HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994-04-19 - AGENDA REPORTS - ACCESS CALGROVE INTERSTATE 5 (2)AGENDA REPORT
Manage
Cial
v
Item to be presented by:
Anthony J. Nisich'
CONSENT CALENDAR
DATE: April 19, 1994
SUBJECT: ACCESS TO CALGROVE BOULEVARD AT INTERSTATE 5
DEPARTMENT: Community Development
BACKGROUND
During the public comment period at the regular Council meeting of March 22, 1994, the owner of
Carrows Restaurant, located on Calgrove Boulevard immediately east of Interstate 5, asked the City
Council to consider modifying the existing detour plans to make access to the restaurant possible.
The City Council referred this issue to staff for review and recommendation.
ANALYSIS
Sort -term Issues:
Before the Council meeting of March 22, 1994, City staff had received several requests from the
owner of Carrows, Supervisor Michael Antonovich's office, and Caltrans' executive office to find
ways to make the access to Carrows possible. Public Works and the Engineering staff evaluated
several access options at this location, as outlined in the attached traffic study. The study
concluded that only the alternative which would only allow the northbound freeway traffic to exit
at Calgrove Boulevard could be implemented with the least impact to the residential community in
the area.
City staff met in the field with the representatives of Caltrans and Carrows to review the
alternatives. Although Caltrans staff had the same safety concerns as the City staff regarding
modifying the detour plan during the construction period, Caltrans is willing to modify the detour
if the City formally requests such action and assumes potential liability which might arise as a
result.
Subsequently, City staff also met with representatives of Happy Valley residents north of the
removed barricades. Staff presented the options to the residents and discussed the pros and cons
of each alternative. No consensus was reached among those present at the meeting. The residents
would like the detour plan to remain the same during the remainder of the freeway construction
period.
The completion of the 1-5 freeway construction is scheduled to be completed in mid June. However,
the construction appears to be ahead of schedule, and Caltrans has informed staff that the project
might be completed by the last week of May or early June. Based on this information and the
potential liability to the City which might arise as a result of modifying the detour plan, changes to
the freeway detour plan at Calgrove Boulevard are not recommended.
APPROWED Ar , t ahem, -/04
ACCESS TO CALGROVE BOULEVARD AT INTERSTATE 5
April 19, 1994 - Page 2
Long-term Issues:
The removal of the barricades on Calgrove Boulevard and Maple. Street was brought to the City
Council for action on January 25, 1994. Asa result of Caltrans' urgent need to provide a temporary
freeway detour at Interstate 5/Calgrove Boulevard and closing of Calgrove Boulevard, the City
Council concurred with staff about the necessity to provide a second means of access to this area,
should Wiley Canyon Road be closed due to emergency reasons or winter storms. Due to the
emergency nature of this work, the City did not have an opportunity to provide information to the
area residents and seek the community's input before the barricades were removed.
The City Council's resolution action at the January 25, 1994 meeting, calls for reinstalling the
barricades once the 1-5 freeway south of Calgrove Is back to its normal condition. Since the
removal of the gates occurred in January, the City has received several Inquiries from the area
residents and homeowner associations requesting the City to keep the gates down even after the
freeway opening. They have asked the City to be given the opportunity to address this Issue In a
Council meeting before the decision to reinstall the barricades is made. One resident has also
questioned the legality of this issue under the Streets and Highways Code, as related to barricading
a street that provides access only to a group of residents. The legality issue has been referred to
the City Attorney for investigation and response.
RECOMMENDATION
Leave the existing detour plan and barricades at Interstate 5 and Calgrove Boulevard as they are
until the completion of the freeway construction south of Calgrove Boulevard.
