Loading...
01-06-00IT J A GENDA ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION 8838 East Valley Blvd. Rosemead, CA 91770 Regular Meeting January 6, 2000 CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 p.m. Roll Call: Chairperson Knapp, Vice-Chair Quintanilla Commissioners Ruiz, Baffo, & Herrera Pledge of Allegiance: Commissioner Knapp Invocation: Commissioner Quintanilla 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - October & December 2. COMMISSION REORGANIZATION FOR 2000 3. 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) 4. OLD BUSINESS - None 5. NEW BUSINESS A. ORDINANCE REGULATING STUDENT LOADING & UNLOADING B. REQUEST FOR SPEED BUMPS ON ROCKHOLD AVENUE BETWEEN MARSHALL STREET AND OLNEY STREET. 6. STAFF REPORTS 7. COMMISSIONER REPORTS 8. ADJOURNMENT - Thursday, February 3, 2000, 7:00 p.m., Rosemead City Council Chambers, 8838 East Valley Blvd., Rosemead, CA 91770 A z ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION OCTOBER 7, 1999 A regular meeting of the Rosemead Traffic Commission was called to order by Vice-Chairman Quintanilla at 7:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 8838 East Valley Boulevard, Rosemead. ROLL CALL Present: Vice-Chairman Quintanilla Commissioners: Ruiz & Herrera Absent: Chairperson Knapp & Commissioner Baffo Ex Officio: Administrative Aide: Jessica Wilkinson Deputy Traffic Engineer: Joanne Itagaki CALL TO ORDER The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commissioner Ruiz The Invocation was delivered by Commissioner Herrera L APPROVAL OF MINUTES It was moved by Commissioner Herrera, seconded by Commissioner Ruiz, and carried unanimously to approve the minutes for September 2, 1999. II. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE -None III. OLD BUSINESS - NONE IV. NEW BUSINESS : A. VALLEY BOULEVARD AT LOMA AVENUE - REQUEST FOR WESTBOUND LEFT TURN ACCESS Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki stated that staff received a letter from Mr. J. Frank Quintanilla of the Golden Rose Florist, 9228 Valley Boulevard. Mr. Quintanilla indicates that his customers are making illegal westbound left turns in to his parking lot. Mr. Quintanilla is requesting a left turn lane be installed to provide a legal lane for his customers to turn left in to his parking lot. This item was tabled to the November meeting due to a conflict of interest with one of the Traffic Commissioners. B. REQUEST FOR STOP CONTROLS ON OLNEY STREET Mr. Gilbert Pedregon, 9546 Olney Street, has contacted the City regarding the installation of STOP controls on Olney Street due to concerns regarding speeds along the street. This the second request from Mr. Pedregon for STOP controls on Olney Street. Mr. Pedregon made this same request in 1996. During the July 11, 1996 Traffic Commission meeting, staff presented a report, analyzing the need for STOP controls at the intersections of Olney Street/Vane Avenue and Olney Street/Marybeth Avenue. This report concluded the installation of STOP controls at these two intersections did not meet Caltrans guidelines. Therefore, STOP controls were not recommended. The conditions described in the 1996 report have not changed. To sLvmmarize: ➢ Olney Street is a 36-foot wide residential street with a prima facie speed limit of 25 mph. ➢ Vane Avenue and Marybeth Avenue are 30-foot wide residential streets with a prima facie speed limit of 25 mph. ➢ Vane Avenue and Marybeth Avenue form "T" intersections with Olney Street. ➢ Vane Avenue is STOP controlled at its intersection with Olney Street. ➢ A yellow crosswalk exists on the west leg of Olney Street at Vane Avenue. ➢ "SLOW SCHOOL RING" markings exist in advance of this crossing on Olney Street in both directions. The reported accident history of the intersections of Olney Street/Vane Avenue and Olney Street/Marybeth Avenue were reviewed for the period from January 1, 1996 through December 31, 1998. There were no reported accidents at the intersection of Olney Street/Vane Avenue. However, one accident was reported at the intersection of Olney Street/Marybeth Avenue and is summarized below: Location and Description Day/Date . Time 4' west ofMarybeth Avenue on Friday/11-29-96 8:40 a.m. Olney Street. A northbound vehicle making a U-turn broad sided an eastbound vehicle proceeding straight (Improper Turn). Twenty-four hour traffic volume counts were taken for each of the approaches to the intersections. These counts are summarized below: • Southbound Vane Ave. north of Olney Street 500 • Southbound Marybeth Ave north of Olney Street 224 • Westbound Olney Street east of Marybeth Ave. 853 • Eastbound Olney Street, west of Vane Avenue 805 • Westbound Olney Street, between Vane Avenue and Marybeth Avenue 921 • Eastbound Olney St. between Vane Avenue and Marybeth Avenue 694 Multi-way STOP Sign Warrants worksheets, attached, were completed for the intersections of Olney Street/Vane Avenue and Olney