Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout012303 PTS Minutes MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA PUBLIC/TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION JANUARY 23, 2003 CALL TO ORDER The City of Temecula Public/Traffic Safety Commission convened in a regular meeting at 6:00 p.m., on Thursday, January 23, 2003, in the City Council Chambers of Temecula City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. FLAG SALUTE The audience was led in the Flag salute by Commissioner Connerton. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Katan, Ramos, Wedel, Connerton, and Chairman Lanier. Absent: None. Also Present: Director of Public Works Hughes, Senior Engineer Moghadam, Principal Engineer Butler, Principal Engineer Attar, Associate Engineer Gonzalez, Battalion Chief McBride, Police Chief Domenoe, Police Sergeant Lohman, Deputy Fire Marshal Neumann, Fire Safety Specialist Horton, Fire Safety Specialist Branaugh, Administrative Secretary Pyle, Minute Clerk Hansen, and Minute Clerk Ross. *(It is noted that Commissioner Katan arrived at 6:03 p.m.) PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS Introduction of new Fire Department Staff- Battalion Chief McBride Battalion Chief McBride introduced the following new employees to the Commission: Fire Safety Specialist Mike Horton, Fire Safety Specialist Shawn Branaugh, and Deputy Fire Marshal Jason Neumann. Chairman Lanier congratulated Battalion Chief McBride on his promotion and welcomed all the new Fire Department employees to the City of Temecula. R:\traffic~nutes\012303 I Police Department Update - Police Chief Domenoe Police Chief Domenoe provided the Commission with an update on the progress of the Citizen Corps Program, as follows: · That the Citizen Corps Program will consist of members of government, the school district, the community, the Fire and Police Departments, the City, the business community and community-at-large; · That weekly meetings are being held with the Council in order to formalize a training program; · That on January 16, 2003, the first community informational meeting was held to solicit citizens who wish to participate in this program; and that it was met with a very positive response; · That at the January 16 meeting, interest cards were distributed to attendees who were also advised that program information was available as well as being made available on the City's website. Approximately 25 interest cards have been received to date and each individual is being contacted personally; · That on January 30, 2003, a second public introduction meeting will be held in the City Council Chambers at 7 p.m; · That presently staff is developing a marketing plan and budget for the program. Police Chief Domenoe conveyed to the Commission that he was very excited about the program and assured to keep them the Commission updated on the Citizen Corps' progress. In response to Commissioner Wedel's request for an organizational chart of the Citizen Corps Program, Chief Domenoe stated that he would make the chart available to the Commission. Commissioner Connerton congratulated Police Chief Domenoe and all the members of the Police and Fire Departments for organizing such a great program. Chief Domenoe advised that it was a team effort; and that he is very optimistic that this program will be a model for this area and, perhaps, even the nation. For Commissioner Katan, Chief Domenoe advised that an initial budget of $5,000 was appropriated from the Police Department. PUBLIC COMMENTS No comments. COMMISSION CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Minutes of October 24 and December 12, 2002 RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the Minutes of October 24, 2002. 1.2 Approve the Minutes of December 12, 2002. MOTION: Commissioner Connerton moved to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1 and 2. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Wedel and voice vote reflected approval, with the exception of Commissioner Ramos who abstained from Consent Calendar Item No. 1. COMMISSION BUSINESS 2. Request for Multi-Way Stop SiRns - Promenade Chardonna¥ Hills RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 That the Public/Traffic Safety Commission deny the request for Multi-Way Stop Signs along Promenade Chardonnay Hills. Senior Engineer Moghadam presented the staff report of record, reviewed the background of the request, and recommended that the Commission approve staff's request to deny the request for multi-way stop signs along Promenade Chardonnay Hills. In response to Chairman Lanier's query and in reference to the chart on page 2 of the staff report, Senior Engineer Moghadam clarified that the data in the chart was compiled prior to the purchase of the light emitting diode (LED) signs. Replying to Commissioner Connerton's inquiries, Senior Engineer Moghadam advised, as follows: · That at present~ there were currently no temporary stop signs in Chardonnay Hills; · That one sign was present in the west northerly direction for approximately 2-~ months; · That one stop sign was present for a few weeks but removed due to a resident's complaint; and the fact that a policy was not in place at the time, therefore, the sign was unenforceable. For Commissioner Connerton, Senior Engineer Moghadam advised that there were no realized benefits from the signs because they weren't up long enough to do a complete before and after speed data study; however, in conversations with residents and in the perception of drivers, he advised that people were slowing down as a result of the LED sign and that the signs elicited a positive response. For clarification purposes, Senior Engineer Moghadam advised