ATTACHMENT
Traffic Study
BJ:hds
counclFWgrov .bj
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Georg e.Caravalho, City Manager
FROM: Jeff Kolin, Deputy City Manager, Public Works
DATE: March 7, 1994
SUBJECT: ACCESS TO CALGROVE BOULEVARD AT INTERSTATE 5
As you are aware, as a result of the Old Road freeway detour at Calgrove Boulevard, Caltrans has
barricaded off -freeway access to and from the east leg of Calgrove Boulevard. Subsequently, the
City removed the barricades on Calgrove Boulevard and Maple Street to provide a second means
of access to this residential area should Wiley Canyon Road be closed to traffic during the rainy
season.
The closure of Calgrove Boulevard has had an Immediate impact on customers wishing to exit the
freeway to go to the Carrow's Restaurant and the Santa Clarita Athletic Club which are located
adjacent to the closed ramps. The City has received several requests from the owner of Carrow's;:
Michael Antonovich's office, and Caltrans' executive office to find ways to make access to the;
Carrow's possible. Our understanding is that Caltrans Is willing to make modifications to the
interchange area to make the access possible, but it is looking for the City's concurrence for any
changes.
Traffic engineering staff has evaluated several access options at this location which are
summarized below:
1. LEAVE FREEWAY DETOUR AS IS:
ADVANTAGE: Provides the safest traffic operations as the northbound freeway detour has no
conflicts with the local traffic off of Calgrove Boulevard..
DISADVANTAGE: Eliminates access to/from 1-5 for all residents and the businesses in the area.
Freeway traffic uses Lyons Avenue interchange and Wiley Canyon Road to reach this area. Should
Wiley Canyon Road. be closed in the rainy season, all traffic would have to use Valley Street to
reach this area.
If the existing detour plan is kept, Caltrans could Install guide/directional signs behind the existing
barricades to direct the motorists to use the Lyons Avenue interchange to access the Carrow's
Restaurant and the Athletic Club.
2. ALLOW ONLY NORTHBOUND 1-5 TRAFFIC TO EXIT AT CALGROVE BOULEVARD:
ADVANTAGE: Allows the northbound freeway traffic to proceed eastbound on Calgrove Boulevard
to access the businesses and the residential community just east of the freeway. In order to return
to the freeway, all traffic has to use Wiley Canyon Road (or Valley Street If Wiley Canyon Road is
closed due to floods) and Lyons Avenue. Traffic to/from southbound 1-5 would continue to be
prohibited.
MEMORANDUM
Access to Calgrove-Boulevard at 1-5
March 7, 1994
Page 2
DISADVANTAGE: There might be some increase in traffic volumes on portions of Calgrove
Boulevard/Valley Street where the barricades were removed. Although the roadway has been
opened to through traffic, several "NOT A THRU STREET" signs have been kept in place in order
to not encourage traffic through the previously barricaded area. Staff estimates that the net
increase in traffic volumes, resulting from this alternative, would be marginal.
This alternative would provide an interchange layout that is not conventional, as the exiting traffic
would not be able to return to the freeway at the same location. There might be a tendency on the
part of some motorists to try to enter the freeway via the off -ramp. If this alternative is
implemented, proper use of concrete barriers, crash cushion, and warning and regulatory signs will
be required in order to discourage the wrong use of the off -ramp. Staff also believes that Caltrans
should widen the northbound detour ramp west of the existing concrete barriers to provide
additional pavement for traffic slowing down to proceed to eastbound Calgrove Boulevard.
Additional freeway signing would also be required for the new exit ramp.
r
3. ALLOW ONLY WESTBOUND CALGROVE BOULEVARD TRAFFIC TO ACCESS 1.5:
ADVANTAGE: Allows the businesses and the residents to access the northbound direction of 1.5.
Traffic heading for southbound 1-5 and all northbound freeway traffic would still continue to use
Lyons Avenue and Wiley Canyon Road.
DISADVANTAGE: Staff believes that this alternative does not provide enough benefit to outweigh
the safety concerns. This alternative might also increase traffic volumes in Calgrove Boulevard,
but its magnitude should be insignificant. A similar safety concern may arise if the northbound
freeway traffic tries to enter Calgrove Boulevard via the on-ramp. In order to provide a safe
operation for the traffic entering the freeway, the existing on-ramp should be widened on the east
side to provide an acceleration lane for the entering traffic.
