TC - 07-10-95MAYOR PRO TEM:
MARGARET CLARK
COUNCILMEMBERS:
-ROBERT W. BRUESCH
JA1' T IMPERIAL
GARY A. TAYLOR
DSCmcad
8838 E. VALLEY BOULEVARD • P.O. BOX 399
ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA 91770
TELEPHONE (818) 288-6671
TELECOPIER 8183079218
MEMORANDUM
TO: Frank G. Tripepi, City Manager
FROM: Carl P. Holm, Administrative AidelJkq
!'DATE: -July 10, 1995
SUBJECT: -TRAFFIC COMMISSION MEETING SUMMARY
July 6, 1995
The Traffic Commission took the following actions:
A. REQUEST TO INSTALL GREEN CURB ON EAST SIDE OF ROSEMEAD
BOULEVARD NORTH OF VALLEY BOULEVARD. This was a request from Ms.
Trina Ahlfeldt. The Commission voted 4-0 to clean up the 2-hour time limit and
recommend for some selective enforcement in this area. Green curb does not appear
warranted and the Commission did not want to create a precedence.
B. REQUEST FOR STOP SIGNS ON WALNUT GRAVE AVENUE AT
DOROTHY STREET. This was a request from Ms. Yvonne Argandona. Staff
looked at the possibility of a traffic signal, since a stop sign would not work in
this situation. The intersection does not meet the warrants for a signal. The
Commission voted 4-0 to deny this request.
COMMISSIONER REPORTS
FLAGS ON GARVEY AVENUE. Commissioner Larson requested that the City
look into providing new flags on Garvey Avenue because the current flags are run
down.
cc: Donald Wagner
Jeff Stewart
AGENDA
ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION
8838 E. Valley Blvd., Rosemead, CA 91770
Regular Meeting
July 6,1995
Call to Order: 7:00 p.m.
Roll Call: Commisioners Larson, Knapp, Vice-Chairman Alarcon,
Chairman Tirre
Pledge of Allegiance: Commissioner Knapp
Invocation: Commissioner Alarcon
1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Regular meeting of June 1, 1995.
H. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
This is the time reserved for members of the audience to address the Commission on
items not listed on the agenda (Maximum time per speaker is 3 minutes; total time
allocated is 15 minutes).
HI. OLD BUSINESS
A. INSTALL GREEN CURB ON EAST SIDE OF ROSEMEAD BOULEVARD
NORTH OF VALLEY BOULEVARD. A request from Ms. Trina Ahlfeldt to
install green curb in front of businesses on Rosemead Boulevard north of Valley
Boulevard. (Continued from 6/1).
IV. NEW BUSINESS
A. REQUEST FOR STOP SIGNS ON WALNUT GROVE AVENUE AT
DOROTHY AVENUE. A request from Ms. Yvonne Argandona to install
"STOP" signs at this location.
V. STAFF REPORTS
A. City Council Actions
VI. COMMISSIONER REPORTS
VII. ADJOURNMENT
Thursday August 3, 1995 at 7:00 p.m., Rosemead Council Chambers, 8838 E. Valley
Boulevard, Rosemead, CA 91770.
.L
ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION MINUTES
JUNE 1, 1995
The regular meeting of the Rosemead Traffic Commission was called to order by Chairman
Tirre, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 8838 E. Valley Boulevard, California 91770.
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners: Larson, Knapp, Beezley, Alarcon and Chairman Tirre
Ex Officio: Administrative Aide, Carl Holm
Deputy Traffic Engineer, Joanne Itagaki
Sheriff Liaison, Miller
Secretary, Josephine Pickett
CALL TO ORDER
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Vice-Chairman Alarcon.
The Invocation was delivered by Chairman Tirre.
1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
(MO) It was moved by Commissioner Beezley, seconded by Commissioner Larson to approve
the minutes of May 4, 1995. Vote Resulted:
YES: LARSON, KNAPP, TIRRE, BEEZLEY, ALARCON
NO: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
ABSTAIN: NONE
II. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE - None
HI. OLD BUSINESS - None
IV. NEW BUSINESS
A. REMOVE LOADING ZONE ON DELTA AVENUE SOUTH OF VALLEY
BOULEVARD, DBA SUNSERI MARKET. This is a request from Mike Sunseri
to remove the yellow loading zone adjacent to his business.
Mr.Holm presented the request from Mr. Mike Sunseri to remove the yellow loading
zone on Delta Avenue South of Valley Boulevard doing business as Sunseri Market.
Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki presented the staff report with the recommendation to
remove the 30-feet of yellow curb. Mr. Sunseri indicated that the trucks unload from
the parking lot or from Valley Boulevard. Trucks unloading in the parking lot may
inhibit traffic flow, however, Mr. Sunseri can direct the traffic and request the truck
drivers to move their vehicles. Mr. Sunseri felt that he would prefer parking rather than
a yellow zone. Based on these findings, staff recommends removal of the yellow loading
zone on east side of Delta Avenue and south of Valley Boulevard.
Commissioner Larson suggested to remove some of the red zone to allow for another
parking space.
Ms. Itagaki responded that the red curb also assists in vehicles turning right as Delta is
only striped with a double yellow down the center. If there are cars wanting to make a
left they generally would take the center stripe. If we maintain at least twenty feet of red
curb, it would provide for it.
Mr. Holm clarified that it will be like an unmarked right hand turn lane.
Traffic Commission Minutes
6-1-95
Page 3 of 3
The Commissioners discussed the report on the weekly greensheet. They have agreed
that a breakdown on a 2-hour time limit zone should be itemized in the greensheet.