Street/Marybeth Avenue. The worksheet has been developed from guidelines established from the Caltrans Traffic Manual. The worksheets for the intersections being analyzed indicated that both locations do not meet the minimum guidelines for the installation of multi-way STOP signs. As identified in the traffic volume data, the total traffic volume entering the intersections is as follows: Olney Street/Vane Avenue = (500 + 805 + 921) _ 2226 vehicles per day: Olney Street/Marybeth Avenue (224 + 853 + 694) _ 1771 vehicles per day. This data indicates there has been an increase in traffic volume at the intersection of Olney Street/Vane Avenue since 1996. The traffic volume at the intersection of Olney Street/Marybeth Avenue is roughly the same as 1996. The Caltrans guidelines indicate a multi-way STOP control may be justified if all the approaches to the intersection average at least 500 vehicles per hour for any 8 hours of the day. In addition, the traffic and pedestrian volume from thae.minor street must average at least 200 units per hour for the same 8 hours. The worksheets indicate that both intersections fall below 500 vehicles per bour,and the 200 units per hour average. The reported accident history of the two intersections has been favorable over the three year period reviewed. This would suggest that vehicles area traveling through the intersections with sufficient care for the conditions present RECOMMENDATION: Based on the conditions, data and STOP sign analysis of the intersections, the installation of STOP signs at the intersections of Olney Street/Vane Aveanie and Olney Street/Marybeth Avenue is not recommended. It is recommended Olney Street be placed on the City's list for the use of the radar trailer as a reminder to motorists of the speed limit on Olney Street. In addition, selective sheriff enforcement in the area is recommended. Commissioner Ruiz stated that on Marybeth there is no stop sign, and perhaps there could be one installed (going south). Speaking before the Commission was: Mr. Gilbert Pedregon 9546 Olney Street Rosemead, California 91770 Mr. Pedregon stated that this is his second request. His main concern is with the east and west traffic, people exiting the freeway get diverted down their street. The east and west traffic on Olney Street is a long stretch. He does not feel that by having police enforcement there 8 hours a day will solve their problem, it's only a temporary solution to a permanent problem. Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki stated that the stop sign on Vane Street was installed primarily for safety and not volume. Mr. Pedregon stated that they are very concerned with the safety of the children on that block. Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki stated that one of the reason staff is hesitant to install a stop sign on Olney is because they feel the vehicles will just run right through the stop signs and become another just another sign that people don't pay attention to, if there's not enough cross traffic. She would like to put Olney Street on the list for the radar trailer. Sgt. Robles stated that the Assistant City Manager Don Wagner spoke to the motorcycle officers and requested that they patrol this area and has already written seven (7) citations for speeding. Speaking before the Commission was: Tom Dominia 9524 Olney Street Rosemead, California 91770 Mr. Dominia stated that statistics can be deceiving because there have been other minor accidents at this location that have gone unreported. Mr. Dor6ia stated that he is not in favor of a stop sign, but feels in this case it would help the situation. He stated that Olney Street has a direct feed into the westbound 10 freeway, and feels it justifies a stop sign, as oppose to Marybeth. Mr. Dominia's concern is for the safety of his children and the children in the neighborhood. Mr. Dominia thanked his neighbors for their support and for coming out to the Traffic Commission meeting this evening. Commissioner Ruiz stated that on Encinita there was a similar situation, and the Traffic Commission requested rumble strips to be installed at this location to slow traffic down, and have been found to be very effective. However, he stated that rumble strips are very noisy. Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki stated that the rumble strips have been found to be very effective in not only,slowing traffic down, but also to remind motorists that there is a crossing there and get their attention. Speaking before the Commission was: Marie Dominia 9524 Olney Street Rosemead, California 91770 Mrs. Dominia stated that she does not feel that by placing a stop sign on Olney would cause more accidents. Commissioner Ruiz stated that the problem is that a stop sign would be placed in the middle of a long stretch of road. Mrs. Dominia stated that she feels that a stop sign would be deterrent for commuters getting on the freeway as an altemate route. Mr. Pedregon asked why a stop sign could not be installed on a temporary basis for a year, and if it does not work have it removed. Vice-Chairman Quintanilla stated that the Commission tries to go incrementally to attack a problem. Sgt. Robles stated that if a stop sign is installed, after a period of time, it gives the motorist a false sense of security, and the City becomes liable, because the traffic does not warrant a stop sign there. Mrs. Dominia asked, about speed bumps vs rumble strips. Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki stated that speed bumps are not approved traffic control geometric devices. Mr. Dominia stated that he's willing to give the rumble strips a try, but would like to keep this issue open for a possible stop sign in the future, should this not work. It was moved by Commissioner Ruiz, seconded by Commissioner Herrera and carried unanimously to accept the recommendation by the Traffic Engineer, with the addition to install the rumble strips. In addition, to having a survey done of the traffic and traffic citations in the next 6-9 months and bring it back to the Commission. Commissioner Ruiz invited the audience to attend the City Council meeting when this item comes before them, and address their issues again at that time. He also urged them to take down the license plate numbers and call the Sheriff's Department with that information, so they may be cited. V. STAFF REPORTS - NONE VI. UPDATE ON CITY COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN ON SEPTEMBER 28, 1999 Administrative Aide Wilkinson stated that the City Council voted to approve the installation of flexible delineators on the island area of Temple City Boulevard and Olney Street. VII. COMMISSIONER REPORTS Commissioner Ruiz stated that on Temple City Boulevard and Marshall there is a fire hydrant on the south/west corner, and there seems to be a van that parks too close to the hydrant, and feels a red curb advisable. Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki stated that she would put through a work order to have that done. Administrative Aide Wilkinson advised the Commission of a workshop that will take place on the 21~`. Sgt. Robles stated that there were 2 arrest made at the last sobriety check point conducted in Rosemead, 12 cars were impounded and wrote a total of 25 traffic citations. VIII. ADJOURNMENT There were 19 people in the audience. The next regularly scheduled meeting is set for November 4, 1999. There being no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 8:15 p.m. ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION DECEMBER 2, 1999 A regular meeting of the Rosemead Traffic Commission was called to order by Chairperson Knapp at 7:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 8838 East Valley Boulevard, Rosemead. ROLL CALL Present: Chairperson Knapp Commissioners: Ruiz & Quintanilla Absent: Commissioner Herrera & Commissioner Baffo Ex Officio: Administrative Aide: Jessica Wilkinson Deputy Traffic Engineer: Joanne Itagaki CALL TO ORDER The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commissioner Ruiz The Invocation was delivered by Chairperson Knapp 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES October Minutes: The minutes were deferred until January, due to a lack of quorum November Minutes: It was moved by Commissioner Quintanilla, seconded by Commissioner Ruiz, and carried unanimously to approve the minutes for November 4, 1999. H. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE - NONE III. OLD BUSINESS A. REQUEST FOR RED CURB AND KEEP CLEARR AT TAE INTERSECTION OF VALLEY BOULEVARD AND HIDDEN PINES STREET Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki stated that this item was brought before the Traffic Commission on September 2, 1999. The request was from the Hidden Pines Homeowners Association (HOA). During the September Commission meeting, the Commission had questions on the issue. In addition, the Commission requested staff to further study the location and recommendation. The data and conditions of the intersection have not changed since the September 2, 1999 report was prepared. Staff reviewed the intersection of Hidden Pines Street and Valley Boulevard on several occasions. There continues to be some blockage of the intersection from eastbound Valley Boulevard vehicles stopped at the intersection of Walnut Grove Avenue. However, few vehicles were observed trying to access Hidden Pines Street from the westbound Valley Boulevard direction. The HOA has requested the installation of red curb on both sides of Hidden Pines Street. Such an installation will provide some additional visibility for vehicles exiting Hidden Pines Street. As stated by the Sheriff s Department, this red curb will provide extensive visibility, however, it does provide motorist some additional space to "nose-out" into traffic. The request for "KEEP CLEAR" markings was also made by the HOA. Staff has re-evaluated the installation of "KEEP CLEAR" markings. Based on the minimal number of homes (less than 12) and no reported accidents at the intersection, the installation of "KEEP CLEAR" is not recommended. RECOMMENDATION The installation of 50 feet of red curb west of and 20 feet of red curb east of Hidden Pines Street on Valley Boulevard was recommended. The installation of "KEEP CLEAR" markings was NOT recommended. Speaking before the Commission was: Chris Orozco President of Hidden Pines Association Mr. Orozco stated that he has read the recommendation of the Traffic Engineer, and would like to know why the "KEEP CLEAR" markings are not going to be installed. Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki stated that there were no reported accidents at this intersection, and staff does not like to recommend "KEEP CLEAR" markings unless it is absolutely necessary. Chairperson Knapp stated that the "KEEP CLEAR" markings on Hellman Avenue at the exit on Walnut Grove, it appears the motorist disregard the "KEEP CLEAR" markings at this location. Commissioner Ruiz asked Mr. Orozco, at what time does the back-up occur? Mr. Orozco stated that it starts to back up between 2:00 p.m. - 6:00 p.m., and all day long on the weekends. Commissioner Ruiz recommended that signs stating "NO PARKING ANYTIME" be installed instead of the red curb. It was moved by Commissioner Ruiz, seconded by Commissioner Quintanilla, and carried unanimously to install "NO PARKING ANYTIME" signs, instead of the red curb. IV. NEW BUSINESS A. REQUEST FOR TRAFFIC CONTROLS ON EDMOND DRIVE BETWEEN WALNUT GROVE AVENUE AND MUSCATEL AVENUE Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki stated that a request has been received from Mr. Otto A. Peters, 8738 Edmond Drive, requesting the Traffic Commission install additional traffic controls on Edmond Drive to reduce the speeds on the street. Mr. Peters is specifically requesting the installation of speed bumps on Edmond Drive. Mr. Peters was furnished with the City's policy on speed bumps. As Mr. Peters indicated in his letter, this matter was brought before the Commission previously. According to our records, this issue was brought before the Commission on March 3, 1994. The staff report and minutes of that meeting are attached for the Commission's reference. Edmond Drive is a 36-foot wide east/west residential roadway stretching from Walnut Grove Avenue to Muscatel Avenue. This is a distance of approximately 1,200 feet. Edmond Drive at Walnut Grove Avenue is controlled by a traffic signal. Edmond Drive is stop controlled at its "T" intersection with Muscatel Avenue. There are no sidewalks on either side of Edmond Drive. Curbside parking is minimal to moderate throughout the day. The prima facie speed limit is 25 mph. The reported accident history at the intersection of Fendyke Avenue and Barrette Street was reviewed for the period beginning January 1, 1996 through June 30, 1999. This review indicated no reported accidents at the intersection. Staff will attempt to gather data regarding speeds and traffic volumes on Edmond Drive. This information will be presented at the Traffic Commission meeting. Due to lack of data at this time, discussion will be expanded and presented to the Traffic Commission at the meeting. As you aware, the City's current policy is to deny the installation of speed humps on public streets. This is primarily due to the lack of approved standard designs for the speed humps. Other cities have installed speed humps on a "trial or study" basis and have determined, under their own legal advice, whether their City is taking an additional liability. The installation of rumble strips in the City has been primarily to advise motorists in advance of a specific situation. For example, on Encinitas Avenue, the rumble strips were installed to warn motorists of the yellow school crosswalk at Pitkin Street. The installation of rumble strips on Edmond Drive would be inappropriate, at this time. Upon field review of Edmond Drive, there were no speed limit signs posted on the street. The 1994 staff report recommended the installation of 25-mph speed limit signs at both ends of Edmond Drive. It is unknown why these signs were not installed. RECOMMENDATION: The installation of 25 mph signs (36" x 45") on Edmond Drive at Walnut Grove Avenue and at Muscatel Avenue. It was further recommended that the speed trailer be placed on Edmond Drive followed by selective enforcement. Speaking before the Commission was Helen Peter 8738 Edmond Drive Rosemead, California 91770 Mrs. Peters stated that the speeding situation at this location is very bad, and she is afraid someone will be killed if something is not done. Speaking before the Commission was: Mr. Geller Retired Transportation Specialist Mr. Geller stated that in 1992, he had a car parked, and at approximately 3:00 a.m., it was hit by a drunk driver. He would like the Commission to look at speed controlled bumps, he feels they help reduce the speed. Chairperson Knapp asked why the rumble strips would not be appropriate at this location. Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki stated that rumble strips are generally installed to advise the motorists of a particular situation. Chairperson Knapp asked Mrs. Peters if the residents have ever considered asking the City to install sidewalks. Mrs. Peters stated that she does not feel sidewalks would help the situation. Chairperson Knapp stated that whatever the Commission recommends tonight goes to the City Council for their approval. Commissioner Ruiz recommended that a study be done at this location to install rumble strips and come back with their findings. It was moved by Commissioner Ruiz, seconded by Commissioner Knapp, and carried unanimously to approve the Traffic Engineer's recommendation, in addition to having a study being made at this location to install rumble strips and a stop sign and bring it back at a later date. B. REQUEST FOR SIGNAGE AT 4655 FENDYKE AVENUE Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki stated that this request was received from Ms. Dorothy Y. Chu of 4655 Fendyke Avenue. Ms. Chu is requesting the installation of "reflectors" in front of her residence to "deter drivers from running up" the driveway. Ms. Chu indicates she has experienced two incidents where vehicles have run on to her property causing damage. Ms. Chu's residence, 4655 Fendyke Avenue, is directly across from Barrette Street. Barrette Street is a 30-foot wide east/west roadway also with no existing striping on the street. The prima facie speed limit is 25 mph. The reported accident history at the intersection of Fendyke Avenue and Barrette Street was reviewed for the period beginning January 1, 1996 through June 30, 1999. This review indicated no reported accidents at the intersection. Field review of the intersection of Fendyke Avenue/Barrette Street revealed some tire marks in the street indicating some high-speed travel through the intersection. There were no visible marks on the curb. Fendyke Avenue north of Barrette Street is a cul-de-sac. Therefore, the majority of traffic is likely turning westbound to southbound and northbound to eastbound. This is supported by the tire marks of the intersection. There is an existing street light located in front of 4655 Fendyke Avenue. The location of this street light would be appropriate for the installation of signs warning of the "T" condition of the intersection. RECOMMENDATION: The installation of a W56 sign with a yellow Type N-I marker was recommended on Fendyke Avenue directly across the Barrette Street. Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki stated that rumble strips are generally installed to advise the motorists of a particular situation. Chairperson Knapp asked Mrs. Peters if the residents have ever considered asking the City to install sidewalks. Mrs. Peters stated that she does not feel sidewalks would help the situation. Chairperson Knapp stated that whatever the Commission recommends tonight goes to the City Council for their approval. Commissioner Ruiz recommended that a study be done at this location to install rumble strips and come back with their findings. It was moved by Commissioner Ruiz, seconded by Commissioner Knapp, and carried unanimously to approve the Traffic Engineer's recommendation, in addition to having a study being made at this location to install rumble strips and a stop sign and bring it back at a later date. B. REQUEST FOR SIGNAGE AT 4655 FENDYKE AVENUE Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki stated that this request was received from Ms. Dorothy Y. Chu of 4655 Fendyke Avenue. Ms. Chu is requesting the installation of "reflectors" in front of her residence to "deter drivers from running up" the driveway. Ms. Chu indicates she has experienced two incidents where vehicles have run on to her property causing damage. Ms. Chu's residence, 4655 Fendyke Avenue, is directly across from Barrette Street. Barrette Street is a 30-foot wide east/west roadway also with no existing striping on the street. The prima facie speed limit is 25 mph. The reported accident history at the intersection of Fendyke Avenue and Barrette Street was reviewed for the period beginning January 1, 1996 through June 30, 1999. This review indicated no reported accidents at the intersection. Field review of the intersection of Fendyke Avenue/Barrette Street revealed some tire marks in the street indicating some high-speed travel through the intersection. There were no visible marks on the curb. Fendyke Avenue north of Barrette Street is a cul-de-sac. Therefore, the majority of traffic is likely turning westbound to southbound and northbound to eastbound. This is supported by the tire marks of the intersection. There is an existing