Loading...
TC - Item 2A - Minutes of October 2, 2025 Rosemead Traffic Commission Meeting Minutes of October 2, 2025 Page 1 of 7 Minutes of the Regular ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION MEETING October 2, 2025 The special meeting of the Rosemead Traffic Commission was called to order by Chair Drange at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 8838 E. Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, California. FLAG SALUTE: Commissioner Nguyen INVOCATION: Vice Chair Lang PRESENT: Commissioner Nguyen, Commissioner Tran, Vice-Chair Lang and Chair Drange ABSENT: Commissioner Trieu STAFF PRESENT: City Engineer Basilyous and Commission Liaison Nguyen ADMINISTRATION OF OATH OF OFFICE: Michael Drange, Lucy Nguyen, and John Tran REORGANIZATION: Chair Drange and Vice Chair Nguyen The City received a general public comment from Dr. Clyde Williams requesting that the Commission reconsider the traffic item regarding Mission Drive and Encinitas Avenue and reevaluate it at a later meeting, citing an incomplete traffic report. He noted that in 1971, the City Engineer of Berkeley, California, was asked to modify the first wheelchair ramp in the United States after it was found to be inaccessible due to a design focused on flood control rather than wheelchair use. He referenced this example to emphasize the importance of accessibility in the current discussion. He further stated that the traffic report contained inaccuracies related to the intersection, including incorrect information about ADA compliance, posted speed limits, and parking restrictions. According to Dr. Williams, the intersection is not ADA-compliant, the posted speed limit is 35 mph, and not 40 mph as mentioned in the report, and parking is prohibited. He requested that the report be revised to properly address ADA concerns and the proposed traffic or children’s guardian requirements for this intersection. Chair Drange asked Traffic Commissioners if anyone would like to make revisions or additions to the minutes of February 6, and May 1, 2025. Commissioner Tran made a motion, seconded by Vice Chair Lang, to accept consent calendar. Vote resulted in: Yes: Drange, Nguyen, Lang, Tran No: None Abstain: None Absent: Trieu 1. PUBLIC COMMENTS 2. CONSENT CALENDAR Rosemead Traffic Commission Meeting Minutes of October 2, 2025 Page 2 of 7 A. Crossing Guard Review for Mission Drive and Encinita Avenue Chair Drange opened public comments. The City received a public comment via email from Mr. and Mrs. Benitez urging the Council to assign a crossing guard at the intersection of Mission Drive and Encinita Avenue. They expressed concern for public safety, noting that they have witnessed multiple car accidents at this location. Chair Drange closed public comments. Associate Engineer Richter provided a brief description of the item and presented a PowerPoint presentation of the studies that were conducted. Associate Engineer Richter explained that the City received a resident request regarding the addition of an adult crossing guard at the intersection at Mission Drive and Encinita Avenue. The request reported concern for students and residents in the community crossing the intersection at Mission Drive and Encinita Avenue, and asked that improvements be installed in the area. This intersection is signal controlled, and there are existing crosswalks at all three legs of the intersection. In response to this r equest and on behalf of the City, engineering staff has completed a traffic review of this intersection at Mission Drive and Encinita Avenue. The traffic review included a review of existing conditions, 3-years of available collision data, Average Daily Traffic (ADT) counts, 24-hour speed survey, pedestrian counts, and field observations at the intersection of Mission Drive and Encinita Avenue. Engineering staff has completed a traffic calming review, as well as recommended appropriate improvements at the location of Mission Drive and Encinita Avenue. After a thorough review of existing traffic conditions and per the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CAMUTCD), California Vehicle Code (CVC), based on the traffic review and engineering judgement, it was determined that the intersection at Mission Drive and Encinita Avenue would benefit from the installation traffic calming to improve the overall visibility of the intersection. It was also determined that based on the existing conditions and vehicle counts along Mission Drive at Encinita Avenue, the requirements for the installation of a crossing guard were not met. Associate Engineer Richter noted that there was a typo in the report regarding the speed limit. Along Mission Drive on this section is 35 miles per hour, while the other side of this segment is 40 miles per hour. Commissioner Tran asked if the high school does not require a crossing guard. Associate Engineer Richter replied that is correct. Commissioner Tran mentioned he has seen high schools with crossing guards in neighboring school districts. Associate Engineer Richter replied they may have them, however, the standards in the municipal code and the general consensus was that crossing guards are not considered for high school age. Chair Drange commented they might be paying for the crossing guards themselves because typically when it comes to crossing guards, the city and district split the cost. 3. NEW BUSINESS Rosemead Traffic Commission Meeting Minutes of October 2, 2025 Page 3 of 7 Commissioner Tran asked what the financial impact would be if there was a crossing guard. City Engineer Basilyous responded that the cost would be shared between the City and the School District, however, he is unsure of the exact amount. He will look into it and follow up with the commissioners. Commissioner Tran recalled that it was reported seven collisions in the past three years and asked whether any involved children. Associate Engineer Richter responded that