Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1996 1016 CC REG ITEM 10DY 7 l- TO: FROM: DATE: AGENDA REPORT E rr w O F MOORPARK The Honorable City Council Kenneth Gilbert, Director of Public Works September 10, 1996 (Meeting of 9- 18 -96) ✓ L: i i *, / ITEMI o. D ;� SUBJECT: Consider the Possible Establishment of a Speed Hump Program This presents a draft Speed Hump program which has been developed with the review and input of the City Council Transportation and Streets Committee [formerly Councilmembers Hunter and Wozniak; currently Councilmembers Hunter and Brown.] In response to citizen interest, the City Council Transportation and Streets Committee has been looking into the pros and cons of the City establishing its own Speed Hump Program. As you may know, unlike the "speed bumps" one may find in a shopping center parking lot, a Speed Hump is a "raised" portion of the road (2" - 3" high) which is twelve feet (121) wide. The design is meant to accommodate vehicular speeds up to twenty (20) to twenty -five (25) mile per hour. Speed Humps are normally installed in sets (depending on the location) and are accompanied by appropriate signing and markings. DISCUSSION A. Status Speed Humps are not approved by either Caltrans or the National Highway Traffic Safety Board as an official traffic control device. The design immunities which normally accompany approved traffic control devices do not accompany Speed Humps. Therefore, those agencies which have used Speed Humps have done so only after the development and implementation of a set of very strict guidelines, based upon "state of the art" standards approved by the City Engineer. Locally, Speed Humps have been used by the Cities of Simi Valley, Thousand Oaks, Camarillo and Santa Paula. The attached guidelines and design standards are based on some of these programs. spdhnpl 00017%..'L Speed Humps September 1996 Page 2 Ll,�` .. There are basically two types of problems which may be addressed through the installation of Speed Humps. They briefly described as follows: 1. Shortcuts -- Problems caused by drivers using a residential street for a shortcut. The warrants for the installation of Speed Humps to address this type of problem normally require traffic volumes exceeding one thousand (1,000) to fifteen hundred (1,500) vehicles per day. It should be noted that if the City's Speed Hump program were designed to merely address this type of problem, that it is likely that any residential street in the City would qualify. 2. Speed -- Excessive speed in residential neighborhoods. The warrants for this type of a program do not stress traffic volume, but do require average vehicle speeds to exceed a certain threshold. As stated below, the Transportation and Streets Committee did not make a recommendation regarding the approval and adoption of this program. However, the Committee did conclude, that if such a program is adopted, that it should be designed to address the problem of excessive speed in residential neighborhoods. C. Concerns Speed Humps are seen by many to be a panacea for speeding problems. Although they have been used with some success by some agencies, Speed Humps are not without problems. A few of those problems are summarized as follows: 1. Emergency Vehicles: Speed Humps are generally not met with much favor by emergency response vehicles (fire, police, ambulance, etc.). As one might expect, they are seen as possible a source for delayed response times. 2. Non - Approved Traffic Control Device: As mentioned above, Speed Humps are not an approve traffic control device. They may be seen as still in the experimental stage. They should only be installed in accordance with very strict guidelines. 3. Liability: As with any "non- standard" program, there is a potential for an increase in the level of risk or liability which an agency assumes when it adopts, implements, and administers a Speed Hump program. spdtupl Speed Humps September 1996 Page 3 4. Control: The primary concern associated with Speed Humps is that a Speed Hump could cause, or be alleged to have caused, a vehicle to go out of control. 5. Grades: In order to reduce possible vehicle control problems, Speed Humps are generally not installed on a street segment having a slope greater than five percent (5 %). 6. Installation Requirements: It is usually not appropriate to install only one Speed Hump. When they are installed, usually an entire street segment is designated for such installation and several Speed Humps are installed at an appropriate spacing. Installation requires more than just the "hump." Paint markings and warning signs are also required. 