CC - Item 4G - Request for All Way Stop at Olney Street and Marybeth AvenueROSEMEAD CITY COUNCIL
1-0&"IaATED '9
TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: BEN KIM, CITY MANAGER V�
DATE: OCTOBER 8, 2024
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR ALL WAY STOP AT OLNEY STREET AND
MARYBETH AVENUE
N1 a ►1 iT/M TA
At the July 11, 2024, Traffic Commission Meeting, staff presented recommendations and options
for traffic improvements at Olney Street and Marybeth Avenue. After discussion and presentation
of the item, the Traffic Commission approved the staff recommendations for the area as shown on
the "Installation Exhibit" in Attachment C. Public Works Field Services staff will complete all the
recommended items. If necessary, additional materials and supplies may be purchased at a minimal
expense to complete the recommended work and staff would utilize approved Fiscal Year 2024-
2025 Traffic Signs and Markers available funds.
BACKGROUND
On behalf of the City of Rosemead, engineering staff has completed an all -way stop and line -of -
sight review, as well as recommended appropriate improvements at the location of Olney Street
and Marybeth Avenue.
The City of Rosemead received a resident request to review the intersection for Olney Street and
Marybeth Avenue. To determine if the intersection meets the requirements for an all -way stop.
The request reported vehicles will often travel on Olney Street at a high rate of speed and is
concerned for vehicles and pedestrians traveling through this area. The resident requested that an
all -way stop be installed at the intersection. In response to this request and on behalf of the City,
engineering staff completed a traffic review to determine if an all -way stop was warranted to be
installed at the intersection of Olney Street and Marybeth Avenue, and recommended appropriate
measures.
AGENDA ITEM 4.G
City Council Meeting
October 8, 2024
Page 2 of
The traffic review included an analysis of the existing roadway conditions, a field review, and a
review of approximately 3 -years of available collision data.
Existing Conditions:
Olney Street runs east/west and is considered a local road, per the California Road System
Functional Classification by Caltrans. Olney Street has a posted speed limit of 25 MPH and is
approximately 35 -feet wide. Olney Street has one lane in each direction and has no marked
centerline. Parking is available on the north and south side of Olney Street, except on street
sweeping days. This segment of Olney Street is adjacent to single-family residential homes located
on both sides of the street.
Marybeth Avenue is a north/south street, classified as a local road, per the California Road System
Functional Classification Map by Caltrans. Marybeth Avenue has a prima facie speed limit of 25
MPH, approximately 30 -feet wide with one lane of travel in each direction, and has no marked
centerline. Parking is allowed on both sides of the street except during street sweeping hours, on
Wednesdays from 8 AM to 12 PM for both sides of the street. This section of Marybeth Avenue is
primarily single-family residential housing. At the intersection with Olney Street, Marybeth
Avenue is considered the minor street at the intersection, however there is no posted signage
indicating vehicles should stop for southbound traffic approaching Olney Street.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The Traffic Commission voted 5-0 to approve staff recommendations. It is recommended that city
council authorize the following recommendations:
1. INSTALL NEW STOP SIGN (111-1): Install New Stop Sign (RI -1) on Marybeth Avenue
for southbound traffic approaching Olney Street, at the northwest corner of the intersection.
2. INSTALL STOP BAR AND "STOP" PAVEMENT LEGEND: Install Stop Bar And
"Stop" Pavement Legend adjacent to the new Stop Sign along Marybeth at the intersection
with Olney Street
3. INSTALL 20 -FEET OF RED CURB: Install 20 -Feet of Red Curb at the northeast corner
of the intersection of Olney Street and Marybeth Avenue
City Council Meeting
October 8, 2024
Page 3 of 4
4. INSTALL 1125" PAVEMENT LEGEND FOR EASTBOUND TRAFFIC: Install "25"
Pavement Legend for eastbound traffic approximately 75 -feet east of the intersection at
Olney Street and Vane Avenue, for vehicles approaching the intersection of Olney Street
and Marybeth Avenue.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
The City of Rosemead Public Works Field Services Division will complete the recommended
items utilizing approved Fiscal Year 2024-2025 Traffic Signs and Markers available funds. All
recommended items will be performed by in-house staff. If necessary, additional materials and
supplies may be purchased at a minimal expense to complete the tasks.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The proposed work involves the maintenance and minor alteration of existing public infrastructure;
therefore, the project is Class 1 Categorically Exempt pursuant to the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA)
STRATEGIC PLAN IMPACT
The project is consistent with the City of Rosemead's Strategic Plan Goal C - Infrastructure and
Facilities, which is to enhance streets, sidewalks, and public infrastructure; coordinate with
relevant utility agencies regarding safety and enhancements; and modernize facilities by expanding
the use of wireless network technology and renewable energy.
City Council Meeting
October 8, 2024
Page 4 of 4
PUBLIC NOTICE PROCESS
This item has been noticed through the regular agenda notification process.
Prepared by:
elle arcia
ublic Works Fiscal and Project Manager
Submitted by
Albert Leung
Acting Director of Public Works
Attachment A: July 11, 2024 Traffic Commission Staff Report
Attachment B: July 11, 2024 Traffic Commission Minutes
Attachment C: Installation Exhibit
Attachment A
Traffic Commission Staff Report
Dated July 11, 2024
ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION
TO: TRAFFIC COMMISSION
FROM: DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
DATE: JULY 11, 2024
STAFF REPORT
SUBJECT: ALL WAY STOP REQUEST AT OLNEY STREET AND MARYBETH
AVENUE
SUMMARY
On behalf of the City of Rosemead, engineering staff has completed an all -way stop and line -of -
sight review, as well as recommended appropriate improvements at the location of Olney Street
and Marybeth Avenue.
The City of Rosemead received a resident request to review the intersection for Olney Street and
Marybeth Avenue. to determine if the intersection meets the requirements for an all -way stop. The
request reported vehicles will often travel on Olney Street at a high rate of speed and is concerned
for vehicles and pedestrians traveling through this area. The resident requested that an all -way stop
be installed at the intersection. In response to this request and on behalf of the City, engineering
staff completed a traffic review to determine if an all -way stop was warranted to be installed at the
intersection of Olney Street and Marybeth Avenue, and recommended appropriate measures.
ANALYSIS
The traffic review included an analysis of the existing roadway conditions, a field review, and a
review of approximately 3 -years of available collision data.
Existing Conditions:
Olney Street runs east/west and is considered a local road, per the California Road System
Functional Classification by Caltrans. Olney Street has a posted speed limit of 25 MPH and is
approximately 35 -feet wide. Olney Street has one lane in each direction and has no marked
centerline. Parking is available on the north and south side of Olney Street, except on street
sweeping days. This segment of Olney Street is adjacent to single-family residential homes located
on both sides of the street.
