The URL can be used to link to this page

TC - 11-07-96i AGENDA ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION 8838 E. Valley Blvd., Rosemead, CA 91770 Regular Meeting NOVEMBER 7,199 Call to Order: 7:00 p.m. Roll Call: Commissioners Larson, Ruiz, Tine, Vice - Chairperson Knapp, Pledge of Allegiance: Vice - Chairperson Knapp Invocation: Commissioner Tine I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - October 3, 1996 II. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS This is the time reserved for members of the audience to address the Commission on items not listed on the agenda (Maximum time per speaker is 3 minutes; total time allocated is 15 minutes). III. OLD BUSINESS IV. NEW BUSINESS A. REQUEST FOR LEFT -TURN PHASING ON WALNUT GROVE AVENUE AND MISSION DRIVE - This is a request to review the intersection for the installation of separate left turn signal phasing for Walnut Grove Avenue. B. REQUEST FOR GREEN CURB ON GARVEY AVENUE EAST OF DEQUINE AVENUE - This is a request from the owners of Wienerschnitzel and Garvey Equipment Company to review parking conditions in front of the store as it relates to the recent opening of the Alhambra School District Southeast Adult Center School. C. REQUEST FOR TRAFFIC CONTROLS AT MISSION DRIVE AND EARLE AVENUE - This is a request from Dolly Leong received at the October Traffic Commission meeting to review traffic conditions at the intersection. V. STAFF REPORTS A. HELLMAN- LAFAYETTE RED CURB REVIEW - This is a request by Mr. Bernard Ancheta of 8043 Hellman Avenue to review the need for red curb in front of his house installed recently as a result of previous requests and evaluations. VL COMMISSIONER REPORTS VII. ADJOURNMENT Thursday, December 5, 1996 at 7:00 p.m., Rosemead Council Chambers, 8838 E. Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, CA 91770 ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 3. 1996 The regular meeting of the Rosemead Traffic Commission was called to order by Vice - Chairperson Knapp, at 7:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 8838 East Valley Boulevard, Rosemead. ROLL CALL Present: Vice - Chairperson Knapp Commissioners Tirre, Larson, Ruiz Ex Officio: Administrative Aide: Brad Johnson Acting Deputy Traffic Engineer: Chris Turnbull CALL TO ORDER The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commissioner Larson The Invocation was led by Vice - Chairperson Knapp I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES It was moved by Commissioner Tirre, seconded by Vice - Chairperson Knapp, to approve the Traffic Commission minutes for September 5, 1996, with one correction by Commissioner Larson. Commissioner Larson would like the record to show that he had an excused absent for the September meeting. Vote resulted: YES: Vice - Chairperson Knapp, Commissioner Tirre, Commissioner Ruiz NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Commissioner Larson Commissioner Larson abstained his vote because he was not present at the September meeting. II. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE Speaking before the Commission was: Dolly Leong 9554 E. Ralph Street Rosemead, California 91770 Ms. Leong stated that the pedestrian crossing at Mission Drive and Earle Avenue is very dangerous. She has witnessed two accidents at this location. She would like staff to review the accident reports and see what can be done at this intersection. Ms. Leong wanted the Commission to recognize Judy Thompson of the California Christian Home who helped the child out of the car after one of the accidents mentioned above. Commissioner Ruiz recommended that the Sheriff's Department use selective enforcement at this intersection until staff can provide a possible solution. Page 1 % 1 B. REQUEST FOR LEFT TURN ACCESS TO "PARK MONTEREY" MOBILE HOME PARK ON GARVEY AVENUE IN THE VICINITY OF DEQUINE AVENUE Deputy Traffic Engineer Turnbull stated that this request came from Helen Guarno, Manager of Park Monterey, to remove the landscaped median to provide better eastbound left turn access. He also discussed the 4 alternatives offered to the residents. Chairperson Knapp stated that the City staff held a meeting with the residents of "Park Monterey" Mobile Home Park, prior to the Traffic Commission meeting tonight, to discuss various alternatives to the problems they are experiencing at this location. Everyone was in agreement that alternative 3 would be the best choice. Alternative 3 would extend the two -way left turn striping across the Dequine Avenue intersection opening. This alternative would provide an area within the intersection for vehicles to wait for opposing traffic to clear. This alternative, however, still presents difficulties for eastbound left turning traffic due to the location of the driveway and the raised median. The construction cost to implement this remedial measures is approximately $ 400.00. In addition, it was recommended that No U -turn signs be installed on the median and red curb be installed east of the driveway, to increase visibility, exiting the site. Staff also agreed to have selective enforcement at this location and start citing violators. Chairperson Knapp recommended that the residents contact their landlord to widen the driveway into the Mobile Home Park. Commissioner Ruiz wanted to make sure that the property owner had been informed of the City's recommendation. It was moved by Commissioner Larson, seconded by Commissioner Tirre, and carried unanimously to go with alternative 3, with the addition of the red curbing and the "No U- turn" signage. C. REQUEST FOR RED CURB ON MISSION DRIVE AT VALLEY BOULEVARD Deputy Traffic Engineer Turnbull stated that this request came from the Traffic Commission, to install red curb on Mission Drive near the intersection of Valley Boulevard. The request is made for the area just north of Valley Boulevard in front of the Mission Valley Liquor Store blocking the right turn pocket at the intersection. Based on the current no parking restrictions, by way of the vehicle code, and the fact that this no parking condition is not readily apparent, 55 feet of red curb is proposed for Mission Drive north of the Valley Boulevard intersection. Commissioner