The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About12/19/2007 - STAFF REPORTS - 3.A. Canyon Estates — Toledo Avenue I am here tonight to make 2 requests of the council: 1. Immediately reduce the speed limit on Toledo Avenue to a speed limit in accordance with the latest speed survey 2. Instruct staff to take the necessary actions required to classify Toledo Avenue as a local, residential street thereby allowing the local authority to establish the speed limit without the requirement for a speed survey. For this purpose I would like to address the following points: `r There are 254 homes in Canyon Estates Y In the majority, the occupants of these residences are 55 years of age and over > Toledo Avenue is 8110 of a mile long / 4,224 feet Lavern to Maricopa stop sign: 1/10 of a mile / 528 feet Y Maricopa to Canyon Estates Drive: 3/10 of a mile / 1,584 feet Canyon Estates Drive to East Murray Canyon Drive: 4/10 of a mile /2,112 feet 61 Driveways on Toledo Avenue / 1 driveway every 69 feet Y 11 streets entering Toledo Avenue between Lavern and Murray Canyon A vehicle traveling at 50 MPH will travel 4,400 feet per minute or 73.3 feet per second. Y A vehicle traveling at 50 MPH will travel the entire length of Toledo Avenue in 73 seconds, including the time required for stopping at the stop sign at Maricopa. At 50 MPH a vehicle would have less than one second to stop if another vehicle backs out of 1 of the 61 driveways into its path. At 50 MPH the probability of death is high in an accident of this nature. Toledo Avenue is the major entrance & egress for Canyon Estates Y Toledo Avenue meets the criteria for a "Residence District" under CA Vehicle code Y Section 22352 Establishes a Prima Facie Speed Limit of 25 MPH in a residence district ➢ Section 22357 allows the local authority by ordinance to determine and declare a prima facie seed limit of more than 25 MPH -from 30 to 65 MPH - Whichever is found most appropriate to facilitate the orderly movement of traffic and is reasonable and safe. Section 40802 — Speed Traps (2) —This paragraph does not apply to a local street, road or school zone therefore exempting from a traffic survey requirement. The installation of a stop sign at Canyon Estates Drive and Toledo Avenue would eliminate any possibility of speed trap classification. (B) Not more than one-half mile of uninterrupted length is one of 3 requirements which must be met. We respectfully request that the council: 1. Immediately reduce the speed limit on Toledo Avenue 2. Order the installation of a stop sign at the intersection of Toledo Avenue and Canyon Estates Drive 3. Take whatever action is necessary to establish a reasonable and safe speed limit on Toledo Avenue of 35 MPH within a short and reasonable period of time. _ n Jay Thompson n a -ITY or ^,�LN S, From: Paul [buzzyzpop@hotmall.com] 2001 BEC 19 Ali 11: 50 Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 8:08 PM To: jay.thompson@palmsprings-ca.gov CITYrCLERI"�,d Subject: Tachevah Dr. speed limit Dear Mr. Thompson: Thank you for your advice today. Here's an independent survey of speed limits by a group of Tachevah Drive homeowners. It would be great if Council members could have this to read prior to Wednesday night's meeting. This is our first time presenting to the Council so any hints on the process would be greatly appreciated. Having only had two days notice, we've not had time to gather signatures in support of this proposed change, but we hope the facts speak for themselves. Sincerely, Paul Van Nies Zach Weingart 1431 Tachevah Drive, PS The best games are on Xbox 360. Click here for a special offer on an Xbox 360 Console. Get it now' ��.I�l0V11ti� I lwl'-'V�4L(JI la ] [, la '7 12/19/2007 Independent Survey by Tachevah Drive Residents Speed Limits on Major Routes In and Surrounding the Ruth Hardy Park Neighborhood Speed Limits on Major East-West Routes (These are through streets that run from Sunrise Way all the way to Indian Canyon Drive. For purposes of this survey, we included only those portions of the streets bounded by Sunrise Way and Avenida Caballeros—the east and west boundaries of the Ruth Hardy Park Neighborhood) Speed Street Limit Notes Via Escuela....................25.............Curbs/gutters/sidewalks present Vista Chino....................45.............2 lanes each direction, curbs/gutters/sidewalks present Tachevah....................45............Narrow(25'6"in some places),designated bike route(though without painted bike lane markings),dirt and/or gravel shoulders, curbs/gutters/sidewalks only in front of Casas del Desierto. Deep gutter:on each side of Sunrise are hard on cars. Tamarisk.......................25.............Curbs/sidewalks present on at least one side Alejo..............................40.............Curbs/gutters/sidewalks present on at least one side Amado..........................40.............Wide street, curbs/gutters/sidewalks present Tahquitz........................40.............2 lanes each direction with median, curbs/gutters/sidewalks present Baristo ..........................40.............Curbs/gutters/sidewalks present Ramon --------___.............40.............2 lanes each direction,curbs/gutters/sidewalks present Sunny Dunes.................35.............Curbs/gutters/sidewalks present Mesquite...................... 