Loading...
TC - Agenda - 04-03-08Public 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 Rosemead Traffic Commission AGENDA APRIL 3, 2008 7:00 PM Rosemead Community Recreation Center 3936 N. Muscatel Avenue, Rosemead. CA. 91770 Holly Knapp, Chairperson Howard Masuda, Vice - Chairman Ron Gay, Commissioner Joan Hunter, Commissioner. Brian Lewin, Commissioner ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION • CALL TO ORDER — 7:00 PM • PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE —Commissioner Hunter • INVOCATION —Commissioner Lewin • ROLL CALL - Commissioners Knapp, Masuda, Gay, Hunter and Lewin 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES March 6, 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 P-1111:t A. DRAFT — RESIDENTIAL ON- STREET DISABLED PERSONS' PAR PROGRAM POLICY AND PROCEDURES At the direction of the Traffic Commission, staff has prepared a DRAFT of Residential On- Street Disabled Persons' Parking Program. The DRAFT policy and procedures are for the Traffic Commission's review and comment. Recommendation It is staff's recommendation that the Traffic Commission review and comment on this DRAFT document and send the document with these incorporated comments to City Council for approval. 4. NEW BUSINESS A. REQUEST FOR A BUS LOADING /UNLOADING ZONE AT 8450 GARVEY AVENUE A letter was received from Ms. Rosemary Cai, owner of Royal Gifts Company at 8450 Garvey Avenue, #101. Staff spoke with Ms. Cai to get clarification on request she made for a bus loading zone for her business. Ms. Cai indicated that there is no designated bus parking on -site and buses visit her business almost every evening (between 4:00 and 8:00 PM). Ms. Cai is requesting the bus loading /unloading zone to be on Garvey Avenue. Recommendation It is staffs recommendation that the Traffic Commission recommends the City Council approve the installation of 50 feet of white curb and 20 feet of red curb in front of 8450 Garvey Avenue. B. REQUEST TO REMOVE RED CURB AT 9102 VALLEY BOULEVARD At the March Traffic Commission meeting, Ms. Orawan Huttayasomboom requested the City remove red curb in front of her property at 9102 Valley Boulevard. Ms. Huttayasomboom indicated that she has been trying to lease this business property but has been unsuccessful primarily due to the lack of parking, both on- street and on -site. She has requested the removal of red curb to allow on- street parking at her property. ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION K1111.1 Recommendation It is staffs recommendation that the Traffic Commission recommends the City Council approve the removal of red curb to accommodate 2 parking spaces in front of the properties at 9048 and 9102 Valley Boulevard. C. REQUEST FOR ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION REGARDING THE PANDA EXPRESS PROJECT At the March 12, 2008 Traffic Commission meeting, Traffic Commissioner Brian Lewin requested a copy of the environmental information prepared for the new Panda Express project on Walnut Grove. The Addendum to the Rosemead Commercial Retail Center EIR for the Panda Express Mixed -Use Development Project has been included as requested. 5. STAFF REPORTS 6. COMMISSIONER REPORTS 7. ADJOURNMENT. The next regular meeting is scheduled for May 1, 2008 at 7:00 pm at the Rosemead Community Recreation Center, 3936 N. Muscatel Avenue, Rosemead. CA. 91770. Q:\ M6774 -Rsd Retainer 07 -08 \Traffic Commission Agendas \4 April 2008\April Agenda.doc ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION MARCH 6, 2008 DRAFT The 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. PLEDGE OF ALLIGIANCE Commissioner Masuda INVOCATION Commissioner Hunter ROLL CALL Present: Chairperson Knapp, Commissioner Masuda, Commissioner Gay, Commissioner Hunter, Commissioner Lewin Absent: None 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Minutes of January 3, 2008: Commissioner Lewin requested that under Approval of Minutes, page 1, "People to People" be corrected to read "People for People." On page 3, second paragraph under Lawrence Bevington, remove the extra period at the end of the sentence. On page 5, 2 nd complete paragraph, 2 nd sentence, change "an" to "on." On page 6, first paragraph under Robert Castillo, change "Applewood" to "Amberwood." Minutes of February 7, 2008: Commissioner Gay requested that "ROX be changed to "RYA" on page 6, last paragraph. On page 7, 5th paragraph, 2 nd sentence, the word "making" be replaced with "using." It was moved by Commissioner Gay, seconded by Commissioner Hunter to accept and approve the amended minutes of the January 3, 2008, and February 7, 2008 meetings. Vote Results: Yes: Chairperson Knapp, Commissioners Masuda, Gay, Hunter and Lewin. Noes: None Absent: None Abstain: None Rosemead Traffic Commission Meeting March 6, 2008 Arnec(06160)16774 /1002 /Min03 Page 1 2. PUBLIC COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE Speaking before the Commission: Jim Flournoy 8655 Landis View Rosemead, CA 91770 Mr. Flournoy spoke with the City Attorney this afternoon regarding the public comments for the Panda addition. Comments have to be considered and responded to prior to the action by City Council. Mr. Flournoy believes traffic issues need to be considered by the Traffic Commission before it comes before the City Council and there is time to do it. Subsequent to the EIR, an addendum requires either new information that could not reasonably have been thought about ahead of time or substantial changes in information that wasn't thought about when the original EIR was completed. Mr. Flournoy has requested that the City Manager