Loading...
TC - Agenda - 11-06-08Public Comment from the Audience: • If you wish to address the Rosemead Traffic Commission, please complete a Speaker Request Card and hand it to the Secretary before the start of the meeting. • The Rosemead Traffic Commission will hear public comments on matters not listed on the agenda during the Public Comments from the Audience period. • Opportunity to address the Traffic Commission (on non - agenda items) is limited to 3 minutes per speaker. • The Traffic Commission will hear public comments on items listed on the agenda during discussion of the matter and prior to a vote. Brown Act: Pursuant to provisions of the Brown Act, no action may be taken on a matter unless it is listed on the agenda, or unless certain emergency or special circumstances exist. The Traffic Commission may direct staff to investigate and /or schedule certain matters for consideration at a future Traffic Commission meeting. Americans with Disabilities Act: In compliance with the ADA, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk's office at least 48 hours prior to the meeting to allow the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting or service. Persons attending the meeting shall observe rules of propriety, decorum, good conduct, and refrain from impertinent or slanderous remarks. Violation of this rule shall result in such persons being barred from further audience before the governing body. This agenda was posted 72 hours in advance of the meeting at the City Hall, 8838 E. Valley Boulevard, Rosemead; the L.A. County Library, Rosemead Branch, 8800 E. Valley Boulevard, Rosemead; and other locations pursuant to RMC Sec. 1.08.020. Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Rosemead Traffic Commission regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection in the City Clerk's office during normal business hours. Rosemead Traffic Commission AGENDA NOVEMBER 6, 2008 7:00 PM City Hall Council Chambers 8838 E. Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, Califomia 91770 Holly Knapp, Chairperson Howard Masuda, Vice - Chairman Keno Deary, Commissioner Brian Lewin, Commissioner Joanne Russell, Commissioner ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION November 6, 2008 • CALL TO ORDER — 7:00 PM • PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE —Vice Chairman Masuda • INVOCATION —Commissioner Deary • ROLL CALL —Chairperson Knapp, Vice Chairman Masuda; Commissioners Deary, Lewin and Russell 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES October 2, 2008 — Regular Meeting 2. PUBLIC COMMENT FROM THE AUDIENCE Please refer to public comment guidelines on the first page of this document. 3. OLD BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS A. MISSION DRIVEIIVAR AVENUE— Southbound Visibility Concerns and Crosswalk Concerns This item was originally brought before the Commission on July 17, 2008. At that time, the Commission approved the installation of red curb on the north side of Mission Drive east of Ivar Avenue and to add "ladder" striping to the crosswalk. This item has been brought back to the Commission to provide analysis of school pedestrians crossing the intersection of Mission Drivellvar Avenue within the existing crosswalk. The request is for the installation of a crossing guard, flashing beacon, or in- roadway warning lights to provide additional notification of this school crossing location. Staff Recommendation It is staffs recommendation that the Traffic Commission denies the request for the installationfmplementation of additional traffic control devices for the crosswalk on Mission Drive at Ivar Avenue. 4. NEW BUSINESS A. Presentation on Citywide Street Striping and Signage Improvement Program As part of the City's Fiscal Year 2008 -09 budget, the City Council included funding to update street striping conditions and street signage throughout the City. City staff will review a presentation explaining the project and take input from the Commission on issues related to these work efforts. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that the Traffic Commission review the presentation and provide input related to the Citywide Street Striping and Signage Improvement Program. ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION November 6, 2008 B. EARLE AVENUE— Letter Request to Review Parking Conditions SUMMARY City staff received a letter request from Sheryl Blum, 4824 Earle Avenue, regarding parking conditions along Earle Avenue north of Mission Drive and south of Grand Avenue. Ms. Blum has asked that the Traffic Commission review the existing conditions and identify possible alternatives for improving parking in this area. A petition of residents on Earle Avenue was also included with the letter request. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that the Traffic Commission direct staff to study this item further and develop recommendations for the Commission's consideration. C. SAN GABRIEL BOULEVARD SOUTH OF GARVEY AVENUE — Turning Movement Concerns at Walgreens Driveway SUMMARY Chairperson Knapp and Commissioner Russell both requested this issue be addressed. The concern was with regards to vehicles parking adjacent to this driveway and the left turn access from the driveway onto San Gabriel Boulevard. Staff Recommendation It is staff's recommendation that the Traffic Commission recommends the following to the City Council 1. Install 68 feet of red curb on the east side of San Gabriel Boulevard south of the driveway access of Walgreen's south of Garvey Avenue. 2. Install two "No Left Turn" (R3 -2) signs for vehicles entering and exiting the Walgreen's driveway on San Gabriel Boulevard south of Garvey Avenue. 