Larson recommended a letter be sent to the business owner informing them as to why the City is painting the curb red. Commissioner Ruiz asked if a "No Stopping Anytime" sign could be installed. It was moved by Commissioner Ruiz, seconded by Commissioner Knapp and carried unanimously to approve the Traffic Engineer's recommendation, with the addition of the "No Stopping Anytime" sign. Page 3 V. STAFF REPORTS A. HEL114AN- RAMONA /WALNUT GROVE - TRAFFIC SIGNAL OPERATION Acting Deputy Traffic Engineer Turnbull updated the Commission on the status of this location. Staff is reviewing the enhance operation of this location. A number of alternatives are being proposed. It is contingent on some Cal -Trans surplus right -a -way. VI. COMMISSIONER REPORTS Deputy Miller stated that there will be a 3rd motorcycle police officer in the City of Rosemead very soon. Commissioner Ruiz stated that Foothill Transportation and Antelope Valley Transportation are using Loftus as part of their route, between Temple City Boulevard and Baldwin Avenue. Vice - Chairperson Knapp informed the Commission that People for People are having their annual fundraiser luncheon on Sunday, October 13th, from 12:00 p.m. - 4:00 p.m., at the Mormon Church, to raise funds to buy turkeys and hams for Christmas. Administrative Aide Johnson stated that Councilman Jay Imperial's father -in -law passed away. Services will be held on Saturday, October 12th, at Rosehill's Chapel. VII. There being no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 7:57 p.m. The next meeting will take place on November 7, 1996. Page 4 TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION FROM: CHRIS TURNBULL ACTING DEPUTY TRAFFIC ENGINEER DATE: OCTOBER 9,1996 RE: REQUEST FOR LEFT -TURN PHASING ON WALNUT GROVE AVENUE AT MISSION DRIVE REQUEST A request was received through the City Managers Office for the installation of left - turn signal phasing on Walnut Grove Avenue at Mission Drive. Walnut Grove Avenue is a 64 -foot wide north -south roadway with two lanes of traffic provided in each direction. Left -turn pockets are also provided on each approach of the intersection. The posted speed limit on Walnut Grove Avenue is 40 mph. Parking is prohibited along both sides of Walnut Grove Avenue. Mission Drive is a 64 feet wide east -west street that provides two lanes of traffic in each direction. Left -turn pockets are also provided on each approach of the intersection. The posted speed limit on Mission Drive is 40 mph. Parking is prohibited along both sides of Mission Drive. DATA Traffic accident data and peak hour traffic volumes for the intersection were accumulated to evaluate established criteria for implementing left -turn phasing at signalized intersections. The accident data was accumulated for the most recent three -year period which occurred from March 1, 1993 to March 31, 1996. A review of the accident data revealed that a total of seventeen .accidents have been reported at the intersection for the three -year period studied. The attached collision diagram depicts these accidents. A total of five accidents were reported for the north and southbound left turns. Peak hour turning movement counts were taken at the intersection. In addition, a field observation of the AM and PM peak hour conditions were completed to determine the number of vehicles that may be experiencing delay. The peak hour traffic volumes are attached for further reference. DISCUSSION In order to determine if left -turn phasing is warranted, one or several standard guidelines must be met. The guidelines utilized for this evaluation were obtained from The Caltrans Traffic Manual, Section 9.01.3. The guidelines refer to four basic areas of consideration for the addition of left turn phasing. The guidelines are discussed as follows: 1. Accidents. The accident warrant requires five or more left -turn accidents for a particular left turn movement during a 12 -month period. As mentioned previously, a total of five left turn accidents have been reported for the north and southbound directions. Three were reported for the northbound left turn and two for the southbound direction. Because the accidents did not total five for a particular left turn movement, this warrant is not satisfied. 2. Delay. Left -turn delays of one or more vehicles which were waiting at the beginning of the green interval and are still remaining in the left -turn lane after at least 80% of the total number of cycles for one hour. A review of the time delay data for the intersection reveals that the maximum delay experienced for the northbound left turn is 28 percent during the AM peak hour and for the southbound left turn a 3 percent delay is experienced during the PM peak hour. Given this data, the delay warrant is not satisfied. 3. Volume. For a pretimed signal or a background - cycle - controlled actuated signal, a left -turn volume of more than two vehicles per approach per cycle for a peak hour, or for a traffic- actuated signal, 50 or more left turning vehicles per hour in one direction with the product of the turning and conflicting through traffic during the peak hour of 100,000 or more. A review of the traffic volume data during the most critical peak hour, revealed that the maximum volume for the Walnut Grove Avenue left and opposing through movements were 162 and 505, respectively. The product of these two values totals 81,810, thus, not satisfying the Volume Warrant No. 3. 