Loading...
CC – Item 4K – Request for All Way Stop at Marshall Street and Chariette AvenueROSEMEAD CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: BEN KIM, CITY MANAGER 7 DATE: OCTOBER 8, 2024 SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR ALL WAY STOP AT MARSHALL STREET AND CHARIETTE AVENUE SUMMARY At the July 11, 2024, Traffic Commission Meeting, staff presented recommendations and options for traffic improvements at Marshall Street and Chariette 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 Marshall Street and Chariette Avenue. The City of Rosemead has 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 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. AGENDA ITEM 4.K City Council Meeting October 8, 2024 Page 2 of 4 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: Marshall Street is an east/west street, classified as a major collector per the California Road System Functional Classification Map by Caltrans. Marshall Street has a posted speed limit of 35 MPH. The roadway is approximately 40 -feet wide, with one lane of travel in each direction and marked yellow dashed centerline. Parking is allowed on both sides of the street except on Street sweeping hours and at designated red curbs. This segment of Marshall Street is primarily single-family residential housing. At the intersection with Chariette Avenue, Marshall Street is uncontrolled in the east/west directions. Chariette Avenue is a north/south street, considered a local road per the California Road System Functional Classification by Caltrans. Chariette Avenue has a prima facie speed limit of 25 MPH. The roadway is approximately 35 -feet wide with one lane of travel in each direction and no marked centerline. Parking is allowed on both sides of the street except during street sweeping hour. Land use along this segment of Chariette Avenue consist of single-family residential housing. At the intersection with Marshall Street, Chariette Avenue is one way stop controlled for the North/South directions. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Traffic Commission voted 5-0 to approve staff recommendations. It is recommended that city council authorize the following recommendations: 1. REMOVE AND REPLACE STOP SIGN (R1-1): Remove and replace faded stop sign with new Stop Sign (RI —1) located on the east side of Chariette Avenue, at the intersection with Marshall Street, for northbound traffic. 2. INSTALL "CROSS TRAFFIC DOES NOT STOP" PLAQUE (W4 — 4P): Install "Cross Traffic Does Not Stop" plaque (W4 — 4P) beneath existing stop sign that is located on the east side of Chariette Avenue, at the intersection with Marshall Street, for northbound traffic. City Council Meeting October 8, 2024 Page 3 of 4 3. INSTALL RED REFLECTIVE STRIP: Install red reflective strip on the existing stop signpost, located on the east side of Chariette Avenue, at the intersection with Marshall Street for northbound traffic. 4. REFRESH "STOP" AND STOP BAR PAVEMENT MARKINGS: Refresh Stop Bar and "STOP" pavement legend markings located along Chariette Avenue, at the intersection with Marshall Avenue, for northbound traffic. 5. INSTALL RED CURB: Install 20 -feet of red curb along the south side of Marshall Street, west of Chariette Avenue. The addition of this red curb will improve the line of sight at the intersection for vehicles approaching Marshall Street from Chariette Avenue. 6. INSTALL RED CURB: Install an additional 15 -feet of red curb east of the fire hydrant that is located along the south side of Marshall Street, west of Chariette 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 in account 201-3010-5660. 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. PUBLIC NOTICE PROCESS This item has been noticed through the regular agenda notification process. City Council Meeting October 8, 2024 Page 4 of 4 Prepared by: 7 elle Garcia ublic Works Fiscal and Project Manager Submitted by: ( tA-' % 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 10 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 MARSHALL STREET AND CHARIETTE 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 Marshall Street and Chariette Avenue. The City of Rosemead has 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 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. 