Loading...
TC - Agenda - 03-04-04M i ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION 8838 East Valley Boulevard Rosemead, California 91770 Regular Meeting MARCH 4, 2004 Call to Order: 7:00 p.m. Roll Call: Chairperson Knapp, Vice - Chairperson Matsdorf, Commissioner Quintanilla, Commissioner Baffo, Commissioner Benjamin Pledge of Allegiance: Commissioner Matsdorf Invocation: Commissioner Quintanilla I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - February 5, 2004 II. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE - This is the time reserved for members of the audience to address the Commission on items not listed on the agenda. (Maximum time per speaker is three (3) minutes; total time allocated is fifteen (15) minutes). III. OLD BUSINESS A. REQUEST FOR ANALYSIS OF TRAFFIC IN THE ALLEY EAST OF DEL MAR AVENUE BETWEEN HELLMAN AVENUE AND HERSHEY STREET IV. NEW BUSINESS A. REQUEST TO INSTALL RED CURB ON THE EAST SIDE OF NEW AVENUE BETWEEN NEWMARK AVENUE AND FERN AVENUE B. REQUEST FOR "DO NOT BLOCK INTERSECTION" SIGN AT THE INTERSECTION OF GARVEY AVENUE AND STINGLE AVENUE C. REQUEST FOR RED CURB ON THE NORTH SIDE OF MARSHALL STREET EAST OF EARLE AVENUE V. STAFF REPORTS A. UPDATE ON CITY COUNCIL'S ACTIONS VI. COMMISSIONER REPORTS VII. ADTOURNMENT -To the next regular meeting of the Traffic Commission on Thursday, April 1, 2004, at 7:00 p.m., Rosemead City Council Chambers, 8838 East Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, California 91770. ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION MEETING FEBRUARY 5, 2004 A regular meeting of the Rosemead Traffic Commission was called to order by Chairperson Knapp at 7:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 8838 East Valley Boulevard, Rosemead. ROLL CALL Present: Chairperson Knapp, Commissioner Matsdorf, Commissioner Quir tanilla, Commissioner Baffo & Commissioner Benjamin Absent: None Ex- Officio: Planning Director: Brad Johnson Traffic Engineering Deputy: Joanne Itagaki CALL TO ORDER Pledge of Allegiance: Commissioner Baffo Invocation: Commissioner Benjamin I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES It was moved by Commissioner Baffo, seconded by Commissioner Matsdorf, and carried unanimously to approve the minutes for January 8, 2004. II. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE Speaking before the Commission was: Mr. Giai Tung /Mr. Kenny Wu 3954 Rio Hondo Avenue Rosemead, California 91770 Mr. Wu stated that Mr. Tung owns a house next to the new development on Valley and Rio Hondo Avenue. Mr. Tung is requesting the red curb in front of his home to be removed. He is unable to park in the alley since the City placed parking restrictions in the alley. Chairperson Knapp stated that staff will have to look into this and bring it back at a later date. III. OLD BUSINESS A. REQUEST FOR STOP SIGN AT THE INTERSECTION OF RAMONA BOULEVARD AND IVAR AVENUE Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki presented the staff report. RECOMMENDATION Staff continues to recommend against the installation of stop signs on Ramona Boulevard at Ivar Avenue at this time. As reported in the November staff report, a favorable reported collision history and field observations indicate motorists travel through the intersection with due care. It was moved by Commissioner Baffo, seconded by Commissioner Benjamin, and carried unanimously to approve the Traffic Engineer's recommendation. B. REQUEST FOR STOP SIGN OR TRAFFIC SIGNAL AT MARSHALL STREET AND EARLE AVENUE Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki presented the staff report. RECOMMENDATION Staff continues to recommend against the installation of stop signs or traffic signals at the intersection of Marshall Street and Earle Avenue at this time. Selective enforcement of speeds on Marshall Street is recommended. Chairperson Knapp asked staff to look into installing a red curb to help alleviate some of the problems at this location. Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki stated that she will look into installing red curb, but feels it needs to come back before the Commission, in an attempt to notify the residents in the area. It was moved by Commissioner Baffo, seconded by Commissioner Benjamin and carried unanimously to approve the Traffic Engineer's recommendation. In addition, staff will looking at installing a red curb and also notify the surrounding residents. IV. NEW BUSINESS /:V GROVEAVENUE Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki presented the staff report. RECOMMENDATION UZI PAS Based on the observed blockage at the intersection of Norwood Place and Walnut Grove Avenue, the installation of "Do Not Block Intersection' signs and "KEEP CLEAR" pavement markings is recommended. This recommendation is shown on Exhibit A. With regards to the requested parking restrictions, staff recommends the Traffic Commission take public comment on the issue after which staff may then be prepared to make a recommendation to the Commission. Speaking before the Commission was: Rosalyn Canezzi 8528 E. Norwood Place Rosemead, CA 91770 Ms. Canezzi stated that it is very difficult to get out of her street, especially with Rosemead Boulevard so crowded, and feels a sign is needed so they don't block the cars. Speaking before the Commission was: Lee Kunz 8532 Norwood Place Rosemead, CA 91770 Mr. Kunz stated that he is addressing this issue on behalf of the residents on Norwood Place. He does not feel signs are needed, but does feel extending the red curb another 20' feet would satisfy most of the residents, because there seems to be trucks that park there and block the view of the cars. Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki stated that if the Commission desires to have red curb extended, that it be extended the entire 32' feet. Commissioner Matsdorf recommended that the Commission approve the signs to be installed. However, to bring back the red curb at a later date after the residents have been informed, to give them an opportunity to speak before the Commission It was moved by Commissioner Matsdorf, seconded by Commissioner Baffo, and carried unanimously to approve the Traffic Engineer's recommendation, and to bring back the red curb at a later date. Chairperson Knapp informed the residents in the audience that this item will be brought before the City Council, and they're welcome to attend that meeting and speak before the Council. V. STAFF REPORTS 10raim- VI. COMMISSIONER REPORTS Commissioner Benjamin thanked the Sheriffs Department for their quick response to the kids driving the scooters in front of Muscatel Middle School. ' Commissioner Quintanilla asked if we had jurisdiction going southbound at Glendon Way and Rosemead Boulevard, turning into the car wash, as far as making a u -turn at this location. Deputy Traffic Engineer stated that she would not be in favor of this type of request, and it would have to go through Cal- Trans. Commissioner Quintanilla asked if there was a master plan to re- examine the traffic patterns of the shopping center. Planning Director Johnson stated that the shopping center is about 1 year away from being fully occupied, including the 2nd floor of Target, at which time the traffic patterns will be re- evaluation. Commissioner Baffo stated that there was an accident on the corner of Walnut Grove and San Gabriel Boulevard on Saturday morning in front of Carrows. Chairperson Knapp stated that there seems to be a lot of tour buses traveling the streets of Rosemead, and perhaps staff could contact them and have them take an alternate route, such as Mission Drive rather than Wells Street. Commissioner Benjamin stated that he too sees a lot of buses traveling Rosemead Boulevard and driving very aggressively. Chairperson Knapp invited everyone to.attend the People for People Fish Fry on Friday, February 20th, from 5:00 p.m. -7:30 p.m., at the 1 51 Baptist Church in Temple City. Chairperson Knapp announced her resignation as Chairperson for the Annual Parade Committee, due to medical reasons. VII. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Commission; the meeting was adjourned at 7:57 p.m. There were 18 people in the audience. The next regularly scheduled meeting is set for March 4,2004. Staff Report Rosemead Traffic Commission TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS - ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSSION FROM: JOANNE ITAGAKI, TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DEPUTY DATE: February 25, 2004 RE: Follow -up — Traffic Conditions on Alley East of Del Mar Avenue between Hellman Avenue and Hershey Street This item was brought before the Traffic Commission on January 8, 2004. At that time, the Traffic Commission requested staff to collect more speed data in the alley. The Commission further requested staff to collect this data on the weekend. The additional speed data was collected on Saturday, February 21, 2004 from 11:00 AM to 1:00 PM. During this 2 hour collection period, 15 vehicles were surveyed. All of these vehicles had an origin or destination in the alley. None of the vehicles