Commissioner Knapp reminded Ms. Itagaki about a study on this particular issue some
two years ago. Commission Knapp recalled that in that report, there were a lot of
statistics from Caltrans to the type of signs that may be posted on major or secondary
highway.
Commissioner Knapp suggested a type of communication letter to the different tenants
coming from the City rather than from a neighbor.
(MO) It was moved by Commissioner Knapp, seconded by Commssioner Larson to continue
the item for further review with the direction given by the Commission. Vote resulted:
YES: LARSON, KNAPP, TIRRE, BEEZLEY, ALARCON
NO: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
ABSTAIN: NONE
V. STAFF REPORTS - none
VI. CONIAIISSIONER REPORTS
A.. Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki reported on the following items:
(1) A follow up on last month's meeting with regards to Temple City Boulevard
and I-10 Freeway, on a letter to Caltrans about the ramps. Caltrans replied that
they would consider these items and study it.
(2) Left turn facing on Mission and on Marshall at Rosemead Boulevard.
Rosemead and Mission, Caltrans had denied the request for this installation, while
Rosemead and Marshall, Caltrans had approved it and would be on the next City
Council meeting.
B. Commissioner Knapp inquired if the guardrails had already been installed. Ms.
Itagaki replied that there had been some delay on its installation, however, Mr.
Ruiz will be contacted to inform him of its status.
C. Commissioner Larson was concerned about a large pothole on Ramona going
west of Burton in the westbound lane.
D. Commissioner Beezley announced his resignation as a Traffic Commissioner
effective June 2, 1995. Chairman Tirre thanked Commissioner Beezley for the
the many years he worked for the Commission and that it had been a great
pleasure working with him.
E. Commissioner Knapp invited everyone to participate on the 4th of July
celebration. She also mentioned the place and time where the parade would start
and end.
F. Chairman Tirre reminded the Rosemead High students to wait until the meeting
is over for their attendance slips.
VII. ADJOURNMENT
There being no other business to come before the Commission, the meeting was
adjourned at 7:30 p.m. The next meeting will take place on July 6, 1995 at 7:00 p.m.
STAFF - REPORT -
TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN
AND MEMBERS
ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION
FROM: JOANNE ITAGAKI, DEPUTY TRAFFIC ENGINEER
DATE: JUNE 22, 1995
RE: TIME LIMITED PARKING ON ROSEMEAD BOULEVARD SOUTH OF
BENTEL AVENUE - FOLLOW-UP
DISCUSSION
This item was brought before the Traffic Commission at its June 1,
1995 meeting. A copy of that staff report is attached.
The request, from Ms. Trina Ahlfeldt, is for the installation of
green curb on the east side of Rosemead Boulevard south of Bentel
Avenue. There has been an indication that employees of the Poly-
Tech Dental Studio park in front of the businesses for extended
periods of time.
Additional field review of the location was conducted. This review
indicated that there is a "2 Hour Parking, 9 AM to 6 PM, Except
Sundays and Holidays" posted parking prohibition in front of the
businesses south of Bentel Avenue. Staff reported in error, last
month, that there were no posted parking prohibitions.
Table 1 depicts the parking review conducted along Rosemead
Boulevard and Bentel Avenue. This table identifies that several of
the cars parking in this vicinity are parked for long periods of
time. Several cars were also recognized from previous days of
field review.
The installation of green curb in front of businesses in the City
of Rosemead is generally denied. There must be extenuating
circumstances before such an installation occurs. There have not
been any green curb installations, that I am aware of, in the past
3 years. However, in recent travels in the City, I did find green
curb installed on the west side of Ivar Avenue north of Valley
Boulevard.
There appears to be a need for additional enforcement of the 2 hour
parking prohibition to be affective. Based on our field review and
discussions with Ms. Ahlfeldt, most employee vehicles park all day
on Rosemead Boulevard. In addition, the installation of additional
signs would clarify the parking prohibition.
TRAFFIC COMMISSION
Based on the existing use of the curb side parking on the east side
of Rosemead Boulevard between Valley Boulevard and Newby Avenue,
the installation of additional "2 Hour Parking, 9 AM to 6 PM,
Except Sundays and Holidays" signs is recommended. Selective
enforcement of this parking prohibition is also recommended.
Attachment
JI:
RSDPIP
STAFF REPORT =
TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN
AND MEMBERS
ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION
FROM: JOANNE ITAGAKI, DEPUTY TRAFFIC ENGINEER
DATE: MAY 24, 1995
RE: REQUEST FOR TIME LIMITED PARKING ON ROSEMEAD BOULEVARD
SOUTH OF BENTEL AVENUE
REQUEST
Me. Trina Ahlfeldt, owner of PIP Printing, is requesting the
installation of green curb on the east side of Rosemead Boulevard
south of Bentel Avenue. She has indicated that 4 of the 5
businesses affected by the requested green curb are in favor of the
installation. However, this.is not documented in writing at this
time.
Ms. Ahlfeldt indicates that the Poly-Tech Dental Studio has several
employees. Due to the limited on-site parking, these employees
often park in front of the businesses all day. Me. Ahlfeldt feels
the green curb would relocate these vehicles and provide curb side
parking for customers.
Parking is allowed on the east side of Rosemead Boulevard and on
Bentel Avenue. The approximate number of parking spaces available
on Rosemead Boulevard from Valley Boulevard to Newby Avenue is 18.
On Bentel Avenue, both sides of the street, there are approximately
10 spaces that appear to be used by the businesses on Rosemead
Boulevard. These spaces extend into the residential neighborhood.