Rosemead Traffic Commission Meeting
July 11, 2024
Page 2 of 2
Marybeth Avenue is a north/south street, classified as a local road, per the California Road System
Functional Classification Map by Caltrans. Marybeth Avenue has a prima facie speed limit of 25
MPH, approximately 30 -feet wide with one lane of travel in each direction, and has no marked
centerline. Parking is allowed on both sides of the street except during street sweeping hours, on
Wednesdays from 8 AM to 12 PM for both sides of the street. This section of Marybeth Avenue
is primarily single-family residential housing. At the intersection with Olney Street, Marybeth
Avenue is considered the minor street at the intersection, however there is no posted signage
indicating vehicles should stop for southbound traffic approaching Olney Street.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
After a thorough review of existing field and traffic conditions and per the guidelines in the
California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CAMUTCD), California Vehicle Code
(CVC), and based on engineering judgement, it was determined that the intersection of Olney
Street at Marybeth Avenue does not meet the requirements for the installation of an all -way stop.
However, it was determined that this area along Olney Street at Marybeth Avenue would benefit
from the installation of other traffic calming measures.
Please refer to the Installation Exhibit in Attachment A for a conceptual exhibit representation
of the proposed recommendations.
These improvements include:
1. INSTALL NEW STOP SIGN (111-1): Install New Stop Sign (RI -1) on Marybeth Avenue
for southbound traffic approaching Olney Street, at the northwest corner of the intersection.
2. INSTALL STOP BAR AND "STOP" PAVEMENT LEGEND: Install Stop Bar And
"Stop" Pavement Legend adjacent to the new Stop Sign along Marybeth at the intersection
with Olney Street.
3. INSTALL 20 -FEET OF RED CURB: Install 20 -Feet of Red Curb at the northeast comer of
the intersection of Olney Street and Marybeth Avenue.
4. INSTALL "25" PAVEMENT LEGEND FOR EASTBOUND TRAFFIC: Install "25"
Pavement Legend for eastbound traffic approximately 75 -feet east of the intersection at
Olney Street and Vane Avenue, for vehicles approaching the intersection of Olney Street and
Marybeth Avenue.
Prepared by:
Allison Richter, Contract Traffic Engineering Division
Attachments:
A. Attachment A — Technical Traffic Engineering Report
WAA
TRANSTEch
TO: City of Rosemead, Department of Public Works
FROM: Transtech Engineers, Inc.
DATE: July 11, 2024
SUBJECT: ALL WAY STOP REQUEST AT THE INTERSECTION OF OLNEY STREET AND MARYBETH
AVENUE
INTRODUCTION
The City of Rosemead has received a resident request to review the intersection of Olney Street and
Marybeth Avenue. The resident is requesting for the installation of an All -Way Stop at the intersection of
Olney Street and Marybeth Avenue, due to speeding concerns in the area. In response to this request and
on behalf of the City, engineering staff has completed a traffic review at the intersection of Olney Street
and Marybeth Avenue. The traffic review included a review of existing conditions, 3 -years of available
collision data, Average Daily Traffic (ADT) counts, 24-hour speed survey counts, turning movement counts
(TMC), and pedestrian movement counts.
Figure 1: Vicinity Map
7.1' ,
��,.�-} s� � • 1 SFJ �'�� � .., _.
gf$
Rte-
'
LEGEND
Olney Street and Marybeth Avenue
0,&
Prepared By: Transtech Engineers, Inc. I Page 1
TRAFFIC REVIEW OF THE INTERSECTION OF OLNEY STREET AND MARYBETH AVENUE
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Figure 1: Existing Conditions Diagram — Olney Street and Marybeth Avenue
Olney Street: Within the City of Rosemead, Olney Street is an east/west street, considered a Major
Collector road, per the California Road System Functional Classification by Caltrans. Olney Street has a
posted speed limit of 25 MPH, approximately 36 -feet wide with one lane of travel in each direction and
has no marked centerline. Parking is allowed on both sides of the street except during street sweeping
hours. Street sweeping hours are on Wednesday from 8 AM to 12 PM, for both sides of the street. Land
use along this segment of Olney Street consists of single family residential housing.
Marybeth Avenue: Within the City of Rosemead, Marybeth Avenue is a north/south street, classified as a
local road, per the California Road System Functional Classification Map by Caltrans. Marybeth Avenue
has a prima facie speed limit of 25 MPH, approximately 30 -feet wide with one lane of travel in each
direction, and has no marked centerline. Parking is allowed on both sides of the street except during street
sweeping hours, on Wednesdays from 8 AM to 12 PM for both sides of the street. This section of Marybeth
Avenue consists of single-family residential housing. At the intersection with Olney Street, Marybeth
Avenue is considered the minor street at the intersection, however there is no posted signage indicating
vehicles should stop for southbound traffic approaching Olney Street.
00A
Prepared By: Transtech Engineers, Inc. I Page 2 of 15
TRAFFIC REVIEW OF THE INTERSECTION OF OLNEY STREET AND MARYBETH AVENUE
V Street approaching Marybeth
Avenue
COLLISION DATA
Collision data was obtained from the computerized collision records system maintained by the State of
California Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS). A review of collision history for the
intersection of Marybeth Avenue and Olney Street was conducted over a 3 year period between January
2021 to the most recent available data, December 2023.
2023 — 0 collisions
2022 — 0 collisions
2021-0 collisions
TOTAL: 0 collisions
Prepared By: Transtech Engineers, Inc. I Page 3 of 15
TRAFFIC REVIEW OF THE INTERSECTION OF OLNEY STREET AND MARYBETH AVENUE
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC fADTI
Average Daily Traffic (ADT) data was obtained from counts taken on Thursday, May 16, 2024, for Olney
Street east of Marybeth Avenue, Olney Street west of Marybeth Avenue, and Marybeth Avenue north of
Olney Street. A summary of ADT data is shown in Table 1: Average Daily Traffic (ADT). The ADT is attached
(Attachment 1) at the end of the report.
Table 1: Average Daily Traffic (ADT)
Location
Vehicles per Day (vpd)
Vehicles per Day (vpd)
Vehicles per Day (vpd)
5/16/2024
5/16/2024
5/16/2024
Olney Street E/O Marybeth
EB
WB
TOTAL
Avenue
569
762
1,331
Olney Street W/O
NO
SB
TOTAL
Marybeth Avenue
582
784
1,366
Marybeth Avenue N/0
Olney Street
NS
SB
TOTAL
108
117
225
SPEED SURVEY
To assess the speed at which vehicles are traveling along Olney Street, a 24-hour speed survey was taken.
A 24-hour speed survey was taken on Thursday, May 16, 2024, for Olney Street west of Marybeth Avenue.
The 85th percentile speed of vehicles along Olney Street west of Marybeth Avenue is at 27 MPH. This
means that 85 percent of the vehicles sampled are traveling at 28 MPH or below, which is slightly above
the posted speed limit of 25 MPH. Table 2 below shows the speed survey results. The speed summary is
attached (Attachment 2) at the end of the report.