35.............Wide, paved shoulders It is important to note that Tahquitz and Ramon—two of the three widest east-west streets in the study area,with two lanes in each direction,traffic signals and sidewalks—have speed limits lower than Tachevah.Only Vista Chino—which in the survey section is actually part of Highway 111—has a speed limit as high as Tachevah's. All streets surveyed except Tachevah have sidewalks on at least one side. Because Tachevah is narrow and has no sidewalls,we feel a limit of 35 miles per hour would be safer and more appropriate. Speed Limits on Major North-South Routes Speed Street Limit Notes Sunrise Way.......-----------40.............2 lanes in each direction,traffic signals, left turn lanes at major intersections, partial curbs/gutters/sidewalks Avenida Caballeros.......35.............Wide street, 2 lanes each direction in some places, partial curbs/gutters/sidewalks Again,wider streets with more traffic controls and lower speed limits than Tachevah. Independent Survey by Tachevah Drive Residents Speed limits on Major Routes In and Surrounding the Ruth Hardy Park Neighborhood Summary Major east-west streets in and around the Ruth Hardy Park Neighborhood were surveyed to compare speed limits. Many of the streets are similar to Tachevah Drive in paved width and number of vehicle lanes.The majority of streets in the survey area—Tachevah being the exception—have curbs,gutters and sidewalks bordering all or a major portion of the length of the street. Of these similar streets,ALL have speed limits five to 20 miles per hour lower than those on Tachevah. Three streets surveyed have two lanes in each direction, with curbs, sidewalks and gutters, and traffic signals. Of the three,Tahquitz and Ramon have speed limits of 40 miles per hour,five miles less than Tachevah. Only Vista Chino—which in the survey section is actually part of Highway 111—has a speed limit as high as Tachevah's. In addition, portions of Tachevah have been designated as a bike route. This is particularly troubling and dangerous because the street is so narrow,there are no painted bike lane markings and the shoulders on much of Tachevah are dirt and/or gravel,There is no place to ride a bike safely out of the main lane of traffic. Because Tachevah is narrow and has no sidewalls and no bike lanes, we feel a limit of 35 miles per hour would be much safer and more appropriate to the otherwise quiet residential character of the street. Also, at Sunrise and Tachevah,there are two deep drainage gutters, one on each side of Sunrise. If a car hits them at 45 miles per hour, it's likely to do damage to the car's suspension and may easily cause loss of control of the vehicle; resulting in an accident. �pALMSp O +P� F � U �n .+ o .� xx c4`'F°aN�¢ City Council Staff Report December 19, 2007 LEGISLATIVE Subject: PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDING PALM SPRINGS MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 12.20.020 TO REVISE THE PRIMA FACIE SPEED LIMITS OF MURRAY CANYON DRIVE, TACHEVAH DRIVE, AND TOLEDO AVENUE From: David H. Ready, City Manager Initiated by: Public Works and Engineering Department SUMMARY On October 3, 2007, the City Council adopted Ordinance 1720, enacting speed limits on various City streets in accordance with the California Vehicle Code. In response to concerns stated by the Council, and requests received from the public, staff has re- evaluated speed limits on three streets, conducted new speed surveys, and based on the re-evaluation is recommending that speed limits be reduced 5 miles per hour on three streets. The attached ordinance proposes to revise speed limits on Murray Canyon Drive, Tachevah Drive, and Toledo Avenue. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Waive the reading of the ordinance text in its entirety and read by title only. 2. Introduce on first reading Ordinance No. , "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 12.20.020 OF THE PALM SPRINGS MUNICIPAL CODE, RELATING TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF PRIMA FACIE SPEED LIMITS OF VARIOUS CITY STREETS." STAFF ANALYSIS: In order to use radar or other electronic devices in the enforcement of speed limits within local jurisdictions, the California Vehicle Code (CVC) specifies that the speed limits must be reviewed and adjusted at five-year intervals on the basis of an "Engineering and Traffic Survey". Accordingly, earlier this year the Public Works and Engineering Department had coordinated preparation of an "Engineering and Traffic Survey", prepared by tt Allbei Item No. 3 -A . City Council Staff Report December 19, 2007 - Page 2 Revised Speed Limits Grover & Associates. The purpose of the Engineering and Traffic Survey was to document compliance with the CVC, and to determine if changes (decreases or increases) to posted speed limits of City streets were appropriate. It is a common belief that posting of speed limit traffic signs will influence drivers to drive at that speed. However, the facts indicate otherwise. Driver behavioral research conducted in many parts of the country over a span of several decades shows that the average driver is influenced by the appearance of the highway itself and the prevailing traffic conditions in choosing the speed at which he or she drives. More importantly, the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) published by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), further supplemented and adopted by the state of California in 2003, states the following: Speed limits are established at or near the 85th percentile speed, which is defined as that speed at or below which 85% of the traffic is moving. The 85th percentile speed is often referred to as the critical speed. Pace speed is defined as the 10 mph increment of speed containing the largest number of vehicles...Speed limits higher than the 85th percentile are not generally considered reasonable and prudent. Speed limits below the 85th percentile do not ordinarily facilitate the orderly movement of traffic and require constant enforcement to maintain compliance. Speed limits established on the basis of the 85th percentile conform to the consensus of those who drive highways as to what speed is reasonable and prudent, and are not dependent on the judgment of one or a few individuals. The majority of drivers comply with the basic speed law. Speed limits set at or near the 85th percentile speed provide law enforcement officers with a limit to cite drivers who will not conform to what the majority considers reasonable and prudent. Further studies show that establishing a speed limit at less than the 85th percentile (Critical Speed) generally results in an increase in collision rates. (Emphasis added). Recognizing this, the CVC requires that speed limits be established with appropriate engineering practice and methods. In evaluating existing speed limits, the Engineering and Traffic Survey considers the prevailing roadway speeds, width and number of traffic lanes, access points, roadway alignment, traffic volumes, accident experience, adjacent land use characteristics, bicycle and pedestrian safety. The study involved the following three major categories of data and analysis: (1) geometric and characteristic street surveillance; (2) spot speed survey; and (3) accident rate analysis. The arterial and collector streets were previously surveyed by field observation to determine the existing roadway characteristics, condition and placement of signs and markings, adjacent land uses, pedestrian and bicycle activity, and to identify roadway characteristics that are not readily apparent to vehicle drivers. Spot speed surveys, utilizing a calibrated radar gun, were previously conducted at 130 roadway segments to determine existing vehicular travel speeds. A minimum of 100 0090u2 City Council Staff Report December 19, 2007 - Page 3 Revised Speed Limits observations (when possible) were recorded, 50 for each direction of travel, on all the arterial and collector streets. This data was used to calculate statistical information such as the 85th percentile speed, 10 mile per hour pace speed, percent of vehicles within the 10 mile per hour pace, median speed, and other pertinent data for analysis. Accident data was tabulated from the City's accident records. The accident rate was calculated and considered in recommending the speed limit. Speed limits are required to be established at or near the 85th percentile speed recorded during the spot speed survey. However, in matching existing conditions with the traffic safety needs of the community, engineering judgment may indicate the need for a further reduction in speed. Whenever such factors are considered to establish the speed limit, they are documented on the speed survey or in the accompanying engineering report. When