TC - Agenda - 03-06-08.:
Public Comment from the Audience:
• If you wish to address the Rosemead
Traffic Commission, please complete a
Speaker Request Card and hand it to the
Secretary before the start of the meeting.
• The Rosemead Traffic Commission will
hear public comments on matters not
listed on the agenda during the Public
Comments from the Audience period.
• Opportunity to address the Traffic
Commission (on non - agenda items) is
limited to 3 minutes per speaker.
• The Traffic Commission will hear public
comments on items listed on the agenda
during discussion of the matter and prior
to a vote.
Brown Act:
Pursuant to provisions of the Brown Act, no
action may be taken on a matter unless it is
listed on the agenda, or unless certain
emergency or special circumstances exist.
The Traffic Commission may direct staff to
investigate and /or schedule certain matters
for consideration at a future Traffic
Commission meeting.
Americans with Disabilities Act:
In compliance with the ADA, if you need
special assistance to participate in this
meeting, please contact the City Clerk's office
at least 48 hours prior to the meeting to allow
the City to make reasonable arrangements to
ensure accessibility to the meeting or service.
Persons attending the meeting shall observe
rules of propriety, decorum, good conduct,
and refrain from impertinent or slanderous
remarks. Violation of this rule shall result in
such persons being barred from further
audience before the governing body.
This agenda was posted 72 hours in advance
of the meeting at the City Hall, 8838 E. Valley
Boulevard, Rosemead; the L.A. County
Library, Rosemead Branch, 8800 E. Valley
Boulevard, Rosemead; and other locations
pursuant to RMC Sec. 1.08.020
Rosemead
Traffic
Commission
AGENDA
MARCH 6, 2008
7:00 PM
Rosemead Community Recreation Center
3936 N. Muscatel Avenue, Rosemead. CA. 91770
Holly Knapp, Chairperson
Howard Masuda, Vice - Chairman
Ron Gay, Commissioner
Joan Hunter, Commissioner
Brian Lewin, Commissioner
ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION
March 6, 2008
• CALL TO ORDER —7:00 PM
• PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE —Commissioner Masuda
• INVOCATION —Commissioner Hunter
• ROLL CALL - Commissioners Knapp, Masuda, Gay, Hunter and Lewin
1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
January 3, 2007 - Regular Meeting
February 7, 2008 — Regular Meeting
2. PUBLIC COMMENT FROM THE AUDIENCE
Please refer to public comment guidelines on the first page of this document.
3. OLD BUSINESS - NONE
4. NEW BUSINESS
A. REQUEST FOR PARKING RESTRICTIONS ON MUSCATEL AVENUE NORTH AND
SOUTH OF VALLEY BOULEVARD
Commissioner Hunter requested staff review the need for parking restrictions on Muscatel
Avenue south of Valley Boulevard. Commissioner Hunter indicated that exiting from the
Chamber of Commerce (Chamber) driveway was often inhibited due to vehicles parked on
the west side of Muscatel Avenue north of the Chamber. After this issue was brought out
by Commissioner Hunter, the Commissioners identified the possibility of creating
dedicated northbound and southbound left turn lanes on Muscatel Avenue at Valley
Boulevard.
Recommendation
It is staffs recommendation that the Traffic Commission recommends the City Council
approve the following:
• Install 50 foot northbound and southbound left turn lanes on Muscatel Avenue at
Valley Boulevard.
• Install red curb on Muscatel Avenue north and south of Valley Boulevard as shown
on Exhibit B.
• Direct staff to obtain a modified traffic signal design plan of Muscatel Avenue at
Valley Boulevard to include new traffic striping, traffic loop detector work and red
curb parking restrictions.
B. CITYWIDE BLUE CURB POLICY
In recent months, the City has received several requests for the installation of disabled
persons/blue curb. Currently, the City of Rosemead has no formal guidelines or policies
for the installation of blue curb on city streets. Blue curb requests have usually been
reviewed on a case -by -case basis and have resulted in not installing blue curb but
addressing the residents concerns in other ways.
ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION
March 6, 2008
Recommendation
Staff is requesting direction from the Traffic Commission regarding a citywide policy on the
installation of blue curbs.
C. UPDATE ON FIELD SERVICES ACTIVITIES
• Oral Report
D. PROCESS FOR CONDUCTING TRAFFIC STUDIES
During Fiscal Year 2007 -08, staff has noticed an increase in the number of traffic study
requests. Due to budget constraints and the cost involved in preparing studies, staff
thought that it was important to review the process for requesting a special traffic study in
the City. This review will also help prepare the Commission and staff as we begin to
develop budget estimates for the City's Fiscal Year 2008 -09 budget.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Traffic Commission receive and file this report.