Table 2: Speed Survey at Woodruff Avenue and Alessandro Avenue (9/7/23)
Dir. of Date/Time of
Location 85%ile Speed Posted Limit
Travel Survey
Olney Street W/O Marybeth EB/WB 5/16/2024 28 MPH
Avenue 24-hour 25 MPH
FIELD OBSERVATIONS
On Thursday, May 23, 2024, a field review was conducted at the intersection of Olney Street and
Marybeth Avenue. The review consisted of reviewing the conditions of existing signage, roadway
conditions, and review of vehicle movements in the area.
Prepared By: Transtech Engineers, Inc. I Page 4 of 15
TRAFFIC REVIEW OF THE INTERSECTION OF OLNEY STREET AND MARYBETH AVENUE
LINE OF SIGHT ANALYSIS
A Line -of -Sight analysis consists of reviewing the existing conditions a driver encounters when
approaching an intersection to turn onto the other street and determining if there is limited view for the
driver turning. The driver of a vehicle approaching or departing from an intersection or driveway should
have an unobstructed view of the intersection, including any traffic control devices, and sufficient lengths
along the intersecting highway to permit the driver to anticipate and avoid potential obstructions. Any
object within the sight triangle that would obstruct the driver's view of an approaching vehicle should be
removed or modified per the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. Obstructions within sight
triangles could be buildings, vehicles, hedges, trees, bushes, tall crops, walls, fences, or parked cars. A
parked vehicle extends approximately 7 -feet from the curb, so it's necessary to consider the width of a
vehicle when determining the amount of red curb needed to obtain a clear line of sight. On intersections
in urban areas where street parking is allowed, the common practice by motorists after stopping at the
curb and watching and yielding for any potential pedestrians crossing on the sidewalk, is to pull a sufficient
distance forward in the parking lane to have a better view of oncoming traffic. Figure 3 presents an
example of a clear sight triangle at an intersection.
Table 3: Stopping Sight Distance
Per A PON on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets (AASHTO) Table 3-1
Stopping Sight Distance
Design Brake reaction
Braking distance on
Speed distance
(level
Calculated CalDe
Cal De sign
(MPH) (ft)
(ft)
25 91.9
60.0
151.9
155
30 110.3
86.4
196.7
200
35 128.6
117.6
246.2
250
40 147.0
153.6
1 300.6
305
45 165.4
194.4 1
359.8
360
Note: Brake reaction distance predicated on a time of 2.5s; deceleration rate 11.2 ft/sec'
By: Transtech Engineers, Inc. I Page 5 of 15
TRAFFIC REVIEW OF THE INTERSECTION OF OLNEY STREET AND MARYBETH AVENUE
Figure 3: Example of Stopping Sight Distance Triangle with Vehicles Parked Along Curb
Stopping Sight Distance
Vehicle
Stopping Sight Distance
Min 7' distance for
Area to be dear of view
obstruction
Figure 4: Line of Sight for Vehicles at the intersection of Olney Street and Marybeth Avenue
30'
Legend
�f, a
1
. 3L t
xExisting Driveway ........ Available curb space for parking I ......... I Existing Red Curb
TRAFFIC CALMING DEVICES AND STRATEGIES
Traffic calming is the process of reducing vehicle speeds through the use of both passive devices, such as
signs and striping, and physical devices such as changes in road elevation or path. As part of this study,
traffic speeds, accidents and traffic volumes were used to assess existing conditions along this segment.
The type, design and placement of traffic calming devices depend upon the road classification, desired
traffic speed and types of traffic issues along Marshall Street at Ivar Avenue. The following is a list of
common traffic calming measures usually deployed to reduce speeding, increase visibility of signs, and
decrease running of Stop signs.
O E AD
.,�....,�. w.,
Prepared By: Transtech Engineers, Inc. I Page 6 of 15
TRAFFIC REVIEW OF THE INTERSECTION OF OLNEY STREET AND MARYBETH AVENUE
1) Traffic Education Campaign
2) Signage and Pavement Legends
3) Larger Dimension Signs or Beacons on Signs
4) Traffic Striping
5) Radar Feedback Signs
6) Targeted Police Enforcement
ALL -WAY STOP CONTROL CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING IF STOP CONTROL IS WARRANTED
Traffic control devices work in concert with the basic "rules of the road" contained in traffic laws and
ordinances. The California Manual of Uniform Traffic Devices (CAMUTCD) describes applications,
warrants, and placement of STOP signs (111-1). The STOP sign is a regulatory device that is used when
traffic is required to stop. STOP signs are used to assign right-of-way at an intersection. Multi -way control
is used where the volume of traffic on the intersecting roads is approximately equal. Stop signs are not
used as a speed control device. Since a STOP sign causes inconvenience to motorists, it should be used
only where warranted. There are several factors that an intersection needs to meet for the consideration
of all -way stop control; criteria include minimum volumes on each of the street approaches, collision
investigation, speed of traffic, number of pedestrians and potential sight obstructions.
All -Way Stop Installation
The following briefly outlines the Criteria for the installation of All -Way stop warrants.
The placement of All -Way stop control is warranted when' minimum volume thresholds are exceeded:
A. Traffic control signals are justified.
B. A crash problem exists as indicated by 5 or more collisions in a 12 -month period.
C. Minimum Volumes are met if:
1. Volume entering intersection from the major approach (total of both approaches) averages
300 vehicles per hour for any 8 hours of an average day. And
2. The combined vehicle, pedestrian and bicycle volumes entering the intersection from the
minor street approaches averages at least 200 units per hour for the same 8 hours.
3. If the 851^ percentile approach speed of the major street exceeds 40 mph the minimum
volumes are 70 percent of the above values.
Peak hours used in Table 4 are from ADT counts taken on each approach on Woodruff Avenue and
Alessandro Avenue to determine if the intersection met volume warrants for all -way stop installation.
The following Table 4 summarizes traffic during the highest 8 peak hours of the day on both streets.
California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices, Section26 2B.07 Multiway Stop Applications
O E AD
By: Transtech Engineers, Inc. I Page 7 of 15
TRAFFIC REVIEW OF THE INTERSECTION OF OLNEY STREET AND MARYBETH AVENUE
Table 4: Summary of Vehicular and Pedestrian Volume to Meet Minimum Thresholds for All -Way
Stop Control, Olney Street at Marybeth Avenue
Time
Eastbound and
Met Minimum
Southbound
East Leg
Met Minimum
(highest 8
Westbound along
Threshold of at
Traffic on
and West
Threshold of 200 Veh
hours)
Olney Street
Least 300
Marybeth
Leg
Units Per Hour (NB +
(Non -Stopped
Units Per Hour
Avenue
Pedestrians
SB+ Peds+ Bikes) for
Street Considered
(NB + SB +
Minor Street
and
The Same 8 Hours as
the Major Street)
Peds + Bikes)
(Stop
Bicycles
Marshall Street?
for the 8
Controlled
crossing
Hours?