Parking on-site is located behind the businesses with access from
Bentel Avenue and Valley Boulevard. There are 15 spaces on-site.
According to Ms. Ahlfeldt, each tenant is allocated 2 spaces. The
Dental Studio is considered as two tenant areas and is allotted 4
parking spaces.
Figure 1 depicts the available parking in the vicinity.
DISCGSSION
Field review of the location was conducted on several days at
different times of the day. This revealed several vehicles parked
for extended periods on Bentel Avenue and occasionally on Rosemead
Boulevard. Parking on-site was not specifically checked. However,
the parking appeared to be full during the field inspections.
Due to the complexity of the this situation, staff is requesting
additional time to study the parking. In addition, staff will
contact the businesses regarding the requested green curb and
report on their responses at the next meeting.
TRAFFIC COMMISSION
05/ 24/95 10:22 FAX 6952120 WILLDAN .ASSOC ROSE31E.AD . t0003
Page 2.
To allow staff additional time to study the parking on Rosemead
Boulevard and Bentel Avenue, it is recommended this item be studied
further and brought back at the July, 1995 Traffic Commission
Meeting.
Attachment
JI=
RSDPIP
NOT TO
SCALE
J
O
w
F
w
p
r
aL
0
NUMBER OF O
AVAILA6lE PARK106
5PAC E5
EX15Tlu6 RED CURE
-EXinlrIniG DRiVEWA`I
* REVi060 i/v6j95
vAL' E-Y BL.
v v
BENrEL .4V.
SENT BY:WILLDAN ASSOCIATES 6-28-95 8:21 WILLDAN ASSOCIATES- 818 307 9218;# 2
W
t-
1
Nom.
~
~
v
~
*
v
~
T
v
i
~
N
tD
'D
v
'i
c
y
d
d
~
~
Kl
m
-
.
-4
4
~
~
~
~
a
In'~
1~
U1
~
1>7
N
N
~
N
N
m
N
~
N
~
ln
ll1
~
1n
~
N
cg
N
N
d
r.
5C
d
a~
y
Q'' v
QQ
QL
~ ~
'd'
d
~
~
~
lS1
Cp
N
U1
~
N
l11
~
N
~
~
~
N
N
c}
-
Z ~
.
H
O[
Z
h
H
of
f
a[
~
F
H
a[
2
(Y
~
of
~
ol
Z
in
0
~
Q
N
N
d'
Q
O
O
'Ile
SENT BY:WILLOAN ASSOCIATES 6-28-95 821 WILLDAN ASSOCIATES- 818 307 9218;9.3
u
N tJ c.l
4-
Z
~v
w a
Q_
to
r~ a a
~ r
l° ° N
a
a ~
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
STAFF'REPORT =
TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN
AND MEMBERS
ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION
FROM: JOANNE ITAGARI, DEPUTY TRAFFIC ENGINEER
DATE: JUNE 22, 1995
RE: REQUEST FOR STOP SIGNS ON WALNUT GROVE AVENUE
AT DOROTHY STREET
REQUEST
A request has been received from Ms. Yvonne Argandona for the
installation of "STOP" signs on Walnut Grove Avenue at Dorothy
Street. She indicates accidents have occurred at this
intersection.
Due to the existing traffic controls on Walnut Grove Avenue, the
installation of "STOP" signs was not considered. The installation
of a traffic signal, however, was analyzed.
In addition, this intersection was discussed during the November 5,
1992, Traffic Commission meeting. The request at that time was for
the installation of a crosswalk. The Traffic Commission approved
staff's recommendation not to install the crosswalk. A copy of the
staff report and meeting minutes are attached.
Traffic conditions have not changed from the 1992 report. The
conditions are summarized below:
Walnut Grove Avenue -
64 feet wide
2 lanes in each direction
40 mph speed limit
Dorothy Street -
40 feet wide
No centerline striping
STOP controlled at Walnut Grove Avenue
25 mph speed limit
Figure 1 depicts existing conditions at the intersection.
DA
A
T
The reported accident
history at and within 100 feet of the
intersection of Walnut
Grove Avenue and Dorothy Street was
reviewed. This review identified 5 accidents reported from January
1, 1992 through December
31, 1994. These accidents are summarized
on the following page.
TRAFFIC COMMISSION
Page 2.
41" south - Southbound vehicle proceeding 9/2/93 11:00pm
straight rearended a southbound parked
vehicle (Improper Turn).
31" south - Northbound vehicle making an 5/10/93 10:25pm
unsafe turn rearended a northbound
parked vehicle
(Driver Alcohol/Drug:Improper Turn).
83" south - Southbound vehicle turning 10/10/93 9:57pm
left broadsided a northbound vehicle
proceeding straight (Lane Change).
At - Westbound vehicle turning left 12/21/92 8:20pm
collided head-on with an eastbound
parked vehicle (Wrong Side:Unsafe speed).
95" south - Northbound vehicle proceeding 11/14/92 1:20pm
straight rearended a northbound vehicle
proceeding straight and a northbound
stopped vehicle (Too Close).
A 24-hour traffic volume count was also conducted on the approaches
to the intersection. This count revealed the following:
Walnut Grove Avenue
Northbound Approach - 10,679
Southbound Approach - 10,477
Dorothy Street
Eastbound Approach - 738
24-hour Total Traffic Volume - 21,894
Pedestrian volume counts were not conducted at this location due to
the close of the school session. However, contact was made with
the Garvey School District regarding the number of students living
east of Walnut Grove Avenue attending Willard Elementary. Dr.
Chang of the District indicated approximately 154 students live
east of Walnut Grove Avenue.
