MEETING DATE:
July 9, 2024
SUBJECT:
Title
ORDINANCE NO. 2024-1545 - APPROVING AN ENGINEERING AND TRAFFIC SURVEY AND ESTABLISHING PRIMA FACIE SPEED LIMITS FOR SPECIFIED CITY STREETS AND AMENDING THE CITY OF SAN MARCOS TRAFFIC SCHEDULE FOR SPEED ZONES PER SAN MARCOS MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 12.04.020
Body
Recommendation
Recommendation
INTRODUCE (first reading) Ordinance approving an engineering and traffic survey and establishing prima facie speed limits on specified City streets and amending the City of San Marcos traffic schedule for speed zones per San Marcos Municipal Code Section 12.04.020.
Body
Board or Commission Action
On June 5, 2024, the results of the engineering and traffic survey were presented to the City of San Marcos Traffic Commission as an informational item.
Relevant Council Strategic Theme
Good Governance
Relevant Department Goal
Not Applicable
Executive Summary
California Vehicle Code (CVC) sections 22357 - 22366 authorize the City to establish prima facie speed limits on roadways within its jurisdiction following an engineering and traffic survey (E&TS). Pursuant to CVC section 40802, a current E&TS is required for radar enforcement of any speed limit set by a local jurisdiction rather than the default prima facie speed limits established by the CVC. Over 2023-24, the City conducted an updated E&TS and presents for City Council consideration an ordinance establishing speed limits on the basis of that survey (Attachment 1).
Discussion
Radar enforcement of any speed limit other than the default prima facie speed limits established by the CVC requires that the speed limits be based on an E&TS. Such surveys may be used, provided law enforcement undertakes the required training if enforcement is by radar, in prosecution of offenses relating to certain streets or zones when performed seven (7) years prior to the date of an alleged violation, unless a registered engineer conducts an evaluation and determines that no significant changes in roadway or traffic conditions have occurred including, but not limited to, changes in adjoining property or land use, roadway width or traffic volumes, in which case it can be extended under CVC Section 40802 to fourteen (14) years.
CVC section 22358 allows local authorities to determine and declare prima facie speed limits based on an E&TS. In 2021, the CVC was amended, and consistent with Caltrans Traffic Operations Policy Directive 09-04, required the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CAMUTCD) to be revised to include provisions for rounding speed limits to the nearest five miles per hour of the 85th percentile speed of free-flowing traffic. These amendments also provided guidance on applying reductions to the 85th percentile speed if justified by road safety considerations not readily apparent to drivers. The Caltrans Manual for Setting Speed Limits, provides additional guidance for conducting an E&TS.
In 2008, the City Council considered an E&TS and adopted Ordinance 2008-1307 establishing prima facie local speed limits on 20 specified City streets. In June of 2017, the City Engineer certified an E&TS relating to 12 identified roadways. As the roadway segments identified in the 2008 Ordinance were not all the same as those evaluated as described in the 2017 City Engineer determination, and to determine whether driver behavior and volumes may have been affected by the change in COVID-19 traffic conditions, staff caused a comprehensive E&TS of all 120 road segments within the city with posted speed limits to be undertaken, which was conducted by CR Associates.
The CR Associates E&TS dated June 21, 2024 (2024 Survey), is included as Exhibit A to the proposed ordinance. The free-flow speed data was collected between December 2022 and February 2023 by National Data Services with additional speed data collected by City staff in April and May 2024.
Of the 120 roadway segments surveyed:
• 20 meet the CVC definition for a residence district, thus the prima facie speed limit will retain the 25 miles per hour (mph) posted speed limit;
• 2 segments were not evaluated due to the changes to the Discovery Street extension and opening of the bridges across Via Vera Cruz and Bent Avenue; these segments will be evaluated in the future when traffic patterns have adjusted to the network changes; and
• 98 roadway segments were evaluated to determine the prima facie posted speed limits in accordance with the CVC section 22358 based on the rounding of the 85th percentile speed.