4. Miscellaneous. Other factors that might be considered are consistency of signal phasing with adjacent intersections, impaired sight distance due to horizontal of vertical curvature, or where there is a large percentage of buses and trucks. There are no unusual geometrics or conditions that would satisfy the miscellaneous guideline. The guidelines discussed above do not lend to a recommendation for the installation of separate left turn traffic signal phasing. However, since the majority of the accidents have occurred within a recent one year period (1995), it is recommended as a remedial measure that the "all red" signal clearance time be increased from 0.0 to 1.0 second for the north and southbound approaches. This will provide addition time for vehicles to clear the intersection prior to the opposing street traffic green time is initiated. The 1.0 second red clearance is consistent with Caltrans signal timing guidelines fora 40 mile per hour speed limit. RECOMMENDATION An evaluation of the request to provide separate left -turn signal phasing for the Walnut Grove Avenue approaches at the intersection of Mission Drive intersection has been conducted. The evaluation demonstrated that the left -turn traffic signal guidelines, as established by Caltrans, have not been met, and therefore, separate left -turn signal phasing is not recommended. However, an increase in the "all red" clearance interval for Walnut Grove Avenue is recommended as a remedial measure. p:\066\chris\rosemead\walmisif COLLISION DIAGRAM INTERSECTION M '2512` �/21VE AND B 4U-r GR� - JE AVEi.IVE PERIOD 39 Mon - n+s FROM / - / - 9 3 TO 3-51- 96 CITY 7 Y FCoSC -nR ^D PREPARED BY NUMBER OF ACCIDENTS SYMBOLS TYPES OF COLLISIONS -0-I REAR ENO HEAD ON SNOW FOR 4CH ACCIDENT //', DAMAGE ONLY INJURY OR FATAL / TOTALACCIDENTS • MOVMG VEHCLE 4??L BACKING VEHICLE — NONINVOLVED VEHICLE -- PEDESTRIAN .J PARKED VEHICLE p FDCED OBJECT 0 FATALACCIDENT A INJURY ACC IENT t. TIME DAY. DATE —, 2. WEATHER AND ROAD OUTOFCONTROL SURFACE —IF UNUSUAL CONDITION EMSTED LEFTTURN 3 NITS— IFBETWEEN RIGHT ANGLE I DUSK AND OAWN TURNING MOVEMEN COUNT SUMMARY ACCUTEK CITY: ROSEMEAD NORTH - SOUTH: WALNUT GROVE AVE. EAST -WEST ST: MISSION DR. DATE: 9 -25.96 DAY: WEDNESDAY /THURSDAY PROJ NO. 2157 ---------------------------------------------------- SOUTH WEST BOUND S8 BOUND W8 TIME RT THRU LT TOTAL RT THRU LT TOTAL ........................ ............................ AM 7:15 4 66 8 78 9 107 21 137 7:30 0 99 8 107 11 151 35 197 7:45 5 133 10 148 11 160 45 216 8:00 5 127 26 158 14 156 52 222 TOTAL 14 425 52 491 45 574 153 772 8:15 6 132 15 153 19 223 69 311 8:30 6 113 20 139 15 152 47 214 8:45 3 90 15 108 10 156 40 206 9:00 0 68 9 77 8 152 76 236 TOTAL 15 403 59 477 52 683 232 967 PM 4:15 2 60 16 78 7 65 16 88 4:30 2 92 18 112 9 74 24 107 4 :45 3 80 20 103 6 77 19 102 5:00 3 65 14 82 15 91 33 139 TOTAL 10 297 68 375 37 307 92 436 5:15 2 73 21 96 10 127 26 163 5:30 2 62 10 74 5 85 18 108 5:45 2 80 14 96 8 95 25 128 6:00 1 98 22 121 6 100 28 134 TOTAL 7 313 67 387 29 407 97 533 ------------------------------ .................. .. NORTH BOUND NB RT THRU LT TOTAL .... ................ 16 26 20 62 14 39 31 84 38 88 59 185 38 66 46 150 106 219 156 481 38 93 40 171 9 83 17 109 10 66 39 115 8 40 23 71 65 282 119 466 39 96 29 164 31 74 18 123 25 99 24 148 33 116 28 177 128 385 99 612 45 131 46 222 37 88 38 163 37 116 35 188 37 130 29 196 156 465 148 769 --------------------------------- EAST BOUND EB I 15' HR RT THRU LT TOTAL ITOTAL TOTAL --------------------------.....-- 1 18 42 3 63 340 29 46 3 78 466 18 67 5 90 639 42 94 7 143 I 673 107 249 18 374 2118 39 100 12 151 786 20 65 4 89 551 21 80 8 109 538 11 68 3 82 466 91 313 27 431 2341 28 134 10 172 502 25 121 4 150 492 17 128 12 157 510 30 159 5 194 592 100 542 31 673 2096 27 151 8 186 667 27 169 6 202 547 20 175 8 203 615 26 168 9 203 654 100 663 31 794 2483 -------- AM PEAK HOUR 7:30 -8:30 22 505 71 598 59 691 213 963 123 330 162 615 119 326 28 473 2649 PM PEAK HOUR 1 5:00 -6:00 7 313 67 387 29 407 97 533 156 465 148 769 100 663 31 794 1 2483 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------ ------------- STOP DELAY SURVEY ACCUTEK CITY: ROSEMEAD NORTH - SOUTH: WALNUT GROVE AVE. EAST -WEST ST: MISSION DR. DATE: 9 -25 -96 DAY: WEDNESDAY /THURSDAY PROJ NO. 2157 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SOUTH WEST NORTH EAST BOUND SB BOUND WB BOUND NB BOUND EB I 15 HR TIME RT THRU LT TOTAL RT THRU LT TOTAL RT THRU LT TOTAL RT THRU LT TOTAL ITOTAL TOTAL ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- AM 7:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 8 8 0 0 0 0 10 8:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 4 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 11 11 0 0 0 0 14 8:15 0 0 1 1 0 0 0. 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 8:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:45 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O I 0 TOTAL 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 PM 4:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1_` 1 0 0 0 0 2 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 -1 < 1 0 0 0 0 2 5:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 2. 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 6:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0l 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 ------ - -- ----------------------------------- ----- ----------------------------- AM PEAK HOUR 7:15 -8:15 0 0 1 1 0 0 3 3 0 0 12 12 0 0 0 PM PEAK HOUR 4:45.5:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 U ��(e Lw9's 90 sFC �a C�c�c1S l ho-v✓L 0 16 0 1 4 /J/ s L % N(� TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION FROM CHRIS TURNBULL ACTING DEPUTY TRAFFIC ENGINEER DATE: OCTOBER 29,1996 RE: REQUEST FOR GREEN CURB ON GARVEY AVENUE EAST OF DEQUINE AVENUE REQUEST A request was received by the City Council from Kwok H. Yeung, owner of Wienerschnitzel, to paint the curb green with a "20 MIN PARKING' stencil for the space in front of the establishment. An additional request was received from Garvey Equipment for similar measures. The request indicated parking problems due to the newly opened Southeast Adult Center school, where students are parking in front of adjacent businesses for extended periods of time. The request is attached for reference. CONDITIONS Garvey Avenue is a 74 feet wide with two lanes of traffic in each direction separated by a 10 feet wide raised landscaped median. The posted speed limit on Garvey Avenue is 35 mph. On street parking is limited to two hours from 7 A.M. to 6 P.M. except for Sundays and Holidays. Dequine Avenue is a 30 -foot wide roadway with no striping. The prima facie speed limit is 25 mph. Dequine Avenue is stop controlled at its intersection with Garvey Avenue. Figure 1 depicts existing conditions DISCUSSION A field review of the area was completed and revealed that on street parking in this area is being used by vehicles for