were "cut- through" traffic. The speed data is summarized below: Total number observed = 15 vehicles (7 northbound, 8 southbound) Highest speed observed = 24.mph Lowest speed observed = 12 mph 85` percentile speed = 22 mph Based on this additional data, there is no reason to revise the recommendation from the January meeting. The fact that the vehicles surveyed did not "cut - through" the alley indicates this concern is not as regular as indicated by the requester. RECOMMENDATION Based on the additional field observations, there were no vehicles observed using the alley as a "cut- through" route. Therefore, there is little benefit to creating a one -way alley. Selective enforcement of speeds in the alley is recommended at this time. Attachments ( FILENAME \0) Staff Report Rosemead Traffic Commission TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSSION FROM: JOANNE ITAGAKI, TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DEPUTY DATE: December 24, 2003 RE: Request for Analysis of Traffic in the Alley East of Del Mar Avenue Between Hellman Avenue and Hershey Street REQUEST Staff has received a request to analyze the traffic conditions in the alley east of Del Mar Avenue between Hellman Avenue and Hershey Street. The concern expressed was vehicles traveling in the alley to bypass traffic at the intersection of Del Mar Avenue and Hellman Avenue. CONDITIONS The alley east of Del Mar Avenue between Hellman Avenue and Hershey Street is approximately 20 feet wide with a concrete drain pan running down the middle of the alley. There are residential and commercial developments that access the alley. A church also exists, on the east side of the alley towards Hershey Street. There are parking lots /areas that have direct access to the alley. DATA Turning movement counts into and out of the alley at Hellman Avenue and Hershey Street were taken during the morning (7:00 to 9:00) and afternoon (4:00 to 6:00) peak hours. This data identified slightly different peak hours for the turning movements at Hellman Avenue and at Hershey Street. For the morning peak, Hellman Avenue was 7:30 AM and Hershey Street was 8:00 AM. For the afternoon peak, Hellman Avenue and Hershey Street were the same at 4:45 PM. The following was observed: Into Alley From Alley AM Peak LT RT LT RT Hellman Avenue 2 4 2 2 Hershey Street 3 0 1 1 Into Alley From Alley PM Peak LT RT LT RT Hellman Avenue 9 12 14 11 Hershey Street 7 1 8 1 January 8, 2003 Traffic Commission Meeting Request for Analysis of Traffic in the Alley East of Del Mar Avenue Between Hellman Avenue and Hershey Street Page ( PAGE ) of ( NUMPAGES ) Speed data was also collected for vehicles traveling in the alley. This data was collected for a 15- minute period starting at 8:00 AM. The speed data is summarized below: Total number observed = 7 (2 northbound, 5 southbound) Highest speed observed = 21 mph Lowest speed observed = 11 mph 85 percentile speed = 19 mph DISCUSSION Field observations were made of the alley during the morning and afternoon peaks. During the morning observation, school students were observed walking in the alley. 2 of the 7 vehicles observed in the morning were traveling below the 15 mph speed limit for alleys. Most of the vehicles observed were not "cut - through" traffic and were observed pulling into or out of parking lots /areas in the alley. The peak hour turning movements into and out of the alley at Hellman Avenue and Hershey Street are not extremely heavy. The AM peak was 10 total vehicles at Hellman Avenue and 5 at Hershey Street. The PM peak was higher with 46 total vehicles at Hellman Avenue and 17 at Hershey Street. The majority of the vehicles in the PM peak at Hellman Avenue were associated with the commercial development on the northwest side of the alley. Based on observations, less than 3 vehicles were observed using the alley as a "cut- through ". One alternative to minimize 'but- through" traffic is the creation of a one -way roadway. The idea behind this change in circulation would be to eliminate the vehicles traveling in a certain direction and thus reduce the 'but- through" traffic traveling in that direction. The difficulty with creating a one -way alley is the inconvenience to commercial and residential properties that have direct access to the alley. If the alley were to be made one -way in whichever direction, it will inconvenience the properties that would have to travel around the block to enter or exit. Unless there are physical barriers to restrict wrong way travel, some motorists will travel the wrong way