Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1990 0516 CC REG ITEM 11SMOORPARK PAUL W. LAWRASON, Jr. aK Mayor o °\ SCOTT MONTGOMERY Mayor Pro Temp 0 7 �F- ELOISE BROWN Z 74., . Councilmember CLINT HARPER, Ph.D. Councilmember BERNARDO M. PEREZ Councilmember LILLIAN KELLERMAN City Clerk M E M O R A. N D U M TO: The Honorable City Council. FROM: Kenneth C. Gilbert, Director of Public Wo DATE: May 9, 1990 (Council Meeting 5- 16 -90) ITEM I I -.So STEVEN KUENY City Manager CHERYL J.KANE City Attorney PATRICK RICHARDS, A.I.C.P. Director of Community Development R. DENNIS DELZEIT City Engineer JOHN V. GILLESPIE Chief of Police RICHARD T. HARE City Treasurer SUBJECT: Consideration of the Addition of State Highways to the Street Segment:s Included in the Speed Study OVERVIEW This presents for consideration a possible amendment to the Scope of Work for the Traffic ;peed Study to add all of the State Highways in the City. DISCUSSION A. Background At your meeting of April 4 , the Ci�_:y Council retained the services of Charles Abbott A.:asociates to perform a Traffic Speed Study of certain des-14nated streets throughout the City. This study and repori is required in order to use electronic radar devices in -he enforcement of speed limit laws. The scope of that C'(:)11" r -act did not include any State Routes. Coincidentally, the Traffic ,,treed. Study prepared for all of the State Routes in the Cit,;7 has an expiration date similar to that of the report(s) pi -pared for City streets. The City Engineer's Office was; la, arc, of this fact and notified Caltrans of the need to upd,c r t:�(,i: study. A response was received from Caltrans that t was their intent to have a new Speed Study prepared.rc)r th.is reason State Routes were not included in the C i s 1)ro ;ect:. 799 Moorpark Avenue MoorpakE California 93021 (805) 529 -6864 Amend Speed Study May 16, 1990 Page 2 B. Lapse in Radar Enforcement The Speed Study applicable i_o State Highways expired last month. Law enforcement officials will not be able to use radar in the enforcement of speed laws until another speed study is prepared. As stated earlier, Caltrans has begun efforts to have a new study prepared. It has come to our attention, however, that this new Speed Study will not be finalized for some time. The date estimated by Caltrans for the completion of this report: is October. This date could "slide" into November or 1.atF r .. C. Request for Quotation for__Ad<_itiona,l._Work In light of the above, staf:' has requested Charles Abbott Associates to prepare an out;ine of the requirements and an estimate of the costs for ,,j ;rk necessary to add the State Highways to the work they ai nOW performing for the City. The response of Charles Abbott Associates is attached. The estimated cost for this extri work is $3,120 plus the cost of processing the Caltrans.! n �-mit ( t cost plus 25%). Please note in the letter fr m our !' onsultant the length of time which may be required *c: Process this work through Caltrans. D. Summary The cost /benefit associated with a decision to add State Highways to the City's proje,.t are not clear at this time. If a study can be completed b,r the City's Consultant in much less time than it will take CLal.trans to complete their study, it would be wise to proceed. with the work. If, on the other hand, no substantial time sic,,ing, .an be achieved, such a decision would be ill advi.s+ E. Conclusion It is the intent of staff D pursue and clarify certain questions surrounding both of these approaches. Of particular concern are the de ays posed by the imposition of Caltrans' Permit procedures :n the City's efforts. Should these questions be resolved ,atisfactorily and it is shown that City efforts will produc:f,, a Speed Study much sooner than the date anticipated by Cal.tr ns: , it is recommended that the additional work be authori. z:E,L Amend