Street)
Ivar Avenue
SB
07:00-08:00
103
N
9
N
09:00-10:00
71
N
10
N
10:00-11:00
44
N
9
N
12:00-13:00
70
N
8
N
13:00-14:00
96
N
10
N
16:00-17:00
114
N
9
N
18:00-19:00
97
N
13
N
19:00-20:00
68
N
9
N
O E„_01AD
Prepared By: Transtech Engineers, Inc. I Page 8 of 15
TRAFFIC REVIEW OF THE INTERSECTION OF OLNEY STREET AND MARYBETH AVENUE
RECOMMENDATIONS
After a thorough review of existing traffic conditions and per the California Manual on Uniform Traffic
Control Devices (CAMUTCD), California Vehicle Code (CVC), based on the traffic review and engineering
judgement, the intersection of Olney Street at Marybeth Avenue was found to have appropriate traffic
devices installed and sufficient line of sight. The following measures are recommended and shown in the
Recommendation Exhibit below:
Recommendations:
1. INSTALL NEW STOP SIGN (11111-1) on Marybeth Avenue for southbound
traffic approaching Olney Street, at the northwest corner of the
intersection.
2. INSTALL STOP BAR AND "STOP" PAVEMENT LEGEND adjacent to the new
Stop Sign along Marybeth at the intersection with Olney Street.
Figure A: Stop Sign
(RI -I)
3. INSTALL 20 -FEET OF RED CURB at the northeast corner of the intersection of Olney Street and
Marybeth Avenue.
4. INSTALL "25" PAVEMENT LEGEND for eastbound traffic approximately 75 -feet east of the
intersection at Olney Street and Vane Avenue, for vehicles approaching the intersection of Olney
Street and Marybeth Avenue.
a. Installation of a pavement legend will help remind drivers of the speed limit in the area.
Prepared By: Transtech Engineers, Inc. I Page 9
TRAFFIC REVIEW OF THE INTERSECTION OF OLNEY STREET AND MARYBETH AVENUE
ATTACHMENTS
1. ADT Count: Average Daily Traffic Counts: 5/16/2024
a. Olney Street E/O Marybeth Avenue
b. Olney Street W/O Marybeth Avenue
c. Marybeth Avenue N/O Olney Street
2. ADT 24HR Speed Survey: 5/16/2024
a. Olney Street W/O Marybeth Avenue
EW AD
Prepared By: Transtech Engineers, Inc. I Page 11 of 15
TRAFFIC REVIEW OF THE INTERSECTION OF OLNEY STREET AND MARYBETH AVENUE
Attachment 1a: Average Daily Traffic Counts — Olney Street E/0 Marybeth Avenue
- rreP.re69ry xwnn.: o.caawrveyu¢se,.;re:
VOLUME
Olney St E/O Marybeth Ave
Day: Thursday
Date: 5/16/2024
City: Rosemead
Pr9169.it M9 CA24_020161 002
TOTALSDAILY
0
0
569
762
1,331
AMPer• •
NG SB
Es
W13
TOTAL
0000
0
1
1
12:00
5
II
19
00:15
1
1
2
12:15
9
13
22
00:30
0
1
1
12:30
5
7
12
WAS
1
2
0
3
1
5
12A5
7
26
10
44
17
70
01:00
0
1
1
2390
7
15
22
01:15
3
2
5
13:15
6
20
26
01:30
0
0
0
13:30
6
14
20
O1.
0
3
0
3
0
5
13A5
15
34
16
65
31
99
02:00
0
1
1
14:00
15
20
35
02:15
2
0
2
14:15
6
Is
24
02:30
1
1
2
14:30
9
11
20
02:45
0
3
0
2
0
5
14:45
5
35
16
65
21
100
03:00
0
0
0
15:00
15
12
27
09:15
2
0
2
15:15
10
11
21
0330
2
1
3
154-30
8
9
17
WAS
1
5
1
2
2
7
1545
7
40
14
46
21
86
0490
0
0
0
16:00
11
14
25
04:15
1
0
1
16115
11
14
25
0430
2
1
3
1630
16
17
33
04AS
2
5
2
3
4
8
16A5
9
47
11
56
20
IW
0590
3
1
4
1790
11
19
30
05:15
0
0
0
17:15
9
13
22
Woo
2
1
3
17:30
20
16
36
WAS
5
10
3
5
8
IS
1745
7
47
17
65
24
112
0690
5
2
7
IBRO
11
19
30
%:15
4
2
6
16:15
5
9
14
06:30
5
5
10
18:30
13
15
28
06A5
4
18
3
12
7
30
18A5
it
40
10
53
21
93
07.100
7
5
12
19:00
12
7
19
07:15
8
13
21
19:15
12
7
19
07:30
11
13
24
19:30
6
6
12
07:45
11
37
39
70
50
107
1945
6
36
12
32
18
68
08110
9
10
19
20-.W
13
10
23
00:15
5
12
17
20:15
6
10
16
W:30
6
14
20
20:30
8
7
15
WAS
8
28
7
43
15
71
WHIZ
6
33
7
34
13
67
09:110
14
9
23
21:00
9
10
19
01:15
6
7
13
21:15
4
9
13
09:30
7
5
12
21:30
2
13
15
WAS
8
35
16
37
24
72
21A5
3
18
4
36
7
54
1090
4
5
9
22110
3
10
13
10:15
5
5
10
22:15
3
3
6
10:30
6
7
13
22:30
4
3
7
WAS
5
20
11
28
16
48
22AS
2
12
5
21
7
33
11:00
9
10
19
23:00
3
1
4
11:15
6
5
11
23:15
3
6
9
1130
7
7
14
23:30
2
1
3
1145
4
26
6
28
10
542345
1
9
1
9
2
I8
TOTAIS
192
236
478
7'OGIS
377
526
903
SPFIt%
44.9%
55.1%
321%
ww%
1
41.A
523%
W4%
DA I LY TOTALS
�18
LB
Ell
W11
Total
F569
762
1,03t3l
4M Peak Noor
07:15
07:6
07:15
PM Peak Hour
16:0
13:15
MIS
M Pk Vdume
39
75
114
PMPk Volume
49
70
111
Pk Hr Factor
am
0A41
0.5)0
Pk H,FMor
0.66
0475
am
7-9V6ume
0
16
178
4-6Volume
%
121
21S
7-9Peak Hour
07:15
07:15
WAS
4-6Peak Hour
16:45
IP.w
I7A0
7-9Pk Volume
39
A
114
4-6%Vdume
49
65
III
Pk Hr Farlor
0.896
0.481
0.570
Pk Hr Factor
0.613
Mass
am
/}S
OSE , E,4 D
Prepared By: Transtech Engineers, Inc. I Page 12 of 15
TRAFFIC REVIEW OF THE INTERSECTION OF OLNEY STREET AND MARYBETH AVENUE
Attachment lb: Average Daily Trak Counts — Olney Street W/O Marybeth Avenue
Preebad 67 Narim Dxa 4 Surv"ig Servim•
VOLUME
Olney St W/O Marybeth Ave
Day: Thursday
Date: 5/16/2024
City.- Rosemead
Project8: CA24_020162 001
AM Peak Hour
DAILY
TOTALS
7.15
PM Peak Hme
0
13:15
L211 0
0
AM Pkvtlume
Ell
582
WB
784
116
MF *Volume
62
71
173
Ttid
1 1,366
0.1PU
AM Period
0:00
No
0
Se
0
Fa
0
0.80.5
WB
0
7-9W..
