no Safety Commission Meeting held for the month of August.
MSC (PerrettlWhite) to approve the minutes of July 14, 2005 as submitted. (4-0-3) Rosario,
Willett absent.
MEETING AGENDA
5. Oral Communications
*1.
Philip Christensen
1656 Oleander Avenue, Chula Vista
Mr. Christensen takes issue with the ongoing speeding problem and would like City staff to
reevaluate the placement of a stop sign at the intersection of Tanoak Court and Oleander. Taken
under advisement about 10 years ago. The solution to the problem at that time was a three-way
stop sign at the intersection of Sequoia and Oleander. Citizen would like a reevaluation of the
placement of that stop sign.
6-27
fr-te1'pf ~W\ lDfl'?)O{' wi~
Safety Commission lVIinutes
October 13, 2005
Page 5
11. Reauest for time limited Darkina on Crann Avenue
Staff received a letter addressed to Traffic Engineering written by Ms. Candy Murillo and signed
by the 10 out of 11 residents on Crann Avenue, stating that they have no street parking when
they come back from work in the evenings. They claim that a large number of residents of
neighboring apartment and condominium complexes are parking their vehicles along Crann
Avenue due to insufficient parking facilities in their complex and that Crann Avenue residents
cannot find parking between the hours of 4:00 pm on-ward and on weekends. They request that
the City convert erann Avenue-a public street into a resident parking permitted street from 4 pm
to 7am. This street lies between Paiomar Street and Orange Avenue.
./.
Staff Recommendation: That the Safety Commission concur with staffs recommendation to:
. Deny the request for permitted parking.
. Accept staffs report on the impiementation of parking restrictions through red curb in
order to eliminate illegal parking on Crann Avenue.
. Encourage residents to widen singlewide driveways to provide additional onsite
parking.
Engineering Technician Guerrero, Jr. gave a brief presentation. It appears that most residents
converted their garages into extra living space, leaving them with fewer parking options. There
always is parking on this block, however the closer you get to Palomar Street, the more likely it is
that your parking space will be occupied.
Commission Discussion: Commissioner A1-Ghafry noted the absence of residents who signed
the petition. Feit that an incentive would be required in order to get residents to fund widening of
singlewide driveways themseives, as it is a sizeable expense.
MSC (AJ-Ghafry/Willett) to concur with staffs recommendation to deny request for time-limited
parking (6-0-1, White absent)
Item 12 taken out of order.
-1K
12. Reauest for Traffic Calmina on Oleander Avenue between Tanoak Court and Main
Street
City Staff received a notice from Mr. Phillip Christensen, 1656 Oleander Avenue, concerning
speeding on Oleander Avenue, and requesting traffic-calmers along Oleander Avenue between
Tanoak Court and Main Street. Apparently, vehicles traveling above the 25 mph posted speed
limit prevent Mr. Christensen from backing out of his driveway. This item was presented by Mr.
Christensen at the September 08, 2005 Safety Commission meeting where the commission
directed staff to bring it for consideration at tonighfs meeting.
Engineering Technician Ben Guerrero, Jr. gave a brief presentation.
Staff Recommendation: That the Safety Commission concur with staffs recommendation to re-
stripe Oleander Avenue to reduce travel lanes from 12' to 11' from Tamarack St to Main Street as
a means of speed control and add 250' of raised reflective white pavement markers adjacent to
the edge stripe starting at Tanoak Court and going south within the horizontal curve area..
Public hearing opened.
1 . Phillip Christensen, 1656 Oleander Avenue, Chula Vista
6-28
Safety Commission Minutes
October 13, 2005
Page 6
Public hearing closed.
Commission Discussion: Commissioner AI-Ghafry asked whether City staff had analyzed the
intersection of Tan Oak Court. Engineering Technician Guerrero, Jr. replied that stop signs aren't
used as traffic-calmer devices. Cars that speed in between the stop signs, wiil just continue
speeding after stop signs. Commissioner Gove asked whether police enforcement is present, to
which Principal Civil Engineer Rivera replied affirmatively. This area would not be classified as a
speed trap, like Rutgers Avenue. Commissioner AI-Ghafry liked staff's recommendation, but felt
more needs to be done to deal with this issue. Commissioner Gove would like to see the survey
on installing a stop sign on Tan Oak; to her it looked as though one could be put in. Despite stop
signs not specifically reducing speed, Commissioner Gove commented that in reality, they do just
that. She also felt it should be continued until next month's meeting.
