HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-09-28 - AGENDA REPORTS - VALLEY CALGROVE CIRCULATION (2)CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
AGENDA REPORT
UNFINISHED BUSINESS City Manager Approval: •
Item to be presented by: Anthon_ J. Nisich
DATE: September 28, 1999
SUBJECT: VALLEY STREET/CALGROVE BOULEVARD CIRCULATION ISSUES
DEPARTMENT: Transportation & Engineering Services
RECOMMENDED ACTION
City Council to receive a staff presentation; consider the pros and cons of alternatives;
receive public testimony; and provide direction to staff.
BACKGROUND
On April 27, 1999, the City Council directed staff to pursue mediation with the
Valley Street/Calgrove Boulevard residents regarding the connection of Valley Street and
Calgrove Boulevard. This direction was given in order to resolve the long-standing issues of
traffic circulation, access, and other concerns surrounding the gating of Valley Street and
Calgrove Boulevard. Staff conducted several meetings with representatives of the
Valley Street/Alamos Lane area and the then -elected board of the Hidden Valley
Homeowners' Association (HOA). City staff also pursued retaining a professional mediator
to aid all parties in reaching consensus and determining a long-term solution. While a
formal mediation session was set for July 17, 1999, it was canceled due to an inability to
reach common ground on the conditions of the mediation.
Previously, the elected board of the Hidden Valley HOA and the appointed representatives
of Valley Street/Alamos Lane had differing opinions on the future status of the gate placed
in the private roadway adjacent to Valley Street and Calgrove Boulevard. The Hidden
Valley Association Board of Directors expressed great concern about the validity of the
conditions requiring maintenance of the gate and the cost associated with the ongoing
vandalism to the area. , In addition, they expressed concerns regarding the speed of traffic
traveling westbound on Calgrove Boulevard once denied through access to Valley Street.
However, on August 11, 1999, a new Board of Directors was installed for the Hidden Valley
HOA.
On August 17, 1999, City staff met with the newly elected board of the Hidden Valley HOA
and representatives of the Valley Street/Alamos Lane area. At that time, the two groups
represented to the City that they had reached consensus on the issues previously
referenced, i.e., gating of the area and through access. It was stated that the Hidden Valley
HOA would replace and maintain the gate across the private portion of the roadway. The
representatives present also requested that the City take action to ensure that this issue
K �,�
Agenda 1tern.a D
VALLEY STREET/CALGROVE BOULEVARD CIRCULATION ISSUES
September 28, 1999 — Page 2
would be formally resolved and a permanent solution set forth. They therefore suggested
the abandonment of a portion of the public roadway adjacent to the private .gate and
construction of two cul-de-sacs (a permanent closure) at each end of the public portion of
Valley Street and Calgrove Boulevard. At this time, the Hidden Valley HOA is continuing
to research and install a gate structure suitable for the location.
Given that Valley Street/Calgrove Boulevard is designated as a secondary arterial roadway
in the City of Santa Clarita General Plan, the option set forth via the two groups will
require a study and formal findings that the public roadway is no longer required as part of
the traffic circulation in the area. The study will also address the subdivision access
requirements of such a proposal. This will require a formal amendment to the Circulation
Element of the General Plan, as well as the appropriate environmental documentation and
required public hearing process.
It should also be noted that in addition to meeting with representatives of the two primary
areas, staff has continued to receive many calls and correspondence from those in the
Oakridge, Oaks, and La Salle developments, the Hidden Valley HOA, Valley Street, and
other surrounding areas. These residents have expressed a strong desire to have the
roadway open and are opposed to solutions that do not allow access for all. At the time of
writing this agenda report, a meeting is scheduled for September 23, 1999, so several
representatives of these areas can discuss their concerns with City staff. Any additional
issues brought up by this group and not reflected in this agenda report will be presented to
the City Council during the staffs presentation of this item.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
1. Preserve the current situation with the private gate being operational and
enhance the barricade structure in the public portion of the roadway:
Pros:
• Maintains the previous City Council direction.
• Satisfies traffic concerns for the Happy Valley and Hidden Valley residents.
• The City will have the opportunity to open the public road in emergency situations.
Cons:
• Continued cost for the Hidden Valley HOA to operate and maintain the gate.
• Impacts the local and long-range circulation plan of the City, as well as
police/fire/transit operations.
• Many area residents have expressed concerns about this situation, as only the
Hidden Valley residents will have access, through the private gate. These residents
feel the public road should be open to all people and not to a specific group of
homeowners.
VALLEY STREET/CALGROVE BOULEVARD CIRCULATION ISSUES
September 28, 1999 — Page 3
If this alternative is chosen, City Council should direct staff to install an enhanced
barricade system in the public right-of-way to replace the existing temporary
barricades. The enhanced barricades have already been fabricated, and when installed
will have a locking mechanism that will enable City staff to open the public portion of
the right-of-way when needed in emergency situations. Funds are already budgeted in
the Field Services maintenance account to perform this work.
2. Assess the feasibility of cul-de-sacing each end of the public right-of-way by
vacating a portion of the road, and continuing the operation of the private
gate in the private area (the traffic access and operations will be nominally
similar to Alternative 1; only Hidden Valley residents will have access
through the end of the cul-de-sacs and the private gate):
Pros:
• Satisfies traffic concerns for the Happy Valley and Hidden Valley residents.
• There is a perception by Happy Valley and Hidden Valley residents that the
permanent cul-de-sacing of the street will put an end to this issue.
Cons:
• Continued cost for the Hidden Valley HOA to operate and maintain the gate.
• Impacts the local and long-range circulation plan of the City, as well as
police/fire/transit operations.
• Many area residents have expressed concerns about this situation, as only the
Hidden Valley residents will have access through the private gate. These residents
feel the public road should be open to all people and not to a specific group of
homeowners.