7. Construction Techniques: The specifications for the construction of the "hump" are very specific and must be followed exactly. Construction methods and techniques are very crucial to a proper outcome. The specifications must be very detailed. The nature of this work requires that there be a full -time inspector on the job during every aspect of construction. This requirement results in inspection costs considerably higher than normal. 8. Construction Cost: Installation costs are considerable (see Section pertaining to Fiscal Impact). 9. Maintenance Cost: The striping and legends required to be installed at and near Speed Humps must be re- painted each year. 10. Program administration Cost: Program costs must also include the cost of managing and administering the program. Such cost include: processing application, review and verifying petitions, evaluating candidate streets, developing recommendations, preparing reports, seeking City Council determination, design preparation, bid administration, award of contract, etc. 11. Nuisance Factor: The novelty of a Speed Hump wears off very quickly. Local residents are left the one most affected. Subsequent to installation, Speed Humps have been viewed by some neighborhoods as an inconvenience. Some agencies have been asked to remove the Speed Humps. spolvpi (Jcoi ?? Speed Humps September 1996 Page 4 12. Effectiveness: As stated earlier, Speed Humps have been seen as effective in reducing speeds. However, their effectiveness has also been questioned. In some cases, drivers have been known to drive faster to achieve, or attempt to achieve, a smoother ride. 13. Utilities: of course a Speed Hump cannot be installed over a manhole cover. In addition, utility cuts through a Speed Hump cause unique re- pavement problems. 14. Motorcycles: Speed Humps are not very Motorcycle- friendly. Care most be taken to minimize motorcycle related problems. 15. Low Clearance Vehicles: Speed Humps are also not very compatible with vehicles which have a short clearance. Damage to the street and to the vehicle can occur. 9805-TV . 7 P As stated above, in order to adequately discuss the merits and /or problems associated with the establishment of a Speed Hump program, it was necessary for staff to develop a draft program which illustrates the various elements which must be included in any such program. That draft program is attached as Exhibit 'A.' A summary description of that program is as follows: 1. Guidelines: Some general information pertaining to the installation of Speed Humps. 2. Warrants: A list of minimum criteria which must be met in order for Speed Humps to be installed. 3. Procedures: The procedures to be followed by staff in processing such Applications. 4. Design Standards: The design standards to be followed in constructing one or a series of Speed Humps. The cost for administering a Speed Hump program is, of course, unknown. In the chart below, staff has attempted to determine the estimated annual cost (in time and dollars) of such a program. These costs not only include installation spdhvpl 000175 Speed Humps September 1996 Page 5 costs, they also include the cost of administering the program (processing of applications, etc.). For each task listed, a range of costs has been provided based on an estimated range of applications from one to ten. Ref . I. Distribute Application Packets C -2 2. Answer questions and assist applicants in the C -2 preparation of their applications and /or in the compiling of signatures on petitions 3. Initial screening: C-3 - verify validity of Petition - confirm Warrant Nos. 1, 2, 3 & 4 are met. 4. Warrants 1, 2, 3 or 4 Not Net: C -4 - Send Notice of Rejection 5. Warrants 1, 2, 3 and 4 Met - send notice C -5a - retain Traffic Engineer C -5b - transmit to Traffic Engineer C -5b - traffic engineering analysis C -5c - Engineer's Report C -5d - Staff Report C -5e - TSC Preliminary Review C -5e 6. Warrants 5 or 6 Not Met - Letter Notice of Informal Meeting C -6b - Informal Meeting with TSC C -6c - Notice of Rejection C -6c 7. Warrants 5 & 6 Met - Informal Meeting with TSC C -7b - Public Hearing Notice C -7d - Staff Report C -7e - City Council Action C -7f 8. Select Design Consultant - -- 9. Prepare Design - -- 10. Prepare Bid Package - -- 11. Advertise, receive bids, present bids, award - -- contract 12. Construct project - -- 13. Evaluate project performance subsequent to - -- construction spdhmpl Estimated Hours Est. Cost ($ Kin. Max. Kin. Max. 0.2 1 0.5 10 2 20 1 10 .3 4 2 30 1 10 2 20 2 20 4 40 2 20 1 10 2 20 10 100 2 20 1 10 10 15 8 15 6 10 5 20 1 4 1,000 10,000 2,000 8,000 5,000 20,000 0001-7!3 Speed Humps September 1996 Page 6 Estivated Was Est. Cost ($) Task Ref. Kin. Max. Kin, Nax. 14. Prepare report on perforeance F. Committee Review --- 3 5 Total Hours 66 414 Rate ($) Sub -Total ($) Total Cost ($) 50.00 50.00 3,300 20,700 8,000 38,000 11,300 58,700 The Transportation and Streets Committee participated in the review and development of the attached draft program. At the end of that process the Committee requested that this matter be forwarded to the City Council for discussion and consideration. The Committee made no recommendation. G. Implementation The attached draft program is just that -- a draft. If the City Council wishes to proceed with the implementation of a Speed Hump program it is recommended that the following steps be taken. 