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: Marshall Street is an east/west street, classified as a major collector per the California Road System Functional Classification Map by Caltrans. Marshall Street has a posted speed limit of 35 MPH. The roadway is approximately 40 -feet wide, with one lane of travel in each direction and marked yellow dashed centerline. Parking is allowed on both sides of the street except on Street sweeping hours and at designated red curbs. This segment of Marshall Street is primarily single-family Rosemead Traffic Commission Meeting July 11, 2024 Page 2 of 3 residential housing. At the intersection with Chariette Avenue, Marshall Street is uncontrolled in the east/west directions. Chariette Avenue is a north/south street, considered a local road per the California Road System Functional Classification by Caltrans. Chariette Avenue has a prima facie speed limit of 25 MPH. The roadway is approximately 35 -feet wide with one lane of travel in each direction and no marked centerline. Parking is allowed on both sides of the street except during street sweeping hour. Land use along this segment of Chariette Avenue consist of single-family residential housing. At the intersection with Marshall Street, Chariette Avenue is one way stop controlled for the North/South directions. 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), Califomia 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. Please refer to the Installation Exhibit in Attachment A for a conceptual exhibit representation of the proposed recommendations. These improvements include: 1. REMOVE AND REPLACE STOP SIGN (Rl — 1): Remove and replace faded stop sign with new Stop Sign (RI — 1) located on the east side of Chariette Avenue, at the intersection with Marshall Street, for northbound traffic. 2. INSTALL "CROSS TRAFFIC DOES NOT STOP" PLAQUE (W4 — 4P): Install "Cross Traffic Does Not Stop" plaque (W4 — 4P) beneath existing stop sign that is located on the east side of Chariette Avenue, at the intersection with Marshall Street, for northbound traffic. 3. INSTALL RED REFLECTIVE STRIP: Install red reflective strip on the existing stop signpost, located on the east side of Chariette Avenue, at the intersection with Marshall Street for northbound traffic. Rosemead Traffic Commission Meeting July 11, 2024 Page 3 of 3 4. REFRESH "STOP" AND STOP BAR PAVEMENT MARKINGS: Refresh Stop Bar and "STOP" pavement legend markings located along Chariette Avenue, at the intersection with Marshall Avenue, for northbound traffic. 5. INSTALL RED CURB: Install 20 -feet of red curb along the south side of Marshall Street, west of Chariette Avenue. The addition of this red curb will improve the line of sight at the intersection for vehicles approaching Marshall Street from Chariette Avenue. 6. INSTALL RED CURB: Install an additional 15 -feet of red curb east of the fire hydrant that is located along the south side of Marshall Street, west of Chariette Avenue. Prepared by: Allison Richter, Contract Traffic Engineering Division Attachments: A. Attachment A — Technical Traffic Engineering Report 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 MARSHALL STREET AND CHARIETTE AVENUE INTRODUCTION The City of Rosemead has received a resident request to review the intersection of Marshall Street and Chariette Avenue. The resident is requesting for the installation of stop signs along Marshall Street, creating an All -Way Stop at the intersection with Chariette Avenue. The resident expressed concerns about speeding vehicles along Marshall Street. In response to this request and on behalf of the City, engineering staff has completed a traffic review at the subject intersection. 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 a review of the intersection at Marshall Street and Chariette Avenue. Figure 1: Vicinity Map EA... Prepared By: Transtech Engineers, Inc. I Page 1 of 17 O .�,W, TRAFFIC REVIEW OF THE INTERSECTION OF MARSHALL STREET AND CHARIETTE AVENUE EXISTING CONDITIONS Figure 2: Existing Conditions Diagram — Marshall Street and Chariette Avenue Chariette Avenue: Within the City of Rosemead, Chariette Avenue is a north/south street, considered a local road per the California Road System Functional Classification by Caltrans. Chariette Avenue has a prima facie speed limit of 25 MPH. The roadway is approximately 35 -feet wide with one lane of travel in each direction and no marked centerline. Parking is allowed on both sides of the street except during street sweeping hours. This segment of Chariette Avenue consists of single-family residential housing. At the intersection with Marshall Street, Chariette Avenue is stop controlled for northbound traffic approaching Marshall Street. Marshall Street: Within the City of Rosemead, Marshall Street is an east/west street, classified as a major collector per the California Road System Functional Classification Map by Caltrans. Marshall Street has a posted speed limit of 35 MPH. The roadway is approximately 40 -feet wide, with one lane of travel in each direction and marked yellow dashed centerline. Parking is allowed on both sides of the street except during street sweeping hours and in areas marked with red curb. This segment of Marshall Street is consists primarly of single-family residential housing. At the intersection with Chariette Avenue, Marshall Street is uncontrolled for eastbound and westbound traffic. 