Of the students living east of Walnut Grove Avenue, the majority of
these students live on Burton Avenue, Bartlett Avenue, etc. These
students would cross Walnut Grove Avenue at Hellman Avenue/Ramona
Boulevard or Garvey Avenue. Both of these loactions are
signalized.
Page 3.
The remaining students live on Walnut Grove Avenue. It is
estimated that fewer than 50 students live on Walnut Grove Avenue.
This is further supported by the 40 students that were identified
as living on Walnut Grove Avenue in the October 28, 1992 staff
report.
DISCUSSION
Traffic signals, in general, enhance traffic safety and promote
traffic flow when installed at locations where studies have shown
such control to be Justified. These studies examine traffic
volumes, speed, accident history, alignment, user behavior,
engineering judgement, and the location's compatibility with other
signalized locations in the vicinity. The data collected at this
intersection was compared to the guidelines (warrants) which have
been prepared based on nation-wide examinations of a broad cross-
section of locations.
The traffic volumes collected at this intersection were compared to
the traffic signal warrants (attached) found in the Caltrans
Traffic Manual. The traffic volumes on Walnut Grove Avenue meet
the warrants for the installation of a traffic signal. However,
the traffic volumes on Dorothy Street fall below the minimum
requirements necessary to meet the traffic volume warrants. Only
the Peak Hour Volume warrant (Warrant 11) was satisfied.
The accident guideline is met when 5 or more accidents, correctable
by the installation of a traffic signal, are reported in a 12 month
period. The accident history was reviewed for a 3 pear period. Of
these reported accidents, none were identified as being correctable
by the installation of a traffic signal. Three of the 5 reported
accidents involved parked vehicles. This accident guideline,
therefore, is not satisfied.
The student pedestrian volumes crossing Walnut Grove Avenue do not
meet the traffic signal installation guidelines. These pedestrians
are encouraged to use the signalized locations at Hellman
Avenue/Ramona Boulevard and Garvey Avenue. The locations are
identified with yellow crosswalks to inform motorists that they are
used by school aged pedestrians.
When traffic signals are installed at locations where they are not
Justified, safety is often compromised and congestion is increased.
When this occurs, the community as a whole is poorly served by the
device.
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the results of this study, the installation of a traffic
signal at the intersection of Walnut Grove Avenue and Dorothy
Street is not recommended.
~c.
6
~ Q
i
~
I I
J
~
O
uo SCALE
r
~
J
3
`IELIOW
DO eorN Y 5T. 40'
0
To WILLAi'D SCOCOL
Q
T
40
64'
O
I-
I ~
0
co
~ I
FIGURE I
WAL /I uT 6lZpvE Av.
AND %DRDr4`I ST.
CITY OF ROSEMEAD
9-6' TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING Traffic Manual
1-1992
Figure 9-1
TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS
CALC Zic i DATE z-r 5-
DIST CO RTE PM CHK DATE
Major St lh 4 Grove f} }~nuP Critical Approach Speed 4-7 mph
Minor St: Duerr t h ~ 1 ~P~ Critical Approach Speed mph
Critical speed of major street traffic ? 40 mph - - - - - - - - - - - - - or 1 RURAL (R)
In built up area of isolated community of < 10,000 pop. - - - - - - - - - ❑ J
❑ URBAN (U)
WARRANT 1 - Minimum Vehicular Volume 100% SATISFIED YES ❑ NO
80%SATISFIED YES ❑ NO l~
MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS
(90% SHOWN IN BRACKETS)
U R 11 U R
APPROACH
1
2 or more
7-5A(
LANES
Both Apprcits.
500
350
600
420
1366
Major Street
(400)
(280)
(480)
(336
Highosl Apprrh.
150
105
200
140
41
Minor Street
(120)
(84)
(160)
(112)
WARRANT 2 - Interruption of Continuous Traffic
APPROACH
r Both Apprchs.
Malor Street
Highosl Apprch
Minor Street
MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS
(80% SHOWN IN BRACKETS)
U R U R
1 2 or more
750 525 900 630
100
WARRANT 3 - Minimum Pedestrian Volume
Hour
100% SATISFIED YES ❑ NO E'
REQUIREMENT
FULFILLED
Pedestrian volume crossing the major street is 100 or more
for each of any four hours or is 190 or more during any one
Yes ❑ No
Q
hour: AND
There are less than 60 gaps per hour in the major street iraf-
Yes ❑ No
Q
tic stream of adequate length for pedestrians to cross: AUQ
The nearest traffic signal along the major street is greater
Yes E'1 No
❑
than 300 feet: AND
The new traffic signal will not seriously disrupt progressive
Yes ❑ No
[~J'
traffic flow on the major street.
IOZ9 IIO4Z-11311 1123411 Z15
101 1 3I 1 33 1-3'9 1 35 1 73 56
100% SATISFIED
80% SATISFIED
Hour
YES ❑ NO Q
YES ❑ NO 2'
366 1652 IpZ9 1042 1311 lZh4 6Zt`3 14 z0
41 lot 31 33 39 35 ~3 S~
The satisfaction of a warrant Is not necessarily justification for a signal. Delay, congestion, confusion or other
evidence of the need for right-of-way assignment must be shown.
Traffic Manual TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING 9-7
14992
WARRANT 4 - School Crossings Not Applicable _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ❑
Figure 9-2
TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS
0161nwfGrove ki/Doro+4. St
WARRANT 5 - Progressive Movement
See School Crossings Warrant Sheet [-:r
SATISFIED YES ❑ NO a
MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS
DISTANCE TO NEAREST SIGNAL
FULFILLED
> 1000 FT.