MSC (AI-Ghafry/Gove) to concur with staff's recommendation, as well as bring an item back to
the Safety Commission for an All-Way stop study at the intersection of Oleander and Tan Oak
Court (6-0-1, White absent)
13. Traffic Accident Summary - Auaust 2005
Sgt. Munch was not in attendance.
Comments: Commissioner Willett commented on Inoperable Vehicle Abatement Program, and
house just off of Otay Lakes Road with four such cars in driveway. Principal Civil Engineer Rivera
took note.
14. Safetv Commission Action Item Summary/Staff Comments
SeDtember 8. 2005
.
All-Way Stop at Clubhouse Drive and Silverado Drive: Safety Commission concurred with
staff's recommended installation, and this was completed on September 23, 2005.
Time-Limited Parking Along Oleander Avenue: Safety Commission concurred with staff's
recommendation of parking T's, and the work order was submitted on September 26, 2005.
Traffic Mitigation Measures for Saint John's Episcopal Church/School: Commission
concurred with staff's recommended traffic measures within school. City staff wiil work with
school staff to establish new traffic circulation pattern and will set up an educational meeting
with school staff and parents.
Proposed On-Street Parking on Rancho Del Rey Parkway near Ayamonte Way:
Commission concurred with staff on denial of request for re-striping. Staff report was
accepted regarding implementation of red curb to eliminate iilegal parking. Staff implemented
red curb on those areas, which are illegal to park (Pedestrian Ramps, Curb Returns, In Front
of Fire Hydrant).
.
.
.
15.
Potential Safetv Commission Aaenda Item
.
Request for time limited parking - Gotham Street and Otay Lakes Road
OTHER BUSINESS
16. Election of Chair and Vice Chair
6-29
Safety Commission Minutes
December 8, 2005
t;cupt &Y\1 17/r;(o5 t\\1'\5
Page 2
Public hearing opened.
1. Cynthia Gamos, 1043 Plaza Elena, Chula Vista
2. Jo Reese, 1350 East J Street, Chula Vista
3. Chad Nelson, 1257 Via Escalante, Chula Vista
4. Madeline Kershaw, 1341 East J Street, Chula Vista
5. Patricia Chavez, 1007 Plaza Ultima, Chula Vista
All public speakers were residents of the nearby area, and were concerned about the problem
speeders are posing for children walking to school in the morning. It's a problem in the morniRg,
for drop-off, and in the afternoon; when students are picked up. Also, several find that the cul-de-
sacs get biocked off, and residents cannot even exit, during school time traffic.
Public hearing closed.
Commission Discussion: Sgt. Munch offered to organize four motors to go out to area during
school hours. They area very unforgiving bunch, and will issue citations to anyone, including
residents speaking out at Commission meeting. Showing that there Is a Police interest in the
matter, could help.
Commission also recommended that issue be discussed with school officials. Vice-Chair Perrett
is familiar with this area, and had a son who attended one of these schools. He went on to say
that he nonmally wouldn't support an all-way stop, but something needs to be done there to slow
down traffic. Chair White personally examined area, and stated that it would normally have been
a slam dunk that all-way stop be installed. However, in light of the public outcry, he would support
all-way stop and police presence.
Commissioner AI-Ghafry added that the installation of an un-warranted stop sign is much more of
a hindrance than a help. He asked that staff look Into the notion of this area being a speed trap;
possibly place a yield sign. Commission promised that this item would not be put to rest until
some solution had been found.
MSC (Gove/Al-Ghafry) to table item until next month's Commission meeting, have staff consider
alternative solutions to this problem (5-0-2) Willett, Rosario absent.
Item 7 taken out of order.
~
7. Reauest for Traffic Calmina on Oleander Avenue between Tamarack Court and
Main Street
City Staff received a notice from Mr. Phillip Christensen, 1656 Oleander Avenue, concerning
speeding on Oleander Avenue, and requesting traffic calming along Oleander Avenue between
Tanoak Court and Main Street. Apparently, vehicles traveling above the 25 mph posted speed
limit prevent Mr. Christensen from backing out of his driveway. This Item was presented by Mr.