• Will require a public hearing process and preparation of an environmental document
to establish if the roadway can be taken off the General Plan.
• May not meet the subdivision access requirements of various residential tracts.
• The preparation .of the environmental document and the potential construction of
the cul-de-sacs would be very costly.
• The City would have no control over opening the roadway in emergency situations,
as the only means of access will be through the private gate.
It should be noted that the City Attorney has advised that California case authority
restricts the ability of cities to permanently close a street unless the city (1) makes a
finding that the street is no longer needed for through vehicular traffic; and (2) makes
required physical changes to comply with other applicable standards (Rumford vs. City
of Berkeley [1982] 31cal.3d545). In addition, more recent case authority precludes the
gating of a public street for limited access by selected users (Citizens against Gated
Enclaves vs. Whitley Heights Civic Associations [1994]23cal.app.4th812).
VALLEY STREET/CALGROVE BOULEVARD CIRCULATION ISSUES
September 28, 1999 — Page 4
If this alternative is chosen, City Council should appropriate $100,000 from Council
Contingency Fund, Account No. 1240-7401 to Traffic Engineering Contractual Services,
Account No. 4331-8001, and direct staff to conduct a comprehensive study to examine
environmental policy, public safety, subdivision access requirements, traffic circulation,
and legal requirements. The construction costs for building the cul-de-sacs will also
have to be appropriated at a later date should this option be pursued following the
certification of the environmental document.
3. Assess the feasibility of a complete closure or barricading of the public and
private portions of the roadway at the connection of Valley Street and
Calgrove Boulevard:
Pros:
• Satisfies traffic concerns for the Happy Valley residents.
• There will not be any private gate in operation.
• The City could install an enhanced barricade system in the public right-of-way that
would enable the City to open the roadway in emergency situations.
Cons:
• Many Hidden Valley residents will probably oppose this plan.
• Impacts the local and long-range circulation plan of the City, as well as
police/fire/transit operations.
• Many area residents have expressed concerns that this is a public road and they
have the right to use it, and therefore the roadway should not be closed to the
general public.
• May not meet the subdivision access requirements of various residential tracts.
If this alternative is chosen, City Council should direct staff to prepare options and costs
for barricading the entire width of Calgrove Boulevard on one or both sides of the
private gate. The City Council will need to appropriate funds to construct and install
those barricades at a later date. The estimated cost for these barricade options may
range from $20,000 to $30,000.
4. Assess the feasibility of opening the public roadway at the connection of
Valley Street and Calgrove Boulevard, and investigate the installation of
appropriate traffic calming measures (traffic circles stop signs/speed humps)
to minimize the traffic impacts to the neighborhood:
Pros:
• Improves the local and long-range circulation plan of the City, as well as
police/fire/transit operations.
• Satisfies the overall traffic circulation needs of many City residents.
VALLEY STREET/CALGROVE BOULEVARD CIRCULATION ISSUES
September 28, 1999 — Page 5
There will not be any private gate in operation.
The City Council could also recommend removal of the barricade across Maple
Street to further improve the area's traffic circulation (technically speaking, there
should not be a need for the Maple Street barricade if Calgrove Boulevard is open, as
this barricade was mainly installed to prohibit short-cuts through the neighborhood
when Calgrove Boulevard was gated).
Cons:
Many Happy Valley and Hidden Valley residents will oppose this plan.
There will be costs associated with the construction and installation of traffic
calming devices to be approved by the City Council.
If this alternative is chosen, City Council should direct staff to investigate and report
back to City Council regarding the feasibility, financial aspects, environmental issues,
and quality of life impacts of designing and constructing traffic calming measures along
Calgrove Boulevard and Valley Street in the vicinity of the existing barricades to
minimize the traffic impacts to the neighborhood (Hidden Valley and Valley Street
residents).
FISCAL IMPACT
The fiscal impact of each alternative is referenced above.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
Other action as determined by City Council.
ATTACHMENT
Vicinity Map
TM:BJ:lkl
wunN\velcel2doc
t
r5S O
eYP v W 1—
b• 0aol
vi c d c\ Q w
rn
N=ND3238 CROSS �r x 0 � co O aW
Oby 1
s z C^.a 4tiYN z w Q U
J
TREASURE VISTA R
p z JANEL AV ? O �'
a� SRR o AVE
j c � CT GERIAN t Q
> Q ACORN OR o
�y VALLEY _ _ za5 0
'24s007
y\SAGE 4 1fYV O,R 3 d7
_ R ST �
APPLE z N 2
r_, z .- u: ti� t� GONG pin g
> 0. "a Z 4" '(Nlc' CT ''� ci <t o
CEREzo bio >o-r� C3 ax• c�a� abiy 3�� p3D� 2 ,� +n;;a
ULE
AVE �( z cttp,��`'cY ° ' ME IR?
U ♦ o � EBE CER
P ACHLAND a w c Q
F'Ca ¢
v
3�y �
HIGHSPRI£ $�yy M Ix
DR '4zG
r
)IvoN1
25000 fin. w 0 O VN -3f, W' <
WH{ELLER d \ERIA0 d o <. C ~
c c
„t(? \� VER?e4GNT xU'
a EVERET 5
a.
pyo 2 xo�a �p\N ob D
or z
BLVD q, G��oN
y\ z AiWOOD I —
>FO�
o Rp o0
n
osy i a
W1�
ho
/V�
b
-+ `J .F4.�' yO�j )`'1•SJ �'
CpRERAT1s/cs.�3,,)"�l$g�N SyF
Z P�
z V
iJ FOXCAIL N
ap '
C1flQhJ,'j� GS
SARGASSO
e
Cr
F
F CREEN
CT
253G0 ER
g4.`'K