N _280 ff. S _La(~ It, E ft. W ft.
YES[:] NO
ON ONE WAY ISOLATED STREETS OR STREETS WITH ONE WAY TRAFFIC SIGNIFICANCE AND ADJACENT
SIGNALS ARE SO FAR APART THAT NECESSARY PLATOONING 8 SPEED CONTROL WOULD BE LOST
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
ON 2 WAY STREETS WHERE ADJACENT SIGNALS DO NOT PROVIDE NECESSARY PLATOONING AND
VE SIGNA
SYSTEM
❑ C
L
SPEED CONTROL PROPOSED SIGNALS COULD CONSTITUTE A PROGRESSI
WARRANT 6 - Accident Experience
SATISFIED YES ❑ NO Ei-
REQUIREMENTS
WARRANT
FULFILLED
ONE WARRANT
WARRANT I MINIMUM VEHICULAR VOLUME
SATISFIED
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_
80%
OR
WARRANT 2 INTERRUPTION OF CONTINUOUS TRAFFIC
YES ❑
NO
SIGNAL WILL NOT SERIOUSLY DISRUUPT PROGRESSIVE TRAFFIC FLOW
❑
ADEQUATE TRIAL OF LESS RESTRICTIVE REMEDIES HAS FAILED TO REDUCE ACCIDENT FREQUENCY
❑
ACC WITHIN A 12 MONTH PERIOD SUSCEPTIBLE OF CORR. 8 INVOLVING INJURY OR ? $500 DAMAGE
MINIMUM REQUIREMENT NUMBER OF ACCIDENTS
50R MORE (I/I e{Z - 1261 /94>
❑
Cw
WARRANT 7 - Systems Warrant
SATISFIED YES ❑ NO L
MINIMUM VOLUME FULFILLED
REQUIREMENT ENTERING VOLUMES ALL APPROACHES
~SY
DURING TYPICAL WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR 11221 VEH!HR
1000 VEH,HR -
OR
DURING EACH OF ANY 5 HRS. OF A SAT. ANO/OR SUN VEH'HR YES NO
❑
CHARACTERISTICS OF MAJOR ROUTES MAJOR ST MINOR ST.
HWY SYSTEM SERVING AS PRINCIPLE NETWORK FOR THROUGH TRAFFIC ✓
RURAL OR SUBURBAN HWY OUTSIDE OF. ENTERING. OR TRAVERSING A CITY ✓
APPEARS AS MAJOR ROUTE ON AN OFFICIAL PLAN ✓
ANY MAJOR ROUTE CHARACTERISTICS MET. BOTH STREETS ❑ Q
The satisfaction of a warrant Is not necessarily justification for a signal. Delay, congestion, confusion or other
evidence of the need for right-of-way assigmmnent must be shown.
9-8- TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING Traffic Manual
1.1991
Figure 9-3
TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS
60a nvi Grove AJ /Lb+b+hy St
WARRANT 8 - Combination of Warrants
SATISFIED YES ❑ NO a
REOUIREMENT
WARRANT
J j
FULFILLED
TWO WARRANTS
1. MINIMUM VEHICULAR VOLUME
SATISFIED
TRAFFIC
2. INTERRUPTION OF CONTINUOUS
YES ❑ NO
80
WARRANT 9 - Four Hour Volume
SATISFIED YES ❑ NO
2 or qp~a a R~ y0
Ona mnra ~pt/ ~ y Hour
Both Approaches - Major Street
hJ6~
4657- lZlS
t4-W
Highest Approaches - Minor Street
✓
1
14,
tot R3
56
` Refer to Figure 9-6 (URBAN AREAS) or Figure 9.7 (RURAL AREAS) to determine if this warrant is satisfied.
WARRANT 10 -Peak Hour Delay SATISFIED YES ❑ NO
(ALL PARTS MUST BE SATISFIED)
1, The total delay experienced for traffic on one minor street approach controlled by a
STOP sign equals or exceeds four vehicle-hours for a one-lane approach and live
vehicle-hours for a two lane approach. AND YES ❑ NO ❑
2. The volume on the same minor street approach equals or exceeds 100 vph for rY
one moving lane of traffic or 150 vph for two moving lanes; AND YES ❑ NO Lu
q The total entering volume serviced during the hour equals or exceeds 800 vph
for intersections with four or more approaches or 650 vph for intersections with
three approaches. YES 9 NO ❑
SATISFIED
YES [Z' NO ❑
Hour
* Refer to Figure 9 8 (URBAN AREAS) or Figure 9-9 (RURAL AREAS) to determine if this warrant is satisfied
The satisfaction of a warrant is not necessarily justification for a signal. Delay, congestion. confusion or other evidence
of the need for right-of-way assignment must be shown.