Christensen at the September 08, 2005 Safety Commission meeting. The item was continued for
the October 13, 2005 meeting where the commission directed staff to study all-way stop control at
the Intersection of Tamarack Street & Oleander Avenue and Tanoak Court & Oleander Avenue.
Senior Civil Engineer DeTrinidad gave a brief PowerPoint presentation.
6-30
Safety Commission Minutes
December 8, 2005
Page 3
Staff Recommendation:
. Deny the installation of an all-way stop control at the intersection of Oleander. Avenue
with Tamarack Street based on the location receiving 24 points of a possible 100 points
pursuant to Council Policy Number 478-03.
. Deny installation of an all-way stop control at the intersection of Oleander Avenue with
Tanoak Court based on the location receiving 21 points of a possible 100 points pursuant
to Council Policy Number 478-03.
. Install southbound curve warning sign with a 20 MPH advisory speed limit for curve.
Public hearing opened.
~.
1. Phillip Christensen, 1626 Oleander Avenue, Chula Vista
2. David Garcia, 154 Olive Court, Chula Vista
Public hearing closed.
Commission Discussion: Commissioner AI-Ghafry brought up the fact that stop signs are not
intended for traffic calming, although a consequence is that they typically do slow traffic for a
time. However, they will speed up thereafter, to make up lost time. Suggested that staff increase
wattage of the two streetlights that engulf curb. He went on to suggest that staff consider updating
the legends. Commissioner Gove suggested forced removal of shrub by neighbor, mentioned in
staff report. Mr. Christensen interjected that shrub is not the problem, but rather the speeding.
Vice-Chair Perrett was in favor of the latter two staff recommendations.
MsC (White/AI-Ghafry) concur with staff's recommendation (5-0-2) Willett, Rosario absent
8. Traffic Accident Summary - October 2005
sg!. Munch gave a brief presentation.
9. Action Summary Update/Staff Comments
October 13, 2005
.
All-Way Stop at Stone Gate Street and Duncan Ranch Road: Safety Commission
concurred with staff's recommended installation, and the work order was submitted on
October 31, 2005.
East Palomar Time-Limited Parking: Safety Commission concurred with staff's
recommended installation, and the item was scheduled for the City Council Meeting on
December 6, 2005.
.
November 10, 2005
.
Installation of Triple Left on Tierra Del Rey at East H Street: Safety Commission
concurred with staff's recommended installation, and work was completed on November 28,
2005.
10.
Potential Safety Commission Aaenda Item
.
Request for time limited parking - Gotham Street and Otay Lakes Road
Request for flJl-Way Stop at the intersection of Ithaca Street and Scripps Avenue
.
6-31
Safety Commission Minutes
Januarv 12. 2006
~/tvrrr ~ f\^ II 11 o~ VM i V\7
PaCle 2
all way stop control at the intersection of East J Street and Via Escalante. The residents felt that increasing
traffic volume and high speed of vehicles traveling along East J Street required the installation of the
requested traffic control. This Item was presented to the Safety Commission on December 8, 2005. After
receiving public input regarding traffic conditions in the area, the Commission decided to table this item and
directed staff to perform a more comprehensive traffic study of this neighborhood. Tonight, staff is proposing
to conduct a Neighborhood Traffic Management Study for the entire area contributing traffic to the East J
Street (east of Paseo Ranchero) and Via Escalante corridor. This study will identify all traffic concems that
may be affecting this neighborhood and recommend a traffic plan for effectively mitigating these concerns.
Staff Recommendation: That the Safety Commission accept staffs report outlining the process for
conducting a Neighborhood Traffic Management Study for the East J Street (east of Paseo Ranchero) and Via
Escalante corridor.
,.
MSC (WillettJAl-Ghafry) to concur with staff recommendation. (6-0-1, Perrett absent)
8. Reoort on soeed establishment at Stone Gate Street between Hunte Parkwav and Adirondack
Place
On September 21, 2005 staff completed an Engineering and Traffic survey for Stone Gate Street. Based on
the results of this speed survey and pursuant to the authority under the Chula Vista Municipal Code Section
10.48.020, city staff has -determined that a 35 mph speed limit should be established on Stone Gate Street
between Hunte Parkway and Adirondack Place.
Staff Recommendation: That Safety Commission concur with staffs recommendation to recommend to
Councii to establish a 35 mph speed limit on Stone Gate Street between Hunte Parkway and Adirondack
Place and that Schedule X of the register maintained in the office of the City Engineer be revised to inciude
this established speed limit.