she was unsure if any children were involved, but noted that a few of the incidents did involve pedestrians crossing the street. Commissioner Tran acknowledged the analysis and understood that the report did not warrant a crossing guard, however, he felt that sharing the cost of a crossing guard would have a positive impact on traffic safety. Commissioner Tran recalled the public comment regarding the sidewalks not being ADA compliant and if it needs to be further looked into. Associate Engineer Richter responded that she is able to speak about her field observations but directed questions about sidewalk repairs to the City Engineer. She agreed that the south side of the street, the sidewalk is not wide enough for it to be considered ADA compliant. She added that the City has been working on sidewalk improvement plans, including upgrading pavement areas and ADA ramps. Chair Drange asked if the sidewalks and ramps are items discussed by Traffic Commission. City Engineer Basilyous responded that Public Works reviews those items and will look further into it. Commissioner Lang recalled from the report that most of the traffic on the north side of Mission Drive moves east to west toward the high school. He noted that the proposed recommendations primarily address vehicle traffic flow, but do not specifically focus on pedestrian concerns. Chair Drange asked why crosswalk flashing lights were not considered. Associate Engineer Richter responded that flashing lights cannot be installed on the existing signal since they are not part of its design. She added that the City could consider refreshing the crosswalk markings to enhance visibility for approaching drivers and possibly add pavement legends near the signs along Mission Drive. Commissioner Lang commented that the issue is either drivers are failing to yield to pedestrians, or that students may be running across the street. Associate Engineer Richter replied that she did not observe students running across the street, but did notice vehicles occasionally stopping or waiting to turn right while positioned in the crosswalk, as well as vehicles turning left from Mission Drive onto Encinita Avenue. She noted that, because it is an unprotected left turn, some drivers tend to accelerate as the signal changes to red in an attempt to complete the turn. Commissioner Lang asked if there are any considerations for making it a protected left turn from Mission Drive to Encinitas Avenue. Rosemead Traffic Commission Meeting Minutes of October 2, 2025 Page 4 of 7 City Engineer Basilyous responded that a traffic study would need to be done to see if there can be a protected left turn at this location. He will look into this and bring it back to the Commission. Chair Drange asked if that would be considered a separate traffic item from the agendized item. City Engineer Basilyous responded it would be a separate item. Vice Chair Nguyen asked if there is a speed feedback sign going eastbound similar to the one for traffic going westbound on Mission Drive. Associate Engineer Richter replied there is one located further up along the segment, closer to Muscatel Avenue. Vice Chair Nguyen noted from the report that there appears to be significant amount of traffic traveling eastbound near the In-N-Out and asked whether it would be beneficial to install a speed feedback sign on the side for eastbound traffic. Associate Engineer Richter responded it would need to be placed farther west of Loma Avenue, as there is an existing HAWK signal near Newby Avenue. Chair Drange commented that the speed survey did not specifically indicate excessive speeding, but identified turning movements, particularly left turns from Mission Drive onto Encinita Avenue, as a primary concern. Commissioner Tran agreed with the proposed recommendations, however, expressed that a crossing guard would have the most impact on traffic safety. He added that he would like to further explore that option and possibly engage with the school district to see if they would participate in placing a crossing guard and share the cost. Chair Drange asked if there is a crossing guard at Encinita Elementary School. Associate Engineer Richter responded that a crossing guard is currently stationed at Pitkin Street and Encinita Avenue. She clarified that, of the five reported collisions involving a pedestrian or bicyclist, two occurred during school hours while the remaining three took place outside of school hours. She noted that the issue is not solely related to school activity, but also involves vehicles making left turns at the intersection. Commissioner Tran reiterated the importance of safety for the students and children. He is interested in getting the school districts feedback and if they would like to be involved. City Engineer Basilyous responded he will follow up and provide an update to the commission. Commissioner Lang mentioned we should also consider looking into Rosemead Boulevard and Mission Drive as well as it likely has similar pedestrian traffic. Chair Drange reminded the group that the Commission had requested City staff to look into the protected left turn and ADA-compliant sidewalk issue at Mission Drive and Encinita Avenue, the financial impact of crossing guards, and coordination with the School District regarding crossing guard placement. Rosemead Traffic Commission Meeting Minutes of October 2, 2025 Page 5 of 7 Commissioner Lang made a motion, seconded by Vice Chair Nguyen, to approve staff recommendations. In addition, it was requested for city staff to communicate with the school regarding placing a crossing guard at the corner of Mission Drive and Encinita Avenue, as well as the corner of Rosemead Boulevard and Mission Drive. Vote resulted in: Yes: Drange, Nguyen, Lang, Tran No: None Abstain: None Absent: Trieu A. Discussion on Speed Hump Requests and Survey Responses City Engineer Basilyous provided an overview and progress update of speed hump requests. From the prior traffic commission meetings, 11 street segments were evaluated for traffic calming review and speed hump eligibility. Of the 11, there were 4 street segments that were eligible and speed surveys were sent out to the residents. The ones received included a request at Ivar Avenue between Ramona Boulevard and Garvey Avenue. For the speed hump survey sent out, of the 125 residents on this street segment, 106 were non- responsive. 