assign to the Traffic Commission the responsibility of considering the traffic issues reported in the EIR. He would like to set a precedent here with other future projects that the traffic part come before the Traffic Commission. Right now the EIR traffic issues are not brought to the Traffic Commission. Chairperson Knapp suggested that the Traffic Commission probably should not sign the petition presented by Mr. Flournoy but that Mr. Flournoy has every right to present the petition to the City Manager and to give his ideas to the City Manager, who in time will decide if he wants to do this. Mr. Flournoy stated that after the meeting the Commissioners could individually sign the petition if so inclined. He'll send it to the City Manager and let him sort it out, and put it on the agenda for next time. Chairperson Knapp stated that he should present the letter to the City Manager and let him decide if it would be on our agenda the next time. Mr. Flournoy stated the Commission can decide to put it on the agenda. Any of the Commissioners can ask that something be put on the agenda and then discuss it. He believes a shot across the bow needs to be fired saying we've got a very able Traffic Commission and we need to utilize them because we do have people very upset about parking and traffic impact in the City. Commissioner Lewin stated he would support putting this on the agenda next time for discussion. Chairperson Knapp stated she's not sure how the Commission can do that. Commissioner Lewin stated he will make a request during the items from Commissioners portion of the meeting. Rosemead Traffic Commission Meeting March 6, 2008 Rmec(06160)16774/1002/Min03 Page 2 DRAFT Speaking before the Commission: Orawan Huttayasomboom 8513 Turpin St. Rosemead, CA (626) 286 -3549 Ms. Huttayasomboom has a building at 9102 Valley Boulevard. Requested that the red paint be removed and replaced with regular parking in front of the store. The store has been closed for at least ten years. It is a working store but no one wants to rent it because there is no parking. Every time she finds a renter and they learn there is no parking they do not want the store. There is parking in the back but there is no access because of the adjacent apartment. The driveway next to her store belongs to the apartment. She described the area around the store and how there is no access to the back. Traffic Engineering Deputy Itagaki stated one of the things that will be looked at is access rights. She will try to place this item on the next agenda and Ms. Huttayasomboom will be notified. 3. OLD BUSINESS — NONE 4. NEW BUSINESS A. REQUEST FOR PARKING RESTRICTIONS ON MUSCATEL AVENUE NORTH AND SOUTH OF VALLEY BOULEVARD Traffic Engineering Deputy Itagaki presented the staff report and study findings. Recommendation It is staffs recommendation that the Traffic Commission recommends the City Council approve the following: Install 50 -foot northbound and southbound left turn lanes on Muscatel Avenue at Valley Boulevard. Install red curb on Muscatel Avenue north and south of Valley Boulevard as shown on Exhibit B. Direct staff to obtain a modified traffic signal design plan of Muscatel Avenue at Valley Boulevard to include new traffic striping, traffic loop detector work and red curb parking restrictions. Chairperson Knapp asked for comments from the audience. Rosemead Traffic Commission Meeting March 6, 2008 Page 3 Jl:mec (06160)16774/1002/Min03 w f Speaking before the Commission: Hari Alipuria 3949 Muscatel Ave. Rosemead, CA (626) 378 -9033 DRAFT Mr. Alipuria reported that sometimes the Library parking lot is completely full and parking is a problem. Restricting the parking on Muscatel will cause more problems than it would solve. He believes the parking should be left as it is. On Wednesday morning with street sweeping it is difficult to find parking. The City should consider building a parking structure. Chairperson Knapp asked Mr. Alipuria the exact location of his residence, the south side next to the Chamber? He responded yes. That puts his residence across from the driveway into the library. Commissioner Gay asked Mr. Alipuria if he has a driveway access for his vehicle and if that's enough for parking. Mr. Alipuria stated he does but that sometimes he'doesn't like to park in the driveway because it is a narrow driveway. He doesn't want to scratch his car so he doesn't use the driveway all the time. Commissioner Gay stated one reason for taking the parking is to have room for a devoted left -turn lane. If the spaces are not taken, it would not be possible to free up the traffic traveling north or south. Commissioner Lewin asked about the occasional difficulty Mr. Alipuria has getting out of his driveway. Mr. Alipuria stated the restrictions would affect parking and where residents have to park. Commissioner Lewin stated part of the restricted parking will improve the visibility for the residents and make it safer when exiting their driveways. Commissioner Hunter stated the whole reason for the changes on Muscatel is for safety purposes. Drivers can't see with cars traveling around the corner. Bill Ornelas, Field Services Manager, asked about protected left turn signals on Muscatel Traffic Engineering Deputy Itagaki, stated that even with a protected left turn signals, she would recommend a left turn lane. Traffic Engineering Deputy Itagaki stated that a good estimate for the cost of a left -turn phasing would be more than a detector installation. Split- phasing is a possibility, but that adds delay. Traffic Engineering Deputy Itagaki explained the signal is not on an automatic cycle. It has