that the location of the sign for the westerly or northerly direction was just east of Chemin Margaux and the sign in the easterly direction was north of Parducci Lane; and that it was the sign north of Parducci Lane that was removed. In response to Commissioner Wedel's inquiry, Senior Engineer Moghadam stated that, although the data was seven to eight months old, staff had recently completed daily observational counts; and there were no significant changes in traffic because most of the homes were still under construction and not currently occupied. At this time, Chairman Lanier opened the public hearing. The following citizens stated their support for the installation of stop signs in the Chardonnay Hills area: · Joseph LaMarca, 41138 Promenade Chardonnay · Don Smith, 41209 Promenade Chardonnay · Tracy Enalen, 41200 Promenade Chardonnay · James Wrather, 41194 Promenade Chardonnay · Vincent Cocca, 41132 Promenade Chardonnay The above citizens were in favor of the installation of stop signs in the Chardonnay Hill area for the following reasons: · That cut-through traffic has increased and traffic conditions have become worse with the increased growth; · That the safety of the neighborhood children is of concern; · That drivers speeding issues is 24 hours a day; · That the LED signs were not working or not working long enough; · That the traffic creates excessive noise impacts. At this time, Chairman Lanier closed the public hearing. Commissioner Wedel thanked the citizens for their comments and summarized the issues as follows: · That the neighborhood perception is one of excessive speeding which has been validated by the recommendation of the Public/Safety Traffic Commission for Stage #1 traffic calming; however, in this case, traffic calming efforts were not successful; · That a problem does exist - excessive speed; and that the issue is how to address it appropriately; R:\trafficrr~nutes\012303 4 · That, in addition, the issue of liability should be addressed if unwarranted stop signs were installed; · That the idea that stop signs are not effective in slowing traffic should be challenged. Via overhead projection, Commissioner Wedel referred to a chart distributed by the Public Works Commission from an issue of the Urban Transportation Monitor called "The Effectiveness of Traffic Calming Measures to Reduce Speeds." The effectiveness of stop signs fell in the middle of the chart; · That warrants are guidelines--not laws; · That the preface should be customer friendliness and creating a peaceful quiet safe environment; · That a staff report, which recommends no stop signs, cannot be supported without providing an alternate solution. Commissioner Connerton made the following points: · That it has not been proven that stop signs slow traffic but that they function as part of an overall program to control traffic; · That because these are public streets, cut-through traffic is very difficult to control; · That traffic speeds could be studied by placing the radar trailer in the neighborhood which measures and records speeds. Because there is an obvious problem with traffic/speed in the neighborhood and the Commission is charged with finding the most appropriate solution, Commissioner Connerton recommended that the radar trailer be placed on the neighborhood streets for a period of three to four days; that the trailer then be removed and that traffic speeds be enforced by motor officers for several days; that the radar trailer be put back in the neighborhood and repeat the cycle in order to make a good determination of the traffic/speed issue. Commissioner Ramos commended the residents and homeowners of Chardonnay Hills for investing their time and efforts and agreed with Commissioner Wedel that a solution needs to be found to alleviate the neighborhood traffic issues. Commissioner Ramos stated that to continue to study the issues would just belabor the problem and recommended action by installing two stop signs, especially one where the school bus stops. Commissioner Katan thanked the residents for their comments; advised that, obviously, the data did not support what the residents were experiencing in their neighborhood; and agreed with Commissioner Ramos regarding the placement of a stop sign perhaps at the highest point of speed as a good test to determine if a stop sign would slow down the traffic. Commissioner Katan opined that if a stop sign placed at the greatest point of speed were successful in slowing the traffic down, additional signs could then be considered not by warrant standards but by actual standards. Commissioner Katan suggested increased enforcement, speed bumps (referring to a television program about speed bumps in the City of Seattle that were designed to be open for the wheel base of emergency vehicles), or any alternative that would improve the situation without relying solely on stop signs. In response to Commissioner Katan's inquiry, Senior Engineer Moghadam advised that there was one location where visibility was an issue; however, it only becomes an issue if someone were using excessive speed - referring to the location as Chemin Cline (the top of the hill). Referring to the location of the tot IotJpool as justification for a stop sign, Senior Engineer Moghadam clarified for Commissioner Wedel, that all conditions are considered not just those that directly impact the warrant FAILED MOTION: Commissioner Wedel made a motion to install two stop signs of the four requested, one at the Chemin Cline intersection (where the bus stops) as an initial deterrent to cut-through traffic and leave the other stop sign open for discussion. The motion was seconded for discussion by Commissioner Ramos. Ultimately, this motion failed