1. Approve City Engineering services in the amount of $1,000 to review, modify and finalize the Speed Hump program (It is anticipated that some staff assistance will be necessary). 2. Review and adopt the final program when completed. 3. Approve an appropriation of funds and an amendment to the budget at a level required to fully fund the additional costs related to the administration of the program, including additional staff time, additional consultant time and estimated construction costs. The installation of a Speed Hump is far different from the installation of most typical traffic control measures. Such an act comes only as a part of a rather complicated and expensive spolmpl 00018C Speed Humps September 1996 Page 7 program. The implementation and administration of such a program requires the commitment of a considerable amount of resources. Of course, the cost of such a program includes the design, construction and inspection of the installation of sets of Speed Humps. But more importantly program costs also include considerable administrative costs. If this program is adopted and implemented, it is anticipated that the City will receive numerous requests for the installation of Speed Humps. It is possible that only a few of these requests would meet the minimum standards and would receive a favorable recommendation from the City Engineer for the installation of Speed Humps. However, the review, evaluation and processing of all of the other requests would require the expenditure of a considerable amount of staff and consultant engineering time. It is the recommendation of staff that a Speed Hump program not be adopted by the City. This recommendation is based on the concerns regarding the level of resources required as well as the concerns expressed in Section C above. Staff recommends that the City Council not adopt a Speed Hump program. spdhapl 000181 Exhibit 'A' DRAFT City of Moorpark SPEED HUMP PROGRAM A. Guidelines The following general guidelines shall govern the installation of Speed Humps. 1. Speed Humps will only be installed on streets which meet the minimum Warrants and which meet the Design Standards set forth in Section D below. 2. Speed Humps are experimental roadway features. As such, additions, alterations or removals of any or all Speed Humps installed, may occur at any time. 3. Upon the installation of Speed Humps on any street, the Public Works Department will notify the Ventura County Fire Department, the Moorpark Police Department and the local ambulance service of said installations (where they may incur delay). B. Warrants The installation of Speed Humps on public roads will be considered only if all of the following conditions are met over the entire proposed street segment as determined by the City's Traffic Engineer: 1. The road must be either a residential road or a local road meeting the following definitions: a) a residential road is defined as a road having residential structures with direct access to the road; b) a local road is defined as a road that is intended to primarily provide access to adjacent residential areas, neighborhoods or structures; c) structures, as used in the above definitions, shall include separate dwelling houses, churches, apartments buildings or multiple dwelling houses. 2. The road must have a width of at least 35 feet. 3. The road must have no more than 2 traffic lanes. 4. Any portion of the road shall not have any grades in excess of 5%. 5. The average traffic volume must exceed 750 vehicles in a 24 hour period. spdbapl 0OU 82 Exhibit 'A' Page 2 6. More than 50% of the surveyed vehicles must exceed a speed of 30 MPH. Applications for the installation of Speed Humps shall be received, evaluated and acted upon as follows: spdhmpl 1. City Initiated Study: The City Council may direct that one or more streets be evaluated for the purpose of determining whether or not said street or streets meet the minimum requirements for the installation of Speed Humps. In such event, said streets shall be evaluated as prescribed below (commencing with Section C -3) and a report shall be presented to the City Council. 