3. Remove the left turn pavement marking at the driveway of Walgreen's to be consistent with the proposed "No Left Turn" sign. 5. STAFF REPORTS 6. COMMISSIONER REPORTS ADJOURNMENT The next regular meeting is scheduled for December 4, 2008 at the Rosemead City Hall, City Council Chambers, 8838 East Valley Boulevard. Q:yn17470 -Rsd 2008 -09 TE on- call \Traffic Commission Agendas \November 2008 \Nov 08 Agenda.doc DRAFT MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION OCTOBER 2, 2008 The meeting of the Rosemead Traffic Commission was called to order by Chairperson Knapp at 7:00 p.m., in the City Hall Council Chambers, 8838 E. Valley Boulevard, Rosemead. The pledge to the flag was led by Commissioner Lewin. The invocation was delivered by Vice Chairman Masuda ROLL CALL OF OFFICERS: Present: Chairperson Knapp, Vice Chairman Masuda, Commissioners Deary, Lewin and Russell Absent: None APPROVAL OF MINUTES Minutes of September 4, 2008, Regular Meeting were amended as follows: On page 3, second paragraph under Mr. DelaCruz speaking before the Commission, Commissioner Lewin believes it would be appropriate to mention that Traffic Engineering Deputy Itagaki explained speed humps historically have not been used by the City. The paragraph is amended to read: "Traffic Engineering Deputy Itagaki explained history of speed humps in the City. That historically speed humps have not been used by the City and that staff has not been given any other direction from the City." On page 5, next to last paragraph, Commissioner Lewin stated he believes the location of the 7 foot hedge is the northwest corner. (Southwest corner is correct; no change in minutes.) Commissioner Lewin requested that on page 6, 2 nd paragraph, "stops sign" be changed to "stop signs." 3' paragraph: Change spelling of "Garvailia and Jcakson" to "Garvalia and Jackson." Under the Vote Results change Hunter to Russell. Vice Chairman Masuda motioned and seconded by Commissioner Russell to accept and approve the amended minutes of September 4, 2008. Vote Results: Yes: Chairperson Knapp, Vice Chairperson Masuda, Commissioners Deary, Lewin and Russell Noes: None Abstain: None 2. PUBLIC COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE Mr. Roland Rodriguez, 8267 Artson Street, stated he is concerned about the crosswalk on Mission Drive that is directly in front of the Rosemead swimming pool. It needs to be repainted. Two children were hit by cars last year at that intersection. Other citizens are also concerned about the crosswalk. He asked that perhaps the City could conduct a study, possibly put in a Rosemead Traffic Commission Minutes of October 2, 200 Page 1 of 10 GTTTIlii reflector system where the reflectors light up, and signs. He stated that while waiting to pick up his children he has noticed that people drive pretty fast in that area. Chairperson Knapp asked Mr. Rodriguez if he could be more specific about the location of the crosswalk. Mr. Rodriguez answered that it is on Mission, directly in front of the Rosemead swimming pool. Near Newby. Mr. Larry Callaham, Principal of Rosemead High School, verified that two children were struck after school last year while in that crosswalk. He stated it is a very dangerous crosswalk because people traveling westbound have a speed limit of 45 and then 25 mph at the school, but when there is little traffic the crosswalk is ignored by the drivers He arrives at the school between 6:45 and 7:00 a.m., not a heavy traffic time, but there are students using the crosswalk crossing north to the pool and on down the street. During peak hours the traffic is congested and much slower. It is after school hours when traffic moves freely that the crosswalk is the most dangerous. Mr. Callaham confirmed that the crosswalk is at Newby. He also requested a study be conducted. Commissioner Lewin stated that Mission Drive is one of the things that he was thinking of as a possible study topic. In particular, that stretch between Rosemead Boulevard and Valley Boulevard. In general, he believes the Commission needs to take a look at Mission Drive and see if it could be made a safer street. He believes 45 miles per hour is too high for that street, especially that section. He agreed with Mr. Rodriguez and Mr. Callaham that something needs to be done with that crosswalk, and that Mission needs to be looked at. Chairperson Knapp asked if painting the crosswalk isn't something that should have been done earlier. Traffic Engineering Deputy Itagaki responded that Deputy Public Works Director Chris Marcarello will make sure the crosswalk at Mission and Newby will get painted. Mr. Marcarello stated he will take care of it. 4. OLD BUSINESS A. TRAFFIC STUDY AT RUSH STREET AND ANGELUS AVENUE Deputy Public Works Director Chris Marcarello presented the staff report. Notification cards were sent out to people within the immediate vicinity of Rush Street and Angelus Avenue. Mr. Marcarello stated that unfortunately it did not appear that many people were able to attend the meeting. Recommendation It is staffs recommendation that the Traffic Commission: 1) Review the presentation made by staff and Kimley -Horn and Associates, 2) Recommend to City Council that Level 1 improvements be made along Rush Street, and 3) Direct staff to continue monitoring traffic conditions and provide updates regarding the effectiveness of the Level 1 improvements. Rosemead Traffic Commission Minutes of October 2, 200 Page 2 of 10 DRAFT An unidentified person from the audience stated he just received the postcard notification. The card is postmarked September 30 and he received it October 2n He is not at the Traffic Commission meeting because of Rush Street but for the Delta Avenue agenda item. His neighbor received his card October 1s` and that is what made him aware of the Delta Avenue agenda item. There was some discussion about the notification process; many cards were sent out to tenants and property owners a week earlier notifying them of the agenda items. The lateness of delivery will be addressed by the Commission at a later time. Mr. Bill Dvorak of Kimley -Horn and Associates made the presentation of traffic calming alternatives for Rush Street and Angelus Avenue. Kimley- Horn's recommendation is Level 1 improvements and staff to determine if Wal -Mart can be conditioned to pay for these or any improvements. Discussion Commissioner Deary inquired about Wal -Mart's stake in the improvements and wondered if they had been invited to the meeting. Mr. Marcarello responded their stake is nothing. Chairperson Knapp