detectors now that change the signal to green on Muscatel Rosemead Traffic Commission Meeting March 6, 2008 Page 4 Jl:mec (06160)16774/1002/Min03 DRAFT Commissioner Masuda asked if moving the line and curving it would cause a bottleneck? Traffic Engineering Deputy Itagaki responded there are different ways to stripe Muscatel to allow more cars to be there. To lengthen the left turn lane means more red curb and it might run into the residential area. There might be a way to adjust the transition to allow more cars through. Commissioner Lewin recommends straightening out the line to allow more transition space. Traffic Engineering Deputy Itagaki stated that could be done on both sides of the street. On the south side, Commissioner Lewin asked about the loading zone. He wondered why it wasn't made red. Traffic Engineering Deputy Itagaki stated that white is traditionally loading, this one could be for dropping off books or children. Commissioner Lewin asked if it could be repainted and a loading zone, no parking sign be added. Chairperson Knapp asked for further comments from the Commissioners. There being none, she requested a motion. Commissioner Masuda moved to accept staff recommendation with changes are recommended by the Commission. Traffic Engineering Deputy Itagaki summarized the motion and changes to be voted on: 1. Create the left turn lane for both directions of Muscatel at Valley. 2. Modify the double yellow line to bring it more to the center. 3. Repaint the white curb and add a No Parking Loading Zone (R7 -6) sign. Commissioner Lewin seconded the motion. Vote results: Yes: Chairperson Knapp, Commissioner Gay, Commissioner Masuda, Commissioner Hunter, Commissioner Lewin Noes: None Abstain: None B. CITYWIDE BLUE CURB POLICY Traffic Engineering Deputy Itagaki presented the staff report. Rosemead Traffic Commission Meeting March 6, 2008 Page 5 Jl:mec (06160)16774/1002/Min03 DRAFT Recommendation Staff is requesting direction from the Traffic Commission regarding a citywide policy on the installation of blue curbs. Chairperson Knapp asked for comments. Bill Ornelas, Field Services Manager, discussed the policies of the blue curb in the City of Norwalk. Chris Marcarello, Administrative Services Officer, also discussed the policy and problems. The direction to develop a blue curb policy comes from the City Manager. Traffic Engineering Deputy Itagaki stated that what she likes about the two policies is that there is an appeals process. It provides the residents the opportunity to present the request for further review if the request is denied. There was discussion about how to go about reviewing this item. Traffic Engineering Deputy Itagaki stated staff is asking for direction from the Commission; do they want such a program, and if so staff will work on it. Chairperson Knapp asked if all Commissioners were in agreement. Commissioner Lewin stated he is generally in favor of such a program, especially in residential areas, and there is likely to become a greater need for this over the years. He leans toward the Monterey Park model except for the annual review process; he prefers a case -by -case. If there is a short -term need for blue curb, there could be a review. It is his belief that having an annual review would be extra work. Traffic Engineering Deputy Itagaki stated it is her understanding that in Norwalk a letter is sent to the resident for the purpose of re- gathering the required information and if that information is not provided then the blue curb goes away. Responding to a question asked by Mr. Flournoy regarding ADA, Traffic Engineering Deputy Itagaki stated that the City of Monterey Park has a statement on their website that the City is not required to provide the program by ADA; it is provided as a special program by the City as it does improve the quality of life. Cities are not required by ADA to make improvements to public roadways, even the ramps. Commissioner Hunter does not favor the blue curb. Chairperson Knapp requested a motion. Commissioner Gay motioned and Commissioner Lewin seconded to direct staff to look into the blue curb proposal utilizing the best of what will work for the City and come back with a proposal. Rosemead Traffic Commission Meeting March 6, 2008 Page 6 J1 :mec (06160)16774/1002/Min03 DRAFT Vote Results: Yes: Chairperson Knapp, Commissioner Masuda Noes: None Abstain: Commissioner Hunter Commissioner Gay Commissioner Lewin, C. UPDATE ON FIELD SERVICES ACTIVITIES — Oral Report Chris Marcarello introduced himself and stated the City is looking to work with the Traffic Engineering Deputy Itagaki and the City Engineer, as well as the Commission for improvements in the City. Mr. Marcarello also introduced Silvia Llamas who is responsible for the Commissioner's agenda packet. There is an emphasis on public safety and the City Manager has made a big effort to direct more money into the program. Mr. Marcarello requested Bill Ornelas, Field Services Manager, to attend the meeting and outline the programs being implemented in the City. Mr. Ornelas reported on the graffiti program and that 4 years ago his department received 30 -40 calls per day concerning graffiti. Now the calls average 2 to 3 a day, which doesn't mean there is less graffiti because there is more. Graffiti removal is a 7- day -a -week operation and the reported graffiti is removed within 24 hours. Field Services has a staff of four. Field Services also handles regulatory sign installation /repair, pot holes and utility cuts; traffic signal maintenance (Republic is called). There is also a bulky item pickup program 3 days a week. They work with