WARRANT 11 - Peak Hour Volume
9.1p . TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING Traffic Manual
1.1992
Figure 9-5
SCHOOL PROTECTION WARRANTS
CALC DATE 6 Z~ S
DIST CO RTE PM CHK DATE
Major St: G- kfe Ad evlup Critical Approach Speed 4 mph
Minor SC DU 'H^ r X71 tt~F Critical Approach Speed mph
Critical speed of major street traffic ? 40 mph - - - - - - - - - - - - - RURAL (R)
In built up area of isolated community of < 10,000 pop. - _ _ _ - - - - - - URBAN (U)
YELLOW SCHOOL SIGNALS
ARTS MUST BE SATISFIED)
hT K um Requirements
n
w oT w I --U it R
SATISFIED
M 1
Vehicle Volume
Eacnot
2 hours
200
40
SATISFIED
School Age Pedestrians
Each of
40
40
Crossing Street
2 hours
AND
PART B
Critical Approach Speed eeds 35 mph SATISF
AND
PART C
Is rest controlled crossing more than 600 feet away? SATISFIED
YES ❑,-Mb ❑
YES ❑ NO ❑
YES ❑ NO ❑
YES ❑
SCHOOL AREA TRAFFIC SIGNALS SATISFIED YES ❑ NO
(ALL PARTS MUST BE SATISFIED)
Minimum Requirements
PART A U R f3 ti'
Vehicle Volume
Each of
500
350
1401
1268
2 hours
Each of
t00
70
A.C55
40
School Age Pedestrians
2 hours
Crossing Street
or
500
350
per day
AND
SATISFIED YES ❑ NO
d or 021 Z9,Ig4Z repc,4
PART B
Is nearest controlled crossing more than 600 feet away? SATISFIED YES (a NO ❑
9.12 TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING Traffic Manual
1.1991
Figure 9-7
FOUR HOUR VOLUME WARRANT
(Rural Areas)
(,~a~nui- GYbJC ~~1~(bi-~ty Sf-
400
x
CL
= 300
~U
wQ
w
2 0
~ cc
(n a
CL
a 200
Ow
z~
O
x 100
x
2 OR MORE LANES (MAJOR) 2 OR MORE LANES (MINOR)
2 OR MORE LANES (MAJOR) & 1 LANE (MINOR)
OR 1 LANE (MAJOR) & 2 OR MORE LANES (MINOR)
1 LANE (MAJOR) & 1 LANE (MINOR)
+00)
*+h
t C56)
4-
0 L-
200
300 400 500 600 700 800 900
MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH
-1- All J "r howr v na 0Y s'4 JO~umN > IOCC> V.0n
' NOTE:
80 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET
APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 60 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER
THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE.
1000
9-14 TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING Traffic Manual
1.1"I
Figure 9-9
PEAK HOUR VOLUME WARRANT
(Rural Areas)
IJa6,-- G+nve A\;/j:>o"" v Sf
500
2 OR MORE LANES (MAJOR) & 2 OR MORE LANES (MINOR)
x
CL
> 400
x
U
F
¢ w 300
¢a
a
N a
s w
Z 200
J
0
>
a 100
2
2 OR MORE LANES (MAJOR) & 1 LANE (MINOR)
OR 1 LANE (MAJOR) & 2 OR MORE LANES (MINOR)
1 LANE (MAJOR) & 1 LANE (MINOR)
0 L-
300
400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100
MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH
Ma~ot ee+ = IbS?
H1nor `afrce~ _ IC,
1200 100
* NOTE:
100 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET
APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 75 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER
THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE.
TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN
AND MEMBERS
ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION
FROM: JOANNE ITAGAKI, DEPUTY TRAFFIC ENGINEER
DATE: OCTOBER 28, 1992
RE: REQUEST FOR CROSSWALK AT THE INTERSECTION OF WALNUT GROVE
AVENUE AND DOROTHY STREET
REQUEST
Ms. Lorraine Burchett, a resident, has requested the installation of
a crosswalk on Walnut Grove Avenue at Dorothy Street. She indicates
that students of Willard Elementary School that live east of Walnut
Grove Avenue must cross at either Hellman Avenue/Ramona Boulevard or
Garvey Avenue. She feels this is too far to travel and that crossing
at Dorothy Street would be easier for the students.
CONDITIONS
f.4'
Walnut Grove Avenue is a kY' wide north/south roadway. There are two
lanes of traffic in each direction separated by a double yellow
centerline. There are fronting residential uses on Walnut Grove
Avenue between Garvey Avenue and Hellman Avenue/Ramona Boulevard.
Parking is allowed on both sides of the roadway in the vicinity of
Dorothy Street. The posted speed limit on Walnut Grove Avenue is 40
mph.
Dorothy Street is a 40' wide east/west roadway. There is no striping
on this roadway. The east end of this street terminates at Walnut
Grove Avenue to form a "T" intersection. Dorothy Street is STOP
controlled at this intersection. A yellow crosswalk exists on
Dorothy Street at Walnut Grove Avenue. Parking is allowed on both
sides of the roadway. The prima facie speed limit is 25 mph on this
street.
Hellman Avenue/Ramona Boulevard is approximately 780' north of
Dorothy Street. Garvey Avenue is approximately 1,860' south of
Dorothy Street.
Figure 1 depicts these conditions.
page 2.
DATA
The accident history within 100' of the intersection was reviewed:for
the time period of January 1, 1989 to June 21, 1992. This accident
history indicated 5 accidents were reported. These accidents are
summarized below:
Location and Description Date
Walnut Grove Avenue 84' south of Dorothy 11/02/91
Eastbound vehicle turning left
broadsided a northbound vehicle
proceeding straight (Right-of-way
automobile).
Dorothy at Walnut Grove Avenue 09/18/91
Northbound vehicle proceeding straight
sideswiped a northbound vehicle
proceeding straight (Improper turn).
Walnut Grove Avenue 90' south of Dorothy 03/21/89
Southbound vehicle proceeding straight
collided with an eastbound pedestrian
(Pedestrian violation).
Time
11:50 p.m.
2:30 p.m.
2:25 p.m.
Walnut Grove Avenue 6' north of Dorothy 11/21/89 7:15 p.m.
Eastbound bicycle entering traffic
collided with a southbound vehicle
proceeding straight (Driver alcohol/
drug - Other equipment).