TOTAL
170
PM Period
12:00
No
0
SE
0
EB
7
233
we
IS
7:15
TOTAL
zz
7:15
0:15
0
0
1
7-9 Pk Volume
1
81
2
4-6MVolume
12:15
0
0
7
0.841
15
0.647
22
0.775
0:30
0
0
0
1
1
12:90
0
0
5
7
12
DAIS
0
0
1
2
0
2
1
4
12-
0
0
7
26
11
48
18
74
1:00
0
0
0
1
1
13:60
0
0
6
25
21
1:15
0
0
3
2
5
13:15
0
0
6
19
25
1:30
0
0
1
0
1
13:90
0
0
4
SS
19
IA5
0
0
0
4
0
3
7
13A5
0
0
15
31
16
65
31
96
2:00
0
0
0
1
1
14:00
0
0
17
21
38
2:15
0
0
2
0
2
14:15
0
D
8
Is
26
2:30
0
0
0
1
1
14:30
0
0
10
12
22
2A5
0
0
0
2
0
2
4
14,45
0
0
7
42
16
67
23
109
3:00
0
0
0
0
15:00
0
0
13
12
25
3:15
0
0
2
0
2
15:15
0
0
12
12
24
330
0
0
2
1
3
15:30
0
0
5
9
14
SAS
0
0
1
5
1
2
2
7
15A5
0
0
4
34
16
49
20
83
490
0
0
1
1
2
16100
0
0
12
20
32
4:15
0
0
1
0
1
16:15
0
0
14
10
24
4:90
0
0
2
1
3
16:30
0
0
20
14
34
4A5
0
0
2
6
2
4
4
10
16A5
0
0
12
58
19
63
31
121
590
0
0
3
2
5
1790
0
0
16
18
34
SAS
0
0
0
0
17:15
0
0
9
12
21
5:30
0
0
2
1
3
17130
0
0
17
IS
32
SAS
0
0
5
10
3
6
5
16
17A5
0
0
8
50
17
62
25
112
690
0
0
4
2
6
18:00
0
0
16
to
34
6:15
0
0
5
2
7
18:15
0
0
6
11
17
6:30
0
0
5
5
30
18:30
0
0
12
15
27
SAS
0
0
6
20
3
12
9
32
18,45
0
0
10
M
10
54
20
98
790
0
0
5
6
12
19100
0
0
11
8
19
7:15
0
0
6
15
21
19:15
0
0
13
9
22
7:30
0
0
10
10
20
19:30
0
0
6
5
11
7A5
0
0
11
33
42
73
53
106
19,45
0
0
6
36
21
33
17
69
8:00
0
0
10
12
22
20:00
0
0
10
9
19
8:15
0
0
5
13
is
20:15
0
0
6
13
19
am
0
0
6
14
20
20:30
0
0
11
7
is
8:45
0
0
8
29
8
47
16
76
20:45
0
0
8
35
7
36
15
71
990
0
0
12
10
22
21:00
0
0
8
10
is
9:15
0
0
7
9
16
21:15
0
0
4
9
13
9:30
0
0
6
6
12
21:30
0
0
2
12
14
9:4.5
0
0
9
34
10
35
19
69
21A5
0
0
3
17
4
35
7
52
1090
0
0
3
5
8
22:00
0
0
3
6
9
10:15
0
0
3
6
9
2215
0
0
4
3
7
tow
0
0
5
10
i5
22:30
0
0
3
3
6
WAS
0
0
5
16
12
33
17
49
22AS
0
0
2
12
5
17
7
29
11100
0
0
8
10
18
23:00
0
0
3
1
4
11:15
0
0
7
6
13
23:15
0
0
2
6
8
11:30
0
0
10
7
17
23:30
0
0
1
0
1
11:45
0
0
9
29
6
29
0
58
23,45
0
0
1
7
0
7
1
14
TOTALS
190
248
498
TOTALS
392
536
928
9PSR%
41.4%
366%
37492
Spur%
I
51.8%
67.901
DAILYNB
sa
Total
AM Peak Hour
715
7:45
7.15
PM Peak Hme
HAS
13:15
MAS
AM Pkvtlume
37
81
116
MF *Volume
62
71
173
Pk Hr Factor
0.1PU
0.962
0.5417
M W Factor
0.775
0.80.5
0.904
7-9W..
62
170
No
4-6Vd
106
in
233
7-9Peak Hour
7:15
7:45
7:15
4-6Peek Hour
16:15
1655
16:15
7-9 Pk Volume
37
81
116
4-6MVolume
61
61
In
Pk HrFMor
0.841
0.482
0.647
MWFu1or
0.775
am
0.90',
4091
�O EEACED Prepared By: Transtech Engineers, Inc. I Page 13
TRAFFIC REVIEW OF THE INTERSECTION OF OLNEY STREET AND MARYBETH AVENUE
Attachment lc: Average Daily Traffic Counts — Olney Street N/O Marybeth Avenue
ha.dMllatlarHl O•d�Sur•eykrser9ieF
VOLUME
Marybeth Ave N/O Olney St
Day: Thursday
Date: 5/16/2024
Gly: Rosemead
PT014LS 7h. CA24_020161_001
aaa s Har
DAILYTOTALS
07:15
09=
108 117
16.'00
0
1600
0
6
Il
225
PYP9Vo4me
••
14
27
MWfxta
6400
0.664
MM
Pk Hr FaR
am
am
&%3
7-9 V01nee
6
00:00
0-
0
21
0
0
7-:PeakH
12:00•
2.
