TC - 01-07-99AGENDA
ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION
8838 E. Valley Blvd.
Rosemead, CA 91770
Regular Meeting
January 7, 1999
CALL TO ORDER
Roll Call:
Pledge of Allegiance:
Invocation:
7:00 p.m.
Vice-Chairperson Knapp,
Commissioners Ruiz, Quintanilla, & Baffo
Commissioner Ruiz
Commissioner Baffo
1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - December 3, 1998 (Minutes for November 5, 1998 will
be deferred to the next meeting)
H. COMMISSION REORGANIZATION FOR 1999
III. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE - 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 three (3) minutes; total time allocated is fifteen (15) minutes.)
IV. OLD BUSINESS - None
V. NEW BUSINESS
A. CITY OF ROSEMEAD'S SPEED HUMP POLICY
B. REQUEST FOR REFLECTIVE PAVEMENT MARKERS ON EARLSWOOD
DRIVE BETWEEN IVAR AVENUE AND ROSEMEAD PLACE
VI. STAFF REPORTS
VII. COMMISSIONER REPORTS
VIII. ADJOURNMENT -Thursday, February 4,1999,7:00 p.m., Rosemead City Council
Chambers, 8838 E. Valley Blvd., Rosemead, CA 91770
ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION
DECEMBER 3. 1998
A regular meeting of the Rosemead Traffic Commission was called to order by Vice-
Chairperson Knapp, at 7:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 8838 East Valley
Boulevard, Rosemead.
ROLL CALL
Present: Vice-Chairperson Knapp
Commissioners: Ruiz, Quintanilla & Baffo
i,
Absent: None
i
Ex Officio: Administrative Aide: Jessica Wilkinson
Deputy Traffic Engineer: Joanne Itagaki
CALL TO ORDER
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commissioner Quintanilla
The Invocation was delivered by Vice-Chairperson Knapp
I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
It was moved by the Commission, and carried unanimously to approve the
minutes for October 1, 1998.
I
i
II. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE
Speaking before the Commission was:
Glenn Clanton
3244 Leyburn Drive
Rosemead, California 91770
Mr. Clanton stated that he is speaking in behalf of himself and several residents
who are concerned with the City streets getting smaller these days.
III. OLD BUSINESS - NONE
IV. NEW BUSINESS
A. ENGINEERING AND!TRAFFIC SURVEY FOR 1998
Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki stated that the City of Rosemead is currently
surveying the prevailing speeds on various City streets. Due to the construction
work on Valley Boulevard, three streets will not be surveyed until construction
is complete. These streets are Valley Boulevard, Mission Drive and De Adalena
i
Street. With the construction, altered traffic flow is anticipated on these streets
and would not represent normal traffic conditions.
An Engineering and Traffic!Survey is intended to be the basis for the
establishment, revision, and enforcement of speed limits for selected streets
within the City. The survey enables the Sheriffs Department to utilize radar for
speed enforcement. The California Vehicle Code enforcement by radar is
applied. The CVC also specifies the surveys must be conducted every 5 years.
Elements of an Engineering and Traffic Survey include the measurement of
prevailing speeds, reported accident history, and roadway characteristics not
readily apparent to the motorist.
The measurement of prevailing speeds is collected with the use of a hand held
traffic radar. The speeds for a minimum of 50 vehicles in each direction, or a
total of 2 hours, are observed and recorded. The surveys are conducted in good
weathers conditions and during off peak periods.
The Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS) reports are used to
determine the number of reported accidents on a given street segment. This
information is then translated to an accident rate (accidents per million vehicle
miles) and compared to average, or anticipated, accident rates on similar
roadways.
Roadway characteristics not readily apparent to the motorist can include
proximity to schools, uniformity with existing speed zones in adjacent
jurisdictions and pedestrian activity. They do not include width, curvature,
grade or surface conditions of a roadway. A determination is made whether any
roadway characteristics not readily apparent to the motorist are significant to
warrant a change in the speed limit.
Commissioner Ruiz asked that if under major truck routes, if it would be
possible to concentrate on the speeds trucks are travelling throughout the surface
streets.
Vice-Chairperson Knapp asked if there was going to be a staff meeting regarding
this location for some input from the Traffic Commission.
Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki stated that the study includes a good sampling,
no specific vehicles indicated. She added that this would be a separate study.
Commissioner Ruiz concluded that it would be important to have such statistics.
Vice-Chairperson Knapp observed that traffic counters have avoided Valley,
Rosemead Boulevard, Lower Azusa, Ellis Lane, Marshall and Grand, and
inquired as to why they are not part of the study.
Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki stated that clue to increased traffic, the study
must concentrate on speed increments.
Vice-Chairperson Knapp asked if there was going to be a staff meeting regarding
this location for some input from the Traffic Commission.
Deputy Traffi Engineer Itagaki stated that she will notify the Commission of the
review meeting.
V. STAFF REPORTS
A. UPDATE FROM ROSEMEAD CITY COUNCIL MEETING -
NOVEMBER 24, 1998.
