Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1991 0320 CC REG ITEM 11IPAUL W. LAWRASON JR. Mayor BERNARDO M. PEREZ Mayor Pro Tem SCOTT MONTGOMERY Counalmember JOHN E. WOZNIAK Courclmember LILLIAN KELLERMAN City Clerk ME DATE: MOORPARK M E M O R A N D I li L. M / 1, X. MOORPARK, CAUFORNIA STEVEN KUENY Gty Cou l Meeting City Manager f of 199 CHERYL J. KANE City Attorney ACT)ON:- K RICHARDS, A.I.C.P. " Director of Community Development BY JOHN F. KNIPE City Engineer JOHN V. GILLESPIE Chief of Police RICHARD T. HARE U M City Treasurer The Honorable City Council Kenneth C. Gilbert, Director of Public Works TA March 12, 1991 (Council Meeting 3- 20 -91) SUBJECT: Consider a Report on a Citizen Request Concerning Traffic Controls on Loyola Street near Wheaton Court OVERVIEW This is in response to a petition submitted by some of the residents on Loyola Street requesting the installation of speed bumps and other traffic control measures on Loyola Street. Also addressed in this report is a related request for the installation of barricades at the end of Queens Court. DISCUSSION A. Request A petition was received, signed by some of the residents on Loyola Street, expressing concern about speeds on Loyola Street. The petition requested that consideration be given to the placement of "Children at Play" signs and construction of speed bumps on the street. B. Playing in the Street One of the points raised in the petition (and in comments made at a recent Council meeting) was that children play in the street. One could interpret form those comments that this is an acceptable practice and that the request is asking the City to take steps to lessen the danger of this practice. Obviously, children playing in the street is not a safe practice. Care should be taken in considering the request and the possible responses described in this report, to avoid any action would condone or encourage this practice. 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 (805) 529 -6864 Loyola Street Traffic March 20, 19.91 Page 2 C. Options Staff has looked at a broad range of possible actions which could be considered in developing a proper response to the request. These option are described as follows: 1. "Children at Play" Sign: The purpose of a "Children at Play's sign is to warn traffic approaching an unfenced school or park playground where there may be concentrated number of children present. The placement of a "Children at Play" sign in a typical residential neighborhood, would not be an approved use of this traffic control device and could be viewed as encouraging children to play in the street. 2. Speed Bumps: The use of speed bumps on City streets should be avoided. Drivers are not accustomed to, and would not expect there to be speed bumps on a public street. An encounter with such an obstacle at "normal" speeds could cause the driver to loose control of the vehicle. Such an installation would, therefore, pose a serious liability problem. In recent years, some agencies have been experimenting with the installation of "speed humps." Unlike a speed bump, a speed hump is twelve feet (121) wide (measure in the direction of travel) -- a design which is more compatible with the safe operation of a vehicle. Again, this is an experimental program. Neither the speed bump or the speed hump are approved traffic control measures of any state or federal agency. Even in those cities which are experimenting with speed humps, the decision to do so is entered into with caution. The first order of business would normally be the development of a POLICY clearly stating the purpose, design standards and installation guidelines (criteria and constraints) for the construction of a speed hump. One of the criteria usually cited in such a policy is that a speed hump SHALL NOT be constructed on a hill. Again, the safe operation of a vehicle would be compromised by such an installation. If this policy were to be applied to the subject portion of Loyola Street, the placement of speed humps would be prohibited. Again, the use of speed humps is limited and experimental. Staff does not recommend that the use of speed humps as a traffic control measure be considered at this time. e I Loyola Street Traffic March 20, 1991 Page 3 3. Speed Limit Sian: The prima facie speed limit for a residential area is 25 MPH. This is the speed limit for this segment of Loyola Street. Speed limit signs could be placed on Loyola Street to remind drivers to observe the maximum speed in this area. 4. "T" Intersection Sian: Because of vertical and horizontal curves on that portion of Loyola Street east of Campus Park Drive, the ability of east bound traffic to have advance warning of Wheaton Court is somewhat limited. A yellow diamond warning sign giving advance notice of this "T" intersection could be placed on Loyola Street at an approved distance west of this cul- de -sac. 5. HOA Participation: Quite often in situations similar to this, most of the offending drivers live in the general neighborhood. The properties in this area happen to be in a Homeowners Association. One possible way to advise these drivers of the perceived problem would be for the H. O. A. to communicate this to through its Newsletter or other such communication media. D. Barricades After a field review of the conditions at the end of Marymont Street and at the end of Queens Court, caution delineators were installed to better mark the end of those streets. E. Conclusion Of the options listed above measures on Loyola Street, City Council NOT approve Consideration could be given or #4. In addition, the implement Item #5. RECOMMENDATION pertaining to traffic control staff would recommend that the either Item #1 or Item #2. to the implementation of Item #3 applicant could take steps to Direct staff to install speed limit and "T" intersection warning signs in accordance with applicable traffic standards.