for lack of a vote. Chairman Lanier suggested that as part of the follow-up study, an up-to-date survey be compiled to include the numbers and the 85th percentile. Commissioner Connerton requested the completion of an additional up-to-date analysis; advised that it was his experience that stop signs do not slow traffic but do cause a false sense of safety; and relayed that, at this time, he would not be in favor of any stop signs at this time; Discussion ensued among the Commissioners with various solutions being suggested. The consensus was to have staff prepare a solution(s) and bring the item back to the Commission at the next meeting. Director of Public Works Hughes made the following points: · That it would be his preference not to install stop signs only to possibly have them removed because of ineffectiveness; · That if stop signs were to be installed for the purpose of slowing traffic, the Commission should make that recommendation to the City Council; · That regardless of the number of completed surveys that are done, the existing speeds will not satisfy everyone; · That a drastic change in speed will not occur by installing multiple stop signs; The average drop in speed is 3 m.p.h; That if the Commission has a recommendation, it should go forward with it and not experiment. In response to Commissioner Connerton's inquiry, Director of Public Works Hughes clarified that the use of the LED radar trailer and increased enforcement could be implemented without City Council approval; however, in order for a stop sign to be enforceable, it would require City Council approval. SECOND MOTION: Commissioner Connerton made a motion to: (1) install the LED speed limit signs in both directions at a location to be determined by the Public Works Department for a period of 10 days, (2) enforce speed limits, and monitor and record speeds at regular intervals to be determined by the Police Department to be the most effective for a period of 10 days, and (3) return the LED radar trailer to measure the effectiveness of enforcement. The motion was seconded for discussion by Chairman Lanier. This motion ultimately failed (see page 8). If the Commission's intention were to immediately affect driving habits, Sergeant Loman advised that placing motor officers in the area writing tickets would be the most effective. Commissioner Connerton added that it would be his desire to record the speeds measured by the radar trailer in order to have additional data to compare with the speed surveys. Commissioner Wedel opined that these solutions had been tried over a year ago, and that increased enforcement by the Police Department doesn't provide a permanent solution; therefore, he cannot support such a motion. Commissioner Connerton reiterated that it was also a proven fact that stop signs are not an effective measure for slowing traffic. Referring to the traffic engineers' survey, Commissioner Wedel advised that stop signs were ranked as an effective tool for slowing traffic. Director of Public Works Hughes encouraged the Commission to set an objective and to request staff to evaluate solutions in an effort to meet that goal. In agreement with Director of Public Works Hughes, Commissioner Wedel articulated the facts, as follows: · That according to California Law, there is a 25 m.p.h, speed limit in a residential neighborhood; · That the Police Department advises that a ticketable speed is approximately 30 m.p.h, in a residential neighborhood; · That as an intermediate step, options be discussed between staff and the neighborhood homeowners association; that agreeable actions be forwarded to the Commission in four weeks for approval. Director of Public Works Hughes advised that if the goal were 30 m.p.h., that staff would discuss recommendations with the Chardonnay Hills Homeowners Association to ensure their acceptance and forward a recommendation to the next meeting of the Public/Safety Traffic Commission to be held on February 27, 2003. For Director of Public Works Hughes, Commissioner Wedel clarified that the goal would be an 85th percentile of 30 m.p.h. By way of a voice vote, the previously made motion failed, as follows: Commissioners Katan, Ramos, Wedel were opposed and Commissioner Connerton and Chairman Lanier were in support. Commissioner Ramos opined that as a motorist he would cut-through Chardonnay Hills knowing that the neighborhood has no stop signs; however, if he knew he would have to make several stops, he would avoid the neighborhood. FINAL MOTION: Commissioner Katan made a motion to direct staff to provide the Public Safety/Traffic Commission with alternatives and options which would address the goal of reducing the speeds in the Chardonnay Hills neighborhood to 30 m.p.h. (i.e., the 85th percentile of speed traveled at 30 m.p.h.), and that staff obtain input from the Chardonnay Hills Homeowners Association regarding these alternatives and options prior to the next Public/Safety Traffic Commission Meeting on February 27, 2003; and, additionally, moved to increase enforcement in the Chardonnay Hills area. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Wedel and voice vote reflected approval, with the exception of Commissioner Ramos, who opposed. 