2. Citizen Requests: Requests for the installation of Speed Humps on any given street shall be made in accordance with the following requirements: a. All requests shall be made on an Application to be provided by the City. b. To be deemed complete, an Application shall include a petition containing the signatures of the owner or resident of at least sixty percent (60 %) of the properties fronting the affected street segment. c. A separate petition shall be circulated for each street included in the Application. d. Completed petitions shall be delivered to: City of Moorpark, Department of Public Works, 799 Moorpark Avenue, Moorpark, California 93021. 3. Initial Screening: Upon receipt of an Application for the installation of Speed Humps, the Public Works Department shall do the following: • Verify that the application includes a valid petition, • Confirm that the following Warrants are met: #1: Subject street(s) are residential or local roads. 12: Road width is at least 35 feet. #3: Number of traffic lanes does not exceed two (2) traffic lanes. 14: Street grade does not exceed 5 %. OWAS3 Exhibit 'A' Page 3 spdhapi 4. Warrants 1, 2, 3 & 4 Are Not Met: In the event it is determined that the petition is invalid and /or one or more of Warrants 1, 2, 3 or 4 can not be met, the Public Works Department shall notify the applicant that the Application has been denied. [Note: Notices pertaining to City Council initiated studies shall state that the minimum Warrants were not met.] Said notice shall state the reason for the denial. A copy of said notice shall be provided to the City Council. Upon request, the matter may be scheduled for review by the City Council Transportation and Streets Committee (TSC) as described in Section C -6b. 5. Warrants 1, 2, 3 & 4 Are Met: a. Notice: In the event it is determined that the petition is valid and that Warrants 1, 2, 3 and 4 are met, the Public Works Department shall notify the applicant that his /her Application has been forwarded to the Traffic Engineer for evaluation. Said notice shall state the approximate date when the application will be considered by the TSC and shall also state that the applicant will be advised in writing of the exact date and time the Application will be considered by the TSC. b. Transmittal to Traffic Engineer: All Applications which meet the requirements of Warrants 1, 2, 3 and 4, shall be forwarded to a Traffic Engineer for evaluation and recommendation. Said transmittal shall include the findings of the Director of Public Works yielding a determination that Warrants 1, 2, 3 & 4 are met. The City Traffic Engineer or a Contract Traffic Engineer may be retained to perform a study to evaluate pending Applications. c. Traffic Engineer Review: The Traffic Engineer shall review each pending Application, perform field traffic counts and speed surveys, and compile all traffic volume and vehicle speed data required to determine if Warrants Number 5 and 6 are met. The Traffic Engineer shall also perform a site investigation of the street segment for each pending Application to determine if the geometric design for the street segment in question meets the minimum requirements set forth in the Design Standards for the installation of Speed Humps. 000184 Exhibit 'A' Page 4 d. Engineer's Report: Subsequent to conducting said studies and compiling such information, the Traffic Engineer shall evaluate said data and prepare and submit a report to the Public Works Department. Said report shall contain the following information: • a description of the street segment being studied; • a statement of findings and determinations regarding whether or not Warrant Nos. 5 and 6 were met; • an analysis of the roadway geometrics and a statement indicating if the subject street segment is or is not compatible with the Design Standards set forth in Section D; and, • any other data or information relevant to the installation of Speed Humps within the limits of the area being studied; • a recommendation regarding whether or not Speed Humps should be installed; • if recommended, a general description of the location, spacing and number of Speed Humps required; and, • if applicable, a statement regarding the relative priority of the area studied compared to other areas being considered for like treatment. e. Staff Report to TSC: The Engineer's Report shall be forwarded to the TSC for consideration. The Engineer's Report shall be accompanied by a staff report prepared by the Director of Public Works. Said staff report shall include the following information: • a description of the street segment studied by the Traffic Engineer, including a description of all of the adjacent properties affected by