street light located in front of 4655 Fendyke Avenue. The location of this street light would be appropriate for the installation of signs warning of the "T" condition of the intersection. RECOMMENDATION: The installation of a W56 sign with a yellow Type N-1 marker was recommended on Fendyke Avenue directly across the Barrette Street. Speaking before the Commission was: Dorothy Y. Chu 4655 Fendyke Avenue Rosemead, California 91770 Mrs. Chu thanked the Commission for their recommendation at this location. It was moved by Commissioner Ruiz, seconded by Commissioner Quintanilla, and carried unanimously to approve the Traffic Engineer's recommendation, in addition to adding 25' feet of red curb in between the driveways. V. STAFF REPORTS Administrative Aide Wilkinson stated that the City Council approved the left turn pocket on Valley Boulevard, at Loma and Gernert. Administrative Aide Wilkinson was asked about the City's preparations for Y2K. VI. COMMISSIONER REPORTS Commissioner Quintanilla wished everyone a Happy Holiday Season and Happy New Year. Commissioner Ruiz stated that last month there was talk about the trucks on Temple City Boulevard. Commissioner Ruiz said that a couple days after the meeting, there was a report from the AQMD regarding the exhaust of diesel fuel, he would like staff to look at this issue because it pertains to trucks on residential streets. Commissioner Ruiz stated that the red curb needs to be painted on Temple City Boulevard right at the fire hydrant. Commissioner Ruiz stated that at the corner of Ellis Lane and Olney there are bushes that are extending out to curb, they are approximately 4-5' feet, causing poor visibility. VII. There being no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned. The next regular scheduled meeting is set for January 6, 2000. MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION FROM: JESSICA WILKINSON, ADMINISTRATIVE AIDE DATE: JANUARY 6, 2000 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. MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION FROM: FRANK G. TRIPEPI, CITY MANAGER DATE: JANUARY 3, 2000 RE: ORDINANCE REGULATING STUDENT LOADING & UNLOADING At the direction of City Council, staff is bringing this draft ordinance to the Traffic Commission for review, consideration and return with a recommended action to the City Council. Beginning with the new school year, the City has redoubled efforts to improve traffic and student safety enforcement near school sites. Sheriff's Department personnel continue to focus on traffic violations while supplementing city parking control teams with parking enforcement. Some of the most troublesome examples of unsafe practices reported by Sheriff, city, school site personnel and residents are the loading and unloading of pupils from private vehicles. Children crossing streets unattended without a crosswalk or signal, and darting out from behind parked or double-parked vehicles is of particular concern. Other cities report similarunsafe practices. Efforts to address this unsafe condition are hampered by lack of a specific vehicle code reference against which to cite. The Sheriffs Department recommended the City adopt an amendment to the municipal code regulating the loading and unloading of children in school zones. This will allow traffic officers to more aggressively enforce this unsafe practice. The City Attorney has prepared an ordinance regulating loading and unloading of students for consideration. The proposed ordinance was reviewed with school district executives and school site management personnel. Their input and Sheriff's Department recommended changes have been incorporated into the ordinance. Our goal is to promote improved student and traffic safety, and provide'the Sheriffs Department specific enforcement authority to cite violators who endanger students and other motorists. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Traffic Commission review the draft ordinance regarding addition of a new section to the Municipal Code establishing regulations for the loading and unloading of student passengers and recommend approval to the City Council for their January 25, 2000 meeting. ATTACHMENT - ORDINANCE NO. 801 ORDINANCE NO. 801 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD ESTABLISHING REGULATIONS FOR THE LOADING AND UNLOADING OF STUDENT PASSENGERS IN SCHOOL ZONES THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. New section 10.04.060 is hereby added to the Rosemead Municipal Code to read as follows: 10.04.060. LOADING AND UNLOADING OF STUDENT PASSENGERS IN SCHOOL ZONES. (a) No operator of a motor vehicle shall stop or park to load or unload students, in a school zone, where such loading or unloading is in a location which would cause the student, while unattended by an adult, to walk upon the street or highway or to cross the street or highway out of a marked crosswalk or controlled intersection. (b) No operator of a motor vehicle shall load or unload any student, within a school zone, in any intersection, private driveway or street traffic lane. (c) As used in this section "student" means any child, seventeen (17) years of age or younger, who attends any public or private elementary, middle or senior high school. 