0O E AD Prepared By: Transtech Engineers, Inc. I Page 2 of 17 TRAFFIC REVIEW OF THE INTERSECTION OF MARSHALL STREET AND CHARIETTE AVENUE PICTURE SUMMARY COLLISION DATA Southbound view Chariette Avenue at the intersection with Marshall Street 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 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 AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (ADT) Average Daily Traffic (ADT) data was obtained from counts taken on Wednesday, May 29, 2024. Counts were taken along Marshall Street east and west of Chariette Avenue, and along Chariette Avenue south of Marshall 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. COW OSE, AD Prepared By: Transtech Engineers, Inc. I Page 3 of 17 TRAFFIC REVIEW OF THE INTERSECTION OF MARSHALL STREET AND CHARIETTE AVENUE Table 1: Average Daily Trak (ADT) Vehicles per Day (vpd) Vehicles per Day (vpd) Vehicles per Day (vpd) Location 5/19/2024 5/19/2024 5/29/2024 Marshall Street east of EB WB TOTAL Chariette Avenue 2,944 2,315 5,259 Marshall Street west of EB WB TOTAL Chariette Avenue 2,983 2,367 5,350 Chariette Avenue south of NB SB TOTAL Marshall Street 182 201 383 SPEED SURVEY To assess the speed at which vehicles are traveling through the intersection, a 24-hour speed survey was conducted. The speed survey was taken on Wednesday, May 29, 2024, along Marshall Street west of Chariette Avenue. The 85th percentile speed of vehicles traveling along Marshal Avenue was found to be 37 MPH. This means that 85 percent of the vehicles sampled are traveling at 37 MPH or below, which is 2 MPH above the posted speed limit of 35 MPH. Table 2 below shows the May 29, 2024, speed survey results. The speed summary is attached (Attachment 2) at the end of the report. Table 2: Speed Survey Dir. of Date/Time of Location III Speed Posted Limit Travel Survey Marshall Street west of Chariette EB/WB 5/29/2024 37 MPH 35 MPH Avenue 24-hour PEAK HOUR TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT To determine what type of turning movements are encountered at the intersection of Marshall Street and Chariette Avenue during the heaviest peak hours, traffic counts were taken at this intersection during the hours of 7AM — 9AM and 4PM — 6PM on May 29, 2024. Figures 3 and 4 depict the highest peak hour of vehicles at the intersection during each count period. The Turning Movement Counts are attached (Attachment 3 & 4) at the end of the report. Figure 3 below shows the calculated peak hour volumes for the AM Peak hour of 7:30AM—8:30AM at the intersection of Marshall Street and Chariette Avenue on May 29, 2024. Figure 4 below shows the calculated peak hour volumes for the AM Peak hour of 5:00AM — 6:OOAM at the intersection of Marshall Street and Chariette Avenue on May 29, 2024, 00AD Prepared By: Transtech Engineers, Inc. I Page 4 of 17 TRAFFIC REVIEW OF THE INTERSECTION OF MARSHALL STREET AND CHARIETTE AVENUE Marshall Street and Chariette Avenue N Highest 1 Hour in AM PEAK (7:30 - 8:30 AM) 156 5 � o Figure 4: AM Peak Hour Count 7:30 -8:30 AM FIELD INVESTIGATION Marshall Street and Chariette Avenue N Highest i Hour in AM PEAK (5:00 - 6:00 PM) 265 —1 F- 168 6 � � 8 I Figure 5: PM Peak Hour Count 5:00- 6:00 PM A field investigation was conducted on June 12, 2024, which included site observations at the intersection of Marshall Street and Chariette Avenue. It was observed that the stop sign and the "STOP" pavement marking, located on the south-west corner of the intersection, were faded and in poor conditions. It was noted that the fire hydrant located along the south side of Marshall Street, east of Chariette Avenue did not have sufficient red curb marking. The available line of sight, for vehicles turning into Marshall Street, from Chariette Avenue was found to be insufficient. Line of sight available of eastbound traffic along Marshall Street, standing at the intersection with Chariette Avenue. Prepared By: Transtech Engineers, Inc. I Page 5 of 17 TRAFFIC REVIEW OF THE INTERSECTION OF MARSHALL STREET AND CHARIETTE AVENUE LINE OF SIGHT REVIEW 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. Per California Highway Design Manual, any object within the sight triangle that would obstruct the driver's view of an approaching vehicle should be removed or modified. 