extended periods of time. Most likely, the on street parking is being used by students of the Southeast Adult Center school, because one of the two on -site parking areas was gated and the other area was under utilized. On street parking along Dequine Avenue was being fully utilized. As part of the Cities approval of the school, much consideration was given to parking conditions and requirements within the area. This is partly the reason the school has two parking areas onsite. The school has been put on notice regarding on -site parking conditions and are subject to their Conditional Use Permit. The attached letter provides some background on the City's position regarding parking. Garvey Avenue is a public street with 2 hour parking limits from 7 A.M. to 6 P.M. except for Sundays and Holidays. A public parking space is typically not allocated to just one user, however, it is commonly used by adjacent business owner(s). Given the nature of student parking, which is typically longer than two hours, and parking conditions placed on the school by the City to provide ample on site parking, it is appropriate for the Garvey Avenue public parking to be designated as high turnover parking to reflect the needs of the business located adjacent to the parking space. To accomplish this, it is recommended that approximately 85 feet of curb be painted green with white "20 MINUTE" messages stenciled on the top of each curb section. As part of this improvement, the removal of one existing parking sign and the installation of two new parking signs that enforce the new parking treatment is recommended. Figure 1 depicts proposed conditions. RECOMMENDATIONS Based on conditions discussed above in the vicinity of the Garvey Avenue and Dequine Avenue, it is recommended that approximately 85 feet of curb on Garvey Avenue east of Dequine Avenue be painted green with white "20 MINUTE" messages stenciled on top of the curb and noted parking signs installed as shown on Figure 1. Attachments P:\066\chris\rosemead\gargren o a II E jj W J Q V r r w w Q s ,ZZ 1 ,LL , [ JLJ ,ZZ 1 ( 1 i 1 i v 0 n rc V. w A. r— � W 4 GFn W Fn r r w CD i I I ° o r z x � C oo„ ea v W W i I I ° o r z a L IMLINHOS83NIM w w _Z w N Z Q W W U S r F N D Q 0 n Lu W Q ry LLJ U _Z Z D Lil CY W LLJ ry 0 0 L Z O Q Z W O > �a Q J ; Q � (n Q Z C) dl w s w 01 O O U x � C i J v W W UN m W e � � r 6 U U Z 1N3YYdm03 k3AUVO Z i Z i a° 30IAa3S olnV o N08IS MY L IMLINHOS83NIM w w _Z w N Z Q W W U S r F N D Q 0 n Lu W Q ry LLJ U _Z Z D Lil CY W LLJ ry 0 0 L Z O Q Z W O > �a Q J ; Q � (n Q Z C) dl w s w 01 O O U Wienerschnitzel #144 7434 E. Garvey Ave. Rosemead, Ca. 91770 (818) 442 -7833 September 27, 1996 Mayor 8838 Valley Blvd. Rosemead, Ca. 91770 (818) 288 -6671 Dear Mayor, This letter regards my concern about the parking space in front of my store. I have only one parking space in front of my store that is available to my customers. This space is very often occupied by the customers who intend to `stop and go' for a quick meal. This is a very convenient spot for my customers and it has helped our business. The customers can easily exit from their car and walk -up to our counter to place their order. This is necessary for those that are in a hurry and need `fast- food.' Recently, the building across from us has opened up and become a school. The problem is the students. They repeatedly park their cars in our designated spot for countless hours, occupying that space and denying it to our customers. This has hurt our business tremendously. It is especially repelling our valued `stop n go' customers. I would like for you to get the curb of this parking space painted green with a message stating: 20 minutes only. This would greatly help our business and keep the students from parking there for continuous hours. I would appreciate your effort in accomplishing this as soon as possible. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Kwok H. eung Store Owner /�v OCT. -29' WTUE) 17 :16 CITY OF ROSEMEAD ?TEL :818 -307 -9218 P, 002 MAYOR: PMrK 7 W FRI IF: LH MAYOR PRO TEFA GARY A. TAYLOR COUNCILMEMSERS: MARGARET CLARK JAY IMPERIAL JOE VASOUEZ September 26, 1996 Alhambra School District (nemC8d 8838 E. VALLEY BOULEVARD • P.O. BOX 399 ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA 91770 TELEPHONE (818) 288 -6671 TELECOPIER 6183079218 Attn: Dr. Richard Keihacker, Superintendent 15 West Alhambra Road Alhambra, CA 91801 ; SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 96 -669 7422 E. Garvey Avenue Dear Dr. Keihacker; On April 15, 1996, Rosemead's Planning Commission approved a permit for the Alhambra School District to operate an adult education facility located at 7422 E. Garvey Avenue. Mr. Lyons, Director of Planning and I, worked very closely with Ms. Jean Turner and Mr. Mark Paulson on completing this process - 4ne of our concerns that we presented early on was that there was not enough parking for the number of students that were requested. Our parking code requires an adult educational facility to' provide parking at a rate of one space per two students, plus one space per faculty on the largest shift. Ms Turner stated that there would be eight (8) staff and that you proposed to serve 80 students now with the potential to increase to 100 later. We noted that the site is eight (8) parking spaces short for allowing 80 students. However, they noted that many students take the bus. During the CUP process, we agreed for the school to operate with 80 students. Meanwhile, the school is to take note of the number of students that are taking the bus. This information will help your case when/if you decide to expand your operation without adding parking. However, we have recently received a couple of complaints from your neighbors about students parking on the street. Staff conducted an investigation on September 26, 1996,. and Mr. Brad Johnson of our office spoke with Mr. Frank tonal of your agency. We found, and Mr. Conal confirmed, that the students have not been allowed to use the parking facilities. In their place, staff from other Alhambra School District facilities are now parking at this location. This action places your facility in violation of Condition 4 6 which regulates parking