Administrative Aide Wilkinson stated that at the November 24th City Council
Meeting, the City Council approved 2 items listed below that the Traffic
Commission approved at the November Sth meeting.
1. Yellow Crosswalk at San Gabriel Boulevard and Graves Avenue
2. The request for additional traffic controls on Mission Drive in front of
Rosemead High School.
In addition, they approved for the advertisement recruitment and interviews for
the unexpected vacancy on the Traffic Commission. There is only one
application filed thus far.
VI. COMMISSIONER REPORTS
Commissioner Ruiz wished everyone a "Merry Christmas".
VII. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting
was adjourned. The next scheduled meeting will be on January 7, 1999.
MAYOR:
ROBERT W. BRUESCN
MAYOR PRO TEM:
JOE VASQUEZ
COUNCILMEMBERS:
MARGARETCLARK
JAY T. IMPERIAL
GARY A. TAYLOR
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Pbscmead
8838 E. VALLEY BOULEVARD • P.O. BOX 399
ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA 91770
TELEPHONE (626) 288-6671
FAX (626) 307-9218
MEMORANDUM
HONORABLE CHAIRMAN
AND MEMBERS
ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION
JESSICA WILKINSON, ADMINISTRATIVE AIDECAJD
JANUARY 7, 1998
SUBJECT: REORGANIZATION PROCEDURE
The following procedure is suggested for reorganization of the Commission:
1. The incumbent chairperson turns the meeting over to the Administrative Aide or
another City staff representative for nomination and election of the new
chairman.
2. The Administrative Aide/ City staff calls for nominations. No seconds are
required for nominations.
3. When no further nominations are heard, the Administrative Aide/City staff
declares the nominations closed.
4. If there is only one nominee, a motion of his/her election may be entertained.
5. If there is more than one nominations, then the Secretary will call a roll call vote.
Commissioners should respond with the name of the nominee they vote for.
6. The candidate polling a majority is the new chairperson.
7. The newly-elected chairman assumes the chair, then opens nominations for
vice-chairperson.
12-02-93/sb
TO: HONORABLE VICE-CHAIRPERSON
AND MEMBERS
ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION -
FROM: JOANNE ITAGAKI, TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DEPUTY
~t
DATE: DECEMBER 24, 1998
RE: CITY OF ROSEMEAD'S SPEED HUMP POLICY
REQUEST
At the request of the Planning Commission, the policy regarding the installation
of speed humps within the City of Rosemead is being brought before the Traffic
Commission for reconsideration.
Attached is the pamphlet prepared by staff and the Traffic Commission regarding
speed humps. The pamphlet states the following:
"The State of California does not recognize the speed hump as an official
traffic control device. There are no standard designs developed for
installation of speed humps. This is an additional concern for liability
exposure to the City.
Therefore, the City of Rosemead does not install speed humps on public
streets."
The Planning Commission indicates that several cities have installed speed
humps. Staff informed the Planning Commission that several studies have
shown the installation of speed humps does not significantly affect speeds on
roadways. In fact, some studies have shown that speeds increase between
consecutive speed humps. Also, some cities are removing speed humps due to
the ineffectiveness, complaints of noise and/or increase in traffic volumes on
adjacent streets.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff is requesting direction from the Traffic Commission. Staff supports the
current City policy. However, should the Traffic Commission wish to reconsider
this policy, staff would like direction on how to proceed.
Attachment
066Vi1\Rsd\Speed Humps PC
D
LU
2 O
W.
0 LLJ
ca
u
C
T p
a)N 0
(O
E T
m L N
U
to
O Q 7
o
E
m
° (n
a)
_
L
N
O
C
Q) -
N C
CL
o
m'
C
-
N
0
L
(1)
L
N m
Y m
D
T
C Q)
m
c
.0 3
O_
-0 U
C
U
U
N
a)
C
co
O_
-
o
U N
C
E
7
L
Y
(n .
~Q ~
_
a)
73
a)
U
m
m
m
.Z N
a) N
c
a)
L o
N
-
O C O
C
C
U
a)
N
N
m
N
a)
C
O
L
F
N
4)
m
Q
C
L
T
N N
E:
(:L H
E
-
( a
E~
O
7
7 m
L m
L
f0
-0 U
co "O O
U
a)
c a) V
(D (u
Lm (u E
cn (U
O
N
U
a
) (n
a)
-
o
r
O
_
C
C U
m
N O
-O .0
in
U
C T
m m O
mU
~ .U
°
a)
o
U
c ~
o
a)
a7 N -
L
f-
m
O
w E- m
J
Z
N
N
N m m -o
c
c
a)
a) U V
O
N
a)
o
o m
'
O`
-
~
m
o
m
O N
O C C '
L
N
m
m ow
N
a)
>
a)
a)
a)03m
w
m
m
L
m
a
a)
o
E
w
°
N
a
) 7
,n CL
) c m N
a
U)
O L
o
N
-
U)
N
OC
~ O
m
O
X E N
N
c
M
-
O
O
a)
r
N
0
o n'
m
rm
L ~
r m
CL N
O
a)
3
N
O
a)
o
E
N
m
rn
C
w 7
w Q a)
°
U_
UNNC
c
M
-0
a)
(u-E E
Ei
_
E
-
a) m
CL
.