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, for this reason, 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. At 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 to the edge of the parking lane to have a better view of oncoming traffic. Figure 6 presents an example of a clear sight triangle at an intersection. Figure 6: Example of Stopping Sight Distance Triangle with Vehicles Parked Along Curb ® Stopping Sight Distance Stopping Sight Distance Vehicle obstructing view/Min B' distance for - . vehicle clearance Area to be dear of view obstruction. O Ery �..,p.,.. Prepared By: Transtech Engineers, Inc. I Page 6 of 17 TRAFFIC REVIEW OF THE INTERSECTION OF MARSHALL STREET AND CHARIETTE AVENUE Table 3: Stopping Sight Distance Per A Polity on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets (AASHTO) Table 3-1 Design Brake reaction Braking distance on Speed distance level (MPH) (ft) (ft) Stopping Sight Distance Calculated (ft) Design (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 40 147.0 153.6 300.6 305 45 165.4 194.4 359.8 360 Note: Brake reaction distance predicated on a time of 2.5s; deceleration rate 11.2 ft/sec' Figure 7 : Existing Curb Markings and Line of Sight 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 forthe 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. Prepared By: Transtech Engineers, Inc. I Page 7 of 17 TRAFFIC REVIEW OF THE INTERSECTION OF MARSHALL STREET AND CHARIETTE AVENUE 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 85th 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 2 are from ADT counts taken on each approach on Marshall Street and Chariette 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. Table 4: Summary of Vehicular and Pedestrian Volume to Meet Minimum Thresholds for All -Way Stop Control Time (highest Eastbound and Met North East Leg and Met Minimum 8 hours) Westbound Minimum Approach West Leg Threshold of 200 along Marshall Threshold of Traffic on Pedestrians Veh Units Per Street at Least 300 Chariette and Bicycles Hour (INS +SB+ (Non -Stopped Units Per Avenue Minor crossing Peds +Bikes) for Street Hour (EB +WB Street (Stop Marshall The Same 8 Hours Considered the + Peds+ Controlled Street as Marshall Major Street) Bikes) for the Street) Street? 8 Hours? NB 7:00 —8:00 229 N 17 - N 13:00-14:00 372 Y 18 N 14:00 —15:00 349 Y 15 - N 15:00-16:00 353 Y 14 - N 16:00-17:00 385 Y 19 - N 17:00 —18:00 448 1 Y 14 - N 18:00 -19:00 409 Y 15 - N 19:00 - 20:00 338 Y 16 - N As seen in Table 4, the intersection of Marshall Street and Chariette Avenue only exceed the minimum volume warrants for Marshall Street. The volumes recorded along Chariette Avenue are significantly low ' California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices, Section26 2B.07 Multiway Stop Applications JO E AD Prepared By: Transtech Engineers, Inc. I Page 8 of 17 TRAFFIC REVIEW OF THE INTERSECTION OF MARSHALL STREET AND CHARIETTE AVENUE and do not meet the minimum vehicular volumes stated in the CAM UTCD warrants. Additionaly, the intersection does not meet the minimum collision volumes. For or these reason, the intersection of Marshall Street and Chariette Avenue does not qualify for the installation an All -way Stop control at the moment. 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 Marshall Street and Chariette Avenue does not qualify for the installation of an All -Way Stop control. The intersection did not meet the minimum vehicular volumes, as well as did not meet the required number of collisions in a 12 -month period. However, it was determined that the intersection of Marshall Street and Chariette Avenue qualifies for the following improvements: Recommendations: 1. REMOVE AND REPLACE STOP SIGN (117 —1): Remove and replace faded stop sign with new Stop Sign (Rl — 1) located on the east side of Chariette Avenue, at the intersection with Marshall Street, for northbound traffic approaching the intersection. 2. INSTALL "CROSS TRAFFIC DOES NOT STOP" PLAQUE (W4 —4P): Install "Cross Traffic Does Not Stop" plaque (W4 — 4P) beneath existing stop sign that is located on the east side of Chariette Avenue, at the intersection with Marshall Street, for northbound traffic approaching the intersection. 3. INSTALL RED REFLECTIVE STRIP: Install red reflective strip on the existing stop signpost, located on the east side of Chariette Avenue, at the intersection with Marshall Street for northbound traffic. 