07:15
1
16:001&0
3
16,40
WAS
0
0
17
4-6 Pk Vd
0
10
12:15
1
am
6
0.706
7
0.75H
00:90
0
0
0
12:80
1
1
0
1
OOA5
0
0
0
12A5
1
5
1
8
2
33
01M0
0
0
18:00
0
1
1
01:15
0
0
0
13:15
2
1
3
01:30
1
0
1
18:90
2
4
6
WAS
0
1 0
0
1
13A5
4
8
4
10
8
18
02:00
0
0
0
a=
3
3
6
02:15
0
0
0
14:15
1
1
2
02:30
0
1
1
14:30
2
2
4
M2 45
0
0
1
0
1
14A5
2
8
1
7
3
35
03:00
0
0
0
15:00
0
1
1
03:15
0
0
0
15:15
1
3
4
03:30
0
0
0
15:30
2
0
2
03,45
0
0
0
IsAs
1
4
3
7
4
11
06:00
1
1
2
16:00
3
2
5
04:15
0
0
0
16:15
5
2
7
04:30
0
0
0
1600
3
5
8
MAS
0
1 0
1
0
2
16A5
4
15
0
9
4
24
05,40
0
1
1
17:00
2
3
5
05:15
0
0
0
17:15
1
1
2
05:30
0
0
0
17:30
0
1
I
WAS
0
0
1
0
1
17,45
3
6
1
6
4
12
06:00
0
1
1
13:00
8
4
12
06:15
1
0
1
18:15
2
3
5
06:30
0
0
0
1890
2
3
5
O6A5
2
3 0
1
2
4
18,45
2
14
3
13
5
27
07T0
0
1
19:00
1
3
4
01:15
0
3
3
19:15
4
5
9
07:30
3
1
4
1
19:30
2
1
3
07A5
0
3 4
9
4
12
19A5
1
8
0
9
1
17
08:00
3
3
6
waW
0
2
2
08:15
0
1
1
27.15
0
1
1
0890
1
1
2
27.80
1
3
1
4
08,45
1
5 2
7
3
12
20,45
2
5
0
4
2
9
09:00
0
3
3
21:00
0
1
1
09:15
2
3
5
21:15
0
0
0
mm
1
3
4
21:30
1
0
1
WAS
5
8 1
10
6
18
2IA5
0
1
0
1
0
2
1000
0
1
1
22:00
3
0
3
10:15
0
1
1
22:15
0
0
0
10:30
1
5
6
22:30
0
0
0
10,45
1
2 2
9
1
3
11
22AS
0
3
0
0
3
11:00
0
0
0
23:00
0
0
0
11:15
2
2
4
23:15
0
2
2
11:30
3
0
3
23:30
2
0
2
13,45
1
6 0
z
1
8
23:45
0
2
0
2
0
4
MTAL4
29
41
70
TOTALS
]9
76
155
SPLIT%
IL4%
Sam
31.1%
SPLIT%
SLO%
49.0%
6:.911
DAILY
TOTALS
108
11
aaa s Har
0990
07:15
09=
P1IhakH
16.'00
16:30
1600
�WPk VOk•:l•
6
Il
I6
PYP9Vo4me
IS
14
27
MWfxta
6400
0.664
MM
Pk Hr FaR
am
am
&%3
7-9 V01nee
6
16
24
4-6Va
21
0
%
7-:PeakH
07:15
07:15
07:15
4-:PeakH
16:001&0
16,40
7-9 KVO
6
11
17
4-6 Pk Vd
]5
10
24
•kwF
am
0.666
0.706
PkWFa51w
0.75H
0500
0.]10
O E fh
Prepared By: Transtech Engineers, Inc. I Page 14 of 15
TRAFFIC REVIEW OF THE INTERSECTION OF OLNEY STREET AND MARYBETH AVENUE
Attachment 2a: ADT 24HR Speed Survey —Olney Street W/0 Marybeth Avenue
PleeyrM Sr N.t-10—a �--. s—..
SPEED
Olney St W/O Ellis Ln
D.V: Thursday Oly: Rosemead
Date: 5/16/2024 Pmjec[ M: CA24_020160 001
PMVdu e;
23
fil
U]
120
57
0
0
42
%AM
2s
11
<
I
33
AM R,ak Nu
3.
700
].
].
71ys
9.
7130
VtlJme
5
Is96
93
16
3
103
RevdY
59
]]5
270
17
95
24
1
%PM13
]
3l
]
1sys
PM0.Yk NOu
16l
19
I6
V.
13M
VAG
V.
VdYTe
9
25
.1
%
15
fi
11,
Dlreal.nel Peek Peded.
AM 2-9
NOON 12-2
PM 4e
Off Peak Volume.
All Speeds
volume %
V.— %
volume %
volume %
174 13%
163 12%
226 12%
259 1 52%
UOE E
AD Prepared By: Transtech Engineers, Inc. I Page 15 of 15
Attachment B
Traffic Commission Minutes
of July 11, 2024
Minutes of the Special
ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION MEETING
July 11, 2024
The special meeting of the Rosemead Traffic Commission was called to order by Chair Drange at 7:01 p.m.
in the Council Chambers, 8838 E. Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, California.
FLAG SALUTE: Commissioner Chang
INVOCATION: Commissioner Nguyen
PRESENT: Commissioner Chang, Commissioner Nguyen, Vice -Chair Lang and Chair Drange
ABSENT: Commissioner Hermosillo
STAFF PRESENT: Director of Public Works Wang and Commission Liaison Nguyen
1. PUBLIC COMMENTS None
2, CONSENT CALENDAR
Chair Drange asked Traffic Commissioners if anyone would like to make revisions or additions to the
minutes of May 2, 2024.
Commissioner Nguyen made a motion, seconded by Vice Chair Lang, to accept consent calendar.
Vote resulted in:
Yes: Chang, Nguyen, Lang, Drange
No: None
Abstain: None
Absent: Hermosillo
3. NEW BUSINESS
A. ALL WAY STOP REQUEST AT OLNEY STREET AND ELLIS LANE
Chair Drange opened the public comment period.
The City received a public comment from Belinda Rosales stating she is in favor of installing a stop sign at
Olney Street and Ellis Lane, mentioning vehicles are speeding on Olney Street. Ms. Rosales asked if speed
bumps could be another option as there are no sidewalks and cars do not slow down. She also mentioned
an incident involving a police vehicle pursuit and how these drivers tend to end up driving through Olney
Street. It was also mentioned that the residents residing on Olney Street have been requesting sidewalks,
closure of the Olney Street freeway on-ramp, and speed bumps.
Chair Drange closed the public comment period.
Associate Engineer Richter provided a brief description of the item and presented a PowerPoint
presentation of the studies that were conducted.
Rosemead Traffic Commission Meeting
Minutes of July 11, 2024
Page I of 8
Associate Engineer Richter explained that the City received a resident request to review the intersection for
Olney Street at Ellis Lane to determine if the intersection meets the requirements for an all -way stop. The
request reported vehicles will often travel on Olney Street at a high rate of speed and is concerned for
vehicles and pedestrians traveling through this area. The resident requested that an all -way stop be
installed at the intersection. In response to this request and on behalf of the City, engineering staff
completed a traffic review to determine if an all -way stop was warranted to be installed at the intersection of
Olney Street and Ellis Lane, and recommended appropriate measures.
After a thorough review of existing field and traffic conditions and per the guidelines in the California Manual
on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CAMUTCD), California Vehicle Code (CVC), and based on engineering
judgement, it was determined that the intersection of Olney Street at Ellis Lane does not meet the
requirements for the installation of an all -way stop. However, it was determined that this area along Olney
Street at Ellis Lane would benefit from the installation of other traffic calming measures.
Chair Drange asked if there was a reason no other traffic calming measures were considered such as
roadway side striping.
Associate Engineer Richter replied there are a few items to consider with side striping, including if there is
enough space for the parked cars as well as the travel lanes. At this time, the side striping would not work
due to the street not being wide enough.