4. ALLOW BOTH ON-RAMP AND OFF -RAMP ACCESS AT 1-5 AND CALGROVE BOULEVARD (NO. 2
ADVANTAGE: Provides full access at the interchange, except for the traffic to and from
southbound 1.5. Would decrease the likelihood for any motorist to travel the wrong direction, as
both on-ramp and off -ramps will be provided.
DISADVANTAGE: Would tend to Increase the traffic volumes on Calgrove Boulevard/Valley Street.
Although the magnitude of such Increase might not turn out to be significant, the community's
perception of this change would probably result in requests to the City Council to re -install the
barricades. Since the ramps would provide only partial access to the freeway, it is important to
keep the barricades down during the next few months to provide adequate access to this area.
Staff believes that the Improvements mentioned in Item Nos. 2 and 3 should be implemented in this
alternative to ensure safe traffic operations in the area.
MEMORANDUM
Access to Calgrove Boulevard at 1-5
March 7, 1994
Page 3 _
CONCLUSION: Although any change to the existing detour plan raises some safety concerns, staff
understands the hardship Imposed on the Athletic Club and especially the Carrow's restaurant, and
is willing to cooperate in reducing the impacts to these businesses. Among the above alternatives,
staff believes that only Alternative No. 2 may be implemented at this time with the least impact to
the residential community in the area. As mentioned above, should this option be chosen, staff
would work closely with Caltrans to ensure that proper safety measures are taken into
consideration before implementing the revised detour.
BJ:dis
tnfft\c . . . . .. bj
Attachment
cc: Bahman Janka, City Traffic Engineer
Cie
LV/
"D
c
r
v
40
4
0
V
T
i
�GLYYaw S P 5Jau
A al ! _1,'_ /I, L
r1
r
y
/ / h
v
V
z
z
x.
L
T
Y
d
N
Y
c
,1
Cie Se,
z Xx rrkq (�-,�,14� v%S
Nei
cx�6.,R
r
CaYYowi R'a'Jaur-a.<.�'
7 � 11, ,LL
O
R
RE
m
`A
T
H
C w
A I+zry-v4;v- 2
c x A,6,'� B ,
TO: THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA AND RESPECTED MEMBERS
OF THE CITY COUNCIL
DATE: MARCH 1994
WE, THE HOMEOWNERS AND RESIDENTS OF NEWHALL, respectfully petition the
City of Santa Clarita to replace the MAPLE STREET SAFETY FENCE located on
Maple Street west of Apple Street.
The MAPLE STREET SAFETY FENCE has successfully protected our community and
children from speeding drivers for over 5 years. The removal of the fence has
increasingly jeopardized the safety and quality of life in our community. During the past
3 months, our children have been repeatedly attacked by the resulting onslaught of
speeding drivers. Maple Street is a 2 -lane, home lined, residential road with a posted
speed limit of 25 MPH that is being violated daily. Irresponsible drivers are now
traveling along Maple Street at speeds between 45 to 55 MPH during the very
hours our children are either going to school or playing on the weekend. These
violationsare a direct result of the unwarranted removal of the MAPLE STREET
SAFETY FENCE!
As Newhall residents, we were given a clear understanding from the City of Santa
Clarita that the MAPLE STREET SAFETY FENCE was permanent and created a
valuable protective "cul de sac" The rare opening of the fence was reserved for
emergency vehicles only, i.e., police, fire, and ambulance services. The MAPLE
STREET SAFETY FENCE' was designed to protect the community from the inherent
danger of speeding cars. Drivers are racing up and down the unusually steep incline
and continue along at dangerous speeds. We are sure you would agree that this
fence is a successful and functioning safety device not a restriction to
convenient travel or business.