3. Jefferson Avenue Median Desiqn - Winchester Road to Sanborn Avenue Recommendation: 3.1 That the Public/Traffic Safety Commission receive and file the report and provide recommendations as necessary. Chairman Lanier advised that he would be abstaining from this item, and left the dais at this time. Director of Public Works Hughes presented a brief update on the status of the median design and introduced Senior Engineer Butler and Senior Engineer Attar who presented additional information via enlarged Exhibits, highlighting the following: · That the project only entails improvements to the intersection of Winchester Road and Jefferson Avenue; · That the improvements primarily address the increased turning movements anticipated with additional development in the City; · That the improvements also address the widening of Winchester Road west of Jefferson Avenue; · That the point of discussion tonight, however, is the proposed access control and conflicting left-turn movements along Jefferson Avenue between Winchester Road and Sanborn Avenue; · That Exhibit 1 represents all current peak hour traffic counts for the left-turn movements in the vicinity of the area under study; · That Exhibit 2 depicts the proposed median (from Winchester Road to Sanborn Avenue) that would allow traffic to make a left or U-turn at Sanborn Avenue in a left-turn pocket; · That the proposed improvements include a widening on the southbound direction of Jefferson Avenue between Winchester Road and Sanborn Avenue; · That the high volume of accidents in this area is attributed to conflicting left turns cutting across through traffic; · That in staff's opinion, to cut the median shorter would only shift the accident point. For clarification purposes, Senior Engineer Butler stated that the funded and approved portion of the project was for the Winchester Road Intersection Improvements, i.e., the dual left-hand turn lanes. Commissioner Ramos expressed his concern for the business owners on both sides of the street that would be tremendously impacted by the proposed median. Director of Public Works Hughes commented, as follows: · That Jefferson Avenue was not the only street location that medians were being considered; · That the City's Capital Improvement Program has identified median installation for the entire length of Jefferson Avenue from the City limits to the north all the way to Rancho California to the south; · That because of the multiple conflicting traffic movements, there exists a traffic accident problem; · That the General Plan identifies Jefferson Avenue as an arterial roadway with a median; · That a roadway with a median has a greater roadway vehicle capacity; · That the issue is providing effective access to the adjacent properties vs. reducing accidents and improving the capacity of the roadway; · That as the City grows and roadway capacity and volume increases, in some cases, traffic traveling in one direction can support those businesses that were previously dependent on two-way traffic; · That it would be suggested that the Commission hear the concerns of the business owners in the area and their recommendations. · That at this time, this is only a study instrument and that no final determination has been made; · That from a transpodation and safety standpoint, the median would be the preferred alternative; however, staff does recognize the issue of access to businesses. In response to Commissioner Connedon's queries, Public Works Director Hughes clarified, as follows: · That the traffic volumes as stated in the staff report reflect current peak hour volumes (a.m. and p.m.) and that they are not projecting future volumes; · That upon completion, the new interchange improvements are going to change traffic patterns throughout the area and may alleviate some concerns of the area businesses; · That the intersection improvements at Jefferson Avenue and Winchester Road will be needed with or without the proposed interchange; · That the median would serve as a means of correcting an existing accident issue; · That there is no design manual warrant for medians; · That there are different hierarchies of roadways that have theoretical capacities and access restrictions and that as designated, Jefferson Avenue was intended to serve a higher level of volume and capacity - one that would require a median. For Commissioner Katan, Director of Public Works Hughes stated that solely the accident rate would warrant the need for new alternatives and that staff would likely recommend a median regardless of the street classification. Regarding the accident history at Jefferson Avenue and Winchester Road, Senior Engineer Moghadam commented that because of the Commission's awareness of the high number of accidents, it was requested that the issue be agendized; and in response to Commissioner Katan's inquiry, it was indicated that there was no specific number of accidents. At this time, Chairman Connerton opened the hearing to the public. The following individuals and business owners spoke in opposition to the proposed median: * Carliene Anderson, 27311 Jefferson Avenue, Winchester Plaza Project * Billy Lim, 27300 Jefferson Avenue #A, Operator of Billy B's * Fred Grimes, 27311 Jefferson Avenue #103 * David Thompson, 27315 Jefferson Avenue ~LI, Mailmart * Jack Williams, 27311 Jefferson Road, Owner of Richie's Diner * Darcey Rooney, 27311 Jefferson Avenue * Mark Esbensen, 27311 Jefferson Avenue The above-mentioned individuals and business owners were opposed to the proposed median and provided the following comments: · That limiting access to businesses on either side of Jefferson Avenue would be devastating and could cause the loss of 40% to 60% of their business; · That access and circulation is a critical element to a successful business; · That the same sensitivity that was shown to businesses on the east side of the City be afforded to those on Jefferson Avenue, i.e., circulation plans, stop lights, and left turn pockets; · That a stop light and protected left-hand turn be installed at Sanborn to allow a break in traffic rather than a median limiting access to businesses. · That a balance be found between traffic needs, safety, and the needs of the surrounding