Vice Chair Lang commented that he occasionally walks along Olney Street and although there is no
sidewalk, he stated he feels relatively safe. He reiterated the resident's public comment mentioning that the
concerns appear to be coming from speeding vehicles traveling eastbound trying to enter the freeway on-
ramp. He asked if there was any data that showed this and what time of the day the studies were
conducted.
Associate Engineer Richter replied the data was collected over a 24 hour period for the average daily traffic
as well as the speed.
Traffic Engineer Robbins added that within the 24 hour speed survey, the summary indicates that the 85th
percentile is at 30, meaning 85% of vehicles are traveling 30 miles per hour or less. There were 14%
between 30 to 39, which is higher than the posted 25 miles per hour speed limit.
Chair Drange asked the commissioners if they would like to table this item until after the next item is
discussed regarding the All Way Stop Request at Olney Street and Marybeth Avenue.
Commissioner Chang made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Nguyen, to table item 3A until
after discussion of item 3B on the agenda. Vote resulted in:
Yes: Chang, Nguyen, Lang, Drange
No: None
Abstain: None
Absent: Hermosillo
B. ALL WAY STOP REQUEST AT OLNEY STREET AND MARYBETH AVENUE
Associate Engineer Richter provided a brief description of the item and presented a PowerPoint
presentation of the studies that were conducted.
Rosemead Traffic Commission Meeting
Minutes ofJuly 11, 2024
Page 2 of 8
Associate Engineer Richter explained that the City received a resident request to review the intersection for
Olney Street and Marybeth Avenue. to determine if the intersection meets the requirements for an all -way
stop. The request reported vehicles will often travel on Olney Street at a high rate of speed and is
concerned for vehicles and pedestrians traveling through this area. The resident requested that an all -way
stop be installed at the intersection. In response to this request and on behalf of the City, engineering staff
completed a traffic review to determine if an all -way stop was warranted to be installed at the intersection of
Olney Street and Marybeth Avenue, and recommended appropriate measures.
After a thorough review of existing field and traffic conditions and per the guidelines in the California Manual
on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CAMUTCD), California Vehicle Code (CVC), and based on engineering
judgement, it was determined that the intersection of Olney Street at Ellis Lane does not meet the
requirements for the installation of an all -way stop. However, it was determined that this area along Olney
Street at Ellis Lane would benefit from the installation of other traffic calming measures.
Commissioner Chang asked if striping down the center line could be considered as an alternative option to
side striping.
Associate Engineer Richter replied that either a dashed or a double yellow could be considered.
Traffic Engineer Robbins added that for an all -way stop, there needs to be minimum threshold volumes for
each direction over a period of eight hours, and both these intersection locations do not have enough
volume to meet the warrant.
Vice Chair Lang asked why there is an all -way stop at the intersection of Olney Street and Vane Avenue.
Traffic Engineer Robbins replied it was likely grandfathered, as they did not place it, and as consultants,
standards and guidelines need to be followed.
Chair Drange asked if the striping would go just to the stop sign or from east and west end of the street
segment.
Commissioner Chang made a motion, seconded by Vice Chair Lang, to approve staff
recommendations for both item 3A and 3B, with addition of installing a double yellow striping from
Temple City Boulevard to Rio Hondo Avenue. Vote resulted in:
Yes: Chang, Nguyen, Lang, Drange
No: None
Abstain: None
Absent: Hermosillo
C. ALL WAY STOP REQUEST AT JACKSON AVENUE AND GARVALIA AVENUE
Associate Engineer Richter provided a brief description of the item and presented a PowerPoint
presentation of the studies that were conducted.
Associate Engineer Richter explained that the City received a resident request to evaluate the intersection
of Jackson Avenue and Garvalia Avenue and determine if the intersection qualifies for the installation of an
all -way stop. The resident expressed concern for vehicles speeding through the area along Jackson Avenue
and has requested that an all -way stop or other traffic calming measures be installed at this location. In
response to this request and on behalf of the City, engineering staff completed a traffic review to determine
Rosemead Traffic Commission Meeting
Minutes of July 11, 2024
Page 3 of 8
if an all -way stop was warranted to be installed at the intersection of Jackson Avenue and Garvalia Avenue,
and recommended appropriate measures.
After a thorough review of existing field and traffic conditions and per the guidelines in the California Manual
on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CAMUTCD), California Vehicle Code (CVC), and based on engineering
judgement, it was determined that the intersection of Jackson Avenue and Garvalia Avenue does not meet
the requirements for the installation of an all -way stop. However, it was determined that this area along
Jackson Avenue and Garvalia Avenue would benefit from the installation of other traffic calming measures.
Chair Drange opened the public comment period.
The City received a public comment via Zoom from Ping Lau expressing safety concerns stating they have
lived along Jackson Avenue for over 15 years and have witnessed vehicles speeding up to 40 miles per
hour from Fern Avenue all the way to south of Graves Avenue. He mentioned in 2022, his dog ran out of
their gate and got hit by a driver. He also added that the intersection of Jackson Avenue and Garvalia
Avenue is a two-way stop, however, many drivers are unaware that Jackson Avenue does not have a stop
sign and will sometimes drive forward or make an unsafe turn.
Chair Drange closed the public comment period
Vice Chair Lang asked when the pedestrian study was performed and if it was during or after the school
year.
Associate Engineer Richter replied the study was performed at the end of the school year.
Commissioner Chang reiterated the residents' concerns regarding the intersection of Jackson Avenue and
Garvalia Avenue being a two-way stop, and drivers not knowing that. The proposed recommendations
should address help address that issue.
Vice Chair Lang asked for clarification on the recommendation to install red reflective strip on the stop
signpost.
Associate Engineer Richter replied it is a reflective tape that is placed on the stop signpost to allow more
visibility for approaching vehicles.
Vice Chair Lang made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Nguyen, to approve staff
recommendations. Vote resulted in:
Yes: Chang, Nguyen, Lang, Drange
No: None
Abstain: None
Absent: Hermosillo
D. ALL WAY STOP REQUEST AT MARSHALL STREET AND CHARIETTE AVENUE
Associate Engineer Richter provided a brief description of the item and presented a PowerPoint
presentation of the studies that were conducted.
Associate Engineer Richter explained that the City received a resident request to evaluate the intersection
of Marshall Street and Chariette Avenue and determine if the intersection qualifies for the installation of an
Rosemead Traffic Commission Meeting
Minutes ofJuly ll, 2024
Page 4 of 8
all -way stop. The resident expressed concern for vehicles speeding through the area along Marshall Street
and has requested that an all -way stop or other traffic calming measures be installed at this location. In
response to this request and on behalf of the City, engineering staff completed a traffic review to determine
if an all -way stop was warranted to be installed at the intersection of Marshall Street and Chariette Avenue,
and recommended appropriate measures.
After a thorough review of existing field and traffic conditions and per the guidelines in the California Manual
on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CAMUTCD), California Vehicle Code (CVC), and based on engineering
judgement, it was determined that the intersection of Marshall Street and Chariette Avenue does not meet
the requirements for the installation of an all -way stop. However, it was determined that this area along
Marshall Street and Chariette Avenue would benefit from the installation of other traffic calming measures.