establishing speed limits, a reduction of 5 mph from the 85th percentile speed is allowed, but any decrease of 5 mph must be specifically related to factors "not readily apparent" to the typical driver (physical or other factors of the roadway that a normal person would not be aware of). These factors are usually design factors, such as vertical or horizontal curves. The Engineering and Traffic Survey was presented to the City Council at its September 19, 2007, meeting for approval, with an accompanying Ordinance to re-establish existing speed limits on 95 street segments, establish reduced speed limits on 12 street segments, and establish increased speed limits on 23 street segments. The Ordinance was subsequently adopted on October 3, 2007. During the Council's consideration of revised speed limits, concern was expressed for increasing the speed limit from 45 mph to 50 mph on Murray Canyon Drive and Toledo Avenue. These two roadways are classified as Secondary Thoroughfares on the City's General Plan, and carry 4 lanes of traffic. However, traffic volumes are extremely low as these streets pass through a residential area. Although residential properties are located along these streets, due to the classification and physical width of the street, the CVC requires that the speed limit be established following the specific process outlined in the law. Discussion also occurred about establishing speed limits lower than the prevailing (85th percentile) speed on these streets. However, the CVC is clear that speed limits may only be established pursuant to the Engineering and Traffic Survey, and arbitrarily establishing speed limits creates a "speed trap", which are illegal and unenforceable. Arbitrarily established speed limits invalidate the City's speed limits. Staff also received numerous inquiries from residents living along Murray Canyon Drive and Toledo Avenue, as well as Tachevah Drive, concerned about the increased speed limits. Establishing speed limits, pursuant to the CVC, often results with public criticism of increased speed limits adopted by those agencies. Recently, the cities of Palm Desert and La Quinta have experienced similar results where the prevailing (85th percentile) 000003 City Council Staff Report December 19, 2007- Page 4 Revised Speed Limits speed dictated increased speed limits on their streets, resulting in concern from their Councils as well as the public. In one case, Monterey Avenue in Palm Desert was increased to (and remains at) a speed limit of 60 mph. Minor text changes to the law governing how the speed limit is establish have occurred over the years. Although minor, the changes have had the result of requiring "rounding up" the speed limit to the nearest 5 mph increment from the prevailing (85th percentile) speed. Prior to that change, the speed limit was established by "rounding down" to the nearest 5 mph increment from the prevailing (85th percentile) speed. For example, with an 85th percentile speed of 38 mph, prior to the text change to the law the speed limit would be established at 35 mph; however, after the text change to the law, the speed limit is established at 40 mph. Therefore, from the recent Engineering and Traffic Survey were the following results: MurrayCanyon Drive S. Palm Can on to Camino Real Prevailing (85th percentile) speed surveyed: 48.9 mph CVC required speed limit: 50 mph MurraV Canyon Drive Camino Real to Toledo Avenue Prevailing (85th percentile) speed surveyed. 49.7 mph CVC required speed limit: 50 mph Tachevah Drive (Avenida Caballeros to Sunrise Way) Prevailing (85th percentile) speed surveyed: 42.6 mph CVC required speed limit: 45 mph Toledo Avenue (La Verne Way to Murray Canyon Drive) Prevailing (85th percentile) speed surveyed: 47.8 mph CVC required speed limit: 50 mph All of the speed limits established above are examples of how the minor text change to the law resulted in a requirement to "round up" to 45 or 50 mph as the case may be, whereas prior to the law change the City could "round down" to 40 or 45 mph. Staff relied on the City's consultant to identify any factors of the roadways that would not be "readily apparent" to the typical driver. The most useful information to determine if a factor exists that is not readily apparent is a prior 2 year traffic collision and accident history. This information is a required part of the Engineering and Traffic Survey, and establishes if factors exist allowing for a 5 mph reduction to the speed limit. In the case of each street segment above, the traffic collision and accident rates were below the expected accident rate, indicating to the City's consultant that a 5 mph reduction to the speed limit would not be justified. In light of