based on eight (8) staff and 80 students all using the parking facilities at this site. Nothing was ever mentioned about outside staff using this parking facility. Changes in operation requires a modification request to go back to the Planning Commission for a public hearing (Condition 98). OCT. -29' WTUE) 17 :17 CITY OF ROSEME,AD TEL :818- 307 -9218 P, 003 Conditional Use Permit 96 -669 September 26, 1996 Page 2 of 2 Please work with your staff to correct this problem so that students have the opportunity to park within the facility and staff from other facilities do not. We would like to provide fair warning that cars parked on the street are subject to citations. We have instructed our parking control officers to actively enforce parking restrictions in this area. In addition, we are now reviewing the possibility of reducing the parking limit to 20 minutes in this area to reduce potential conflicts with the neighboring businesses. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Mr. Lyons or myself at (818)288 -6671. We area available Monday - Thursday from 7:00 am to 6:00 pm. Your prompt attention will be greatly appreciated. Sincerely, dip M Carl P. Holm, AICP Associate Planner cc: Director of Planning Director of Administrative Services Case File CUP 96 -669 TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION n FROM: CHRIS TURNBULL •_/� ^ v ' I ACTING DEPUTY TRAFFIC ENGINEER DATE: OCTOBER 29, 1996 RE: REQUEST FOR TRAFFIC CONTROLS AT MISSION DRIVE AND EARLE AVENUE REQUEST A request was received by the Traffic Commission at the October meeting from Ms. dolly Leon to review traffic conditions at the intersection of Mission Drive and Earle Avenue. Ms. Leon stated that it is difficult to exit Earle Avenue and indicated that there have been at least two recent accidents at the intersection. CONDITIONS Mission Drive is 64 feet wide east of Earle Avenue and 62 feet wide west of Earle Avenue. The roadway is striped for two lanes of traffic in each direction with a double yellow centerline stripe separating the east and westbound traffic. Parking is permitted on both sides of the street except for the red curb on the northeast side of the roadway. A white crosswalk is located on the east leg of the Mission Drive and Earle Avenue intersection. A crossing guard was observed during the hours of 1:30 p.m. and 3:00 p.m. The posted speed limit is 40 mph. Visibility from Earle Avenue at Mission Drive was reviewed and found to be adequate. Earle Avenue is 38 feet wide north of Mission Drive and 35 feet wide south of Mission Drive with no centerline striping. Parking is permitted on both sides of the street. The prima facie speed limit is 25 mph. Figure 1 depicts existing traffic conditions. DATA The reported accident history from April 1, 1993 to March 31, 1996 was assembled and reviewed. This accident history revealed two accidents occurring within 100 feet of the intersection. These accidents are summarized as follows: Location and Description Data Time At intersection - Westbound vehicle 6/23/95 5:45 PM proceeding straight collided with a northbound pedestrian (Right -of -way Pedestrian) 18 feet east - Westbound vehicle 9/25/94 10:15 PM proceeding straight rearended an westbound stopping (Unsafe speed) Accident data from April 1, 1996 to the present was not available at this time. Twenty -four hour approach counts were taken at the intersection on Tuesday October 15, 1996. These counts revealed the following: DISCUSSION A review of additional traffic controls at the intersection was completed based on the data collected and guidelines established in the Caltrans Traffic Manual for traffic signals and multi -way STOP conditions. The guidelines consider many factors but primarily depend on vehicle volume, pedestrian volume, and accident history. The traffic volume count of the intersection reveals a total 24 -hour volume of 14,664 on Mission Drive and 554 on Earle Avenue. Field review of the intersection during various times throughout the day revealed less than 5 pedestrians crossing the intersection of Mission Drive and Earle Avenue. A review of the guidelines for additional traffic controls indicates that 8 hours of the main street volume warrant is met but that the minor street warrant falls well below the threshold. The accident warrant of five or more accidents in a recent twelve month period is not met even given the two accidents noted by Ms. Leon. These three accidents would be susceptible for correction with the installation of traffic signal or multi -way STOP. Attached are summaries of the traffic signal and multi -way stop sign warrants found in the Caltrans Traffic Manual and reviewed for this evaluation. All warrants were reviewed and were found to be not satisfied for the installation of a traffic signal or a multi -way STOP. RECOMMENDATION The installation of additional traffic controls at the intersection of Mission Drive and Earle Avenue is not recommended at this time. Attachments p: \066 \ch ris \ro se mea d \m isear 24 -hour AM Peak PM Peak Mission Drive - EB 7,056 483 (8:00) 585 (3:00) Mission Drive - WB 7,608 806 (8:00) 577 (6:00) Earle Avenue - NB 306 20 (8:00) 34 (5:00) Earle Avenue - SB 248 20 (8:00) 25 (3:00) DISCUSSION A review of additional traffic controls at the intersection was completed based on the data collected and guidelines established in the Caltrans Traffic Manual for traffic signals and multi -way STOP conditions. The guidelines consider many factors but primarily depend on vehicle volume, pedestrian volume, and accident history. The traffic volume count of the intersection reveals a total 24 -hour volume of 14,664 on Mission Drive and 554 on Earle Avenue. Field review of the intersection during various times throughout the day revealed less than 5 pedestrians crossing the intersection of Mission Drive and Earle Avenue. A review of the guidelines for additional traffic controls indicates that 8 hours of the main street volume warrant is met but that the minor street warrant falls well below the threshold. The accident warrant of five or more accidents in a recent twelve month period is not met even given the two accidents noted by Ms. Leon. These three accidents would be susceptible