Edison for street light repair. Commissioner Lewin asked about water issues and told Mr. Ornelas of a location where a valve has been leaking. Mr. Ornelas stated they do handle water issues and that there are about 8 water districts in the City. Mr. Ornelas also discussed the process and follow -up used in Field Services. Chairperson Knapp thanked everyone for the discussion. D. PROCESS FOR CONDUCTING TRAFFIC STUDIES Chris Marcarello stated he wanted to address the Commission about the process of traffic studies as it relates to the City's budget process. He is requesting that the Commission start the process of prioritizing special studies for next year's budget and share that list so it can be presented to Council during the budget process. Traffic Engineering Deputy Itagaki stated that Mr. Marcarello is referring to the more extensive studies that require more staff time, not the more simple requests such as a red or green curb. Rosemead Traffic Commission Meeting March 6, 2008 Page 7 Jl:mec (06160)16774/1002/Min03 DRAFT Recommendation Staff recommends that the Traffic Commission receive and file this report and prepare a list of studies at the next Traffic Commission meeting. 5. STAFF REPORTS - NONE Chris Marcarello stated Garvey Bridge will be opening soon with a ribbon cutting on April 11 in Regarding Rush /Angelus Delta, Council directed staff to go back out and do another traffic study at the location. That study was given to another traffic engineering firm and will be going on in the next month or so. That study will go back to City Council. The City is going out to bid for Engineering Services. RFP is on the website. Concerning Rush /Angelus Delta study, Commissioner Hunter stated she has spent a lot of time there watching traffic and people, and she is of the opinion there is no need for a traffic signal. It does need a stop sign. Commissioner Gay asked about the pedestrian flashing crossing. Chris Marcarello indicated that all the previous recommendations are being studied. The study will be going back to Council for action and the Traffic Commission will be kept informed. Commissioner Lewin asked if the study will include off hours? He also suggested a survey of residents with school children about walking to school. Chairperson Knapp suggested this be handled through the school. Jim Flournoy stated parents are not crossing the street because it is not safe. 6. COMMISSIONER REPORTS Commissioner Masuda thanked staff. Commissioner Hunter stated traffic is getting busy. Asked that more handicapped stalls be installed at City Hall. Commissioner Lewin had submitted an item regarding Temple City Boulevard and no trucks to be agendized for this meeting but it was not. He would like this to be on the next agenda. Traffic Engineering Deputy Itagaki suggested this be an item on the priority special study list. Chairperson Knapp agreed; it is a big item. On the technical side, Commissioner Lewin asked what type of study would be done for possibility of introducing protected /permissive signaling. Traffic Engineering Deputy Itagaki responded that the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices does not have any specific guidelines for protected /permissive left turn phasing, meaning there is a left -turn arrow (protected) as well as the ball (permissive, which means you have to watch for oncoming traffic). Willdan has developed guidelines that have been used in other cities. In general, going from fully protected left turn to Rosemead Traffic Commission Meeting March 6, 2008 Page 8 J1 :mec (06160)16774/1002/Min03 DRAFT protected - permissive is not encouraged but it can be looked at. This might be something to put on the study list. Commissioner Gay thanked staff. We're going through growing pains but the Commission is trying to do the best it can and staff input is always appreciated. Commissioner Masuda reminded Commission Lewin that he wanted to agendize the Panda project traffic study. Traffic Engineering Deputy Itagaki will talk with Mr. Marcarello on how best to do that. Chairperson Knapp had no report. 7. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting is adjourned until April 3, 2008, at 7:00 p.m. Rosemead Traffic Commission Meeting March 6, 2008 Jl:mec (06160)16774/10021WO3 Page 9 ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TO: THE HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND COMMISSIONERS FROM: JOANNE ITAGAKI, TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DEPUTY DATE: APRIL 3, 2008 SUBJECT: DRAFT - RESIDENTIAL ON- STREET DISABLED PERSONS' PARKING PROGRAM POLICY AND PROCEDURES SUMMARY At the direction of the Traffic Commission, staff has prepared a DRAFT of Residential On- Street Disabled Persons' Parking Program. The DRAFT policy and procedures are for the Traffic Commission's review and comment. Staff Recommendation It is staffs recommendation that the Traffic Commission review and comment on this DRAFT document and send the document with these incorporated comments to City Council for approval. DISCUSSION Attached is a DRAFT of the policy and procedures for the implementation of on- street disabled persons' parking (blue curb). These policy and procedures were developed from various documents from cities in the southern California area. Staff attempted to address the concerns expressed by the Traffic Commission regarding this issue. These DRAFT procedures are for the Traffic Commission's review and comment. The DRAFT has been formatted with double spacing for your convenience. Traffic Commission Meeting April 3, 2008 Page 2 of 2 Recommendation It is recommended that the Traffic Commission