explained that Wal- Mart comes up because of the condition of approval, number 41. Mr. Marcarello explained Wal -Mart agreed to provide a certain amount of money for a crossing guard at that location and if warranted, they would fund installation of a flashing yellow beacon. Vice Chairman Masuda likes implementing Level 1 and part of Level 2. He asked if higher visibility on bulb -outs can be installed. Delineators, large Botts' dots, short berm were suggested by Chairperson Knapp and Traffic Engineering Deputy Itagaki. Chairperson Knapp asked if the installation of Botts' dots could cause any problems such as when the children are walking on them. Mr. Dvorak stated he was not sure if that has ever been an issue and he would need to discuss it with the engineers. He would hope there would be no issues. Traffic Engineering Deputy Itagaki agreed with Mr. Dvorak, stating the children would be in an area where they should not be crossing because the dots would be on the outside of the crosswalk; it all depends on what is suggested and how designed. Commissioner Russell asked about the time frame if the improvements are approved, if Level 1 is not successful and Level 2 is approved for implementation, and also if Level 3 is implemented. Mr. Dvorak stated generally one year review period is used. There needs to be objective opinions as well as data. Maybe six months to review while school is in session and then make a decision whether to proceed. Traffic Engineering Deputy Itagaki explained that the Commissioners will have an opportunity to pick and choose parts of each level. Commissioner Lewin asked about crosswalk markings. More reflective paint? What about retro- reflective? He also suggested extending the median for a "safe" area, a stop point in the intersection if the pedestrian needs to stop. Rosemead Traffic Commission Minutes of October 2, 200 Page 3 of 10 DRAFT Vice Chairman Masuda asked if the intent of having a pick up / drop -off zone as shown in Level 2 is for convenience and to slow the traffic. Mr. Dvorak indicated yes. Maria Perea, 2434 Charlotte, did not sign the petition. She drives Angelus and Rush every day. She stated one improvement would be lower shrubbery and trim trees higher. Trees and shrubbery limit visibility. Concerning the drop off, she asked if that would actually be on Rush. Traffic Engineering Deputy Itagaki stated the intent is for some of the cars westbound on Rush to drop -off there and not have them turn right on to Angelus. Ms. Perea indicated Rush is a very dangerous street; speed is the issue. Virginia Peterson, Superintendent of Garvey School District, expressed interest in the drop -off area. This is something the District is looking at for all their schools. She stated the drop -off might be helpful to the school; it will remove traffic from Angelus. She suggested it might be appropriate for some City staff to talk to school staff and provide training for them and the drop -off volunteers, and even drivers. Chairperson Knapp asked Ms. Peterson how the crossing guard is working out at that location. Ms. Peterson responded there are no problems specifically identified. It appears the crossing guard is taking great care in his position. Mr. Richard Vasquez, 8105 E. Whitmore, does not live in this particular area but he does drive it every afternoon while returning home from work, east to west on Rush. He has heard the focus of the Commissioners' discussion to be on the crosswalk, but he believes installation of speed signs is just important. When he sees one of the flashing signs it immediately makes him aware of his speed. With the idea of prevention, he believes it is important to slow the drivers before they get to the crosswalk. He also suggests lowering the speed limit. Commissioner Lewin stated he is leaning towards Level 1 with a few modifications. He would like to look at changing the vegetation on all three median areas. Have low growth and possibly trim trees higher along the whole stretch. Chairperson Knapp asked if all Commissioners agree. They responded yes. Commissioner Lewin would also like to add an extension of median nose into the crosswalk with ADA ramp on either side; basically have that as a stop area for pedestrians if needed. After discussion by Mr. Dvorak, Commissioner Lewin revised his request to have staff study the feasibility of adding the median nose ramp. If the drop off /pick up zone is implemented, Commissioner Lewin would like for staff to work with Rice Elementary staff to establish a time frame for installation so that Rice Elementary can get everything they need into place before installation. Commissioner Deary asked with regard to the drop off if there would be a painted line. Traffic Engineering Deputy Itagaki responded yes, it is shown on the Level 2, Figure 3 diagram. Rosemead Traffic Commission Minutes of October 2, 200 Page 4 of 10 DRAFT Chairperson Knapp wondered if the Botts' dots should be added to Level 1. Traffic Engineering Deputy Itagaki suggested to keep this in Phase 2. After Level 1 is looked at the City can ask the residents what can be done to improve it. Vice Chairman Masuda asked if there is a need for dots or delineators at the south side bulb -out. He believes there needs to be something to slow the traffic; even the traffic cone the crossing guard puts out slows the traffic. Traffic Engineering Deputy Itagaki asked a question of Commissioner Lewin for clarification. His motion is to look at Level 1 and do the drop off, because Level 2 includes the bulb -out on the north side. Commissioner Lewin stated he is asking for the bulb -out on the south side also. Traffic Engineering Deputy Itagaki explained that what she sees is that with Level 2 the drop off could be done without the south side bulb -out. For this reason she was asking for Commissioner Lewin's intent. Commissioner Lewin stated at this point he had made no motion or intent for the bulb - out. Vice Chairman Masuda is in favor of adding the bulb -outs on the south side too, with some kind of delineator. Commissioner Russell wondered how paint will slow someone down. Traffic Engineering