During the aftermath of the earthquake, it is not possible to access Calgrove from the
freeway for the residents of Hidden Valley. But Hidden Valley residents are the only
people who need access on a regular basis. Wiley Canyon and Valley roadways have
proven to offer ample access during this recovery period to residents and visitors alike.
Maple Street travel is not and has never been significant to the Hidden Valley area.
Wouldn't you agree that the incremental difference in access provided by Maple
Street is not worth killing or injuring the children of our cityl
We hereby request the replacement of the MAPLE STREET SAFETY FENCE. We
also request that the fence be replaced with the same speed and efficiency as was
exercised in removing it months ago. We, our families and children thank you for your
immediate attention to this matter.
Our community of Newhall stands united in this effort. Please find attached, the names
of the many supporters for the replacement of the MAPLE STREET SAFETY FENCE.
SUPPORTERS FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF
THE MAPLE STREET SAFETY FENCE
?TITIONER ADDRESS
It
VOTER
WN)
r
tj el
uo-,.,,Y,r z3415 HAP(, S7 i
K�' 2L( s Zc
�:ild'v'
SUPPORTERS FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF
THE MAPLE STREET SAFETY FENCE
VOTER
PETITIONER ADDRESS IVi"I
&,f ;z
March 29, 1994
Stephen Kruger
P.O. Box 55243
Valencia, CA 91385
Councilman George Pederson
City of Santa Clarita, City Council
Santa Clarita, CA
Dear Councilman Pederson,
I am writing to you because of your expressed interest in assisting those of us
whose families and children live in Newhall and the surrounding communities. In
light of the recent earthquake and subsequent disaster recovery, many City
Council decisions were made under emergency and unusually stressful
circumstances. Perhaps one particular decision was not made with the usual
thoroughness the council often demonstrates. I am referring to the removal of
the MAPLE STREET SAFETY FENCE located west of Apple Street on Maple
Street in Newhall
I understand the council voted to temporarily remove the fence until the
reopening of the 5 Freeway, slated as June 1994. The residents of this area are
very concerned for a number of reasons. First, Maple Street has turned into a
speedway. Cars are racing up and down the hillside between 45MPH and 55
MPH without regard to children or cross traffic on Apple Street. Maple Street is
a 2 -lane, home lined, residential road with a posted speed limit of 25 MPH that is
being violated daily.
Secondly, the school term is approaching summer vacation and the number of
children playing in the neighborhood throughout the day will increase
geometrically. So will the liability of the city increase for the safety of these
children until the replacement of the fence.
As a solution to this problem, my neighbors and I are strongly recommending the
immediate replacement of the MAPLE STREET SAFETY FENCE. Your
observation that recently the Sheriffs Department has never written so many
citations in the area is indicative of the wrongdoing brought upon us by the
removal of the MAPLE STREET SAFETY FENCE. The MAPLE STREET
SAFETY FENCE is a successful and functioning safety device not an
opportunity for convenient travel. The marginal amount of drivers using this
access point does not warrant the sacrifice of our community's children.
Should you look for an alternative to replacing the fence immediately, I would
recommend temporary stop signs be placed at the intersection of Maple and
Apple streets. These signs would be removed following the replacement of the
MAPLE STREET SAFETY FENCE. I would also recommend increased policing
of the Maple/Apple Street intersection during the active periods: M -F, 6 a.m. to 9
a.m. and Saturday, 8 a.m. to 10 a.m. Friday and Saturday nights have become
a favorite with teenagers racing along the stretch of Maple Street through the
Valley Street intersection.
March 29, 1994
Councilman Pederson
Page 2
Our families and children thank you for your immediate attention to this matter.
removed. A supporting petition is currently circulating among the residents of
Santa Clarita to assure you of our sincerity and cooperative efforts. I am looking
forward to working with you to resolve this important community safety issue.
P.S.: We also fully support putting the Valley Street barrier on-line again as
soon as the 5 Freeway is reinstated to its former design or Calgrove is open to
freeway access.
Enclosure: Drawing of the concerned area