when they determine there is no conflicting traffic. January 8, 2003 Traffic Commission Meeting Request for Analysis of Traffic in the Alley East of Del Mar Avenue Between Hellman Avenue and Hershey Street Page { PAGE } of { NUMPAGES } Other alternatives to minimize "cut- through" traffic might include speed humps or rumble strips. City policy is not to install speed bumps in public property. Most recently, rumble strips have been used in advance of uncontrolled school crosswalks. In addition, rumble strips in this particular alley might create noise issues for the residential and commercial properties. Also, the way the alley has parking lots /areas placement of rumble strips would have to account for vehicles that would travel around the strips and into the parking lots /areas. RECOMMENDATION Based on the field observations, there were few vehicles observed using the alley as a "cut- through" route. Therefore, there is little.benefit to creating a one - way alley. Selective enforcement of speeds in the alley during the PM peak is recommended at this time. { FILENAME \P) Staff Report Rosemead Traffic Commission TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSSION FROM: JOANNE ITAGAKI, TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DEPUTY DATE: February 25, 2004 RE: Request for Red Curb on the East Side of New Avenue Between Newmark Avenue and Fern Avenue REQUEST A request was received through the City Engineer regarding the installation of red curb on the east side of New Avenue south of Newmark Avenue. The requestor indicated that a large flatbed truck was parking in this area causing vehicles to travel in the northbound left turn lane even if they were traveling northbound through. The City Engineer did observe this particular truck parking at the location. CONDITIONS New Avenue is a 56 -foot wide north /south roadway at the western boundary of the City. There are two lanes of traffic in each direction separated by a double yellow centerline. At its intersection with Newmark Avenue, the intersection is signalized with a crosswalk on the south and west legs. The posted speed limit is 35 mph. . Newmark Avenue is a 40 -foot wide east/west roadway that "T's" into New Avenue. Newmark Avenue west of New Avenue is in the City of Monterey Park. There are two lanes of traffic in each direction separated by a double yellow centerline. Exhibit A depicts conditions at the intersection of New Avenue and Newmark Avenue. DISCUSSION Field observation of the subject intersection was conducted on several occasions. During the observations, there was a flatbed truck parked on the east side of New Avenue between Newmark Avenue and Fern Avenue on different occasions. When the truck was parked at that location, vehicles were observed traveling around the truck and passing through the left turn lane. The observations by the City Engineer as well as traffic engineering staff indicate potential conflicts. March 4, 2004 Traffic Commission Meeting Request for Red Curb on the East Side of New Avenue Between Newmark Avenue and Fern Avenue Page 2 of 2 The property specifically affected by the removal of on- street parking has been notified of this agenda item. There is limited on -site parking for this property. However, on- street parking is accessible on Fern Avenue. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended red curb be installed on the east side of New Avenue between Newmark Avenue and Fern Avenue. It is further recommended that a double yellow centerline be installed to direct vehicles away from the left turn lane. These recommendations are depicted in Exhibit A. Attachment { FILENAME \P) •+r» - w a w� wzw.w�.�r..M� wr�naw�a 1 , H 1� Q 1 LLJ U ) s d ,z LC Q 1 �'°°° ~ Z z d I � m 0 1 m .ai 1 1 o � 0 � m M o � 1 m < N r ep .o� 3 1 i I Y JJ <?J CI7 - 66 a 1 1 � 1 m 1 1 8 8 m m Q i S 9 N R w a 1 ' I 1 1 R � Na Staff Report Rosemead Traffic Commission TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSSION FROM: JOANNE ITAGAKI, TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DEPUTY DATE: February 25, 2004 RE: Request for "Do Not Block Intersection" Signs on Garvey Avenue at Stingle Avenue REQUEST A letter (attached) has been received from Mr. Leonard Hernandez, 2743 Stingle Avenue, for the installation of "No Blocking" signs at the intersection of Garvey Avenue and Stingle Avenue. Mr. Hernandez indicates it is difficult to access Garvey Avenue from Stingle Avenue. In addition, westbound vehicles turn left into the driveway on the north side of Garvey Avenue where no left turn