Deputy Itagaki explained it has been shown that when a street has been visually narrowed with lines, there is an effect of a corridor feeling. So even though it is only paint, it does affect how you feel when driving. Commissioner Lewin added that if a bulb -out is added on the south side at the crosswalk, there would also be a need to put the painted 13 foot bulb -out on the west side of the driveway. He is concerned that since basically everything east of the crosswalk on the south side of Rush is being red curbed, many parking spaces will be eliminated. Traffic Engineering Deputy Itagaki asked Mr. Dvorak if cars can still park west of the driveway. Mr. Dvorak indicated that parking would be allowed. Commissioner Russell wondered, when the Commission is talking about Figure 3 Level 2, why the Commission doesn't go to that Level instead of going to Level 1 and changing it. The Commissioners looked at the Figures and agreed 'on Level 2. Traffic Engineering Deputy Itagaki clarified that the recommendation is to go to Level 2 with the addition of a study of the feasibility of adding an extension to the median nose, and to work with the Rice Elementary and the District with regard to drop -off and pick -up zone to make sure that they are able to accommodate the drop- off /pick -up zone. Motion Commissioner Russell motioned and Commissioner Lewin seconded that the Traffic Commission recommends to the City Council that Level 2 improvements be made along Rosemead Traffic Commission Minutes of October 2, 200 Page 5 of 10 DRAFT Rush Street; that staff continue monitoring traffic conditions; that staff be directed to work with staff of Rice Elementary and the school District with regard to the drop -off and pick -up zone. Vote Results: Yes: Chairperson Knapp, Vice Chairman Masuda, Commissioners Deary, Lewin and Russell Noes: None Abstain: None B. TRAFFIC STUDY PRIORITIES Deputy Public Works Director Chris Marcarello presented the Traffic Study Priorities report. Recommendation It is staffs recommendation that the Traffic Commission review its list of priority traffic studies and provide direction regarding a study to review. Discussion In response to a question by Commissioner Russell about the Priorities list, Traffic Engineering Deputy Itagaki explained that the Traffic Study Priorities are more city -wide traffic issues, such as having a neighborhood traffic management program. Speeding is an issue throughout the City and the Commission is very limited in the number of ways it can be handled. What is being done with Rush /Angelus is a start at looking at the bigger picture. It is a specific location with specific problems, but it gives the Commissioners an idea of other tools that can be used to help address some traffic issues. Past issues with specific crosswalks for example, what can be done with uncontrolled crosswalks? When the Commission talks about traffic studies it should be looked at as an opportunity for the Commission to have a voice in how things throughout the city can be addressed in a more "global' manner. Another example is the recent "blue curb" policy. Commissioner Russell asked about Rosemead Boulevard. Mr. Marcarello responded that Rosemead Boulevard is under Caltrans' jurisdiction; possible relinquishment is down the road. Commissioner Russell cited possible studies of signals /flashing red lights for both fire stations. She also suggested Walgreens driveway and northbound San Gabriel at about Hellman as you enter the freeway. Traffic Engineering Deputy Itagaki suggested these two items should come before the Traffic Commission as a regular item. Vice Chairman Masuda suggested looking at tour bus traffic and truck routes, along Temple City Boulevard especially. Traffic Engineering Deputy Itagaki stated truck routes is one item that has been addressed in the General Plan by the Planning Commission. Commissioner Lewin asked Mr. Marcarello if the intent is for the Commission to choose several things, make a motion and approve them, and that will be the study list. Rosemead Traffic Commission Minutes of October 2, 200 Page 6 of 10 DRAFT Mr. Marcarello responded it is staffs recommendation that the Commission pick out a few studies to start with to get the process going. It would go to City Council and advise that the Commission has recommended that the issues be looked at. Commissioner Lewin stated that because the truck route study is included in the General Plan Update he will drop that from his list. He recommends a neighborhood traffic management improvement option; residential speeding is a big issue for the City. Speed humps should be included. City Council previously indicated, about two decades ago, that they did not want speed bumps in the City, Commissioner Lewin believes it important to learn the attitude of the new council concerning speed bumps. Commissioner Lewin also suggested guidelines for protected /permissive left -tum signals. Chairperson Knapp cited her desire to get the pocket at southbound Walnut Grove and Ramona. Also the potholes at the ramp and throughout the City. Motion Commissioner Lewin motioned and Commissioner Masuda seconded that the Commission recommends to the City Council that staff be directed to study the development of a Neighborhood Traffic Management improvement program which would include speed bumps, bulb -outs, and various tools. The Commission also recommends to the City Council that staff be directed to develop guidelines for protected /permissive signals within the City. Commissioner Russell submitted a substitute motion. 