11 (d) As used in this section "school zone" means an area, during the time students are present, adjacent to any public or private school building or the grounds thereof, contiguous to a street or highway and posted with a standard "School" warning sign. (e) As used in this section "unattended by an adult" means to be without the continuous, direct, and immediate supervision of an adult within one arm's length in distance from the student, while upon the street or highway. A student is unattended by an adult if the adult is seated within a vehicle while the student is outside of the vehicle. (f) Subsections (a) and (b) shall not apply when the operator is directed to stop or park and load or unload students by a peace officer. SECTION 2. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and cause the same to processed in accordance with state law. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this day of February, 2000. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk 2 TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION FROM: JOANNE ITAGAKI, TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DEPUTY DATE: DECEMBER 15. 1999 SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR SPEED BUMPS ON ROCKHOLD AVENUE BETWEEN MARSHALL STREET AND OLNEY STREET REQUEST A request has been received, letter attached, from Ms. Lupe Herrera of 3632 Rockhold Avenue. Ms. Herrera is requesting the installation of speed bumps on Rockhold Avenue to reduce the number of speeding vehicles on the street. CONDITIONS Rockhold Avenue is a 36-foot wide north/south residential roadway with no striping on the street. Rockhold Avenue is stop controlled at its "T" intersection with Marshall Street. Rockhold Avenue is uncontrolled at its "T" intersection with Olney Street. Streetlights exist on the east side of the roadway. The prima facie speed limit on Rockhold Avenue is 25 mph. Figure 1 depicts the existing conditions on Rockhold Avenue DATA The reported accident history on Rockhold Avenue between Marshall Street and Olney Street was reviewed for the period beginning January 1, 1996 through June 30, 1999. This review indicated no reported accidents on Rockhold Avenue. DISCUSSION The City's current policy is to deny the installation of speed humps on public streets. This is primarily due to the lack of approved standard designs for the speed humps. Other cities have installed speed humps on a "trial or study" basis and have determined, under their own legal advice, whether their city is taking on additional liability. Field review of Rockhold Avenue found light to moderate on street parking. This added to the perception of a "wide" street that often leads to higher than Request for Speed Bumps on Rockhold Avenue Between Marshall Street and Olney Street Page 2 expected speeds. The street, in fact, was wider than Earle Avenue (30 feet) which is the next street west of Rockhold Avenue. Based on driving in the neighborhood, it is likely the motorists traveling on Rockhold Avenue live on Rockhold Avenue or Olney Street at the immediate end of Rockhold Avenue. On Olney Avenue, there are two "dips" in the street between Rockhold Avenue and Earle Avenue. For "speeding" traffic trying to find a "quick" way home, these two dips would discourage this specific travel pattern. However, to remind motorists traveling on Rockhold Avenue, the installation of 25-mph speed limit signs is recommended. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that 25-mph signs be installed on Rockhold Avenue south of Marshall Street (southbound) and north of Olney Street (northbound). Figure 1 depicts this recommendation. Attachments JI\Rsd\Rookhold Marshall Street Install R2(25) sign on existing post. Existing street sweeping sign to remain. m 7 Q 0° a_ 0 U O z 36 feet IT Na to Sale \ Install R2(25) sign on existing street light pole. Olney Street August 25, 1999 Traffic Department Communications City of Rosemead 8638 East Valley Boul Rosemead, California Gentlemen: My name is Lupe and live at 3632 AUG 3 01999 1770 a resident of the City of Rosemead for 26 years, ld Avenue, between Marshall and Olney Streets. There is a hazardous s tuation on Rockhold that I wish to call your attention to - that of speeding cars which endanger both the children and residents, The high-5 eed incidents occur most frequently on Fridays, Saturdays, and Sundays. It is my suggestion t the legal speed limit Thant you for cons Sincerely, Lupe Herrera 3632 Rockhold Avenue Rosemead, California 9 626/280-7604 speed bumps be installed to slow the traffic to 25 mph, this serious problem. L770