the Council's and public's concerns, staff initiated a re-evaluation of the speed limits on these streets and conducted new speed surveys. The new speed surveys City Council Staff Report December 19, 2007- Page 5 Revised Speed Limits were conducted after the posting of the increased speed limits. The following were our results- Murray Canyon Drive S. Palm Canyon to Camino Real Prevailing (85th percentile) speed surveyed: 46.5 mph CVC required speed limit: 45 mph' MurrayCanyon Drive Camino Real to Toledo Avenue Prevailing (85th percentile) speed surveyed: 48.7 mph CVC required speed limit: 50 mph 5 mph reduction: "continuity of speed" CVC allowed speed limit: 45 mph Tachevah Drive (Avenida Caballeros to Sunrise Way) Prevailing (85th percentile) speed surveyed: 42.8 mph CVC required speed limit: 45 mph 5 mph reduction: "pace speed" CVC allowed speed limit: 40 mph3 Toledo Avenue La Verne Way to MurraV Canyon Drive Prevailing (85th percentile) speed surveyed: 46.0 mph CVC required speed limit: 45 mph Therefore, as a result of staffs further evaluation and re-survey of speeds on these streets, it is staff's recommendation to reduce the currently established speed limits by 5 mph on the identified segments of Murray Canyon Drive, Tachevah Drive, and Toledo Avenue. The attached Ordinance will implement the suggested reduction of speed limits. FISCAL IMPACT: None. ' Although the new posted speed limit is 50 mph, the prevailing speed of most drivers was below the new posted speed limit. As 46.5 mph is closer to 45 mph, in accordance with the CVC, the speed limit may be established by "rounding down" to 45 mph. 2 Although the new posted speed limit is 50 mph, the prevailing speed of most drivers was below the new posted speed limit. Although the required speed limit would remain 50 mph, by establishing a 45 mph speed limit on the prior segment of the same street, continuity of speed is a factor allowed to be used to reduce speed limits by 5 mph to create consistent speeds on traffic corridors. 3 Although the new posted speed limit is 45 mph, the prevailing speed of most drivers was below the new posted speed limit. Although the required speed limit would remain 45 mph, considering the 10 mph pace speed of 35 to 44 mph is below the posted speed limit of 45 mph, pace speed is a factor allowed to be used to reduce speed limits by 5 mph. 4 Although the new pasted speed limit is 50 mph, the prevailing speed of most drivers was below the new posted speed limit. As 46.0 mph is closer to 45 mph, in accordance with the CVC, the speed limit may be established by"rounding down" to 45 mph. 0 6 a 0 3 5 City Council Staff Report December 19, 2007- Page 6 Revised Speed Limits SUBMITTED: —Cz Lnd) David J. Barakian Thomas J. WiPeon Director of Public Works/City Engineer Assistant City Manager David H. Ready, Ci r ATTACHMENTS: 1. Proposed Ordinance ATTACHMENTI PROPOSED ORDINANCE 0000017 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 12.20.020 OF THE PALM SPRINGS MUNICIPAL CODE, RELATING TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF PRIMA FACIE SPEED LIMITS OF VARIOUS CITY STREETS City Attorney's Summary This Ordinance revises prima facie speed limits for Murray Canyon Drive, Tachevah Drive, and Toledo Avenue, in accordance with the California Vehicle Code. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS- SECTION 1. AMENDED CODE. The text for the following three streets of Palm Springs Municipal Code Section 12.20.020 is amended to read as follows. PRIMA STREET SEGMENT FACIE SPEED LIMIT Murray Canyon Dr. S. Palm Canyon Dr. to Camino Real 45 Camino Real to Toledo Avenue 45 Tachevah Drive Avenida Caballeros to Sunrise Way 40 Toledo Avenue La Verne Way to Murray Canyon Drive 45 SECTION 2. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be in full farce and effect thirty (30) days after passage. SECTION 3. PUBLICATION. The City Clerk is hereby ordered and directed to certify to the passage of this Ordinance, and to cause the same or a summary thereof or a display advertisement, duly prepared according to law, to be published in accordance with law. ADOPTED this `day of January, 2008. MAYOR ATTEST: City Clerk 000353 Ordinance No. Page 2 CERTIFICATION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss. CITY OF PALM SPRINGS ) I, JAMES THOMPSON, City Clerk of the City of Palm Springs, California, do hereby certify that Ordinance No. _ is a full, true, and correct copy, and was introduced at a regular meeting of the Palm Springs City Council on December 19, 2007, and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on January _, 2008, by the following vote: AYES: NOES- ABSENT- ABSTAIN: James Thompson, City Clerk City of Palm Springs, California 000002