4. REFRESH "STOP" AND STOP BAR PAVEMENT MARKINGS: Refresh Stop Bar and "STOP" pavement legend markings located along Chariette Avenue, at the intersection with Marshall Avenue, for northbound traffic. S. INSTALL RED CURB AT SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION: Install 20 -feet of red curb along the south side of Marshall Street, west of Chariette Avenue. The addition of this red curb will improve the line of sight at the intersection for vehicles approaching Marshall Street from Chariette Avenue. 6. INSTALL RED CURB AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION: Install an additional 15 -feet of red curb east of the fire hydrant that is located along the south side of Marshall Street, west of Chariette Avenue. (CVC Section 22514). 00-*DPrepared By: Transtech Engineers, Inc. I Page 9 of 17 W J W 0 a ¢ w W V d LL LL W Z a c O 6 H h W acc~ • O y�j Q D Z H H Z W z 2 LL O W ~ O J V D x w a F a F~- Q W Z W h a x 3 z U w w 2 a W LL p O Q w W S OC o > p U5i L H O W a ( e. i i• "�� w 1- 0rA Z x p FW g ¢ z a o U Z Fw W J h O O F a Q i W Z W W 2 W V a LL 0 F- Z FN Q O M w 0 a i.r..♦ ~ a z U 0 Q W U a: J x C - J h Q W W V +.o ♦ I- CO Z Z C Z a LL z J V1 S= L7 Q heAL W W ¢ - 0Tr 0 w a m Z ¢ LL x x '^(j ?�z Hm Q p 00 ® 3 LL O H S z of ♦- OC LL W LL W Z (7 F- w W O -- Z a D LL' Z K F w Z zO _ F.. �� 0o NZ Jm0 X z F- U W O W W U~ w i a 00 O F x F- W ~ w w Z Cr a LL OO p O� 1+- J O F- CC a w 4 a +.eavwr iei y W w O c ac H a H LL 2 W Q O Q< W N z U N Q jy� 00 LLa Q Q J = c Z O W a W tC ¢ m �' Z wx oz K Z J H a oH w m J F- w 3 m o ~ Q Q a z w 2 0 Z 0 Qo w 0� a W W F-O J J V1 J N J a LL W Z Z z Q Z 2 2 0 O O O O O o a � r N M 7 N f0 w m TRAFFIC REVIEW OF THE INTERSECTION OF MARSHALL STREET AND CHARIETTE AVENUE Attachments 1. Average Daily Traffic Counts a. Marshall Street East of Chariette Avenue b. Marshall Street West of Chariette Avenue c. Chariette Avenue South of Marshall Street 2. Speed Survey Marshall Street West of Chariette Avenue 3. Turning Movement Counts, at the Intersection of Marshall Street and Chariette Avenue. 4. Summary of Vehicular Turning Movement Counts at the Intersection of Marshall Street and Chariette Avenue. Prepared By: Transtech Engineers, Inc. I Page 11 of 17 TRAFFIC REVIEW OF THE INTERSECTION OF MARSHALL STREET AND CHARIETTE AVENUE Attachment 1a: Average Daily Traffic Counts for Marshall Street East of Chariette Avenue P..P by N ional Dara a SurvyiM Services VOLUME Marshall St E/O Chariette Ave Day. Wednesday Dare; 5/29/2024 atr. Rosemead Project 4; W4020178_002 DAILYNB OT30 ffr S 0T30 SB 1715 EB ws Ser n vaome 166 274 Ton] PP4 nv9wme 292 las 474 n Hr Factor 0.614 0 a 8.819 nHrwcta ON9 Oen 0.1135 7-9vaknrc 270 ' NB SB ES 4-fiWkake 503 TOTAL em - • • NB SR EB 015 WB 4-fi Peak Hoa TOTAL 0090 • • 10 7 . 174 17 4-6n ]L1p 28 452 39 0.614 W 01189 MIS OTS 4 6 10 12:15 42 35 77 0030 4 2 6 12:30 38 32 70 WAS 6 ' 24 5 20 11 M 1245 33 141 35 141 0 282 OU� 5 4 9 13:W 45 41 86 mss 4 1 5 MIS 56 34 % 01:30 5 1 6 13:30 41 34 75 01:45 5 ' 19 4 10 9 29 13AS 65 207 51 160 116 367 OL181 6 0 6 1490 46 42 a OLAS 4 1 5 14:15 5D 37 87 02:30 2 3 5 14:30 54 37 91 WAS 1 ' 13 1 5 2 18 14AS 36 186 0.i 159 79 345 0390 3 3 6 1590 65 34 99 03:15 3 1 4 15:15 48 36 84 03:30 2 1 3 15:30 46 30 76 03AS 7 ' IS 0 5 ] 20 15AS 52 211 49 149 101 360 OkaO 2 3 5 1690 53 40 93 MIS 3 2 5 16•.15 54 39 93 04:30 3 1 4 1630 58 29 87 04:45 3 ' 21 2 8 5 19 16;" 61 226 42 150 103 376 Osm 13 4 17 MAD 71 49 120 05:15 11 1 12 17:15 70 35 105 05:30 13 6 19 17:30 fig 44 113 DSAS 10 ' 47 11 22 21 69 17:5 67 277 47 175 114 452 06:00 7 10 17 18:00 86 56 142 06:15 5 3 8 18:15 64 38 102 06:30 15 10 25 18:30 47 37 e4 06:45 19 ' 46 12 35 31 81 I8A5 43 240 40 171 83 411 0790 13 13 26 19:00 51 37 a 07:15 22 19 41 19:15 43 32 75 0730 38 37 75 19:30 50 35 85 WAS 44 '117 51 120 95 237 19AS 59 203 28 132 67 335 as= 33 47 8o 20:00 43 23 n 06:15 51 37 86 MIS 41 42 83 08:30 28 39 67 20:30 42 36 78 01tAn 41 '153 49 172 W 325 MAS 36 162 23 129 59 291 0990 25 30 55 21;00 44 35 79 MIS 27 29 55 mss 38 a 56 0930 25 35 61 2130 21 29 50 MAS 24 '102 26 120 50 222 21A$ 29 132 21 103 50 235 1090 33 24 57 Zeal) 26 20 46 was 32 27 59 MIS 40 19 59 1030 31 25 56 12130 28 21 49 IPAS 32 '128 38 114 70 242 22A5 W 130 22 82 58 212 1190 35 36 71 2390 33 19 52 =25 28 43 71 23:Is 13 9 22 1130 34 28 52 23:30 10 11 21 11:45 '129 31 138 63 267 N." 8 fi4 8 47 16 111 MALS 8032 4 769 1573 1OT815 2179 1598 3777 ww% 511% ".ftl N.4%1sPur% 57.7% 42.396 70.616 DAILYNB sa 0 EB WB Total a%Peak Hour OT30 ffr S 0T30 Pka