'She believes the southbound Walnut Grove /Ramona left turn lane is a vital issue to the community. Chairperson Knapp indicated that the work has been approved but it just hasn't been done. Commissioner Russell asked if it has been approved or not approved; what is the status? In response to a question from Mr. Marcarello, Traffic Engineering Deputy Itagaki stated that the work was to have been completed by the previous City Engineer but was not. It is a matter of getting it added to a project list. Mr. Marcarello will make sure that it gets back into the pipeline. Traffic Engineering Deputy Itagaki suggested the Commission send this back to the Council and let them know it was already approved and there needs to be a way to fund the work. Commissioner Russell would like to have a study for the fire station lights and the speed bumps. Commissioner Lewin pointed out that the speed bumps are included in the Neighborhood Traffic Management study. Concerning the fire station lights, Mr. Marcarello stated staff could work with the Fire Department. This will be added to the list for the Traffic Commission. The original motion by Commissioner Lewin and seconded by Vice Chairman Masuda was amended to include a reminder to Council regarding the left -turn at southbound Walnut Grove at Ramona. Rosemead Traffic Commission Minutes of October 2, 200 Page 7 of 10 DRAFT Vote Results: Yes: Chairperson Knapp, Vice Chairman Masuda, Commissioners Deary, Lewin and Russell Noes: None Abstain: None 4. NEW BUSINESS A. EARLE AVENUE AND DELTA AVENUE: BETWEEN MISSION DRIVE AND WELLS STREET — Concern Regarding Speeding and Lack of Sidewalk Traffic Engineering Deputy Itagaki presented the staff report Recommendation It is staffs recommendation that selective speed enforcement be conducted on Earle Avenue and Delta Avenue between Mission Drive and Wells Street especially during school start and release times to address the current speeding issue. It is staff's recommendation that the Traffic Commission recommends the City Council consider the implementation of a speed hump policy or a neighborhood traffic calming program that could be applied city -wide. Discussion Mr. Manuel Cox, 4527 Earle, likes staffs recommendation. He noticed a deputy at the comer and there was a difference. Mr. Cox has observed residences that have vegetation growing on City right -of -way which forces the children into the street. He stated there is not much foot traffic because parents drive their children to school, only a short distance away. Mr. Sal De La Cruz, 4533 Earle, stated enforcement officer parked on the street has helped this week. The crossing guard at Walnut Grove and Wells is very slow. Mr. Marcarello will follow up. Chairperson Knapp asked Mr. Marcarello about the sidewalks. She wondered if there is a code requirement that would mandate installation of a sidewalk. Mr. Marcarello responded there was a code requiring a sidewalk when valuation of a remodel is over $10,000. However, Council approved an ordinance contrary to that; right now there is no legal course to require a sidewalk. The City is being proactive and will work with the residents. There are CDBG grant funds that can be used. Traffic Engineering Deputy Itagaki asked if the City can require a resident who has vegetation within the City right -of -way to cut it back. Mr. Marcarello said "absolutely." Residents are supposed to apply for an encroachment permit for any vegetation or if there are accessibility issues. With a specific address the issue can be addressed to the property owner. Rosemead Traffic Commission Minutes of October 2, 200 Page 8 of 10 DRAFT Mr. Cox was asked for the addresses of the homes with the vegetation. He could provide no addresses but the residences are on the west side of Earle, two houses north of Wells. Mr. Roberto Salazar, 4504 Delta, stated speeds are faster during commute times on Delta. There is some cut through traffic. He believes speed humps will help. In 2001 when he added a bedroom to his house he did not have to add a sidewalk. Commissioner Lewin suggested speed limit signs be posted at either end of both streets to serve as a friendly reminder. It may not affect the worst speeders but it may act as a reminder in some kind of positive fashion. Commissioner Lewin stated that eastbound Wells Street, almost no one stops at that stop sign. When he was with Mr. Cox they watched two or three cars basically go through the stop sign. He recommends a larger sized stop sign and more enforcement. Motion Commissioner Lewin motioned and Vice Chairman Masuda seconded that the Traffic Commission recommends to the City Council to install 25 mph speed signs in both directions of Delta and Earle at Mission and Wells; and increase the size of stop sign on eastbound Wells at Earle, and refresh paint at that intersection. Mr. Marcarello indicated the City is going to bid to inventory all traffic devices throughout the City. This inventory will record all traffic signs. The inventory will then be used as a maintenance tool. Vote Results Yes: Chairperson Knapp, Vice Chairman Masuda, Commissioners Deary, Lewin and Russell Noes: None Abstain: None 5. STAFF REPORTS - NONE 6. COMMISSIONER REPORTS Commissioner Deary asked about the form for "problems." Traffic Engineering Deputy has it ready and will email to each of them. The form will be prepared as a pad for their use. Commissioner Russell wants to make sure that someone talks with the crossing guard at Walnut Grove and Wells. Vice Chairman Masuda stated that notifications of agenda items need to get out earlier. Chairperson Knapp suggested making courtesy phone calls to the key people. A speaker from the audience stated that one reason some residents from Delta and Earle did not attend the meeting was because of the Vice Presidential debate scheduled earlier in the evening. Commissioner Lewin added perhaps the calls could be made specifically to those who want to speak. Those are the people who are the ones most likely to come and talk again. Rosemead Traffic Commission Minutes of October 2, 200 Page 9 of 10 DRAFT Vice Chairman Masuda suggested a recorded message about the meeting. Mr. Marcarello responded that might be happening eventually. Some cities are going to CRM (Customer Relationship Management) that could handle this type of thing. But for now, the website, mailers, or calls to the critical people would be good. 7. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned until November 6, 2008, at 7:00 p.m. Jl:mec(06160)17470/1002/Min04 Rosemead Traffic Commission Minutes of October 2, 200 Page 10 of 10 ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TO: THE HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND COMMISSIONERS FROM: JOANNE ITAGAKI, TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DEPUTY DATE: NOVEMBER 6, 2006 SUBJECT: MISSION DRIVE /IVAR AVENUE — SOUTHBOUND VISIBILITY CONCERNS AND CROSSWALK CONCERNS SUMMARY This item was originally brought before the Commission on July 17, 2008. At that time, the Commission approved the installation of red curb on the north side of Mission Drive east of Ivar Avenue and to add 'ladder" striping to the crosswalk. This item has been brought back to the Commission to provide analysis of school pedestrians crossing the intersection of Mission Drive /lvar Avenue within the existing crosswalk. The request is for the installation of a crossing guard, flashing beacon, or in- roadway warning lights to provide additional notification of this school crossing location. Staff Recommendation It is staffs recommendation that the Traffic Commission denies the request for the installation /implementation of additional traffic control devices for the crosswalk on Mission Drive at Ivar Avenue. ANALYSIS The existing conditions at the intersections of Mission Drive and Ivar Avenue have not changed since this item was brought before the Commission in July. Exhibit "A" depicts existing conditions at the intersection of Mission Drive and Ivar Avenue. Discussion The installation or implementation on most traffic control devices is based on guidelines set forth in the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD). The following guidelines are summarized from the CA MUTCD. Crossing Guards "Adult crossing guards may be used under the following conditions: 1. At uncontrolled crossings where there is no alternate controlled crossing Traffic Commission Meeting November 6, 2008 Page 2 of 4 within 180 m (600 ft); and a. In urban areas where the vehicular traffic volume exceeds 350 during each of any two hours (not necessarily .consecutive) in which 40 or more school pedestrians cross daily while going to or from school; or b. In rural areas where the vehicular traffic volume exceeds 300 during each of any two hours (not necessarily consecutive) in which 30 or more school pedestrians cross daily while going to or from school. Whenever the critical (85 percentile) approach speed exceeds 64 km /h (40 mph), the guidelines for rural areas should be applied. " Note: This is not the complete guideline as presented in the CA MUTCD. However, this is the section that specifically applies to the crossing on Mission Drive at Ivar Avenue. Flashing Beacons at School Crosswalks "Flashing yellow beacons may be installed to supplement standard school signing and markings for the purpose of providing advanced warning during specified times of operation when justified. A flashing yellow beacon may be justified when ALL of the following conditions are fulfilled: 1. The uncontrolled school crossing is on the "Suggested Route to School" and 2. At least 40 school pedestrians use the crossing during each of any two hours (not necessarily consecutive) or a normal school day; and 3. The crossing is at least 180 m (600 ft) from the nearest alternate crossing controlled by traffic signals, stop signs or crossing guards; and 4. The vehicular volume through the crossing exceeds 200 vehicles per hour in urban areas or 140 vehicles per hour in rural areas during the same hour the students are going to and from school during normal school hours; and 5. The critical approach speeds exceed 55 km /h (35 mph) or the approach visibility is less than the stopping sight distance." In- Roadway Warning Lights (IRWLs) "The following shall be considered when evaluating the need for In- Roadway Warning Lights: a. Whether the crossing is controlled or uncontrolled. b. An engineering traffic study to determine if In- Roadway Warning Lights are compatible with the safety and operation of nearby intersections, which may or may not be, controlled by traffic signals or STOPMELD signs. c. Standard traffic signs for crossing and crosswalk pavement markings are provided. d. At least 40 pedestrians regularly use the crossing during each of any two hours (not necessarily consecutive) during a 24 -hour period. e. The vehicular volume through the crossing exceeds 200 vehicles per hour in urban areas or 140 vehicles per hour in rural areas during peak -hour pedestrian usage. f. The critical approach speed (85 percentile) is 70 km /h (45 mph) or less. Traffic Commission Meeting November 6, 2008 Paqe 3 of 4 g. In- Roadway Warning Lights are visible to drivers at the minimum stopping sight distance for the posted speed limit. h. Public education on In- Roadway Warning Lights is conducted for new installations. " Pedestrian and vehicular count data was collected on Tuesday, October 28, 2008. The data is summarized on Exhibit "B" and reveal the following: Pedestrian count Vehicular count 7:30 — 8:30 AM 37 (4 adults) 1,527 2:00 — 3:00 PM 16 (2 adults) 1,096 Observations of the pedestrians indicated that most of the pedestrians were crossing in the northbound direction in both the AM and PM periods. This would seem to indicate that during the AM periods the students crossing are related to the high school. During the PM period, the student crossing appeared to be related to the junior high school. Observations also identified most vehicles would stop for pedestrians in the crosswalk. There were a couple of occasions when vehicles would not stop for the pedestrians. The nearest controlled crossing would be at the intersection of Mission Drive and Rosemead Boulevard. This is a signalized intersection that provides pedestrian signal indications. This intersection is over 600 feet east of the intersection of Mission Drive and Ivar Avenue. The critical approach speed is approximately 45 mph. The exact critical approach speed will be provided at the Traffic Commission meeting. The data collected does not . satisfy the guidelines presented for the installation /implementation of crossing guards, flashing beacons or IRWLs. The data indicate that the pedestrian volumes do not satisfy the "40 school pedestrians" crossing during any 2 hours (not necessarily