Dorothy at Walnut Grove Avenue
Westbound vehicle turning left
broadsided a southbound vehicle
proceeding straight (Right-of-way
automobile).
DISCUSSION
09/08/89 6:45 a.m.
Field review of the intersection of Walnut Grove Avenue and Dorothy
Street was made. The visibility of traffic from Dorothy Street is
adequate. The intersections of Walnut Grove Avenue at Hellman
Avenue/Ramona Boulevard and Garvey Avenue are signalized. A crossing
guard is also present during school crossing hours at the
intersection of Walnut Grove Avenue and Hellman Avenue/Ramona
Boulevard.
Page. 3
Staff contacted the Garvey School District to determine the
approximate number of students living east of Walnut Grove Avenue and
attending Willard Elementary School. Based on this contact,
approximately 40 students live on the east side-of Walnut Grove
Avenue and another 40 students live on Burton Avenue.
Those students living on Burton Avenue attending Willard School.would
have to cross Walnut Grove Avenue at Hellman Avenue/Ramona--Boulevard
or Garvey Avenue. There are not other opportunities to access Walnut
Grove Avenue from Burton Avenue. Therefore, the requested crosswalk
at Dorothy Street would be useful for the 40 students living on the
east side of Walnut Grove Avenue.
Those 40 students, however, should be directed to use the signalized
crosswalks at Hellman Avenue/Ramona Boulevard and Garvey Avenue to
cross Walnut Grove Avenue. These crosswalks are yellow to inform
motorists that they are used by school aged pedestrians. This may be
a longer route but the guidance provided by the signalized
intersection and yellow crosswalks improves the safety of the
pedestrians.
Studies conducted in the Cities of San Diego and Long Beach analyzed
the relative safety at uncontrolled intersections. Uncontrolled
intersections are those locations without traffic signals or four-way
stop signs.
The studies indicated that more pedestrian related accidents at
intersections occurred at marked crosswalks than at those without.
one conclusion of these contradictory results of common sense is the
false sense of security pedestrians feel at the marked crosswalks.
Unfortunately, two painted lines do not provide protection against
oncoming vehicles. The pedestrian must carry the burden of safety
and be alert and cautious while crossing any street.
The California Vehicle Code states that a crosswalk exists at all
intersections unless pedestrian crossing is prohibited by signs.
Therefore, crosswalks should be marked only where necessary for
guidance and control of pedestrians, to direct them to the safest of
several potential routes.
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the analysis of the intersection of Walnut Grove Avenue and
Dorothy Street, the installation of a crosswalk at this uncontrolled
intersection is not recommended. It is recommended that students be
directed to use the signalized intersections of Walnut Grove Avenue
at the Hellman Avenue/Ramona Boulevard and Garvey Avenue.
JI:nv
Attachment
AGENDA:TRAFFIC:11
uo SCALE
DO SOT! ' Y Si. 4a'
~T,., W ILL GZ
NCO L
0
l
a
J
~l
~p
f-
O
co
r
4LJ
v
r
~o
v
77
Q
lye
7
0
v
I-
Z
S
FIGI
WALMUT 6Ro\JE-AV.
AND ~OROr~y ST.
CITY OF ROSEMEAD
T
i
ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION MINUTES
NOVEMBER 5. 1992
The regular meeting of the Rosemead Traffic Commission was called to
order by Chairman Pinon, at 7:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 8x38
East Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, California 91770.
I. CALL TO ORDER
The Pledge to the Flag was delivered by commissioner Larson
The Invocation was delivered by commissioner Larson
II. ROLL CALL
Chairman Pinon
Commissioners: Beezley, Larson, Tirre, Knapp
48
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. It was moved by commissioner Tirre, seconded by
Commissioner Beezley, and carried unanimously to approve
the minutes for September 3, 1992.
B. It was moved by Commissioner Tirre, seconded by
Commissioner Beezley, and carried unanimously to approve
the minutes for October 1, 1992.
IV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE - None
VI. NEW BUSINESS
A. TURNING MOVEMENTS ON GARVEY AVENUE EAST AND WEST OF SAN
GABRIEL BOULEVARD - SAVON/BEECHES AND DIAMOND SQUARE
SHOPPING CENTERS
Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki stated that staff reviewed the
driveways on Garvey Avenue east and west of San Gabriel
Boulevard. The Traffic Commission has indicated that left
turns into and out of these driveways has caused some
confusion and problems to the traffic flow in the area. East
of San Gabriel Boulevard, the driveways provide access to the
Savon/Beeches shopping center on the north curb line of Garvey
Avenue. West of San Gabriel Boulevard, the driveway provides
access to the Diamond Square shopping center on the south curb
line of Garvey Avenue.
r-i,
Garvey Avenue is an east/west primary arterial that traverses
the length of the City. The roadway is 76' wide with two
lanes in each direction separated by a raised center median or
a two-way left turn lane. At the intersection of San Gabriel
Boulevard, right turn only lanes are provided in the east and
west bound directions.
The accident history from January 1, 1989 to September 17,
1992 was reviewed. This accident history revealed several
in the vicinit:• of the drive•.daps. used
further east.
After further discussion and or concerns regarding the
driveways "A" and "B" from several of the commissioners, it
was moved by Commissioner Larson, seconded by Commissioner
Tirre, and carried unanimously to table this item until next
month and have staff look at what was there before the
construction.
The Commission asked that all business owners affected be
notified and invited to attend the meeting.
C
It was moved by Commissioner Larson, seconded by Commissioner
i~P
and carried unanimously to table Driveway "C" until
Tirre
tit)
,
staff notifies the merchants at Diamond Square.