MSC (Al-GhafryIWillett) to concur with staff recommendation. (6-0-1, Perrett absent)
9. Traffic EnClineerinCl CIP Proiect Uodate - December 2005
See attachment.
10. Traffic Accident Summary - November 2005
Sgt. Munch not in attendance, therefore this item was foregone.
11. Action Summary Uodate/Staff Comments
December 8. 2005
.
~
Restripe Oleander Avenue from Tamarack Street to Main Street to narrow through lanes from 12 fl
to 11 ft. Install raised pavement markers on the edge line along both sides of the street from
Tanoak Court to the south end of 1656 Oleander. Replace 100w lighting with 150w for STD street
lights on Oleander: The Commission concurred with staffs recommended installation, and the work
order was submitted on January 4,2006.
All-way stop at East J Street & Escalante: The Commission denied staffs recommended installation,
and staff therefore initiated a traffic calming program in this neighborhood.
.
12. Potential Safetv Commission AClenda Item
1) Request for All-Way Stop on East J Street and Paseo Del Cerro
2) Request for speed calming on Flower Street
3) Restriction of left and U-tums on East J Street and Carla Avenue
13. Commissioner Comments
6-32
Safety Commission Minutes
October 11, 2007
~erpt ~M lol fllo1 V\t1F\5
Paae 3
Commissioner Cochrane stated he was uncomfortable with the insurance business parking their
advertising vehicle in front and understood the liquor store owner wanting time-limited parking for their
customers. He asked if City staff could talk to the property manager and come up with another solution.
f
8. ReDort on Reauest for an AII-Wav StOD at the Intersection of Oleander Avenue and Tamarack
Court
Staff received a written request from Ms. Evelyn Sanchez, who resides at 502 Tamarack Court,
requesting the instailation of an ail-way stop at Oleander Avenue and Tamarack Court. Ms. Sanchez feels
this intersection is unsafe for motorists. Residents living near this intersection have experienced rear-end
accidents and near misses due to excessive speeds of vehicles traveling on Oleander Avenue. A
presentation was made by Sr. Civil Engineer Jim Newton.
Staff Recommendation: Safety Commission concur with staffs recommendation to deny the instailation
of an ail-way stop control at this intersection and approve the instailation of two stop signs, limit lines,
"STOP" legends on Tamarack Court and Tamarack Street approaching Oleander Avenue, and paint red
curb on Oleander Avenue near the intersection.
Public hearing opened.
The following perS"ons spoke in opposition to staffs recommendation:
a. David Garcia, 1540 Olive Court
b. Alma Palomino, 488 Tamarack Street
c. Hector Tamayo, 505 Tamarack Street
d. Phil Christensen, 1656 Oleander Avenue
Public hearing closed,
Commission Discussion: Commissioner Cochrane asked Officer Mullen about traffic enforcement in
the area. Officer Muilen stated the emphasis has been focused on some of the larger streets. The
department is aware of a speeding issue at Oleander and has placed the radar speed signs at that
location in an effort to slow down vehicles. Once the larger street campaign ends, the department will be
able to focus on some of the smaller streets. Commissioner Cochrane asked if the speed studies were
conducted between the rush hour periods. He stated this problem parallels the same problem on J Street
several years ago. Additional stop signs were installed in 1999 or 2000 and they have greatly calmed the
traffic on J Street. The speed limit was raised to 35 because police officers could not enforce the speed
limit due to the width of the street. Consequently, when the ticket would go to court, the case would be
thrown out because the speed limit was too low. Sr. Civil Engineer Newton answered the speed data was
collected at the same time the volume data was collected. The data was collected by tubes that were set
to measure both volume and speed at the same time, over at least a 24-hour period, if not 48 hours. He
was concemed about the volume data in the chart indicating the 2005 date. He would verify the date.
Commissioner Cochrane stated the residents (Speakers) have justified concems based on his past Safety
Commission experience and he would like clarification from the Police and Engineering Departments on
the conditions in the area. He understands the points are not met, but thinks further study should be given
to that intersection and serious consideration given to a 4-way stop.
Chair Perrett stated there needs to be more data on the side streets. He stated this item may have to be
continued. More updated information is needed on traffic volumes on Oleander and the side streets in
order to make a more educated decision.
