CC - Item 5 - Lanscape parking lane planters along Valley - Internal Files box 069Sf
f~_x a ® r
II
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR
AND MEMBERS
ROSEMEAD CITY COUNCIL
FROM: FRANK G. TRIPEPI, CITY MANAGER
DATE: FEBRUARY 22, 1990
Ai]DSC_pE pARKT"!G L\!7-, PLANTERS ALONG VALLE'i BOULEVARD
1090 meeting of the City Council, Councilman j
T-,perial requested that the subject project be put on the next
available agenda for discussion.
Staff has previously prepared a cost estimate for the removal of the
landscaped parking lane planters along valley Boulevard. It is
estimated that construction will be $160,000.
Currently, Southern California ndishe Ruleer20 formin constructpi--rnoject.
along Valley Boulevard as part
Construction is expected to be completed in early summer. It '::as
originally planned to propose the landscape planter modifications
::ith an overlay project for Valley Boulevard once the undergrcuna
work was completed. However, as part of the 1990/91 budget, the
council may allocate from appropriated reserves $190,000 for design
and construction of the project and proceed concurrently with the
underground project.
;GT:nv
r r_ J •i i i"~~ •
I
RESOLUTION NO. 91-6
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD
MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS AND DETERMINATIONS WITH RESPECT TO
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY PAYMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF VISUAL AND
TRAFFIC FLOW IMPROVEMENTS ON VALLEY BOULEVARD BETWEEN
CHARLOTTE AVENUE AND THE EASTERLY CITY LIMIT
WHEREAS, the Infrastructure Management Report, as adopted by the
Rosemead City Council on August 30, 1988, identifies and prioritizes
an underground utility district and traffic flow improvements on
Valley Boulevard in Fiscal Year 1990-91; and
WHEREAS, the scheduled undergrounding of overhead utilities and
removal of parkway planter islands in the roadway on Valley Boulevard
between Charlotte Avenue and the easterly City limit, as depicted in
Exhibit "A", will serve to accommodate Project Area No. 1; and
WHEREAS, the total Agency obligation for this project shall not
exceed Two Hundred Thirty Thousand Dollars ($230,000).
NOW, THEREFORE, the Rosemead City Council resolves as follows:
Section 1. The City.Council finds, determines and declares:
a) That the payment by the Rosemead Redevelopment Agency for
the costs of construction on Valley Boulevard, as depicted
on Exhibit "A", is of benefit to Project Area No. 1. This
finding is based on the fact that the improvements described
above will provide a visual improvement to Valley Boulevard
and improve traffic flow to and from Project Area No. 1.
b) That there are no other reasonable means of financing such
buildings, facilities, structures, or other improvements
available to the community. Although the City maintains a
General Fund surplus, the uncertainty of continuing
municipal revenue sources militates against the depletion of
existing reserves until such time as revenue sources and
major required expenditures are stabilized.
Section 2. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this
Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 12th day of February, 1991.
MAYOR
ATTEST:
'eITY CLERK
I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 91-6 was duly and regularly
adopted by the City Council of the City of Rosemead atna regular meeting thereof
held on the 12th day of February, 1991, by the Yes: McDonald,
No: None
Absent: Taylor
Abstain: None
Bruesch, Imperial
?7Y LEM
EXHIBIT "A"