Peak Hour 1715 1790 1]:15 Ser n vaome 166 274 336 PP4 nv9wme 292 las 474 n Hr Factor 0.614 0 a 8.819 nHrwcta ON9 Oen 0.1135 7-9vaknrc 270 292 562 4-fiWkake 503 3n em 7-9"ka 0130 015 03:30 4-fi Peak Hoa LIM 1T9D 17M ' 166 174 3% 4-6n m In 452 nwf. 0.614 OH's 01189 Pk HrF:tr OTS ON3 094E tri CPrepSSE EAD ared By: Transtech Engineers, Inc. I Page TRAFFIC REVIEW OF THE INTERSECTION OF MARSHALL STREET AND CHARIETTE AVENUE Attachment 1b: Average Daily Traffic Counts for Marshall Street West of Chariette Avenue t EOM �1� C" E�FgD Prepared By: Transtech Engineers, Inc. Page 13 of 17 Pawu4 bp N• OW SSw,iq, Sa VOLUME Marshall St W/O Chariette Ave Dry: Wednesday COy: Rosemead Data: 5/29/2024 Projatt8: CA24_020178_003 AM •• ! DAILY No TOTALS So EB NO We LB TOTAL PM Period NO SO EB we T01AL 0:00 0 0 9 6 15 12:00 0 0 21 41 68 0:15 0 0 I 5 9 12:15 0 0 42 31 73 1130 0 0 4 1 5 12:90 0 0 34 32 56 OAS 0 0 6 23 3 15 9 38 1245 0 ' 0 ' 32 135 ' 35 139 67 214 1:00 0 0 5 4 9 19:00 0 0 49 42 91 1:15 0 0 4 1 5 19:15 0 0 56 35 91 1:30 D 05 1 6 13:30 0 0 43 31 74 1A5 0 0 S 19 4 10 9 29 23A5 0 0 ' 64 212 ' 51 159 115 371 2:00 0 0 6 0 6 14:80 0 0 44 43 87 2:15 0 0 4 0 4 14:15 0 0 49 38 87 2:90 D 0 2 3 5 14:30 0 0 58 37 95 2A5 0 0 1 13 1 4 2 17 1445 0 ' 0 ' 39 190 ' 42 160 81 350 3:00 0 0 3 3 6 15:00 0 0 63 35 98 3:15 0 0 2 1 3 25:15 0 0 47 33 80 300 0 03 1 4 15:90 0 0 45 30 75 SAS 0 0 7 15 0 5 7 20 1545 0 0 ' 49 204 ' 44 142 93 346 4.00 0 0 2 3 5 16000 0 0 56 41 97 4:15 0 0 2 1 3 16:15 0 0 55 37 92 4490 0 02 1 3 16:90 0 0 57 29 86 445 0 0 3 9 3 8 6 17 1645 0 0 ' 67 235 ' 45 152 112 387 SAO 0 0 30 3 13 17:00 0 0 69 46 115 5:15 0 0 11 2 13 17:15 0 0 70 34 104 5:90 0 0 12 6 18 17:90 0 0 fib 41 107 SAS 0 ' D 110 43 9 20 19 63 17A5 0 0 ' S8 273 ' 46 167 114 440 6:00 0 0 6 SO 16 18:00 0 0 84 56 140 6:15 0 0 3 3 6 18:15 0 0 65 36 101 6:30 0 0 12 11 23 18:30 0 045 37 82 6A5 0 D ' 17 38 ' 14 38 31 76 18:45 0 0 ' 44 238 ' 38 167 82 405 7.,00 0 0 12 10 22 19:00 0 0 50 34 84 7:15 0 0 18 21 39 19:25 0 0 43 31 74 7:90 0 0 38 40 78 19:30 0 053 35 a8 745 0 0 ' 41 109 48 119 89 228 19:45 0 0 ' 60 206 ' 28 128 88 334 840 0 0 30 48 78 20.00 0 0 42 25 67 8:15 0 0 50 35 85 20:15 0 0 42 41 83 am 0 0 28 36 64 20:30 0 0 39 31 70 L45 0 0 '40 148 48 167 SO 315 20:45 0 0 ' 35 158 20 117 55 275 SIM 0 0 21 31 52 21:00 0 0 44 39 83 91.15 0 0 26 29 55 21:15 0 0 37 15 52 9:90 0 027 35 62 21:90 D 0 23 30 53 SAS 0 0 ' 22 96 ' 25 120 47 216 21AS 0 0 ' 30 134 ' 22 106 52 240 10:00 0 0 31 24 55 22:00 0 0 26 19 45 10:15 0 0 33 26 59 22:15 0 0 43 17 60 10:90 0 0 27 24 51 22130 0 0 27 23 50 1045 0 0 ' 32 123 35 109 57 232 23A5 D 0 ' 36 132 ' 21 80 57 212 11:00 0 0 35 36 71 29.01 0 0 34 18 52 11:15 0 0 28 43 71 23:15 0 0 11 7 18 11:30 0 0 34 28 62 23:30 0 0 10 11 21 It- 0 D 31 128 31 138 62 266 23A5 0 0 8 63 9 45 17 108 TOTALS 764 753 1517 TOTALS neo 1567 3742 Spur% 50.4% 49.6% SZ% SPLIT% 58.3% 41.46 ]12% DAILYNO F SB F EB WI3 Total AM Peak Hour Y.30 7:30 7:30 PM Peak Hour 17:15 17:30 17:15 AMPk Vdume 159 171 330 PMPk Volume 788 In 465 Pk Hr Factor 0.795 0d91 0.927 Pk Hr Fatlor 0.657 om 0231 7-9VOlume 257 tab 543 4-6Volume 506 319 aD 7 9Peak Hour 730 7:30 7:30 4-6Peak Hou, 17:00 17:00 17,00 7.9%t Vmume 159 In 930 4-6Pk Volume $T3 1a7 460 Pk Hr Factor 1M W191 0.927 Pk Hr Factor 1975 0.911 0.957 t EOM �1� C" E�FgD Prepared By: Transtech Engineers, Inc. Page 13 of 17 TRAFFIC REVIEW OF THE INTERSECTION OF MARSHALL STREET AND CHARIETTE AVENUE Attachment lc: Average Daily Traffic Counts for Chariette Avenue South of Marshall Street ADCPrepared By: Transtech Engineers, Inc. I Page 14of 17 �,.�.o��... M.... Prepared W National Data 6 S Y"y Sery . _- VOLUME Chariette Ave 20011 S/O Marshall St Ory: Wednesday Mr. aosnriead Date: 5/29/2024 Nolettc 6124_020178_001 AM ft,md DAILYNB NB S8 EB SS WE TOTAL B WE Total TOTAL 00:00 0 0 O 1290 3 1 4 00:15 0 1 1 12:15 1 3 4 00:30 0 1 1 12:30 4 2 6 WAS 0 2 4 2 4 125 5 13 4 10 9 23 01:00 0 0 0 1300 3 6 9 01:15 0 0 0 13:15 4 1 5 01:30 0 0 0 13:30 3 7 10 01.5 0 0 0 13AS 4 14 4 1e 8 32 0200 0 0 0 14M 4 3 7 MIS 0 0 0 MIS 6 3 9 0230 0 0 0 14:30 1 5 6 0245 0 0 0 14AS 2 13 4 15 6 28 03:00 0 0 0 1500 3 2 5 03:15 1 0 1 MIS 1 3 4 03M 0 1 1 15:30 5 5 10 WAS 0 1 0 1 0 2 ISM 1 3 12 4 14 7 26 04:00 0 0 0 16:00 2 6 e MIS 1 1 2 MIS 6 6 12 0430 1 0 1 16:30 3 2 5 04:45 1 3 0 1 1 4 16A5 3 14 5 19 a 33 05:00 2 0 2 17M 4 5 9 OSIS 2 0 2 17:15 3 4 7 05:30 1 0 1 17:30 1 1 2 OSAS 0 5 1 1 1 6 IIAS 3 11 4 14 7 25 06:00 I 0 I 1800 1 4 5 06:15 2 0 2 18:15 3 5 8 0630 3 1 4 1$30 4 2 6 06A5 4 20 0 1 4 11 IBM 1 9 4 15 5 24 0700 1 2 3 1900 2 3 5 07:15 7 1 a WAS 1 4 5 07M 4 3 7 19:30 3 5 a 07AS 1 5 