Chair Drange opened the public comment period.
The City received a public comment from Betty Rodriguez stating she would prefer not to have a stop sign
placed at the intersection as it would be placed right in front of her house, however, understands the need
for it due to speeding vehicles between Walnut Grove Avenue and San Gabriel Boulevard. She commented
that there are more car accidents at Delta Avenue and Marshall Street and suggested a stop sign be placed
at that intersection.
The City received a public comment via email from Jenny Zhang expressing her safety concerns and
approval of speed limit and stop sign at the intersection.
The City received a public comment via email from Alfred & Carmen Fong supporting the installation of stop
signs at the intersection.
The City received a public comment via email from Lisa Ng supporting the installation of the all -way stop
signs at the intersection.
The City received a public comment via email from Mary Perez & Olga Perez supporting the installation of
the all -way stop signs at the intersection.
Chair Drange closed the public comment period.
Vice Chair Lang asked to confirm that the intersection will not have additional stop signs installed, and that
the proposed recommendations are to only refresh the existing sign and add red curb.
Associate Engineer Richter replied that is correct.
Chair Drange asked why the speed limit at this location 35 miles per hour and not 25 miles per hour.
Associate Engineer Richter replied the city conducts a citywide speed survey every ten years to review
vehicle speeds traveling along a segment and look at the 85 percentile and it recently conducted in 2023.
The speed limit on this segment was already 35 miles per hour before the speed survey was completed and
there were no recommendations to change or adjust because that is how fast the vehicles were traveling.
Traffic Engineer Robbins added that Marshall Street has different speed limits, with some segments being
30 and this segment at 35. In the speed survey, the 85 percentile for this segment was at 36 so the speed
limit was set at 35.
Rosemead Traffic Commission Meeting
Minutes ofJuly 11, 2024
Rade 5 of 8
Chair Drange asked if at the time of the speed survey, would the question to lowering the speed limit been
possible.
Traffic Engineer Robbins replied there are certain items to look at in order to reduce the speed limit and one
being the number of collisions, accident rate, and land use around that segment. At the time it was
determined that 35 miles per hour was appropriate. In order to change the speed limit, another speed
sample on the segment would need to be conducted to see if the data justifies changing the speed limit. An
amendment to the speed survey would also be needed, which would then have to be adopted by City
Council.
Vice Chair Lang commented that all four traffic items discussed reported zero collisions within the last three
years, so it appears that as a city we are not reporting accidents or another issue.
Chair Drange asked for this specific report, was just this particular intersection looked at for the collision
survey or also the street segments a few blocks away.
Traffic Engineer Robbins replied it was just at this particular intersection looked at for the collision survey. It
was also mentioned that in a lot of cities, the police department and sheriffs typically do not report collisions
if it is only property damage. For City of Rosemead, data is collected from Statewide Integrated Traffic
Records System (SWITRS).
Vice Chair Lang commented that if a speed survey were redone, the data likely would not change since
there are no new traffic calming measures in place. For the next speed survey, if the traffic calming
measures are effective on Marshall Street, we could propose changing the speed limit.
Commissioner Nguyen commented that it is alarming that the data shows 20% of the traffic going above 35
miles per hour and t% of traffic is going above 45 miles per hour. With around 5,000 vehicles, that is
approximately 50 vehicles driving at those speeds.
Commissioner Chang commented that Marshall Street appears to be categorized as a major collector road
as opposed to the other streets looked at which are local roads. He asked if Marshall Streets serves some
other purpose such as for evacuation and if that needs to be considered.
Traffic Engineer Robbins replied Marshall Street was classified as a major collector by Caltrans, and
mentioned that the city receives certain funds for collectors and above, while local roads do not receive road
funds from Caltrans or Metro. There is a process required to change that road designation.
Commissioner Nguyen commented that the city should revisit the discussion on speed hump policy as the
traffic calming measures may not be sufficient in certain areas.
Director of Public Works Wang replied that the commission and city council did recommend for the city to
move forward with developing a speed hump policy and staff is currently working on it to bring to City
Council meeting on July 231d,
Commissioner Chang commented that a temporary measure to help slow down traffic could be using plastic
bo!!ards to narrow the road.
Chair Drange recalled in a few past traffic items, as part of the traffic calming measures, side striping and
double yellow center line was recommended.
Rosemead Traffic Commission Meeting
Minutes of'July 11, 2024
Page 6 of 8
Vice Chair Lang asked how it looks east of Walnut Grove Avenue along this segment.
Chair Drange replied traffic is slower due to Janson Elementary being over there, as well as a stop sign at
Bartlett Avenue and another stop sign at Muscatel Avenue.
Commissioner Nguyen made a motion, seconded by Vice Chair Lang, to approve staff
recommendations, and to include white side striping and double yellow center lines on Marshall
Street from Walnut Grove Avenue to the westerly city limits. Vote resulted in:
Yes: Chang, Nguyen, Lang, Drange
No: None
Abstain: None
Absent: Hermosillo
4. MATTERS FROM STAFF None
5. COMMISSIONER REPORTS
Commissioner Nguyen commented that she had recently attended a Los Angeles Board of Supervisors
Leadership Conference and one of the key topics included discussions on public transportation within the
City of Los Angeles and Los Angeles County in preparation of FIFA 2026 and the Olympic Games in 2028.
She wanted to just put a reminder on that to keep in consideration as we may get a lot of visitors in the
Rosemead area.
Vice Chair Lang recalled an item that was brought up in the previous meeting regarding Rosemead
Boulevard and Mission Drive, by the In -N -Out that has been causing a lot of traffic at the intersection. Part of
the discussion also included potentially looking into Mission Drive and the lighting in the area. He asked
what the SLA or the response time.
Director of Public Works Wang replied she did not have a response time, however, the item was added to
the que for traffic review.
Chair Drange commented that there has been an increase of motorized vehicles such as mopeds and
electric scooters riding on the sidewalk, especially along Valley Boulevard and Garvey Avenue. The city
does allow for bicycles on sidewalk, however, questioned if mopeds or electric scooters would be included.
He asked if it could be looked into to make it safer for pedestrians.
Commissioner Chang agreed with Chair Drange's comment and mentioned that nearby jurisdictions are
looking into that issue to address these alternative modes of transportation.
Director of Public Works Wang replied it will be looked into.
6. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 8:25 p.m. The next Traffic Commission meeting is scheduled for August 1,
2024, at 7:00 p.m. and will take place at the Rosemead City Hall, City Council Chambers, 8838 East
Valley Boulevard.
Rosemead Traffic Commission Meeting
Minutes of July 11, 2024
Page 7 0f8
Z"////
'chael
Chair
ATTEST:
Albert Leung
Interim City Engineer
Rosemead Trac Commission Meeting
Minutes of July 11, 2024
Page 8 of 8
Attachment C
Installation Exhibit
!
Jk
o
�
�
�
�
ƒ
§ kzw
z <)
)\ $, _ _< i
0