Speed Study May 16, 1990 Page 3 RECOMMENDATION Authorize the City Manager to -ipprove the subject additional work when and if the City Manager determines that such work will result in the ability to re- estak} l ish radar enforcement of speed limits in a more timely manner t6.,3n the timeframe anticpated by Caltrans. CA CHARLES A May 10, 1990 Mr. Ken Gilbert Director of Public Works City of Moorpark 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, CA 93021 RE: SPEED SURVEYS ON STATE ROUTES WITHIN MOORPARK Dear Mr. Gilbert: Summary review of the state rc,utes within Moorpark indicates 8 segments will be required for a,,alysis, I have checked with the company I use for vehicle counts and they will have completed the previous, ordered studies before Friday of this week. Because of this, we cannot simply expand the counts now being done. The price wi 1 remain the same, but there will be a 3 week lag time. Caltrans will require encroachn,,ynt permits for us to work within their right -o£ -way. Mr. Don M - : "ain of the Permit Division said he could not quote a cost of th permit until it is actually sub- mitted. He also indicated procFSssi ng time is 6 - 8 weeks on any permit submitted. Mr. Peter Shu, Traffic Opera-::jojis Branch, informed me that Caltrans has decided not to cort.ract speed studies in your area as indicated to you previously He said the work would not be done before the September due d,jP-e and would probably be sometime after that. He also indicated that any speed studies on state routes must be submitted for > c;_,gh and final review by Caltrans and must be on the state repo,., 'orn. Each of these reviews will be processed in about two weeks The state report form is far mc:_e complicated than the County we normally use or the city form y .,ui: police have requested (sample attached). It requires sign'f± art7..,, gore field and office work to complete. ` MANAGEMENT AND FNUI'vLERING PROFESSIONALS 6866 Verde Ruig(_1 Road, Ranch,) PA -5 ✓H<<1os CA 90274 212.541 -0671 CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES, INC. Mr. Ken Gilbert May 10, 1990 Page 2 Because of these requirement:3, the following fee schedule will need to apply to state route s lies Complete report 8 Segments Plus Caltrans processing: Permits a Technician a Engineer ;a i -al TIME SCHEDULE $ 390.00 per segment $3,120.00 Cost + 25% $ 40.00 per hour $ 70.00 per hour "Our" time schedule for these reports would be the same as the previous 27 reports. 2 weeks tca begin work, 6 weeks to have work completed. However, Caltrans requires 8 weeks to process the permit and 2 reviews at 2 weeks each. This adds 10 weeks (min.) to our 8 weeks work schedule, for a total of 18 weeks or 4 -1/2 months. If Council include the approves t:ae extension of our agreement to state routes at the,.,_ e6th meeting, we are look- ing at a mid to 1< to Septemt r :iol very data For the final reports. If Caltrans could deliver their reports at or about the same tame, it would be cost: effect i l tc al's ow them to complete these studies. Sinc rely`, Kevin W. Smith, RCE 33571 Pro 1�ct Engineer KWS:mlk caa \moorpark.tra Attachments ARK WEEKS :WFIC COUNTS XIDENT REVIEW IFE REVIEW T-MP ION REVIEW 'EH] MEASUFEMENT 'DIALYSIS 3EPARE RETORTS OOIFY REPORTS JBWT TO COUNCIL aim Wl •! . :2. CALTRANS PERMIT WEEK 1 CALTRANS WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4 wEFK 5 wig 3.4 TRAFFIC REGULATIONS Traffic Manuol oA.a. 1974 "Ma" t O•tw Figure • -1A SPIED ZONE SURVEY SHEET LM{ N f1►11 /,M IN son Pot Jam` fi .en Ps u.,, t{ tt►w is j� 40 If H. AMA town.y. •rrlrl•`, 223:A, M 5, :3233r uutl 22358.3 tnny not be enforeiitd by ntdnr unless the speed limit hum bern justified by an engineering and trrif e .turvey- within the last five yenrx, S. Emgikl r rimy Qntj Trd f c Suref ys Setti0t1 63; of the Vehicle Code deflntw the ternt "Trafile anti Engineering `surrey" and lists re- tfuirenimax therefor, Folhra•iug ;Ire three method-, of eunductiug rilainerriiig tutu trufic xurreyx to be utters to e- ttablixit or justify prima facie speed limits. Them- methmix ure prexrntetl in conform• once with the Vehie•le t•Ixle, for uw• on: (1) ?itnte llitthw•ttyx (2) ('sty and tbultty tlim% cult higltwityx arteri;tlx mid mill rolh-vtor roKtl.t (3) laorullttrertx I. Stair IIisrimnyis Tht/ x1K4-d zany xurvey for !slate highw•nytt is horde under the tlirertiuu of the Dkiriet Truille Engiuerr. The Muhl vl,;,ll inrludc : a. hilt• rope of the `:taildi li %onl• :4ur- t•ey shrl•t 1144`1• FILUre N -1.1. s•11i1 .hnwm"! { A north arrow•, ' F is N, H,� in.Mal��l •f Nra L., aN u.,, t{ tt►w is j� w tl►w � �: r� h j �.MNJ 1.4IUl one i61IMM 16" SO WM 1""e• mumum • Eligint -er's Stations or po"t mileiigt•, • Minits Qf the proposed zoitex, • 1,indix of existing speed mites. • appropriate notutions slims -ing type of roadside development, such ,t-t —sesittemd buainmit." /'solid residential," etc. Schools adjacent to the Ititilnruy Aho tild be .hon•ii• but other buildiupm nerd not bt, pLlttrtl un}exv they are o famnr it, the speed ree- ominendation ur tit(, point rlt• It•t•ntillatinn of n xprrtl zone. Accidtntt rates for the tnut•x inrolyetl• Averatre daily tni t• yolunw. f,a•ntion of trntlle rigttxk riKnx, ;ltd markinjrx, Ii tlw ttiuhw-ay ix dill ititvi, the limits of zoneet fnr rich dirretintt of triers. Pluttetl a:t pert•ettlile will prim- speeds ,11 loration tukeit xhuw•ittu mperti proflle, b 14 rrtwort tip the nixtrit•I nire0tir - droll: Stiitr thr n•nsott for initintinn of Afx -e(I lour wurk +•y. (`fitr ret-rrmntrnllxti mN aids rl•awltts flien•- fnr Trc c Manual TRAFFIC REGULATIONS s-s tk,"w 1 I Figure 111 -19 SPEED ZONE SURVEY SHEET List the enforcement jurisdictionsinv <>lve, and the attitude of these oiflcials. Give the stationing or mileage at the be ginning and end of each proposed xonc and any intermediate equations. Ties mu`i be given to readily identifiable physic, features. In determining the speed limit which is most appropriate to facilitate the orderly movement of traffic and is reasonable and safe, important factors are prevailing speeds, unexpected cos; ditions, and accident records. Speed limits should be established preferably at or near the 85 percentile speed, which is de- Bned as that speed at or below which 85 per- cent of the traflk is moving. The 85 percentile speed is often referred to ag critical speed. Face speed is defined as the 10 -mile increment of speed containing the larhest number of we hicles (See Fi .-ure 8.2), The lower limit of the Pao_ is plotted on the Speed Zone Survey Sheets as an aid in determining the proper zone limits. Speed limits higher than the 85 per Gentile are not ;enerally considered reasonable and safe and limits below the 85 percentile do not facilitate the orderly movement of traffic. Speed limits established on this basis conform to the consensus of those who drive the high. way as to what speed is reasonable and safe, and are not dependent on the judgment of one or a few individuals. The basic speed law states that no person shall drive at a speed greater than is reason• able or prudent. The majority of drivers com- ply with this law, and disregard regulations which they consider unreasonable. It is only the top fringe of drivers who are inclined to be reckless and unreliable, or who have faulty judgment and must be controlled by enforce - anent. Speed limits set at or slightly below the rig percentile speed provide law enforcement aflleers with a means of controlling the drivers ,vho will not conform to what the majority con - siders reasonable and prudent. Only when roadside development results ;n traffic conflicts and unusual conditions which ere not readily apparent to drivers, are speed mite somewhat below the 85 percentile war. anted.