G
~K
Commissioner Knapp wanted to reiterate to staff to notify
an item that concerns
h
r
en
residents and or business owners w
o
\
them comes before the Commission.
r
d~
CTION OF WALNUT GROVE
B. REQUEST FOR CROSSWALK AT THE INTERSE
YJi
AVENUE AND DOROTHY STREET
Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki stated that this request came
from Ms. Burchett, a resident, who has requested the
installation of a crosswalk on Walnut Grove Avenue at Dorothy
Street. She indicated that students of Willard Elementary
School that live east of Walnut Grove Avenue must cross at
either Hellman Avenue/Ramona Boulevard or Garvey Avenue. She
feels this is too far to travel and that crossing at Dorothy
Street would be easier for the students.
Walnut Grove Avenue is a 61' wide north/south roadway. There
are two lanes of traffic in each direction separated by a
double yellow centerline. There are fronting residential uses
on Walnut Grove Avenue between Garvey Avenue and Hellman
Avenue/Ramona Boulevard. Parking is allowed on both sides of
the roadway in the vicinity of Dorothy Street. The posted
speed limit on Walnut Grove Avenue is 40 mph.
Dorothy Street is a 40' wide east/west roadway. There is no
striping on this roadway. The east end of this street
terminates at Walnut Grove Avenue to form a "T" intersection.
Dorothy Street is STOP controlled at this intersection. A
yellow crosswalk exists on Dorothy Street at Walnut Grove
Avenue. Parking is allowed on both sides of the roadway. The
prima facie speed limit is 25 mph on this street.
Hellman Avenue/Ramona Boulevard is approximately 780' north of
Dorothy Street. Garvey Avenue is approximately 1,860' south
of Dorothy Street.
• The accident history within 100' of the intersection was
reviewed for the time period of January 1, 1989 to June 21,
1992. This accident history indicated 5 accidents were
reported.
Page 3
• Field review of the intersection of Walnut Grove Avenue and
Dorothy Street was made. The visibility of traffic from
Dorothy Street is adequate. The intersections of Walnut Grove
Avenue at Hellman Avenue/Ramona Boulevard and Garvey Avenue
are signalized. A crossing guard is also present during
school crossing hours at the intersection of Walnut Grove
Avenue and Hellman Avenue/Ramona Boulevard.
Staff contacted the Garvey School District to determine the
approximate number of students living east of Walnut Grove
Avenue and attending Willard Elementary School. Based on this
contact, approximately 40 students live on the east side of
Walnut Grove Avenue and another 40 students live on Burton
Avenue.
Those students living on Burton Avenue attending Willard
School would have to cross Walnut Grove Avenue at Hellman
Avenue/Ramona Boulevard or Garvey Avenue. There are not other
opportunities to access Walnut Grove Avenue from Burton
Avenue. Therefore, the requested crosswalk at Dorothy Street
would be useful for the 40 students living on the east side of
Walnut Grove Avenue.
Those 40 students, however, should be directed to use the
signalized crosswalks at Hellman Avenue/Ramona Boulevard and
Garvey Avenue to cross Walnut Grove Avenue. These crosswalks
are yellow to inform motorists that they are used by school
aged pedestrians. This may be a longer route but the guidance
. provided by the signalized intersection and yellow crosswalks
improves the safety of the pedestrians.
Studies conducted in the Cities of San Diego and Long Beach
analyzed the relative safety at uncontrolled intersections.
Uncontrolled intersections are those locations without traffic
signals or four-way stop signs.
The studies indicated that more pedestrian related accidents
at intersections occurred at marked crosswalks than at those
without. One conclusion of these contradictory results of
common sense is the false sense of security pedestrians feel
at the marked crosswalks. Unfortunately, two painted lines do
not provide protection against oncoming vehicles. The
pedestrian must carry the burden of safety and be alert and
cautious while crossing any street.
The California Vehicle Code states that a crosswalk exists at
all intersections unless pedestrian crossing is prohibited by
signs. Therefore, crosswalks should be marked only where
necessary for guidance and control of pedestrians, to direct
them to the safest of several potential routes.
RECOMMENDATION
® Based on the analysis of the intersection of Walnut Grove
Avenue and Dorothy Street, the installation of a crosswalk at
this uncontrolled intersection was not recommended. It was
recommended that students be directed to use the signalized
intersections of Walnut Grove Avenue at the Hellman
Avenue/Ramona Boulevard and Garvey Avenue.
It was moved by Commissioner Knapp, seconded by Commissioner
Larson, and carried unanimously to approve the Traffic
Engineer's recommendation.
VT_ MATTERS FROM COMMISSION AND STAFF
TO: CARL P. HOLM, ADMINISTRATIVE AIDE
FROM: JOANNE ITAGAKI, DEPUTY TRAFFIC ENGINEER
DATE: JUNE 27, 1995
RE: DRAFT TRAFFIC COMMISSION AGENDA FOR
JULY 6, 1995 MEETING
The following is the DRAFT agenda for the next meeting:
A. TIME LIMITED PARKING ON ROSEMEAD BOULEVARD SOUTH OF
BENTEL AVENUE - FOLLOW-UP. This report is a follow-up to last
month's item for time limited parking from Ms. Trina Ahlfeldt
of PIP Copying.
A. REQUEST FOR STOP SIGNS ON WALNUT GROVE AVENUE AT
DOROTHY AVENUE. This is a request from Ms. Yvonne Argandona
to install STOP signs on Walnut Grove Avenue at Dorothy
Street. The installation of traffic signals was analyzed.
If you have any questions, please call me at (310) 908-6226.
JI:
RSDDRAFT