businesses. · That the Commission schedule a workshop with staff and the affected business owners in order to consider all the issues. · That the speed limit on Jefferson Avenue be lowered. · That in the spirit of cooperation, the owners of Jefferson Creek Center offered to redo the existing driveway approach so that it would create an easier ingress/egress, noting that there currently is a steep incline in the driveway apron causing traffic to almost stop before entering. At this time, Commissioner Connerton closed the public hearing. Commissioner Katan opined that an effective Commission is one that addresses issues that are problems for its citizens, i.e., the intersection of Jefferson Avenue and Winchester Road; and that the decision should be based on fact not emotion. Commissioner Ramos agreed that there was a high incident of accidents because of the speed of traffic coming in from the City of Murrieta; that the driveway was an issue and should be redesigned to create an easier ingress and egress; and that it was his recommendation to hold a workshop with staff, emergency services, and business owners to develop alternative solutions and bring them to the Commission for further review. In response to Commissioner Connerton's inquiries, Director of Public Works Hughes advised, as follows: · That no final determinations have been made other than the improvements to the intersection. · That the dispersal of information and workshops were planned as part of the median projects throughout the City. · That the observation of the high accident rate at Jefferson Avenue and Winchester Road caused the Commission to request that this item be placed on the agenda for the purpose of discussing the issue and proposing possible solutions. · That the input received from both the Commission and business and property owners is valuable in the continuation of staff's work. Responding to some of the comments presented, Director of Public Works relayed the following: · With regard to speed limits, the City has a limited ability to control speed limits or lower them below the 85th percentile speed. · With regard to the signal at Sanborn Avenue, any gaps in traffic that would be created by a signal would be short lived due to the expected increase in traffic volumes. In addition, the City has a priority list of approximately 40 signal locations, with funding available for one or two per year. · With the interchange project to the north and if the ramp serves access to Jefferson Avenue, there will be a signal light to the north of this location. In response to the Commission's inquiries, Director of Public Works Hughes advised as follows: · That the intersection improvements providing multiple left and right turn movements are funded in the current budget. · That the intersection project will be taken north to at least driveway #19 (Exhibit 3), with more flexibility from that point north. · That the dual stacking lane will be 300 feet in length. · That construction on the median project would be approximately 12 months away with the construction of the intersection improvements occurring earlier. MOTION: Commissioner Ramos made a motion that staff schedule a workshop to discuss alternatives and options to the proposed median project and invite emergency services, business owners, and members of the Public/Traffic Safety Commission, Commissioner Wedel seconded the motion and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Chairman Lanier, who abstained. Commissioner Katan opined the importance of giving property and business owners adequate notification and requested that staff plan accordingly. It is noted that the Public/Safety Traffic Commission received and filed this report with comments. 4. Appointment of Chairman and Vice Chairman RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 That the Public/Traffic Safety Commission entertain nominations from the Commissioners to appoint a Chairman and a Vice Chairman to preside until the end of the 2003 calendar year. MOTION: Commissioner Katan made a motion to elect Commissioner Connerton as Chairman of the Public Safety/Traffic Commission until the end of the 2003 calendar year. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Ramos and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. MOTION: Commissioner Connerton made a motion to elect Commissioner Katan as Vice Chairman of the Public Safety/Traffic Commission until the end of the 2003 calendar year. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Ramos and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. TRAFFIC ENGINEER'S REPORT There were no further comments made. POLICE CHIEF'S REPORT There were no further comments made. FIRE CHIEF'S REPORT There were no further comments made. COMMISSION REPORTS Commissioner Connerton advised that he had received notice of a meeting to discuss the recommendations for amendments to the General Plan which were in the final stages and would be presented to the City Council in the near future. Commissioner Connerton encouraged everyone to attend the meeting for the Citizen Corps Program to be held next Thursday, January 30, 2003, at 7 p.m. Chairman Lanier suggested that recognition in the form of an award be given to officers for their dedication and hard work during the implementation of "DUI Checkpoints," and that the involvement of the Trauma Intervention Program (TIP) would be of benefit to the Citizen Corps Program. R:~trafficr~nutes\012303 13 ADJOURNMENT At 9:28 P.M. Chairman Lanier formally adjourned this meeting to Thursday, February 27, 2003, at 6:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula. Cha]rr~-~ Scott Lanier Admin~,~ti've S,~--~tary Anita Pyle R:\traffic~nu[es\012303 14