review and comment on this DRAFT document and send the document with these incorporated comments to City Council for approval. Submitted by: Joanne Itagaki Traffic Engineering Deputy DRAFT Residential On- Street Disabled Persons' Parking Program Policy and Procedures Q: \jn16774 -Rsd Retainer 07 -08 \Traffic Commission Agendas \4 April 2008 \Draft Blue curb policy & procedures.doc D AFT CITY OF ROSEMEAD Residential On- Street Disabled Persons' Parking Program Policy and Procedures April 2008 The City of Rosemead recognizes disabled persons' need to park in close proximity to their residence when sufficient and /or accessible off - street parking conditions are limited. Pursuant to California Vehicle Code Sections 22507 and 22511.5 et al., a limited number of on- street parking spaces may be designated by the City for the benefit of residents with an identifiable need for on- street disabled parking without significantly affecting the available curb parking in an area. INTENT An on- street disabled persons' parking space is intended to provide close parking for a disabled resident in a high parking demand area where parking in front of their home may not be readily available. Each on- street disabled persons' parking space displaces a general parking space, which can create an impact to the parking supply in a residential neighborhood. Therefore, the applicant must demonstrate a real need for an on- street disabled persons' parking space. • An on- street disabled persons' parking space is not intended to replace parking in the applicant's driveway or garage. The use of all available off - street parking spaces shall be considered before qualifying for an on- street disabled persons' parking space. i ° d W1 , An on- street disabled persons' parking space is provided as a courtesy to the disabled resident living at that residence who has mobility limitations getting to and from the vehicle. POLICY If a disabled resident /applicant demonstrates a need for an on- street disabled persons' parking space through the application process and the criteria for an on- street disabled persons' parking space are met, then the City may install the disabled persons' parking space for a one time charge of $50.00. The City's Traffic Engineering Department approves or denies the request for an on- street disabled persons' parking space. The applicant may appeal the decision to the City's Traffic Commission with a written letter of appeal within 30 days from date of the denial letter. • An on- street disabled persons' parking space is not a private parking space. The applicant does not have exclusive use of the on- street disabled persons' parking space. Any other persons or vehicles with a valid disabled person placard or disabled license plate may park in any on- street disabled persons' parking space. Existing parking or regulatory restrictions that prohibit on- street parking in front of the applicant's residence cannot be removed to accommodate a disabled persons' parking space. The property should have an accessible path from the requested on- street disabled persons' parking space to the residence. When the passenger side of the vehicle i� -A i , tj must be used for disabled access, the sidewalk or parkway should be unobstructed or the obstruction must be removed at the cost of the applicant/homeowner rip or to installation of the on- street disabled persons' parking space. An on- street disabled persons' parking space will not be provided to accommodate a private transport service or a public transit service to load /unload a disabled resident. These types of vehicle service can use the frontage of the residence's driveway for short-term parking. • The applicant shall submit annually proof of residency and proof of disability. The City shall send via postal mail a renewal reminder. Failure to respond within 30 days from date of the reminder letter will result in the removal of the disabled persons' parking space. The City reserves the right to remove or relocate the on- street disabled persons' parking space at any time. This includes, but is not limited to, failure to provide renewal information, relocation of resident requiring disabled parking, or changes that result in a failure to meet the criteria of this policy. PROCEDURES 1. Application — The applicant may request an on- street disabled persons' parking space by submitting an application to the City's Traffic Engineering Department. The application can be obtained at City Hall or downloaded from the City's website www.cityofrosemead.org , ©> e ,F ', 2. Submit Application — The applicant completes the application. The resident mails or submits the application with proof or residency and proof of disability to: City of Rosemead Traffic Engineering Department 8838 E. Valley Boulevard Rosemead, CA 91770 3. Staff Review — The City's Traffic Engineering Department will review the application and .contact the applicant to arrange for a site visit with the applicant (or representative). The following criteria will be used to determine if an on- street disabled persons' parking space is justified: A. The requested on- street disabled persons' parking space is intended for a residence on a City street and not in a commercial area or on a private street. B. The applicant lives at the address where the on- street disabled persons' parking space is requested. C. The on- street parking in the vicinity of the requested location is in high 3Ia 91T 91 D. The applicant has supplied the requested documentation regarding proof of residency and proof of disability. E. Parking on -site is determined to be unacceptable based on: i. Lack of driveway, ii. Driveway width limitation, L01 MI ) L1 iii. Driveway grade limitation, iv. Garage limitation, or v. Other site specific limitation. A driveway or garage that is used for storage is not an acceptable reason to warrant an on- street disabled persons' parking space. F. A site inspection by City staff confirms the need and the appropriate application of the on- street disabled persons' parking space. 