lane exists. CONDITIONS Garvey Avenue is a 74 foot wide roadway with two lanes of traffic in each direction generally separated by a raised center median. Garvey Avenue is uncontrolled at its "T" intersection with Stingle Avenue. Garvey Avenue is signalized at River Avenue /Rosemead Place and Muscatel Avenue. On the north side of Garvey Avenue, across from Stingle Avenue is the driveway access for 8905 Garvey Avenue. The posted speed limit on Garvey Avenue is 35 mph. Stingle Avenue is a 40 foot wide roadway with no striping separating opposing lanes of traffic. South of Garvey Avenue, Stingle Avenue is a dead -end street. Stingle Avenue is "Stop" controlled at its intersection with Garvey Avenue. The prima facie speed limit on Stingle Avenue is 25 mph. Exhibit A depicts existing conditions at the intersection of Garvey Avenue and Stingle Avenue will be available at the Traffic Commission meeting. DATA The reported collision history at the intersection of Garvey Avenue and Stingle Avenue was reviewed for the period from July 1, 1998 through December 31, 2003. This review identified 9 reported collisions. Five of these collisions involved northbound vehicles colliding with east or west bound vehicles. Three of the five collisions occurred during the PM peak period. A summary of the reported collisions will be provided at the Traffic Commission meeting. March 4, 2004 Traffic Commission Meeting Request for "Do Not Block Intersection" Signs On Garvey Avenue at Stingle Avenue Page ( PAGE) of ( NUMPAGES ) DISCUSSION Field observations of the intersection of Garvey Avenue and Stingle Avenue did identify eastbound vehicles blocking access for vehicles on Stingle Avenue. This congestion occurred primarily during the peak hours. A few eastbound vehicles were also identified turning left into the driveway on the north side of Garvey Avenue at Stingle Avenue. The reported collision appears to indicate some difficulty for vehicles trying to access Garvey Avenue from Stingle Avenue. The type of collisions reported identified the primary` collision factor of "Automobile Right -of -way Violation ". This generally translates to vehicles exiting Stingle Avenue not properly yielding the right -of -way to vehicles on Garvey Avenue. The reported collision history identified one eastbound rearend collision which might have been a result of a vehicle wanting to turn left into the driveway on the north side of Garvey Avenue at Stingle Avenue. However, in further reviewing the collision, it was reported that both vehicles were traveling eastbound with one vehicle rearending a stopped vehicle. Therefore, it appears the eastbound left turning vehicles from Garvey Avenue to the driveway 8905 Garvey Avenue are negotiating the turn with due care. RECOMMENDATION Based on the reported collision history and the field observations of the intersection, the installation of a "Do Not Block Intersection" sign and "KEEP CLEAR" pavement markings is recommended for eastbound Garvey Avenue at Stingle Avenue. These recommendations are identified in Exhibit A. There are no recommended changes to traffic controls for eastbound left turns on Garvey Avenue at Stingle Avenue. Attachments ( FILENAME \P) L 11 I 571 N (Z F cLvd A�l 1 7PP, Ff- I 'C RULES Lo c-b< 1 1v j aee - IE tv rj T VA R, s t A ff Staff Report Rosemead Traffic Commission TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSSION FROM: JOANNE ITAGAKI, TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DEPUTY DATE: February 25, 2004 RE: Request for Red Curb on the North Side of Marshall Street East of Earle Avenue REQUEST Staff received a letter (attached) from Mr. Roman Tiscareno, 8426 E. Norwood Place, regarding the visibility for southbound Earle Avenue at Marshall Avenue. Mr. Tiscareno sent his letter in response to last month's Traffic Commission's item on Marshall Street and Earl Avenue. Mr. Tiscareno has requested the restriction of parking on the north side of Marshall Street east of Earle Avenue. CONDITIONS Marshall Street is generally a 38 -foot wide east/west•,collector street throughout the City. At the intersection of Earle Avenue, Marshall Street narrows to 38 feet wide. There is one lane of traffic in each direction separated by single yellow skip striping. Parking is generally allowed on both sides of the street. The posted speed limit is 35 mph. Earle Avenue at its intersection with Marshall Street is offset. The north leg of Earle Avenue is approximately 35 feet west of the south leg. The north leg of Earle Avenue is 36 feet wide. The south leg