a)' - "O
r
N
0
N
-
L70
U
0
a)
c
-
m
U m
m
a) m a) C
~
m
n
N
-
C
N C
N -r CL -
O
-
(U
m
L O
O w a) `
cn
7
E
M
a)
N
f- C
S 7 -U
-
L
0
cr-
J Q O
J > I
< LU
} ~Q)
Q
F- co
U U
p w
W J Q
w
U)wU)
0000
cr M M
co
00
4.. a7
O
A
G C 2
a. a)•G 'm
O cyp
M y
a
.e aGi ca
3 ~ C a1
L
O 0
U C CL)
U
r
n
tp
ao
co
N
CD
N
e
N
TO: HONORABLE VICE-CHAIRPERSON
AND MEMBERS
ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION
FROM: JOANNE ITAGAKI, TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DEPUTY
:.DATE: DECEMBER 24, 1998
RE: REQUEST FOR REFLECTIVE PAVEMENT MARKERS ON
EARLSWOOD DRIVE BETWEEN [VAR AVENUE AND
M; ROSEMEAD PLACE
REQUEST
A request has been received from Ms. Ramirez, 14508 Cullen Street, Whittier, for
the installation of speed humps on Earlswood drive. She was mailed the City's
pamphlet regarding speed humps. Ms. Ramirez is now requesting the
installation of reflective pavement markers on Earlswood Drive. Ms. Ramirez
indicates that there have been several "near accidents" on this roadway
especially between Rosemead Place and Greendale Avenue.
CONDITIONS
Earlswood Drive is a 36-foot wide roadway with a posted speed limit.of 30 mph.
There is one lane of traffic in each direction separated by a skip-yellow
centerline. Parking is permitted on both sides of the roadway.
DATA
v ,
The reported accident data on Earlswood Drive was reviewed. The three-year -
period reviewed was between January 1, 1996 through December 31, 1997. The'
reported accident history revealed the following four accidents:
Location & Description Date & Time
1. 261' north of Hershey 08/08/97 @ 1:42 p.m.
Southbound vehicle proceeding straight
broadsided an eastbound vehicle turning left
(Improper turn).
2. 280' east of Ivar
Southbound vehicle proceeding straight
rearended a southbound parked vehicle
(Improper turn).
09/04/97 @ 2:30 p.m.
0
Request for Reflective Pavement Markers on
Earlswood Drive between Ivar Avenue and
Rosemead Place
Page 2
Location & Description
3. North of Greendale Avenue
Southbound vehicle passing broadsided
a southbound vehicle turning left (Wrong
side).
Date & Time
10/15/96 @ 4:00 p.m.
4. 66' east of Ivar
Westbound vehicle proceeding straight
collided with a fixed object (Driver alcohol/
drugs).
DISCUSSION
09/26/96 @ 11:15 p.m.
The striping on Earlswood Drive is clearly visible and has raised reflective
pavement markers (RPMs). Parking on Earlswood Drive during field review
indicated moderate parking.
Staff has no objection to the installation of additional reflective pavement markers
on Earlswood Drive. However, staff is concerned with the increase in noise with
the installation of additional reflective pavement markers. The fronting uses on
Earlswood Drive are residential. The increased noise may not be acceptable to
the residents.
Should the Traffic Commission wish to recommend the installation of additional
RPMs, staff recommends placement of an additional RPM between the existing
yellow stripes (Alternative "A" Striping Pattern). Other placements of RPMs are
depicted in Figure 1 for Commission consideration.
motorist of the posted speed limit on
The speed limit signs on Earlswood Drive are clearly visible. However, as a
reminder to motorists, it is recommended Earlswood Drive be placed on the list
for the stationing of the Radar Trailer. The Radar Trailer is used to remind
speed.
RECOMMENDATION
roadway and displays the motorist's
Staff recommends Earlswood Drive be placed on the City's list for the stationing
of the Radar Trailer.
Attachment
066Ui 1 \RsMEarlswood
Earlswood Drive Striping Pattern
h
Existing Striping Pattern
O ❑ 4 0
`Yellow stripe.
Alternative "A" Striping Pattern
O
Yellow reflective.
pavement marker.
O ❑ O q O ❑ O
Additional yellow reflective
pavement marker.
Alternative "B" Striping Pattern
C3 0 CT C=
Non-reflective yellow
pavement markers.
Alternative "C" Striping Pattern o
Non-reflective yellow
i
pavement markers.
Additional yellow reflective
pavement marker.
FIGURE 1
066\0\Rsd\Exh Fig\Earlswood