The speed limits on all but 14 road segments are proposed to remain unchanged. Proposed modifications are shown in Table 1 below. A speed limit decrease is proposed for twelve segments, and an increase is proposed for two segments.
Table 1: Proposed Posted Speed Limit Changes
|
Roadway |
From |
To |
85th Percentile Speed (MPH) |
Current Speed Limit (MPH) |
Proposed Speed Limit (MPH) |
|
Alamitos Way |
Oleander Avenue |
Descanso Avenue |
22 |
30 |
25▼ |
|
Capalina Road |
Rancho Santa Fe Road |
Pacific Street |
37 |
35 |
30▼ |
|
Las Posas Road |
Grand Avenue |
San Marcos Blvd |
43 |
45 |
40▼ |
|
Linda Vista Drive |
Western City Limits |
W Linda Vista Drive |
35 |
40 |
30▼ |
|
Linda Vista Drive |
Grand Avenue |
Las Posas Road |
37 |
40 |
35▼ |
|
Rancho Santa Fe Rd |
Mission Road |
San Marcos Blvd |
36 |
40 |
35▼ |
|
San Marcos Boulevard |
Business Park Drive |
Viewpoint Drive |
51 |
50 |
45▼ |
|
Smilax Road |
S Santa Fe Avenue |
Oleander Avenue |
34 |
35 |
30▼ |
|
Twin Oaks Valley Road |
San Marcos Boulevard |
Barham Drive |
39 |
45 |
40▼ |
|
Twin Oaks Valley Road |
Barham Drive |
Craven Road |
40 |
45 |
40▼ |
|
Via Vera Cruz |
Discovery Street |
Honeysuckle Drive |
34 |
35 |
30▼ |
|
W. Linda Vista Drive |
Tilley Lane |
Poinsettia Avenue |
41 |
40 |
35▼ |
|
Melrose Drive |
Rancho Santa Fe Road |
San Elijo Road |
48 |
40 |
45▲ |
|
Knoll Road |
Mission Road |
San Marcos Blvd |
43 |
35 |
40▲ |
▼- lowering speed limit from existing; ▲- increasing speed limit from existing
The proposed speed limit increases to the segments on Melrose Drive and on Knoll Road are due to CVC requirements for rounding of the 85th percentile speed. The CVC provides that when the 85th percentile speed would be rounded up to the nearest 5 mph increment, the local authority may instead round down. In the case of these two roadway segments, the speed limit was rounded down to the lower 5 mph increment. The CVC does not allow for additional reductions in these cases.
An additional reduction may be taken when justified by conditions not readily apparent if the 85th percentile speed should be rounded down. For example, the segment on Capalina Road has an 85th percentile speed of 37 mph; this speed was rounded down to 35 mph, then an additional 5 mph reduction was applied for conditions not readily apparent. The City Traffic Engineer has not identified any such conditions on the segments of Melrose Drive or Knoll Road.
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the proposed Ordinance approving the E&TS and amend the Traffic Schedule for speed zones.
Environmental Review
The proposed Ordinance is not a project within the meaning of Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines because there is no potential for it to result in a physical change in the environment, either directly or indirectly. In the event this Ordinance is found to be subject to CEQA, it is exempt from CEQA pursuant to the exemption contained in CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility of a significant effect on the environment.
Fiscal Impact
If the proposed Ordinance is adopted, there will be costs incurred with respect to posting new signage for changing posted speed limits for the roadway segments described above. These costs can be accommodated within the Traffic Safety (Fund 201) budget for Fiscal Year 2024-25.
Attachments
Proposed Ordinance - Approving an Engineering and Traffic Survey and Establishing Prima Facie Speed Limits on Specified City Streets, including Exhibit A - CR Associates Engineering and Traffic Surveys Technical Memorandum dated June 21, 2024
Prepared by: Edd Alberto, City Traffic Engineer
Reviewed by: Stephanie Kellar, Deputy City Engineer
Approved by: Michelle Bender, City Manager