the proposed installation of Speed Humps (hereinafter "Study Area"; and, • a summary of the Traffic Engineer's Report; spd*l Exhibit 'A' Page 5 6. Warrants 5 or 6 Are Not Met: a. Preliminary Review: As stated in Section C -5e, the Traffic Engineer's Report shall be forwarded to the TSC for preliminary review. b. Informal Meeting: Subsequent to TSC review of the Engineer's Report and cover staff report, an informal meeting shall be scheduled before the TSC. A letter shall be mailed to the applicant, the petitioners and all of the property owners and residents within the Study Area, advising said parties of said meeting. The letter notification shall include the following information: • a brief description of the Study Area; • a brief summary of the Traffic Engineer's Report; • a brief statement indicating that street segment in question does not meet all of the Warrants for the installation of Speed Humps and that the installation of same is not recommended; • notice that the matter will be discussed at the next meeting of the City Council Transportation and Streets Committee (TSC); and, • an invitation to all interested parties to attend said TSC meeting to discuss the application, and the findings and recommendations contained in the Engineer's Report. c. genial of Application: Subsequent to the above described informal meeting before the TSC, and absent any additional findings indicating that the minimum Warrants have or can be met, the Public Works Department shall notify the applicant that the Application has been denied. Said notice shall state the reason for the denial. A copy of said notice shall be provided to the City Council. 7. Warrants 5 and 6 Are Met: spa"l a. Preliminary Review: As stated in Section C -5e, the Traffic Engineer's Report shall be forwarded to the TSC for preliminary review. Any recommendations of the TSC shall be forwarded to the City Council. b. Informal Meeting with TSC: At the discretion of the TSC, an informal discussion meeting may be scheduled between the applicant and the TSC. In such case, notice of such an informal discussion meeting shall be mailed to the applicant and others in the manner described in Section C -6b. Any recommendations of the TSC shall be forwarded to the City Council. OUo186 Exhibit 'A' Page 6 SP&AP1 c. Scheduled Public Hearing: Subsequent to TSC Preliminary Review, and any informal discussion meetings held before the TSC, a public hearing on the matter shall be scheduled before the City Council. d. Public Hearing Notices: Pubic Hearing Notices shall be published posted and mailed in accordance with the following requirements: 1) Distribution -- Said Notice shall be: • mailed to all signers of the petition; • mailed to all property owners and residents within the Study Area; • hand delivered to all addresses within the Study Area; • posted along any such street, at all intersecting streets, and along all significant diversion streets; • published in a local newspaper consistent with the policies and procedures for providing notice of public hearings; and, • mailed to the following agencies: * Fire Department; * Moorpark Police Department; * Local Ambulance Service; * City Street Sweeping contractor(s); * City Transit Coordinator; and, * City Franchise Refuse collectors. Note: Notices to designated agencies shall include a request that any comments regarding the proposed installation of Speed Humps within the specified Study Area shall be provided to the City within twenty (20) days. 2) Content: Said Notices shall include the following information: • the date, time and location of the public hearing; • a description of the Study Area; • a summary of the Traffic Engineer's findings and recommendations regarding the installation of Speed Humps. e. Staff Report to the City Council: Prior to the scheduled public hearing, the Director of Public Works shall prepare and submit to the City Council a staff report summarizing the Engineer's Report. Said staff report shall include the following information: • a description of the Study Area; • a summary of the Traffic Engineer's Report; OWA S7 Exhibit 'A' Page 7 spdhRP1 • a summary of comments received and /or other findings generated as the result of the posting and publishing of Public Hearing Notices; • a summary of comments received (if any) from any affected agencies; • a summary of any recommendations of the TSC; • a preliminary cost estimate for the design and installation of Speed Humps and related traffic striping and signing; and, • a priority ranking of the subject Study Area compared to other Study Areas being considered. f. City Council Action: Subsequent to the review of the staff report, the recommendations of the TSC and the