17 2 9 7 25 1 19A5 1 1 7 4 16 5 23 08:00 3 1 4 20M 2 4 6 MIS 3 5 8 MIS 0 3 3 0130 1 2 3 ID30 3 4 7 08AS 2 9 2 10 4 19 ZOA5 3 8 3 14 6 22 MOO 3 0 3 2190 1 1 2 MIS 0 1 1 21'15 2 1 3 09:30 2 3 5 21130 0 2 2 09145 4 9 1 5 5 14 11.45 0 3 1 5 1 8 1000 0 1 1 22Q0 1 3 4 10:15 4 4 8 22:15 0 1 1 10.30 2 1 3 22M 0 0 0 10'AS 1 7 2 8 3 15 2 --15 1 2 3 7 4 9 1100 6 5 11 2300 1 3 4 IL-15 2 3 5 23:15 1 1 2 11.30 2 2 4 23:30 2 1 3 SSA5 1 11 0 10 1 23 23A5 0 4 0 5 0 9 TOTALS 72 a III I 110 152 262 SP1f7% 59.5% 40.5% 3L YLR% 420% 58.0% DAILY TOTALS N8 182 $a 201 LB 0 we 0 Total 383 WPut How 0115 Ian 07:15 M1hat Hwa 19:30 15:30 15:10 W.vw. 19 12 M FMYt� 17 71 37 Pt Hr Fawn am 0600 aW3 MWF. am 0875 O.AI 7-9v01ome M 18 M 4-6Y9WOe IS 33 Y �7-9PeatH 0?35 W'S0 07:15 4 -%Peet Mae 16:15 1691 16:11 r -'_rte 19 11 26 4-6M M 29 M LR Hr Fanw am 0550 aM MMF. 0.667 0792 OJ06 ADCPrepared By: Transtech Engineers, Inc. I Page 14of 17 �,.�.o��... M.... TRAFFIC REVIEW OF THE INTERSECTION OF MARSHALL STREET AND CHARIETTE AVENUE Attachment 2: Speed Survey for Marshall Street West of Chariette Avenue Pin+•a M....am. mu a m—'+ s...— SPEED Marshall St W/O Chariette Ave 0av: Wednesday 08y: Rosemead Date: 5/29/2024 Prolan 8: 024_020178_003 Summary Tsme 15 15 19 20-24 25 29 30 34 35 39 4G U 3 ssl7 0%0 AIA 0 2 4 9 14 5 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 311 LL0 0 2 1 1 10 12 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 29 2:00 2 0 3 2 4 1 1 3 1 0 0 0 0 37 3.00 0 1 3 6 5 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 4:00 1 1 2 1 3 6 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 17 sm 2 4 2 11 13 22 5 3 1 0 0 0 0 fig 6:00 8 4 11 17 16 13 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 76 7%0 IS 23 31 55 63 30 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 228 8:00 9 26 33 100 94 37 14 1 1 0 0 0 0 315 9:00 7 20 20 59 68 30 10 2 0 0 0 0 0 216 3000 7 20 30 % 74 25 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 232 21:00 11 22 49 78 0 28 9 0 0 0 D 0 0 266 12:00 PM 7 27 41 68 94 25 10 1 1 0 0 0 0 274 ]3:00 12 34 60 97 108 46 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 371 14:00 7 25 47 72 117 61 17 3 1 0 0 0 0 350 13X0 12 31 30 75 101 70 23 4 0 0 0 0 0 346 16:00 9 32 38 77 144 67 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 387 27%0 7 28 45 102 155 77 22 4 0 0 0 0 0 44o 18:00 10 27 36 86 138 90 14 4 0 0 0 0 0 405 19:00 12 19 40 94 111 42 12 3 1 0 0 D D 334 20:00 6 14 33 74 101 32 12 3 0 0 0 0 0 275 21:00 4 7 31 75 63 49 10 1 0 0 0 0 0 240 22:0021 11 11 M W 43 8 7 0 0 0 0 0 212 29%0 1 7 18 26 31 16 8 0 1 0 0 0 0 108 %ar 3 ] 3 xs 3z 1 s 1 1 MI VaYacei ss 309 WS 4 in 3 ssl7 %M1 j x 9 9 lx 29 Meh kHw 7 1xa e, i. a` em x. VNume IB 36 <9 ILO 91 3] U 3 ] 315 pM VqY 362 1x49 Ir0 Y 3]e2 %%A j 5 0 3 2e 13 3% 3 PMV w. v. v v. 1r xr n.w 23 vaume 32 102 M90 13 r 3 MY DlnctbrMl Peak Period, AM 74 HDON 124 PM" 00 Peek Vekenea AHSpeads vdume % vaume x vYlw:e % vaume x 543 1 10% 645 12% 827 1 16% 3244 1 62% EPrepared By: Transtech Engineers, Inc. I Page 15 O . TRAFFIC REVIEW OF THE INTERSECTION OF MARSHALL STREET AND CHARIETTE AVENUE Attachment 3: Turning Movement Counts, at the Intersection of Marshall Street and Chariette Avenue I.e1Wn: awHae Are&n % 0fa9 � C :IM 4q(NB) Date - Totals 91W.d W: zauminml B.9c s/N/1W1 NS/EW 8tre,4 Llvletle AYE U:sltlh AN 14r9W14 61a - SO0.TIBDIMD SD1111B]IMD EASTBINMD WESIHMMD 0 1 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 IL XI w XU 4 ST 9l 91 M EI ER EII NL W! WR VN TDTK LWM1 0 a t 0 0 0 a a 0 '2 0 D x ll 0 0 W 7.15 M1 3 0 + 0 0 D a D 0 IB 0 0 1 IB o D ` M 7:30 M z 0 1 0 0 D 1 0 D 37 1 0 1 X 0 0' N 7YSM.. I 0 + a 0 0 0 b_ 1 D x.......__50_ a D_ ' 97 -------- &m Ml 0 a 3 -0 _D. _ 0 _._...0 D o --- 0 ._ 0 _ 30 1 0 0 _—_ 47 a 0 K Ba M1 1 0 z 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 1 0 4 33 0 0' N &MM1 1 0 D 0 0 0 0 0 o N 0 0 z 37 a 0 ` 6B &45M o 0 ] D 0 0 0 0 0 N 1 0 1 +B 0 0 91 !8 117 MI 38 41 a ET EN 91 ML TOfK lafKY011.-i B D 0 1) 0 a 0 0 1 a 0 0 753 6 0 1] 12 IN 0 181 0 0 5D MWMW %1: 31.W% O.W% 6&8M 0.0096 O.W16 0.W% 1W.0096 0.8Ib 0.8N6 9J.6B% 1.31% O.W16 <.11% 95.0996 0.6% O.Wl6 W: OI:A.W-09:301M 0 0 1 0 0 056 5 0 675 166 IOfK 9W 18M1: + 0 10 0 9DYI81illClplr OSW OAW m0.0000 0.0.0 O.OW 0.]50 O.OW O.WO O.AS O.OW WIN0.W aJ.0 0 &1 O.OW OApO 0897 0.7W 0.350 02696i5 0 N0801BOU 1 0 0 0;0 S1Une0.MD 0 00 D EASIBOIW 1 D o -, 0 19931BWMD 1 0 0 XL w Hl NU 4 Sf 9l 91 ET E E 19l Wr NV IOrK 190 M 1 a 1 0 0 0 0 0 U 0 4 51 1 0 0 '., 2 38 0 0 97 115M 1 0 1 0 a 0 0 0 0 W 3 0 3 35 a 0 9s 4'MM 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 M z 0 o M o 0 89 J a 0 1 61 D O41 0 0 116 SAM _— 1 _.