consecutive). While the vehicular volume satisfies the guidelines for all the traffic control measures considered. The nearest controlled crossing is more that 600 feet away and the critical approach speed is approximately 45 mph. Based on the data collected at the marked pedestrian crosswalk on Mission Drive at Ivar Avenue, the installation of any additional traffic control devices is not recommended at this time. Traffic Commission Meeting November 6, 2008 Page 4 of 4 Staff Recommendation It is staffs recommendation that the Traffic Commission denies the request for the installation /implementation of additional traffic control devices for the crosswalk on Mission Drive at Ivar Avenue. PUBLIC NOTICE PROCESS This item has been noticed through the regular agenda notification process. Submitted by: � .6.lLICItI ir�R / . Joanne Itagaki Traffic Engineering Deputy Exhibit A: Existing Conditions at Mission Drive and Ivar Avenue Exhibit B: Pedestrian and Vehicle Counts at Mission Drive and Ivar Avenue ° - D r 0 / / m s I I J / IVAR AVENUE / a I � II 4 / O A Z V i o g C A I Y [VAR AVENUE m _ mw r ' H vq < in 'ZJ oX IM / a / v I ✓/ 0 m � z< IM Oy zo / z• / / / �� n o Z zm m Z. •�\ I g ° °� e > ° Z Z r ZW Ln U��cy 0° Z U � S313IH3A 4Z PVd S313IH3A S£ VV� 00 Z M � Cli �a 0 0 � a Ci 98 >> �a <�� $1 �N Q nN Z Z Z Q x xx En w Ix wO �� J p U U W W a a IL IL S313IH3A ZZ Wd r SL WV aMaAb NVAI C9/ re p V, �Q� ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TO: TRAFFIC COMMISSION FROM: CHRIS MARCARELLO, DEPUTY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR DATE: NOVEMBER 6. 2008 SUBJECT: EARLE AVENUE —LETTER REQUEST TO REVIEW PARKING CONDITIONS ' SUMMARY City staff received a letter request from Sheryl Blum, 4824 Earle Avenue, regarding parking conditions along Earle Avenue north of Mission Drive and south of Grand Avenue. Ms. Blum has asked that the Traffic Commission review the existing conditions and identify possible alternatives for improving parking in this area. A petition of residents on Earle Avenue was also included with the letter request. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that the Traffic Commission direct staff to study this item further and develop recommendations for the Commission's consideration. DISCUSSION I Residents along Earle Avenue, north of Mission Drive and south of Grand Avenue submitted a petition asking staff to evaluate the parking conditions in their neighborhood. The residents in this area maintain that employees of the nearby California Mission Inn park along Earle Avenue, limiting parking for residents in this area. Prior to developing recommendations related to this request, staff would like the Traffic Commission to provide input and further direction. Possible items staff will analyze include: • Review of existing parking requirements for California Mission Inn, as required by the City. • Public outreach with the California Mission Inn and neighborhood residents to develop alternatives. • Review potential parking alternatives for California Mission Inn employee vehicles in this area. Submitt d by: Chris Marcarello Deputy Public Works Director Sheryl Blum 4824 Earle Ave Rosemead, CA 91770 626- 675 -2422 Brian Saeki Assistant City Manager 8838 East Valley Blvd Rosemead, CA 91770 9130108 Dear Mr. Saeki, In 1960 the Rosemead Planning Commission granted a waiver of zoning requirements with less than required parking to the California Christian Home, Inc., a care center that has evolved into a multi- million dollar industry, forty -eight years later. The waiver is attached to the property in perpetuity unless there is a structural change at which time the zoning requirements can be challenged. In the mean time the residents of Earle Ave receive the brunt of employee parking daily for a minimum of 16 hours per day, not to mention quarterly open houses and other functions. This has burdened the neighborhood as the employee /function entrance is on the west of Earle Ave. Two years ago we, the residents of Earle, petitioned the Director (CC De&aff) of the California Mission Inn, Rose Manor, Medic 1 and the rehab center to cooperate in a neighborly fashion asking the employees to park on the west of Earle leaving the east for the residents and quests. It was definitely announced at employee meetings but management cannot control the situation. Except for Medic 1, ean exemplary, honorable crew that has honored the agreement. Hence, our petition for enforced Resident Permit Parking only. Wi"really need some relief as the CMI complex is not required to provide entirely off street parking for it's employees with the consideration that the employee entrance' is on Earle, no employee will park on Delta as it is too far to walk. It's easier to cross the street. Several questions arose ,as I went around gathering support for this venture: 1. How many permits will be issued per household? 2. How many quest permits will each house get? 3.. Is, there a fee? A. Can we get better painted cross walks? 5.' Cvn they' slow the traffic?, The last two questions were addressed years ago but there - are some 'neighbors that would like it to be .'better. Thank you for your time and consideration, , Shery Blum ; i Residents of Earle Ave Rosemead, Ca 91770 Brian Saeki Assistant City Manager 8838 East Valley Blvd Rosemead, CA 91770 Dear Mr. Saeki, 915 *6 We, the residents of Earle Ave, formally request enforced Resident Permit Parking only on the east side of Earle Ave between Mission Rd and brand Ave. We acknowledge the co- operation of the California Mission Inn, Rosesumd Manor, Medic 1, and the rehab center but unfortunately a good will agreement cannot be enforced as employees view themselves as the public. Leaving no parking for the residential homeowners or quests, 20 hours a day, 7 days a week. A situation created in 1960, Zone Exception Case No. 5 With respect, The Residents of Earle 471 ►40s' HoMS WCT 4cMr,- 4"36 4842 4846 4852 4856 ,I.: . M F IR MIA ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TO: THE HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND COMMISSIONERS FROM: JOANNE ITAGAKI, TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DEPUTY DATE: NOVEMBER 6, 2006 SUBJECT: SAN GABRIEL BOULEVARD SOUTH OF GARVEY AVENUE — TURNING MOVEMENT CONCERNS AT WAL GREEN'S DRIVEWAY SUMMARY Chairperson Knapp and Commissioner Russell both requested this issue be addressed. The concern was with regards to vehicles parking adjacent to this driveway and the left turn access from the driveway onto San Gabriel Boulevard. Staff Recommendation It is staffs recommendation that the Traffic Commission recommends the following to the City Council: 1. Install 68 feet of red curb on the east side of San Gabriel Boulevard south of the driveway access of Walgreen's south of Garvey Avenue. 