15 responded yes, while 4 responded no. For Denton Avenue between Garvey Ave and Graves Avenue, of the 103 residents, 88 were nonresponsive, with 11 yes and 4 no. For Pine Street between Garvey Avenue and Graves Avenue, of the 71 residents, 59 were nonresponsive, with 14% yes and 3% no. For Bartlett Avenue between Ramona Boulevard and Garvey Avenue, of the 45 residents, 76% were non - responsive, with 16% yes and 4% no. Chair Drange asked whether the residents had been contacted by mail and if the notices were sent to property owners. City Engineer Basilyous confirmed that they were. Commissioner Lang inquired about the languages used for the surveys. City Engineer Basilyous responded that the surveys were available in English, Spanish, Chinese, and Vietnamese. Chair Drange then asked whether the mail was still sent to property owners who do not reside on that street. City Engineer Basilyous stated that the mail is sent to the property owners even if they do not live on the street, but will confirm and report back to the commission. Commissioner Lang asked what criteria of responses would constitute a yes. City Engineer Basilyous responded more than 60%. Commissioner Lang asked to confirm that if there were 100 residents, then 66% would need to respond yes and no response is considered non-responsive. City Engineer Basilyous responded yes. Vice Chair Nguyen asked how much time residents are given to respond. 4. MATTERS FROM STAFF Rosemead Traffic Commission Meeting Minutes of October 2, 2025 Page 6 of 7 City Engineer Basilyous replied that typically a few weeks are allowed, but responses received after the deadline are still counted. Chair Drange noted that the high number of nonresponses seems to indicate that residents may not understand the survey or might question the legitimacy of the mail, rather than simply not caring. City Engineer Basilyous added that the surveys also include a QR code, allowing residents to respond online. City Engineer Basilyous continued the presentation by reporting on two speed hump requests received since April of this year: one for Delta Avenue between Hellman and Garvey Avenues and another for South New Avenue between Garvey and Graves Avenues. City staff are still working on these requests. Chair Lang inquired whether the requestors are aware of the challenges in getting neighbor responses and if they should be encouraged to actively campaign for support from residents on their streets. Engineer Basilyous responded that the City can advise the requestors on this matter. He suggested an option would be to resend the survey letters to non-respondents and then combine those results with the initial survey data. Vice Chair Nguyen reported a concern shared by a teacher from Don Bosco Tech regarding a street light timing issue at San Gabriel Boulevard and Rose Glen during school pickup hours, which the teacher fears could lead to an accident. Chair Drange noted that while there is a street light near the high school, it is located further west, at Delta Street. Commissioner Lang requested a follow-up on a traffic concern submitted via the MyRosemead app, referencing Request #156889 regarding congestion caused by the In-N-Out at Rosemead Boulevard and Mission Drive. City Engineer Basilyous confirmed that staff reviewed the request but could not find a feasible engineering solution to resolve the existing issue. Commissioner Lang then asked why In-N-Out has allowed vehicles to queue onto Mission Drive, noting that in the past, traffic queued only on the safer Rosemead Boulevard. City Engineer Basilyous stated that staff can communicate with In-N-Out regarding the queuing issue, but reiterated that engineering solutions were limited. Chair Drange asked if it is preferable to submit traffic concerns through the Rosemead website or by mentioning them at these meetings. City Engineer Basilyous confirmed that either option is fine. Chair Drange highlighted a specific problem on Walnut Grove Avenue as drivers head north, under the freeway, toward Marshall Street. He commented when going under the freeway, there are posted signs 5. COMMISSIONER REPORTS Rosemead Traffic Commission Meeting Minutes of October 2, 2025 Page 7 of 7 indicating “No Stopping Any Time.” On Sundays vehicles are parked south of the driveway in front of the church, where there is no red curb, forcing drivers to change lanes or make a complete stop. City Engineer Basilyous concluded by offering to deliver a presentation at the next meeting to discuss all items raised, including the cost of a crossing guard and the potential for cost-sharing with the school district, as well as the In-N-Out traffic issue. Chair Drange asked for an update on whether the City would consider adding bike share road signage and sharrows on Hellman Avenue. At the February traffic meeting, an agenda item for Hellman Avenue proposed installing new signage, and it was requested that bike share road signage be considered as part of the recommendations since this segment of Hellman Avenue was classified as class III bike route. City Engineer Basilyous responded he will look into it. 6. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 7:59 p.m. The next Traffic Commission meeting is scheduled for November 6, 2025, at 7:00 p.m. and will take place at the Rosemead City Hall, City Council Chambers, 8838 East Valley Boulevard. ATTEST: ________________________ Sam Gutierrez Director of Public Works _______________________ Michael Drange Chair