is 30 feet wide. Both legs of Earle Avenue are Stop controlled at its intersection with Marshall Street. There are no traffic stripes on Earle Avenue. Parking is allowed on both sides of the street. The prima facie speed limit is 25 mph. Exhibit A depicting the existing conditions on Marshall Street at Earle Avenue will be available at the Traffic Commission meeting. DATA The reported collision history at the intersection of Marshall Street and Earle Avenue was reviewed for the period from January 1, 1999 through December 31, 2001. There were 2 collisions reported in the vicinity of the subject intersection during this period. These collisions are summarized below. March 4, 2004 Traffic Commission Meeting Request for Red Curb on the North Side of Marshall Street East of Earle Avenue Page { PAGE ) of { NUMPAGES ) Location & Description PCF 1. 21 feet east of Earle Improper Turn Eastbound vehicle proceeding (Inattention) straight sideswiped an eastbound parked vehicle. 2. at Earle Right -of -way Southbound left turning vehicle Automobile sideswiped a westbound vehicle proceeding straight. PCF = Primary Collision Factor DISCUSSION Date. Day & Time 05/13/01, Sunday & 6:00 AM 03/20/99, Saturday & 11:00 AM Field observations of the intersection of Marshall Street and Earle Avenue did identify vehicles parking on the northeast corner of the intersection. These vehicles, however, were not "consistently" parked at the location. Visibility for southbound Earle Avenue at Marshall Street was to some extent inhibited by the parked vehicles. The front door of the property on the northeast corner is on Marshall Street. It is likely that the majority of the vehicles parking on the northeast corner are related to 8447 Marshall Avenue. On Exhibit A, there is approximately 54 feet on Marshall Street from the beginning of curve radius (BCR) to the driveway of 8447 Marshall Street. There is an existing fire hydrant at the BCR and therefore parking within 15 feet is not legal. This reduces the available parking to . the driveway to 39 feet (approximately 2 car lengths). Along Earle Avenue, there is approximately 60 feet (3 car lengths) of available parking space from the BCR to the property line of 8447 Marshall Avenue. Mr. Tiscareno has indicated he believes 15 to 20 yards of visibility would be the best solution. This would eliminate parking in front of 8447 Marshall Street. The reported collision history does not indicate a consistent problem with visibility for southbound Earle Avenue at Marshall Street. The one reported collision that involves a southbound vehicle versus a westbound vehicle occurred in 1999. Therefore, there does not appear to be a need for an extended length of red curb on Marshall Street. March 4, 2004 Traffic Commission Meeting Request for Red Curb on the North Side of Marshall Street East of Earle Avenue Page { PAGE } of { NUMPAGES } RECOMMENDATION The installation of red curb on the north side of Marshall Street east of Earle Avenue is not recommended at this time. The favorable collision history and field observation of the location supports this recommendation. Attachment ( FILENAME \P) JAN -29 -2014 0 :35 LA RECOPDS 213 294 4332 P.01 /Ctl January 6. 2004 .City of Rosemead C/o Traffic Commission 8838 E. Valley Blvd. Rosemead, CA 91770 Re: Traffic Commission Agenda Item Dear Ms. Berniea, Thank you so much For notifying me of the commission considering a stop sign at Earl and Marshall. As much as I'd like to attend I cannot. However, if you will, please accept my comments below. Living on Norwood Place since 1987, 1 have always been deeply concerned about going East and/or West on Marshall from Earl. By no real fault of the fancily living on the NorthEast corner of that intersection, it is the cars narked there that create the real hazard A car attempting to go East and /or West while Southbound on Earl has to literally pull- out halfway onto the Westbound lane of Marshall to see if it's clear. Thar is so dangerous and truly frightening. We have been quite fortunate, but in reading your agenda, others unfortunately have not. A stop sign would allow southbound traffic on Earl to safely go East and /or West and allow southbotmd Earl traffic peace of mind when approaching that stop. One very important issue however, is that the NorthEast corner must be clear of cars for at lest 15/20 yards or the problem will continue. For additional information, please do not hesitate to call or write. Sincerely, Roman Tiscareno 8426 E. Norwood Place Rosemead. CA 91770 (626) 571 -0104 Ti - ,TAL P.iAl