for correction with the installation of traffic signal or multi -way STOP. Attached are summaries of the traffic signal and multi -way stop sign warrants found in the Caltrans Traffic Manual and reviewed for this evaluation. All warrants were reviewed and were found to be not satisfied for the installation of a traffic signal or a multi -way STOP. RECOMMENDATION The installation of additional traffic controls at the intersection of Mission Drive and Earle Avenue is not recommended at this time. Attachments p: \066 \ch ris \ro se mea d \m isear 0 tJ L) LIJ LJ > > w C) Lj Z 0 LLJ 57< LLI LU LLJ Z3 W 0 N z 0 0 ;c LL- 0 A P, A s U, 03/96 CITY OF ROSEMEAD SUMMARY OF TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS (FROM CALTRANS TRAFFIC MANUAL) LOCATION: /y'ssm0 BOA. (f Eoe /c "lye, DATE: 7 - 9� WARRANT 1 - Minimum Vehicular Volume 100% Satisfied Yes No 80% Satisfied Yes WARRANT 2 - Interruption of Continuous Traffic 100% Satisfied Yes 80% Satisfied Yes WARRANT 3 - Minimum Pedestrian Volume 100% Satisfied Yes 80% Satisfied Yes o WARRANT 4 - School Crossings Flashing Yellow School Signals School Area Traffic Signals Satisfied Yes No Satisfied Yes WARRANT 5 - Progressive Movement Satisfied Yes No WARRANT 6 - Accident Experience Satisfied Yes WARRANT 7 - Systems Warrant Satisfied Yes WARRANT 8 - Combination of Warrants Satisfied WARRANT 9 - Four Hour Volume Satisfied WARRANT 10 - Peak Hour Delay Satisfied WARRANT 11 -Peak Hour Volume Satisfied Yes No Yes No Yes N0 Yes No 9 -6 TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING Traffic Manual 1 -1992 Figure 9 -1 TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS CALC d65 DATE to - /7 - 9 DIST CO RTE PM CHK DATE Major St: NI ISSICt) 'op A& t Speed y� mph Minor St: Ester /C dye Critical Approach Speed mph Critical speed of major street traffic > 40 mph — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0 RURAL (R) In built up area of isolated community of < 10,000 pop. — — — — — — — — — 01 URBAN (U) WARRANT 1 - Minimum Vehicular Volume 100% SATISFIED YES ❑ NO ,21 80% SATISFIED YES ❑ NO W Highest Apprch. 150 105 Z00 la0 /7 Minor Street (120) (84) (160) (1 12) WARRANT 2 - Interruption of Continuous Traffic Yes MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS hour; AND (80% SHOWN IN BRACKETS) There are less than 60 gaps per hour in the major street traf- Yes ❑ No U R U R fic stream of adequate length for pedestrians to cross; ARI2 APEES 1 2 or more ❑ than 300 feet; Al The new traffic signal will not seriously disrupt progressive Yes No ❑ Bot 750 525 goo 630 103 Maj (600) (420) (720) 504 Highest Apprch. 53 70 11 Minor Street (60) (42) (80) (56) MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS (8o % SHOWN IN BRACKETS) _ = R U R APPROACH 1 2 or more LANES nth Aoorchs. 500 350 600 420 Hour �8Y 878 po7 1�`! «7P 137* 8107 ao /a as ao ?y a6 /L 100% SATISFIED YES ❑ NO 80% SATISFIED YES ❑ NO I$ WARRANT 3 - Minimum Pedestrian Volume Irt 4/ A /Vi /a �'f ao I ha I as I ao 13 Y 1,16 116' 100% SATISFIED YES ❑ NO K REQUIREMENT FULFILLED Pedestrian volume crossing the major street is 100 or more ❑ No for each of any four hours or is 190 or more during any one Yes hour; AND There are less than 60 gaps per hour in the major street traf- Yes ❑ No fic stream of adequate length for pedestrians to cross; ARI2 The nearest traffic signal along the major street is greater Yes ® No ❑ than 300 feet; Al The new traffic signal will not seriously disrupt progressive Yes No ❑ traffic flow on the major street. The satisfaction of a warrant Is not necessarily justification for a signal. Delay, congestion, confusion or other evidence of the need for right -of -way assignment must be shown. Traffic Manual TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING 9-7 1 -1992 Figure 9 -2 TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS WARRANT 4 - School Crossings WARRANT 5 - Progressive Movement Not Appticabte _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - ❑ See School Crossings Warrant Sheet)K� SATISFIED YES ❑ NO l� MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS DISTANCE TO NEAREST SIGNAL FULFILLED > 1oo0 FT. N ft, S ft, E / /00 ft, W /, ft. YES NO ❑ ON ONE WAY ISOLATED STREETS OR STREETS WITH ONE WAY TRAFFIC SIGNIFICANCE AND ADJACENT SIGNALS ARE SO FAR APART THAT NECESSARY PLATOONING 8 SPEED CONTROL WOULD BE LOST OR — — — — — — — — — — — — — -- — — — — — — — — — — — -------------------------------------------- ON 2 WAY STREETS WHERE ADJACENT SIGNALS DO NOT PROVIDE NECESSARY PLATOONING AND ��qq ❑ �I SPEED CONTROL PROPOSED SIGNALS COULD CONSTITUTE A PROGRESSIVE SIGNAL SYSTEM WARRANT 2 INTERRUPTION OF CONTINUOUS TRAFFIC WARRANT 6 - Accident Experience SATISFIED YES ❑ NO CST REQUIREMENTS WARRANT J FULFILLED ONE WARRANT WARRANT 1 - MINIMUM VEHICULAR VOLUME SATISFIED OR — — — — — — — — — — — — — -- — — — — — — — — — — — — YES ❑ NO 80% WARRANT 2 INTERRUPTION OF CONTINUOUS TRAFFIC ❑��1 SIGNAL WILL NOT SERIOUSLY DISRUUPT PROGRESSIVE TRAFFIC FLOW REMEDIES HAS FAILED TO REDUCE ACCIDENT FREQUENCY I ❑ ✓71 ADEQUATE TRIAL OF LESS RESTRICTIVE ACC. WITHIN A 12 MONTH PERIOD SUSCEPTIBLE OF CORR. 8 INVOLVING INJURY OR ? 8500 DAMAGE — MINIMUM REQUIREMENT NUMBER OF ACCIDENTS ❑ 5 O MORE 9 f0 .3 WARRANT 7 - Systems Warrant SATISFIED YES ❑ NO X MINIMUM VOLUME ENTERING VOLUMES - ALL APPROACHES FULFILLED REQUIREMENT DURING TYPICAL WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR Z7 VEH /HR 1000 VEH /HR — — — — — — __ — _ OR DURING EACH OF ANY 5 HRS. OF A SAT. AND /OR SUN. VEH/HR YES ® NO ❑ CHARACTERISTICS OF MAJOR ROUTES MAJOR ST. MINOR ST. HWY. SYSTEM SERVING AS PRINCIPLE NETWORK FOR THROUGH TRAFFIC RURAL OR SUBURBAN HWY OUTSIDE OF. ENTERING. OR TRAVERSING A CITY -------- APPEARS AS MAJOR ROUTE ON AN OFFICIAL PLAN �q ANY MAJOR ROUTE CHARACTERISTICS MET. BOTH STREETS ❑ X11 The satisfaction of a warrant Is not necessarily justification for a signal. Delay, congestion, confusion or other evidence of the need for right -of -way assigmmnent must be shown. 