Commissioner Lopez also recalled the instailation of a number of stop signs on J Street and expressed
concem with the same happening on Oleander. He also expressed concem about the data and wanted to
ensure the most recent data was being used.
Commissioner Moriarty stated she travels Oleander frequently and agreed there are lots of attractions on
Main Street and expressed concem on whether the data is current. Based on the pictures of the
intersection, she believes a stop sign is warranted and stated it looked very dangerous.
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
Safety Commission Minutes
October 11. 2007
PaQe 4
MSC (Perrett/Cochrane) to continue this item to the next meeting and direct staff to include any minutes
if this item was previously presented to the Safety Commission. (4-0-0-3, Liken/Navarro/Rosario absent)
9. Report on Speed Limit Establishment at Bonita Road between Bonita Glenn Drive and 1-805
Southbound Ramps
During the month of June 2007, City staff completed several Engineering and Traffic surveys for various
segments of Bonita Road. It was at this time staff discovered one segment of Bonita Road was not
covered by any surveys. As a result, staff completed a speed survey for Bonita Road between Bonita
Glenn Drive and the 1-805 southbound ramps, and pursuant to the authority under the Chula Vista
Municipal Code Section 10.48.020, City staff has determined that a 35 mph speed limit should be
established.
Staff Recommendation: Safety Commission concur with staff's recommendation to recommend to
Council the establishment of a 35 mph speed limit on Bonita Road between Bonita Glenn Drive and the 1-
805 southbound ramps and that Schedule X of the register maintained in the office of the City Engineer be
revised to include this established speed limit
MSC (Cochrane/Moriarty) to accept staffs recommendation. (4-0-0-3, Liken/Navarro/Rosario absent)
10. Safety Commission Chair Election
This item was continued to the next meeting.
11. Traffic EnQineerinQ CIP Proiect Update - September 2007
Traffic signal modification at Fourth/Main and Fourth/Beyer is underway. The traffic signal design is
complete. Survey work has been requested to complete the design for associated pedestrian ramps.
Traffic signal at Brandywine/Sequoia - Working through last issues relating to design. Small retaining wall
needs to be installed on the southwest comer of intersection to make enough room for the foundation to
be placed for the traffic signal standard. Also, two small trees need to be removed.
School crosswalk enhancement by Harborside Elementary - Project has been advertised. Three bids
were received and will go to Council shortly. It is staffs hope to start construction during the school's
winter break.
12. Traffic Accident Summary. Julv 2007
No update for August. New information from the State should be received by the end of the month.
13. Action Summary Uodate
. August 9, 2007
o Report on Traffic Safety Improvements at the All-Way Stop Controlled Intersection of
Lane Avenue and MacKenzie Creek Road: The Commission concurred with staffs
recommendation to install flashing beacons (solar powered) on the stop signs on Lane
Avenue. Staff is currently in the process of ordering the flashing beacon equipment from the
vendors.
All other items on the summary are up-to-date.
14. Potential UpcominQ Safety Commission AQenda Items
a. Proposed All-Way Stop Control at the Intersection of Hartford Street and Lake Shore Drive.
Summary: Staff is waiting for a letter of request form Ms. Ward.
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
ATTACHMENI. S
RESOLUTION NO. 2008-001
RESOLUTION OF THE SAFETY COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF CHULA VISTA RECOMMENDING THAT CITY COUNCIL
REVIEW THE ALL-WAY STOP CONTROL AT THE
INTERSECTION OF OLEANDER AVENUE AND
TAMARACK COURT/STREET AND ORDER THE
INSTALLATION OF AN ALL-WAY STOP CONTROL AT
SUCH INTERSECTION
WHEREAS, on October 19, 2007 a resident of Tamarack Court requested an all-way stop
control be installed at the intersection of Oleander Avenue and Tamarack Court; and
WHEREAS, staff performed an all-way stop control warrant study at this intersection,
per Council Policy #478-03 and presented reports to the Safety Commission at the regular
meetings of November 8, 2007 and January 8, 2008; and
WHEREAS, since this intersection did not meet the requirements warranting an all-way
stop control, staffs recommendation was to deny the request to establish all-way stop control at
this intersection; and
WHEREAS, the Safety Commission has taken testimony from the public on 11/08/01,
9/08/05, 10/13/05, 12/08/05, 10/11/07, and 11/8/07, on traffic concerns along the 1600 block of
Oleander Avenue; and
WHEREAS, there has been a history of speeding, most recently with an 85% speed of 12
mph above the posted speed limit; and
WHEREAS, the residents have expressed strong desire for the all-way stop; and
WHEREAS, several traffic control measures have not resolved the speeding issue; and
WHEREAS, existing sight distance is below recommended standards and further
degraded by fluctuating on-street parking conditions; and
WHEREAS, based on the above, the Safety commission finds that an all-way stop is
warranted at the intersection of Oleander Avenue and Tamarack Court/Street; and
WHEREAS, on November 8, 2007, the Safety Commission agreed with the concerned
residents present at the public hearing and voted to establish the requested all-way stop control at
this location.