4. Response — The City's Traffic Engineering Department will notify the applicant by postal mail if the request is approved or denied. • Approval — The City's Traffic Engineering Department must receive the one time installation fee of $50.00. The City will accept cash, checks or money orders. Checks and money orders should be made payable to "City of Rosemead ". If the fee is not received within 30 days of date of approval letter, the City will assume the applicant is no longer interested in the on- street disabled persons' parking space and will void the approval. The applicant can reapply after 1 year from the date of the approval letter. The City's Traffic Engineering Staff will prepare a work order for the installation of the on- street disabled persons' parking space. • Denial — The applicant may appeal the decision to the City's Traffic Commission with a written letter of appeal within 30 days from date of the denial letter. ✓ .o > t o L , U,' 5. Annual Renewal — The City shall send via postal mail an annual renewal reminder. Failure to respond within 30 days from date of the reminder letter will result in the removal of the disabled persons' parking space. 6. Layout — An on- street disabled persons' parking space should be 9 feet wide and 20 feet long and identified with a blue curb and disabled persons' parking symbol inside the space. Parking "T "s may be included as determined by Traffic Engineering Staff. Removal — The City reserves the right to remove or relocate the on- street disabled persons' parking space at any time. This includes, but is not limited to, failure to provide renewal information, relocation of resident requiring disabled parking, or changes that result in a failure to meet the criteria of this policy. M �; _ /F CITY OF ROSEMEAD Neighborhood Survey and Notification of Proposed Disabled Persons' Parking Zone NOTICE The applicant identified below has submitted a request to the City of Rosemead to install a Disabled Persons' Parking Space (blue curb) in the public right -of -way in front of his /her residence. If approved, this parking restriction will only be available to motorists in possession of a valid California Disabled Persons' Placard. This parking restriction would be enforceable at all hours. Parking a vehicle without a valid Placard displayed in a marked Disabled Persons' Parking Zone is a violation of CVC 22511.5. Applicant Name: Address: Phone #: NEIGHBORHOOD SURVEY The applicant must provide notice to all adjacent and other affected residents, of the request for restricted parking in the public right -of -way. The following information is required from each household surveyed. Incomplete surveys will result in an automatic denial of the application. 1. I am: OPPOSED — _ SUPPORTIVE of the applicant's request. would like to be notified of any hearings /meetings regarding this matter: _YES — NO. My residence is: _ADJOINING _ FACING the applicant's residence. Name: Address: Phone #: Signature: 2. 1 am: OPPOSED _ SUPPORTIVE of the applicant's request. I would like to be notified of any hearings /meetings regarding this matter: NO. _YES My residence is: _ADJOINING FACING the applicant's residence. Name: Address: Phone #: Signature: 3. I am: _ OPPOSED _ SUPPORTIVE of the applicant's request. I would like to be notified of any hearings /meetings regarding this matter: NO. _YES My residence is: _ADJOINING _ FACING the applicant's residence. Name: Address: Phone #: Signature: CITY OF ROSEMEAD Residential On- Street Disabled Persons's Parkir Application April 208 If a disabled resident /applicant demonstrates a need for an on- street dirabled persons' parking space through the application process and the criteria for an on- street disabled persons' parking space are met, then the City may install the disabled persons' parking space, free of charge to the applicant/for an installation and maintenance cost of $100.00 paid annually by the applicant, as a courtesy to the disabled resident /applicant. (Pro -rated fee depending on date of installation ?) NAME ADDRESS DAYTIME PHONE NUMBER ( ) BLUE CURB LOCATION [ ] or Same as Above PROPERTY OWNER [ ] Yes (letter attached) [ ] No [ 1 Property Owner APPROVAL Same as Above VALID DISABLED Plate or Placard # Expires: PERSONS'PLACARD NUMBER OF VEHICLES REGISTERED TO # Operating # Non - operating (Stored) PROPERTY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS DRIVEWAY [ ] Single [ ]Double[ ] Other_ GARAGE [ ] Single [ ] Double [ ] Other CARPORT[ ] Single [ ] Double [ ] Other NUMBER OF AVAILABLE Driveway /Garage /Carport Available for Parking PARKING SPACES ON PROPERTY [ ]Yes [ ]No Explain: Proof of Residency (Example:Utility Bill) PLEASE INCLUDE A COPY Disabled Persons' CA License or CA Identification OF THE FOLLOWING Disabled Persons' Placard Registration Disabled Persons' Placard Mail completed application with proof of residency and proof of disability to: City of Rosemead, Traffic Engineering Department, 8838 E. Valley Boulevard, CA 91770 ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TO: THE HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND COMMISSIONERS FROM: JOANNE ITAGAKI, TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DEPUTY