9 -8 TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING Traffic Manual 1 -1991 Figure 9 -3 TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS WARRANT a - Combination of Warrants REOUIREMENT WARRANT SATISFIED YES ❑ NO iK IWA FULFILLED ❑ NO TWO WARRANTS 1. MINIMUM VEHICULAR VOLUME SATISFIED 2. INTERRUPTION OF CONTINUOUS TRAFFIC YES 80% ISFIE T � YE T WARRANT 9 -Four Hour Volume S A1^ � 2 o Both Approaches Major Street Highest Approaches - Minor Street S ❑ NO 91 ,� e r fi V Hour 3 * Refer to Figure 9 -6 (URBAN AREAS) or Figure 9 -7 (RURAL AREAS) to determine if this warrant is satisfied. WARRANT 10 -Peak Hour Delay SATISFIED YES ❑ NO (ALL PARTS MUST BE SATISFIED) 1. The total delay experienced for traffic on one minor street approach controlled by a STOP sign equals or exceeds four vehicle -hours for a one -lane approach and five YES El NO vehicle -hours for a two -lane approach: AND 2. The volume on the same minor street approach equals or exceeds 100 vph for one moving lane of traffic or 150 vph for two moving lanes: AND YES ❑ NO I3 3. The total entering volume serviced during the hour equals or exceeds 800 vph for intersections with four or more approaches or 650 vph for intersections with YES NO ❑ three approaches. SATISFIEq YES ❑ NO WARRANT 11 -Peak Hour Volume Ir 2 o At .1� Annrnarh Lanes One more 4� b Hour Both Approaches Major Street Hignest Approaches - Minor Street ✓ * Refer to Figure 9 -8 (URBAN AREAS) or Figure 9.9 (RURAL AREAS) to determine if this warrant is satisfied. The satisfaction of a warrant is not necessarily justification for a signal. Delay, congestion. confusion or other evidence of the need for right -of -way assignment must be shown. 9 -10 TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING Traffic Manual WEEMN� 1.1992 MOMMOMMEM� Figure 9 -5 SCHOOL PROTECTION WARRANTS CALC ✓LS DATE DIST Co RTE PM CHK DATE /� m h Major St: MISS /OA Qt. 6ntieal ApprvaeM Speed P Minor St: E /�e Af/C Critical Approach Speed mph Critical speed of major street traffic ? 40 mph — — — — — — — — — — — — — — � ` RURAL (R) In built up area of isolated community of < 10,000 pop. — — _ — — — — — — — I URBAN (U) FLASHING YELLOW SCHOOL SIGNALS (ALL PARTS MUST BE SATISFIED) Minimum Requirements i� MACY w 11 R SATISFIED YES ❑ NO E4 j SATISFIED YES ❑ NO 9 AND PART B Critical Approach Speed Exceeds 35 mph SATISFIED YES ❑ NO AND PART C Is nearest controlled crossing more than 600 feet away? SATISFIED YES §Q NO ❑ SCHOOL AREA TRAFFIC SIGNALS (ALL PARTS MUST BE SATISFIED) Minimum Requirements OACY n 11 U I R ^ Vehicle Volume Each of 500 350 Vehicle Volume Each of 2 hours 200 140 1 ; R School Age Pedestrians Each of 40 1 40 I Crossing Street 2 hours _ _ — L SATISFIED YES ❑ NO E4 j SATISFIED YES ❑ NO 9 AND PART B Critical Approach Speed Exceeds 35 mph SATISFIED YES ❑ NO AND PART C Is nearest controlled crossing more than 600 feet away? SATISFIED YES §Q NO ❑ SCHOOL AREA TRAFFIC SIGNALS (ALL PARTS MUST BE SATISFIED) Minimum Requirements OACY n 11 U I R ^ Vehicle Volume Each of 500 350 2 hours Each of 100 70 I School Age Pedestrians 2 hours _ _ — L Crossing Street _ or _ 500 350 per day AND SATISFIED YES ❑ NO R SATISFIED YES ❑ NO X PART B Is nearest controlled crossing more than 600 feet away? SATISFIED YES 19 NO ❑ T ffiC Manual TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING 9 -11 ra 1 -1991 Figure 9 -6 FOUR HOUR VOLUME WARRANT (Urban Areas) 500 OR MORE LANES (MAJOR) 8,2 OR MORE LANES (MINOR) CL 400 t F U w 4 0 300 ¢ ¢ y a a 0 w 200 Z_ ` t J O > 100 S L7 0 2 OR MORE LANES (MAJOR) & 1 LANE (MINOR) OR 1 LANE (MAJOR) & 2 MORE LANES (MINOR) 1 LANE (MAJOR) & 1 LANE (MINOR) 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1[uu 1:wu MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH # NOTE: 115 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 80 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE. * 1400 1030 /a8 /a /7 1 a4 3 Traffic Manual TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING 9-13 1.1991 Figure 9 -8 PEAK HOUR VOLUME WARRANT (Urban Areas) 2 OR MORE LANES (MAJOR) & 2 OR MORE LANES (MINOR) 600 S a 500 x F U w 0 400 2 Cr CL to a o W 300 z 2 0 200 x O T 100 R 1 LANE ( AJOR) & 2 OR)MORE LANES N' OR (MINOR) 1 LANE (MAJOR) & 1 LANE (MINOR) 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 a MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH NOTE: 150 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 100 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE. ?� 3 0,56 CITY OF ROSEMEAD MULTI -WAY STOP SIGN WARRANTS (FROM CALTRANS TRAFFIC MANUAL) LOCATION: M ifS /o/1 FMK E4-ple Ave DATE: /o -17 The installation of multi -way STOP signs are based on the following: 1. Where traffic signals are warranted and urgently needed, the multi -way STOP may be an interim measure that can be installed quickly to control traffic while arrangements are being made for the signal installation. Satisfied: Yes No 2. An accident problem, as indicated by five or more reported accidents within a 12 month period of a type susceptible to correction by a multi -way STOP installation. Such accidents include right- and left -turn collisions as well as right -angle collisions. Satisfied: Yes No 3. Minimum traffic volumes: (a) The total vehicular volume entering the intersection from all approaches must average at least 500 vehicles per hour for any 8 hours of an average day, and Satisfied: Ye No (b) The combined vehicular and pedestrian volume from the minor street or highway must average at least 200 units per hour for the same 8 hours, with an average delay to minor street vehicular traffic of at least 30 seconds per vehicle during the maximum hour, but Satisfied: Yes No (c) When the 85- percentile approach speed of the major street traffic exceeds 40 miles per hour, the minimum vehicular volume warrant is 70 percent of the above requirements. Satisfied: Yes No VOLUME WORKSHEET � � � y� � � 4� 0. Guideline A ' h b ^ n A (a) Total Volume 500 (350) 11 97PI // 1 /co91 /a7F 11378 1 P071 (b) Combined Volume 200 (140) 1 3a I yo I as I y3 1 ,3y 1 57 1 YO 1 4; 1 O C T— 1 6— 9 6 WED 1 3: 3 1 T R A F F I C C O U N T S 7 1 4 6 4 6 7 2 3 1 P.0:2 �RDSEMEAD N• IIUUR MACH NI. I:td JN I`.; -HT IkAlI It; C(A1N I:: I : 1 �,,� EJI EARLE AVENUE FILE E9 lD `E* r.. ! REST: MISSION DRIVE ..:......................................................................_.............._........ WILLDAN ASSOC. DAZE: 10/15 .................._.._._...._.. :.. TIME TOTAL BEGIN COUNTED NB SB .