=~Z:,
.1 C
11 I ' C~ LJI ^ V h.
nSan Gal
riellfl
4/-
F 14i n~o
0 i
r. •y~ CPC
Temple City
S-
m
El Mont(
I' y , , •A
t ♦ I sir. ` ~
J ~ [ , I I ~ j ~ ,r1L r+ l I i i l~ ly - S~~'/~~_
--~r' ~ ~ z~-'' 'I .3 ~I .IDS; ~~tl~ i.. ~7'_
U1 6ju
AD! U,
Fill 1x14 N ~w.5 {u _
e1 vK^ ~Y•F~~ A H `4 4 1 ~ C sn• Ji III I IF lL l e
'
d r ' i
outh EI M.onte T n E~
4
rk RESOLUTION NO. 91-6
3i. - cy:.) _'~~~~~..z~.• a \i' VALLEY BOULEVARD, VISUAL 6
TRAFFIC FLOW IMPROVEMENTS
10
NNN"` \
CITY Of ROSEMEAD
Montebello 1982
RESOLUTION NO. 91-3
A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF
ROSEMEAD MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS AND DETERMINATIONS WITH
RESPECT TO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY PAYMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF
VISUAL AND TRAFFIC FLOW IMPROVEMENTS ON VALLEY BOULEVARD
BETWEEN CHARLOTTE AVENUE AND THE EASTERLY CITY LIMIT
WHEREAS, the Infrastructure Management Report, as adopted by the
Rosemead City Council on August 30, 1988, identifies and prioritizes
an underground utility district and traffic flow improvements on
Valley Boulevard in Fiscal Year 1990-91; and
WHEREAS, the scheduled undergrounding of overhead utilities and
removal of parkway planter islands in the roadway on Valley Boulevard
between Charlotte Avenue and the easterly City limit, as depicted in
Exhibit "A", will serve to accommodate Project Area No. 1; and
WHEREAS, the total Agency obligation for this project shall not
exceed Two Hundred Thirty Thousand Dollars ($230,000).
NOW, THEREFORE, the Rosemead Redevelopment Agency resolves as
follows:
Section 1. The Redevelopment Agency finds, determines and
declares:
a) That the payment by the Rosemead Redevelopment Agency for
the costs of construction on Valley Boulevard, as depicted
on Exhibit "A", is of benefit to Project Area No. 1. This
finding is based on the fact that the improvements de_cribed
above will provide a visual improvement to Valley Boulevard
and improve traffic flow to and from project Area No. 1.
b) That there are no other reasonable means of financing such
buildings, facilities, structures, or other improvements
available to the community. Although the City maintains a
General Fund surplus, the uncertainty of continuing
municipal revenue sources militates against the depletion of
existing reserves until such time as revenue sources and
major required expenditures are stabilized.
Section 2. The Agency Secretary shall certify to the adoption
of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this
12th day of February, 1991.
F.AYOR
ATTEST:
AGENCY SECRETARY
i i;ereb certif.: _hat the :foregoing Resolution No. 9L-3 was :u L% and regularly adopted
by the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Rosemead at a regular meeting thereof held o
the 12th day of February, 1991, by the following vote:
,lye: McDonald, Breusch, Imperial
No: None
Absent: Taylor
Abstain: None
AGENCY SECRETARY
I _1-_
r
::a161r Temple City _yxr..
L L:
L- Lj;
r cap,
U
y
r'~(u.~1~ ~f,; Sorel UL~!= i~ rl 4
1 \I~'~ v ~ III
p
C
rk
7af r~:r.
4 M ~ TL'
i
vv~xll-
tI
X
El Monte
Mir
f
Sys
11 M ~ EP /7
t i r
South El Monte E(
J~.
Montebello
rr
E
RRA RESOLUTION NO. 91-3
VALLEY BOULEVARD, VISUAL 6
TRAFFIC FLOW I.MPROVE.*1ENTS
I
CITY OF ROSEMEAO
1982
G.
PETER F SCHASARUM
February 9, 1990
r
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
956 1AALL OF ADNINIS7Ra TION OS ANGELES. CALIFORNIA 90012 - 2751
12131 97x4111
Honorable Dennis McDonald, Mayor
City of Rosemead
8838 East Valley 3oulevard
Rosemead, CA 91770
Dear Mayor McDonald:
VALLEY BOULEVARD TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYNCHRONIZATION PROJECT
I have discussed the concerns expressed in your recent letter regarding our
Valley Boulevard Traffic Signal Synchronization project with Mr. T. A.
Tidemanson, the Director of Public Works.