receipt of public testimony, the City Council will take action. Proposed Speed Hump projects may be denied, approved for future funding or approved and funded for construction. Speed Hump projects which are approved for future funding shall be included in the list of capital improvement projects to be considered during the next capital improvement budget approval cycle. Speed Hump projects which are approved for construction shall be accompanied by any required amendment to the fund appropriations and the current year capital improvement program budget. g. implementation: Upon approval by the City Council of any Speed Hump construction project, the Director of Public Works shall proceed with the preparation of the project design. Upon completion of the design, bids will be solicited and a contract will be awarded for the construction of one or more Speed Hump construction projects. l7 _ Mt FT W 1. Construction Details a) Twelve feet [ 12' ] by two and %" (±%") [ 2%'1 (nominal size) asphalt Speed Humps shall be used. b) Using two templates, the asphalt shall be hand laid in two lifts and hot rolled over a tack coat. c) Speed Humps should be installed across the entire roadway to the lip of the gutter with the last one foot (11) flush with the pavement to minimize gutter running and to preserve gutter flows. OU01.88 Exhibit 'A' Page 8 sp ftl d) Posts should gutters and running. 2. Warnings Signs be installed at the sidewalk where rolled sidewalks are located to minimize gutter a) A thirty inch by thirty inch (30" x 30 ") warning sign stating "Speed Bumps" with five inch (511) high series E letters shall be installed prior to the first encounter with a Speed Hump. b) For the first month after the installation of a series of Speed Humps, a temporary orange flag should be placed on the street side of each sign to add an "animated impact" to the signs. c) Also during the first month after installation, 15 MPH yellow advisory warning signs should be installed below the "Speed Bumps" sign to advise motorists of the "comfortable recommended speed" for critical vehicles. d) Signs should be installed to the controlled street. pollution" the number of minimum number necessary advance warning necessary. 3. Stencils /Legends at all major street approaches In order to minimize "sign signs should be kept to the to adequately provide the a) Eight feet (81) high "BUMP" legends should be painted approximately fifty feet ( 50' ) to one hundred feet (100' ) in advance of each Speed Hump. b) In order to increase the visual "impact" and improve the drivers' awareness of the Speed Humps, one foot (1' ) wide longitudinal ladder markings should be painted on each Speed Hump at six feet (6') intervals on center. 4. Positioning a) Speed Humps shall be placed from fifty feet (501) to two hundred feet (2001) away from intersections, stop signs or tight turns, for the following reasons: 1) To prevent motorists from approaching them at high speed; 2) To enable motorcyclists to traverse them relatively perpendicularly and in a vertical position; 3) To allow for sufficient reaction time. OkAlLb9 Exhibit 'A' Page 9 spftpl b) Speed Humps should be spaced from one hundred fifty feet (1501) to four hundred feet (4001) apart to adequately manage speeds along the street. (250' to 300' feet long intervals are ideal]. c) At least one Speed Hump should be placed in each block. d) The final positioning of each Speed Hump should take into consideration certain matters listed below, which should be field verified prior to installation. 1) The location of each Speed Hump should be: • near street lights to illuminate them at night; • downstream of storm drains; • at a property line when possible; • five feet (51) to ten feet (101) away from driveways; 2) Speed Humps should not be located: • over manholes or near hydrants; • in proximity to a vertical curves or grades which obscure advance visibility; • on a sharp horizontal curves which would obscure visibility or cause stability problems for motorcycles or bicycles. x;190 City C3 InCiuncil C2 SPEED HUNT PROGRA-M Initial Studv pplicatio Screening ATTEIC 97ONPROCPSSIW 4 6b 6b 6b 1,2,3 or4 6c Informal Public Letter to Staff Are Not Reject Letter Meeting Applicant � M t In ut 5 1,2,3 & 4 Are, Met- Initial Advisory Letter 5a Completed C C M- 4 With p TSC 5b 5b /5c 5d 5e 6a 7 Select , Preliminary Traffic Engineering Engineer s Staff y Engineer Review Report Report Review by g TSC 6 5 or 6 Are Not Met Staff 7f 1 7e Denied City Council 5 and 6 Council Staff Report Are Met Conside- ration 7 7f 7c Design & 7d r nstruct Approval ' Public Public ' Comment Hearing 6b Notice Letter to ' Applicant ' 7b Informal L 4NO Meeting - Public Input �. J with TSC 7