------------ EB uB ..............._................... ........................................... ........................................ 12:00 AM 31 1 1 15 1: 12:15 26 0 0 1S 11 12:30 19 1 0 8 10 12:45 10 3 1 9 5 NR TOTAL 94 5 2 47 40 1:00 AM 6 0 0 2 2 1:15 8 1 0 3 4 1:30 11 0 0 5 6 1:45 7 0 0 6 1 MR TOTAL 30 1 0 16 13 2:00 AM 12 1 1 4 6 2:15 8 0 0 5 3 2:30 7 1 0 5 1 2:45 8 0 0 2 6 NR TOTAL 35 2 1 16 16 3:00 AM 4 0 0 2 . 3:15 8 0 0 3 3:30 7 0 0 1 6 . 3:45 6 0 0 3 3 NR TOTAL 25 0 0 9 16 4:00 AM 11 0 0 5 6 6:15 4 0 0 2 2 4:30 10 0 0 9 1 4:45 10 1 0 6 ., MR TOTAL 35 1 0 22 12 5:00 AM 18 0 0 6 12 5:15 19 1 0 13 5 . 5:30 45 0 2 21 22 5:45 43 2 6 11 26 MR TOTAL 125 3 6 ;1 65 6:00 AM 74 0 2 23 49 6:15 89 2 2 31 6:30 104 12 5 27 60 6:45 160 10 6 30 106 NR TOTAL 427 24 15 119 269 7:00 AM 204 5 1 52 146 7:15 219 4 2 67 146 7:30 268 3 5 63 147 7:45 371 5 7 120 '139 MR TOTAL 1062 17 15 302 728 OCT -16 -96 WED 13 :32 TRAF=F =IC COUNTS 71464672.1 P.03 SITE CODE : ROSEMEAD 21. HOUR MACNINE COUNTS -OY TRAFFIC COUNTS PAGE: 2 N-S STREET: EARLE AVENUE FILE: E9610104 E.0 STREET: MISSION DRIVE CLIENT : NILLDAN ASSOC. ............................... DATE: 10/15/96 ................................................................................................... TIME TOTAL BEGIN COUNTED NB - -. •- ---- SB EB UB - ---------•-- 8:00 AM 340 7 10 129 202 8:15 370 5 3 138 224 8:30 326 3 2 110 211 8:45 285 5 5 106 169 MR TOTAL 1329 201.0 1 .83 806 . 9:00 AM 271 2 G 70 195 9:15 212 1 3 L3 125 9:30 231 3 4 85 139 9:45 186 4 1 77 104 NR TOTAL 900 10 12 315 563 10:00 AM 191 5 1 81 104 10:15 181 3 2 78 98 10:30 163 2 G 76 81 10:05 173 1 5 83 84 NR TOTAL 708 11 12 318 367 11:00 AM 201 4 3 85 109 11 :15 175 2 7 83 L'3 11:30 185 1 0 79 101 11 :45 206 6 1 91 108 MR TOTAL 767 13 15 338 401 12:00 PM 205 0 1 93 111 12:15 202 1 3 107 91 12:30 188 6 1 101 00 12:45 196 4 2 85 105 MR TOTAL 791 11 7 386 387 100 PH 183 2 2 83 96 1:15 222 G 4 115 99 1 :30 187 6 1 83 97 1:45 189 7 3 91 88 MR TOTAL 781 19 10 372 380 2:00 PM 186 7 0 02 97 2:15 211 < 7 88 112 2:30 228 4 2 107 115 2 :45 241 13 8 105 115 MR TOTAL 866 28 17 382 439 3:00 PM 275 9 6 119 141 3:15 295 1 5 157 132 3:30 294 3 7 163 121 3:45 286 5 7 146 1Z8 NR TOTAL 1150 18 25 S85 522 OCY—IS-96 WED IS :32 YRo=lFrFr IC COUNYS 71464 6 7 2 3 1 P_ 0 4 SITE CODE -; ROSEMEAD 24 FOUR MACHINE COUNTS-BY TRAFFIC COUNTS PAGE: 3 FILE: L9610104 N•S STREET: EARLE AVENUE I E•W STREET: MISSION DRIVE DATE: 10/15/96 CLIENT : WILLDAN ASSOC. ......... ---------------- ------------ ................ ........................................................ TIME TOTAL BEGIN COUNTED NB Ss Es WN ....................................................... _ ....................................................... 4:00 PH 257 7 1 154 95 4:15 246 7 3 129 107 4:30 253 2 4 139 108 16:45 287 4 6 156 121 MR TOTAL 1043 zo 14 578 431 5:00 PH 287 14 5 161 107 5:15 329 a a 18D 133 530 372 7 5 208 152 5:45 348 5 6 206 I_,I MR TOTAL 1336 34 24 755 523 6:00 PH 373 9 6 217 146 6:15 351 4 1 203 143 6:30 395 a 7 216 164 6:45 293 5 0 164 121. MR TOTAL 1412 26 14 795 577 700 PH 268 2 2 152 112 7:15 203 5 1 110 07 7:30 197 3 2 105 87 7:45 165 6 5 84 70 MR TOTAL 833 16 10 451 356 8:00 PH ISO 2 3 68 77 8:15 153 3 5 67 ?Zi 8:30 117 2 4 60 8:45 103 3 0 58 MR TOTAL 523 10 12 253 248 9:00 PH 99 2 3 50 44 9:15 101 1 1 48 51 9;30 122 2 2 63 ss 9:45 100 1 2 S2 45 MR TOTAL 422 6 8 213 195 10:00 PH 102 2 6 46 48 10:15 83 1 1 44 37 10:30 75 1 1 38 is 10:45 66 4 0 31 31 MR TOTAL 326 8 8 159 151 11:00 PH 61 0 1 28 32 Il:ls 65 0 0 37 33 11:30 39 2 0 18 19 33 1 0 13 19 MR TOTAL 198 3 1 91 103 OAT TOTAL 15218 306 248 7056 7608 SHEET i OF / ACCIDENT DATA CITY OF: Roseiiie'Qel LOCATION: ll,ss.oq Dn (:f Ear /e 14(lP, REPORTING PERIOD: 1-1'93 THROUGH 3 -3/ -96 SWITRS: kl� OTHER: DATE COMPILED: /0 - 9�l BY: case Lorry DATE LOCATION DAY TIME WET DRY PRIMARY COLLISI COLLISION TYPE INJURY .4ao/sr iPt i !b. Arf plw r i 4A- IM'. 6 •?3 f5 1 Fii. s ys �r , Y R O W PPd (✓B Proc. S7 xo V wro! Wef T C/ se SB SB ef eIn S . t 1 /So' N Sun, IV',7 UqS. T N path.-,/ O gas !g ,0!/S n+ �r �rd�c Sio u/i3 Pr si` elal O 1,0 TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION FROM: CHRIS TURNBULL �& ACTING DEPUTY TRAFFIC ENGINEER DATE: OCTOBER 29, 1996 RE: REQUEST TO EVALUATE EXISTING RED CURB ON HELLMAN AVENUE AT LAFAYETTE STREET A request has been received from Mr. Bernard Ancheta to take another look at the recently installed red curb located in front of 8043 Hellman Avenue. The red curb was installed due to a number of complaints received by the City regarding difficulties turning from Lafayette Street, both the north and south directions. Hellman Avenue is a 40 feet wide east/west roadway posted 30 miles per hour (mph). There is one lane of traffic in both directions separated by a single yellow skip stripe. Parking is not allowed for approximately 60 feet east of Lafayette Street for fronting homes located on Hellman Avenue. Lafayette Street is a 34 -foot wide north /south roadway with no striping. The prima facie speed limit is 25 mph. Lafayette Street is stop controlled at its intersection with Hellman Avenue. Parking is allowed on both sides of Lafayette Street. The establishment of the red curb area that exists on Hellman Avenue east of Lafayette Street is the result of sight distance requirements based on the posted speed limit on Hellman Avenue and the criteria contained in the Caltrans Highway Design Manual. Given a sight distance triangle of 330 feet, the existing red curb east of Lafayette Street is appropriate. Figure 1 depicts the sight distance area. Attachments p: \066yose \hellman k� L W r L l d II L 14 4 z I � 1 1 1 I 1 W � 1 J Q ' U N I ' 1 ' I ' � 1 I 1 1 ' i O I m J U) �I 7 Q 1 u 3 o Y z W W = U O V m O �— W W /�\ W ' 1 O O Z 111 Z Q W V W 0 z x Q W 0. W 7 Li z U Q ~ J 1 V) � n D 0 z Q F w W x Q U' Q (9 W J N ZQ 1 1 o� 0 W W Z i I^ > O U -- ( / Q V) Vl _ _ O W Q I = Q LOW Z CL 3 Q u PO _ - - jgl: J O W w Z W w N Q W 01,09 07 O W I Q F ' L it_VJ cC L L W co = E5 � a J � 1338 1S 3113),VJVI O 3 U P :r '�atztx•a.c..:g 7 m ME 11 M M /C' IJ U I �J ' ) s J -911 bd -4y - 1 c S v vl IL � v � C)C- 2 \ Q Q I- -3 o � CYJ . U - ?Av ! O v �1 v � L \ Q Q . U - ?Av !