As you may know, the County is using a considerable amount of Federal-aid Urban
funds and gasoline tax revenues to improve the synchronization of signals in
order to reduce traffic congestion Countywide. Mr. Tidemanson reports that,
should left-turn phasing be needed at one of the intersections we are proposing
to improve as a part of our program, we would certainly include it as a part of
our program. Because of our large financial commitment to this program and the
need to keep our signal system synchronized, on past projects, we have asked
Cities to mutually work with the County should they believe changes are needed
once the new system is installed. Therefore, upon completion of a project a
City could, working with County staff, install new left-turn phasing or revise
the system timing in order to improve the flow of traffic.
The Director infurms me that his staff has been working closely with Caltrans to
see if signal system timing can be developed so traffic on Valley Boulevard can
be progressed through the Valley Boulevard/Rosemead Boulevard intersection.
Currently, the State has a synchronized signal system on Rosemead Boulevard
which stretches from Foothill Boulevard in Pasadena to the Pomona Freeway in
Whittier Narrows. Their system includes 21 signalized intersections and is over
7.5 miles long. I understand that because of spacing between the signalized
intersections and the need to provide time for left-turn phasing and pedestrian
crossings, their system timing cannot be changed. Additionally, Mr. Tidemanson
informs me that, because of similar constraints along Valley Boulevard, the
optimum system timing for our proposed system must be longer than the Statet,
resulting in a "break" at Rosemead Boulevard. Even with the "break" at
Rosemead, our proposed Valley Boulevard system will include 26 signalized
intersections and will progress traffic for over 4.5 miles, which will be quite
beneficial to the motoring public. The Director reports that he investigated
Honorable Dennis McDonald
the option of maintaining the
Rosemead intersection with the
However, this would not appear
Rosemead Boulevard carries in
double the volume currently ca
-2-
February 9, 1990
progression on Valley Boulevard through the
"break" occurring on Rosemead Boulevard.
to be beneficial on a regional basis, since
excess of 50,000 vehicles per day, or nearly
rried by Valley Boulevard.
While it does not appear feasible to progress Valley Boulevard traffic through
the Rosemead intersection in light of the State's system, Mr. Tidemanson reports
that it may be possible to improve the flow of traffic by adding additional
lanes, possibly an eastbound right-turn lane. I have asked him to have his
staff work closely with your City staff on some improvement of this type.
Additionally, as you may know, based on a Board of Supervisors request, the
Traffic Reduction and Free Flow Interagency Committee is currently preparing a
report on the feasibility of utilizing reverse flow traffic lanes on Valley
Boulevard as a pilot program. The Director reports that this route appears to
have the proper traffic flow and roadway characteristics for such an
installation and this may possibly be a solution to moving more traffic on
Valley Boulevard through the Rosemead Boulevard intersection. The feasibility
report is expected to be available late this spring, and I will furnish you with
a copy as soon as it is available for your review and comments.
I look forward to hearing from you so that we can cooperatively move ahead with
the Valley Boulevard Traffic Signal Synchronization project.
Sincerely yours,
PETE SCHABARUM
Supervisor, First District
PS:cs/M
cc: Department of Public Works
4<.I:4 oM ~E V
=~UMCIL ~/EY
L itch osefficad
8638 E VALLEY BOULEVARD • P O. BOX 399
ROSEMEAD. CALIFORNIA 91770
TELEPHONE 18181 2886671
E1 ECOPIER 8183079218
COUNCIL MEMORANDUM
TO
FROM:
MAYOR PRO TEM JAY T. IMPERIAL
FRANK G. TRIPEPI, CITY MANAGER.---.
DATE: OCTOBER 6, 1989
RE; LANDSCAPED PARKING LANE PLANTERS
ALONG VALLEY BOULEVARD
=t was requested that staff prepare a cost estimate for the removal
of the landscaped parking lane planters along valley Boulevard and
ccnstructing curb, gutter and relandscape the parkway providing
continuous parking. The cost estimates for this reconstruction
including aeconstruction contingency is $160,000.
The cost estimate includes ^.e planters along Valley Boulevard from
City Hall easterly.
If you have any questions regarding this, please let me know.
FGT:js
CC-H-1-J(104)