6-35
Resolution No. 2008-001
Page 2
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Safety Commission of the City of
Chula Vista does hereby recommend that City Council review the all-way stop control at the
intersection of Oleander Avenue and Tamarack Court/Street and order the installation of an all-
way stop control at such intersection.
PASSED AND APPROVED by the Safety Commission of the City of Chula Vista, California,
this 8th day of January 2008 by the following vote:
A YES: Commissioners: Caudillo, Cochrane, Liken, Moriarty, Navarro, and Rosario
NAYS: Commissioners: None
ABSENT: Commissioners: Perrett
ATTEST:
~~
Florence Picardal, Secretary
6-36
RESOLUTION NO. 2008-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA TO DENY THE RECOMMENDATION OF
THE SAFETY COMMISSION REGARDING THE
INSTALLATION OF AN ALL-WAY STOP CONTROL AT THE
INTERSECTION OF OLEANDER AVENUE AND
TAMARACK COURT/STREET AND AFFIRM THE DECISION
OF THE CITY ENGINEER
WHEREAS, on October 19, 2007, a resident of Tamarack Court requested an all-way
stop control be installed at the intersection of Oleander Avenue and Tamarack Court; and
WHEREAS, staff performed an all-way stop control warrant study at this intersection,
per Council Policy No. 478-03, and presented reports to the Safety Commission at their regular
meetings of November 8, 2007, and January 8, 2008; and
WHEREAS, since this intersection did not meet the requirements warranting an all-way
stop control, staffs recommendation was to deny the request to establish all-way stop control at
this intersection; and
WHEREAS, the Safety Commission took testimony from the public on November 8,
2001, September 8, 2005, October 13, 2005, December 8, 2005, October II, 2007, and
November 8, 2007, on traffic concerns along the 1600 block of Oleander Avenue; and
WHEREAS, on November 8, 2007, the Safety Commission voted 5-0 (Liken/Navarro
absent) and agreed with the concerned residents present at the public hearing and voted to
recommend the installation of the all-way stop control at this location; and
WHEREAS, the Safety Commission, at their meeting of January 8, 2008, voted 6-0
(Perrett absent) to approve a resolution recommending that City Council review the request for
all-way stop control at the intersection of Oleander Avenue and Tamarack Court/Street, and
pursuant to Council Policy No. 1l0-09(A)(8)(c), order the installation of said all-way stop
control at such intersection in accordance with Council Policy No. 110-09(8).
WHEREAS, based on the following, staff believes that an all-way stop control is not
appropriate at this location:
1.) The intersection of Oleander Avenue and Tamarack Court/Street received a total of
only 22 points out of a possible of 100 points where a minimum of 45 points are
required to justify the installation of an all-way stop control.
2.) There is a lack of significant accident history at the intersection
3.) There is low pedestrian usage
J:\Attomey\DavidMlResosWl Way stops\Oleander AWS.doc
6-37
Resolution No. 2008-
Page 2
4.) Throughout the City, the typical installation at such intersections is a two-way stop
control on the minor approaches
5.) Painting red curbs for a distance of 25 feet would reduce the possibility of
obstruction of available sight distance by parked vehicles
6.) Pursuant to California's Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, stop signs
should not be used as speed control measures
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista does hereby deny the recommendation of the Safety Commission regarding the installation
of an all-way stop control at the intersection of Oleander Avenue and Tamarack Court/Street and
affirming the decision of the City Engineer.
Jack Griffin
Director of General Services
Presented by:
J:\Attomey\Dll.vidM\ResosWl Way stops\Oleander AWS.doc
6-38