DATE: APRIL 3, 2008 SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR BUS LOADING /UNLOADING ZONE AT 8450 GARVEY AVENUE SUMMARY A letter (attached) was received from Rosemary Cai, owner of Royal Gifts Company at 8450 Garvey Avenue, #101. Staff spoke with Ms. Cai to get clarification on the request she made for a bus loading zone for her business. Ms. Cai indicated that there is no designated bus parking on -site and busses visit her business almost every evening (between 4:00 and 8:00 PM). Ms. Cai is requesting the bus loading /unloading zone to be on Garvey Avenue. Staff Recommendation It is staffs recommendation that the Traffic Commission recommends the City Council approve the installation of 50 feet of white curb and 20 feet of red curb in front of 8450 Garvey Avenue. ANALYSIS Garvey Avenue is approximately 77 feet wide with 2 lanes of traffic in each direction. Opposing lanes of traffic are separated by a raised median and two -way left turn lane. Parking is restricted on both sides of Garvey Avenue with "No Parking" allowed between 2 AM and 6 AM and "2 Hour Parking" allowed between 7 AM and 6 PM. The posted speed limit on Garvey Avenue is 35 mph. Earle Avenue is approximately 36 feet wide with no traffic striping. Earle Avenue is stop controlled at its 'T" intersection with Garvey Avenue. Parking is restricted on street sweeping days (Fridays between 10 AM and 2 PM). The prima facie speed limit is 25 mph on Earle Avenue. Exhibit "A" depicts existing conditions in the vicinity of 8450 Garvey Avenue (at Earle Avenue). Traffic Commission Meeting April 3, 2008 Page 2 of 3 Parking demand data was gathered at the subject location.\ Staff contacted Ms. Cai to attempt to count the parking situation when busses would be present. She only indicated that busses arrive between 4:00 PM and 8:00 PM. After our first observation, we contacted Ms. Cai to see if she could be more specific but she was only able to say that the busses come between 4:00 PM and 8:00 PM. During our 2 observation periods, no busses arrived at the subject location. The parking demand analyzed the existing parking lot of 8450 Garvey Avenue as well as on- street parking surrounding the location. In addition, there is subterranean parking under the building that is locked indicating this parking is likely for tenants. The parking demand is summarized in the attached Tables 1 to 4. Tables 1 to 4 indicate that parking is limited based on the time of day. From the observations (4:00 PM to 6:30 PM), the parking lot (Table 1) is approximately 47% occupied. The on- street parking on Garvey Avenue (Table 2) indicates that all the vehicles observed were parked in front of the "Mission Fence Company" property and not 8450 Garvey Avenue. In addition, after 5:30 PM parking is available on Garvey Avenue. On Earle Avenue (Tables 3 and 4), on- street parking is limited before 5:00 PM but opens up after this time. Discussion The need for the bus loading /unloading zone for 8450 Garvey Avenue is difficult to assess based on the observations made of the site. As indicated, staff attempted to make observations when busses would be present. We were unable to obtain a specific time that the busses would be present. However, the parking data collected did provide information regarding the existing parking demand surrounding the site. The existing parking demand indicated that on- street parking is in high demand on Earle Avenue and the parking lot is not. Vehicles parked on Earle Avenue appear to be associated with the businesses on the west side of Earle Avenue with the demand reducing later into the evening hours. The field observations indicate that the parking lot for the development at 8450 Garvey Avenue is not fully utilized ( -47% occupied). The vehicles parked on Garvey Avenue were located to the east of 8450 Garvey Avenue and not likely associated with the site. If on- street parking on Garvey Avenue was converted to a white passenger loading /unloading zone, the displaced vehicles associated with 8450 Garvey Avenue could be accommodated in the parking lot. A white zone is defined in the California Vehicle Code (CVC) section 21458 (a) (3) and reads as follows: "(a) Whenever local authorities enact local parking regulations and indicate them by the use of paint upon curbs, the following colors only shall be used, and the colors indicate as follows: .... (3) White indicates stopping for either of the following purposes: Traffic Commission Meeting April 3, 2008 Page 3 of 3 (A) Loading or unloading passengers for the time as may be specified by local ordinance. (B) Depositing mail in an adjacent mailbox.... (b) Regulations adopted pursuant to subdivision (a) shall be effective on days and during hours or times as prescribed by local ordinances." Staff did consider the option of changing the parking lot to provide an on -site bus loading /unloading zone. However, such a change would make the development non- conforming to the number of required parking spaces for the development. Recommendation Based on the parking demand observed at 8450 Garvey Avenue, it is recommended a 50 foot white curb be installed with 20 feet of red curb starting at Earle Avenue. Exhibit A depicts the recommended installation. PUBLIC NOTICE PROCESS This item has been noticed through the regular agenda notification process. Submitted by Joanne Itagaki Traffic Engineering Deputy Letter from Royal Gifts Company — Ms. Rosemary Cai Exhibit A: Garvey Avenue at Earle Avenue Tables 1 to 4: Parking Demand Study Q:GW6774 -Rsd Retainer 07 -08 \Traffic Commission Agendas\4 April 2008\8450 Garvey -Bus Zone.doc I w 7r —PA LEGEND E)a SnNG RED R ® PR OPOSED WHITEWRB I � PROPOSED RED CURB I I I a MISSION FENCE PATIO SCALE 1' =60 R31(CA) ton —ham 7am -6pm O O O O I Im PA -- O _ _ CATE R31(CA) 2am-6am. 7am —pm - 31(CA) O TO NEW POLE AS SHOWN. tam —gg 7am -6 �1 0 ' 7 -'� 8450 p r �j HINT PROPOSED WHITE WRB. LENGT14 AS SHOWN. p 'o 8 ' —PAINT PROPOSED RED WRB. LENGTH AS SHOWN. I O 2736 O I V. —1 28- ' 50, ID I g EARL.E AYE. o R31(CA) O 7am -6 18' 77 36 29' 2731 R3o(cA) S0. CA. WATER 27 2737 10am —zpm I I P/L JA P/L l41g1J: AVG � I I I I I I I I EXHIBIT 'A" Tr CRY OF ROSEIEAD E I GARVEY AVENUE AT EARLE AVENUE I w CITY OF ROSEMEAD Request for Bus Loading /Unloading Zone at 8450 Garvey Avenue April 3, 2008 Traffic Commission Meeting TABLE 1 Parking Lot of 8450 Garvey Avenue 52 available parking spaces Thursday, 3/13/2008 Time # parked vehicles l# available spaces 4:00 PM 24 28 4:25 PM 24 28 4:45 PM 22 30 Tuesday, 3/18/2008 Time 1# parked vehicles # available spaces 5:30 PM 24 28 5:45 PM 26 26 6:00 PM 25 27 6:15 PM 27 25 6:30 PM 27 25 TABLE 2 Parking on the South Side of Garvey Avenue 151 feet — 7 parking spaces Note: All vehicles parked towards Mission Fence Co. Thursday, 3/13/2008 Time # parked vehicles l# available spaces 4:00 PM 4 3 4:25 PM 4 3 4:45 PM 2 5 Tuesday, 3/18/2008 Time 1# parked vehicles # available spaces 5:30 PM 0 7 5:45 PM 0 7 6:00 PM 0 7 6:15 PM 0 7 6:30 PM 0 7 CITY OF ROSEMEAD Request for Bus Loading /Unloading Zone at 8450 Garvey Avenue April 3, 2008 Traffic Commission Meeting TABLE 3 Parking on the East Side of Earle Avenue 123 feet — 6 parking spaces Thursday, 3/13/2008 Time # parked vehicles # available spaces 4:00 PM 1 4 2 4:25 PM 4 2 4:45 PM 1 4 2 Tuesday, 3/18/2008 Time 1# parked vehicles # available spaces 5:30 PM 2 4 5:45 PM 2 4 6:00 PM 2 4 6:15 PM 0 6 6:30 PM 0 6 TABLE 4 Parking on the West Side of Earle Avenue 151 feet — 7 parking spaces Thursday, 3/13/2008 Time # parked vehicles # available spaces 4:00 PM 5 2 4:25 PM 5 2 4:45 PM 5 2 Tuesday, 3/18/2008 Time # parked vehicles # available spaces 5:30 PM 1 6 5:45 PM 1 6 6:00 PM 1 6 6:15 PM 1 6 6:30 PM 0 7 ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TO: THE HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND COMMISSIONERS FROM: JOANNE ITAGAKI, TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DEPUTY DATE: APRIL 3, 2008 SUBJECT: REQUEST TO REMOVE RED CURB AT 9102 VALLEY BOULEVARD SUMMARY At the March Traffic Commission meeting, Ms. Orawan Huttayasomboom requested the City remove red curb in front of her property at 9102 Valley Boulevard. Ms. Huttayasomboom indicated that she has been trying to lease this business property but has been unsuccessful primarily due to the lack of parking, both on- street and on -site. She has requested the removal of red curb to allow on- street parking at her property. Staff Recommendation It is staffs recommendation that the Traffic Commission recommends the City Council approve the removal of red curb to accommodate 2 parking spaces in front of the properties at 9048 and 9102 Valley Boulevard. ANALYSIS On- street parking on the south side of Valley Boulevard between Rosemead Boulevard and Hart Avenue is marked with parking "T "s. This parking layout was completed several years ago at the request of the business owners at that time. The parking T's generally are 20 feet in length. The red curb was installed to prevent vehicles from parking in locations that were not long enough to accommodate a vehicle. Exhibit A depicts the on- street parking along the south side of Valley Boulevard between Rosemead Boulevard and Hart Avenue. Discussion Review of the on- street parking on the south side of Valley Boulevard indicated that 9102 Valley Boulevard is the only business without on- street parking. The other businesses on the south side of Valley Boulevard between Rosemead Boulevard and Hart Avenue have some on- street parking. Traffic Commission Meeting April 3, 2008 Page 2 of 2 The length of curb between 9102 and 9048 Valley Boulevard is approximately 61 feet. This is enough space to provide 2 parking spaces with red curb on either side. Each parking space should be 20 feet in length. Recommendation Based on the available curb length, it is recommended that red curb be removed to accommodate 2 parking spaces in front of the properties at 9048 and 9102 Valley Boulevard. Exhibit A depicts this recommendation. PUBLIC NOTICE PROCESS This item has been noticed through the regular agenda notification process. Submitted by c5� Joanne Itagaki Traffic'Engineering Deputy Exhibit A: Valley Boulevard between Rosemead BI. and Hart Ave. — Will be available at the Traffic Commission meeting. 0:4n16774 -Rsd Retainer 07 -08 \Traffic Commission Agendas \4 April 2008 \9102 Valley -Red curb removal.doc LHDDI N M 3Nf VM ff06 , 4 ANaLSlOHdV IL OIaeV S N 4 Q V N Ot Bf06 l ]] 6 N m , Q wdg 6 Q -I "' NO Z£ vd ' Q 16 N N � o m m D vd - Q I Wdg -WDg N (vO)Z£a Rl r SLN3NILav ZOl6 O c i _ 90016 Q 9016 N 4 N ALT/3a ONORSO `1 ❑W ❑N R . � w O G', r FA z m 8 2116 2118 0 0 s o w vd - -- °• z r5 F A Ma _ 3snofi uid -wD6 w 25 n Q = ODUM 9116 VO)Z£a y $ z i wdg -wog , 0 z (VO)Z£a Saf101 W l3wu A3llV8 v 0 o o y vd e n 0 w i S3O1na3S HLW3H NOSINn 25 m Ono i 3aVO HLlv3H VSOa < v m ISM 3HL JO NNVS i ZZ16 W(d0)Z�£N r H dM AOVNaVHd 1a380a V9Z16 O N N3AfpN NVn A m o 89Z L6 16 , S m 0 3,n7 IVHN O z ^ 9216 iwdg -WD6 z vd -- (vO)z£a 0 'SNI rfJVJ 31VIS 4£16 Z£16 0£16 vd O V m m C) r o 101 ALdN3 wdg -=6 0 (VO)Z£a m Alddns Ainv3e < vd - -- Sa3LuvnbOV3H OIaQN S.M/9S£OS Zf IB X O 7Dj = �n � 6 co m O =:i 9 f£06 0 33V3 FR C j n 1 eanb HLnOS 1 ° D b '-![AV IN" Ldil 3wev 3E 3Nmmvn .w.... s r. -.a.. al....