2. Install two "No Left Turn" (R3 -2) signs for vehicles entering and exiting the Walgreen's driveway on San Gabriel Boulevard south of Garvey Avenue. 3. Remove the left turn pavement marking at the driveway of Walgreen's to be consistent with the proposed "No Left Turn" sign. ANALYSIS San Gabriel Boulevard is 76 feet wide immediately south of Garvey Avenue. Beyond this, the roadway widens to provide an 84 foot wide roadway. This north /south roadway provides for 2 lanes of travel in each direction separated by a two -way left turn lane. Parking in the immediate vicinity of the subject area is generally restricted by marked red curbs. The posted speed limit on San Gabriel Boulevard is 40 mph. The Walgreen's development on the southeast corner of San Gabriel Boulevard and Garvey Avenue has 2 separate access points. One access driveway is on Garvey Avenue and one is on San Gabriel Boulevard. Both driveways provide a left and right turn lane out of the development while there is 1 entering lane. Traffic Commission Meeting November 6, 2008 Page 2 of 3 Exhibit "A" depicts existing conditions on San Gabriel Boulevard south of Garvey Avenue. Discussion The first concern expressed by the Commissioners was the on- street parking on the east side of San Gabriel Boulevard immediately south of the driveway on San Gabriel Boulevard. Currently, there is a length of approximately 68 feet that allows for on- street parking. However, in this section there is a fire hydrant that reduces the available parking length to 38 feet. The functionality of the 38 foot section for on- street parking is reduced by the angle the curb takes to accommodate the bridge section. The on- street parking area is also the only segment of San Gabriel Boulevard in the immediate vicinity of the driveway that allows for on- street parking. The next available on- street parking is approximately 125 feet south of the bridge. During our field observations, there were no vehicles parked in the allowable on- street parking area. It should be noted, however, that both Chairperson Knapp and Commissioner Russell indicated that parking does occur in this particular area from time to time. Staff Recommendation It is staffs recommendation that the Traffic Commission recommends the City Council install 68 feet of red curb on the east side of San Gabriel Boulevard south of the driveway access of Walgreen's south of Garvey Avenue. The second concern expressed by the Commissioners was the conflicts between vehicles turning left from the Walgreen's driveway and vehicles turning left from the shopping center on the west side of the roadway. The Commissioners base their concerns on those occasions they have witnessed when these vehicles meet head -on in the middle of San Gabriel Boulevard. Turning movement counts were taken at the 2 driveways on San Gabriel Boulevard south of Garvey Avenue. These counts are shown on Exhibit "A" and indicate the majority of vehicles entering the Walgreen's driveway are making right turns. Vehicles exiting the driveway are about equal between right and left turns out. At the shopping center driveway, the majority of entering vehicles are turning right while the majority of exiting vehicles are turning left. Field observations were also made to identify if any "problems" occur between the turning movements of the driveways. The observations only identified 2 instances where vehicles coming out of the Walgreen's driveway caused some conflict with vehicles traveling on San Gabriel Boulevard. No conflicts were observed that involved left turning vehicles exiting each driveway meeting in the two -way left turn lane. Both Traffic Commission Meeting November 6, 2008 Paoe 3 of 3 instances observed involved vehicles turning left from the driveway blocking the travel of vehicles on San Gabriel Boulevard. One conflict observed did create a traffic flow problem that affected all northbound traffic. This conflict occurred after 5:00 PM. The left turning vehicle exiting the Walgreen's driveway blocked all northbound lanes of traffic while attempting to enter the southbound lanes of traffic. This caused a delay of approximately 2 minutes. This observed conflict is likely to be a typical scene during the peak hours. In addition, the location of the Walgreen's driveway, within the length of the left turn lane, creates conflicts with any vehicles turning left into or out of the site. During the peak hours, left turning vehicles could cause delays in both the northbound and southbound directions. Staff Recommendation It is staffs recommendation that the Traffic Commission recommends the City Council install two "No Left Turn" (R3 -7) signs for entering and exiting vehicles of the Walgreen's driveway on San Gabriel Boulevard south of Garvey Avenue. In addition, the Traffic Commission recommends the City Council have the left turn pavement marking on the driveway be removed to be consistent with the proposed "No Left Turn" sign. PUBLIC NOTICE PROCESS This item has been noticed through the regular agenda notification process. Submitted by: A 0 "_ Joanne Itagaki Traffic Engineering Deputy Exhibit A: Existing and proposed improvements on San Gabriel Boiulevard south of Garvey Avenue. o ^ � �K / % zEn § 0 z \i� «� z .�� 2 K g§ m ■ III O� � 0 ! §§ 2 ! § d § ) 2 § § § z I I \ 2 / � c § § < w 2 2 2 § j §A ` x a ? § E I 0 \ , to w I EIHEI ,■� � �� � � � . ,! ■� � nn �\ I \4 x6 � � I \ ® i � I \ lu § ` | ®8 � 2 \ §k§ i mamma& 22 y % 3rNaA¥ �¥9