__6.____0._10 0 ] 0 0 ..._0 -_O 0 0 0 0 67 1 0 1 +6 0 0 in ,:15M1 a z D a 0 a 0 0 67 1 0 3 32 0 0 IN 5:"M 0 0 1 0 a 0 00 0 67 1 0 0 +3 1 0 ` 113 sMSM 0 a 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 M 3 0 1 n 0 0 119 tl M Hl MI 4 ST 5N 81 EL ET EA EU WL Wr WS %11 TbrK NrMYtlIIrFS: 7 0 17 0 1 0 a 0 1 b5 l9 0 13 30 l 0 BS) IM10.1W %'s: NAM O' R N&t% 0.aD96 IW.W16 O.8N6 O.W96 O.BMe 0.10% WN 3.]6% O.W96 3.58% 95.7L% 0.31% Pbixa: M:,M-D6AOM 1 0 0 0 0 165 6 0 e IN 1 0 TorK YY Ph9[MVOL: z 0 9 0 rE.9Nxar/:alax: 0.5W 0.w 0.750 6600 0.150 'M 0.W0 0.000 a(IN am O.SW 0.600 nsm 0299 060 aaW ay% 0.6r MMI 0.996 am By: Transtech Engineers, Inc. I Page 16 of 17 TRAFFIC REVIEW OF THE INTERSECTION OF MARSHALL STREET AND CHARIETTE AVENUE Attachment 4: Summary of Vehicular Turning Movement Counts at the Intersection of Marshall Street and Chariette Avenue Chariette Ave & Marshall St Peak Hour Turning Movement Count ID: 24-020177-001 Chariette Ave Day: Wednesday City: Rosemead • _ _ • a Date: 5/292024 07:30 AM -08:30 AM AM 1 - 0 0 o NONE Noox 0 0 0 0 05:00 PM - 06:00 PM PM 0 0 1 0 0 ' AM NOON MA 0 Noo 4j ♦ %* L* 1171 10 AM O 0 0 0 0 3 o 1170 <} s o o o S o rt _ - 0 0 0 40 1561 0 1265 ♦ 1 5 1 0 , 6 '* 0 AM NOOt1 PIA Totals (AM) 1 ;; 0 a L 06f to 1564♦ � 166 Si4 * eei 6 A O OF Totals (NOON) 10 0 0 0at� + 4to 0.* moo �000sF (Totals (PM) J - VL 2654.4168 6.4 * 4r8 N O 10 PM AM 4 PIA NOON AM 0 i 1 0 I 0 1 ♦ 168 0 _ 166 m o r 8 0 6 a �r z 0 C 0 0 0• => 275 i 0 1 166 0 n o nM 7:00 AM - as:oo AM g � `0 ' ■ It f'+ 14 0 0 NOON NONE m 0 O 0' 0 ' 0 0 Noo 1 PM 4:00 PM -06:00 PM 0 4 PIA NOON AM 0 i 1 0 I 0 1 ♦ 168 0 _ 166 m o r 8 0 6 a �r z 0 C 0 0 0• => 275 i 0 1 166 ',, PGeesbuns (Crosswalks) 1 rd' z z OO .f e z a a i O�o 0 0,0 0 01 0 PM 0 1 0 n V � `0 ' ■ It f'+ 14 0 2 11 0 9 PM 0 O 0' 0 ' 0 0 Noo 11 PM 0 0 4 0 10 AM O a' O O O c• a 3 Chwlette Ave ',, PGeesbuns (Crosswalks) 1 rd' z z OO .f e z a a i O�o 0 0,0 0 01 ..; r 00 &to PM 0 4 ~ 0 PM Noor+ NO 0 NOON AM 0 0 O 0 xON0 of _ to NOON PM 0 4 0 PM O O O O O O �O opw o v O 3 r o IM NOON AM Totals (AM) ( J ; + yoj `L 1564 O � 166 5'h * do A O OF Totals (NOON) 0 0 o i OJT i to 04 O �O 0-4 110 0 0 0 Totals (PM! I� a y ti 2654 O� 168 6-4 4r8 w f r N O l0 qD Prepared By: Transtech Engineers, Inc. I Page 17 of 17 OSE ..................... 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 Orange 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. CONSENTCALENDAR Chair Orange 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 Orange 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 1 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 85t" 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 of July 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 Orange 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 36, with addition of installing a double yellow striping from Temple City Boulevard to Rio Hondo Avenue. Vote resulted in: Yes: Chang, Nguyen, Lang, Orange 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 tum. 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 of July 11, 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 Page 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 1% 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 23rd. Commissioner Chang commented that a temporary measure to help slow down traffic could be using plastic bollards 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 qua 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 of 8 i Michael Chair ATTEST: Albert Leung Interim City Engineer Rosemead Traffic Commission Meeting Minutes of July 11, 2024 Page 8 of 8 Attachment C Installation Exhibit O a 2 Q 2 w F LL 3 AAE�ML 4 h y W a Q O H • � � � Q W � W W H Z N N Z W Z 2CZE N W H J U O 2 Q O Q F Q W z W 2 a 2 O 3 U W 2 a W LL p O Q wi w 2 KO0 > ❑ U w N W W F O � W W w ❑ ❑ p. w H Q � W N O W = W F O p w z Q ?." 6 w W x w W (7 + ❑ �- F > O N Z W W J K c w ❑ Q ❑ W W x W W l7F~Q Q LL a Q U W O OC Q O a of Z w l7 - WF w ¢ Z°❑„ = Q 3 HN FQ p W N W d' F Z UJ W U N F-VF1 Q OF F W z O J ❑ U Q' N t.,.4, J Z~ N LL N W W LL N W ❑ Q U 5 � lZ7 w m Z Z� Z cQ LL Z ON am aZ CQ O F� v a F O= C w LL LL O ,H Co Z 7A F O .� - W l -LLL W Z (7 F w N w LL w 2 cc W x a Z = O O 0 J O W D W U O W _ 3 m O F W w F w 2 Q U z LL F qtr! r, o� oa oN dLL o Oo F O z 2 = a F N @ N Z N OC ca W Vp- T ?j m W C) W Q H Q ❑ LL F s m aC) of W �� u LA a W U x > Q ❑ 0 p J y 9 s uW LL~ G� am Z� w J F- F- < 0O °;; ?� m0 F pQ La C d z w p _ ^^�� / ❑2 O� ❑p Oz LL ZO Qw W o� 'off aF a� xj a a= w F U 2 xt a C'° 5 3 Z Z Z K Q Z Z Z W m { t, ogo�' 000000 o16a''