5. STAFF REPORTS
6. COMMISSIONER REPORTS
ADJOURNMENT.
The next regular meeting is scheduled for April 3, 2008 at 7:00 pm at the Rosemead Community
Recreation Center, 3936 N. Muscatel Avenue, Rosemead. CA. 91770.
WAA AWAJ
Q:\ M6774 -Rsd Retainer 07 -08 \Traffic Commission Agendas\2008 March\Mamh Agenda.doc
,rul�-;Ct�
ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
TO: THE HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND COMMISSIONERS
FROM: JOANNE ITAGAKI, TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DEPUTY
DATE: MARCH 6, 2008
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PARKING RESTRICTIONS ON MUSCATEL AVENUE
NORTH AND SOUTH OF VALLEY BOULEVARD
SUMMARY
Commissioner Hunter requested staff review the need for parking restrictions on
Muscatel Avenue south of Valley Boulevard. Commissioner Hunter indicated that
exiting from the Chamber of Commerce (Chamber) driveway was often inhibited due to
vehicles parked on the west side of Muscatel Avenue north of the Chamber. After this
issue was brought out by Commissioner Hunter, the Commissioners identified the
possibility of creating dedicated northbound and southbound left turn lanes on Muscatel
Avenue at Valley Boulevard.
Staff Recommendation
It is staffs recommendation that the Traffic Commission recommends the City Council
approve the following:
• Install 50 foot northbound and southbound left turn lanes on Muscatel Avenue at
Valley Boulevard.
• Install red curb on Muscatel Avenue north and south of Valley Boulevard as
shown on Exhibit B.
• Direct staff to obtain a modified traffic signal design plan of Muscatel Avenue at
Valley Boulevard to include new traffic striping, traffic loop detector work and red
curb parking restrictions.
ANALYSIS
Muscatel Avenue is a 40 foot wide north /south roadway with one lane of traffic in each
direction. Opposing lanes of traffic are generally separated by a double yellow
centerline north of Valley Boulevard and a skip yellow line south of Valley Boulevard.
Parking is restricted in this area of Muscatel Avenue by street sweeping restrictions and
curb markings. The posted speed limit is 30 mph on Muscatel Avenue.
Traffic Commission Meeting
March 6. 2008
Page 2 of 4
Valley Boulevard is 76 feet wide with two lanes of traffic in each direction. A two -way
left turn lane separates opposing lanes of traffic. There is a 2 hour parking limit
restriction on both sides of Valley Boulevard. The posted speed limit on Valley
Boulevard is 35 mph.
The intersection of Muscatel Avenue and Valley Boulevard is signalized. There are
marked white crosswalks on all legs of the intersection. The traffic signal is a 2 phase
signal operation (north /south and east/west).
Exhibit "A" depicts existing conditions on Muscatel Avenue at Valley Boulevard
Discussion
Field observations were made of the intersection during the morning and afternoon
peak periods. The observations included identification of parked vehicles, turning
movements and vehicles "going around" left turning vehicles.
The number of vehicles parking on Muscatel Avenue north and south of Valley
Boulevard varied with the time of day as well as the duration of parking. In general, 2 to
3 cars parked on either side of Muscatel Avenue both north and south of Valley
Boulevard. The vehicles parking south of Valley Boulevard appeared to be parked for
shorter periods of time (10 -15 minute) while those parked north of Valley Boulevard
appeared to park for longer periods (over 30 minutes). During the afternoon
observation, there were more vehicles parked south of Valley Boulevard. These
vehicles did affect the travel movements of northbound vehicles on Muscatel Avenue
and increased the delay for these vehicles.
During our observations, there were vehicles that parked north of the Chamber
driveway. These vehicles did inhibit visibility of vehicles exiting the Chamber driveway.
Pictures of the driveway exit will be available at the Traffic Commission meeting.
Turning movement count data was also collected for Muscatel Avenue at Valley
Boulevard during morning and evening peak hours. The turning movement counts
included a count of the number of vehicles traveling around northbound or southbound
left turning vehicles. This count was taken to address the concern about the lack of
dedicated left turn lanes on Muscatel Avenue. The turning movement counts are
summarized in Table 1.
As shown in Table 1, several vehicles are "forced" to go around left turning vehicles in
both the northbound and southbound directions of Muscatel Avenue. In general, if there
is a group of vehicles traveling on Muscatel Avenue and 1 vehicle wants to turn left, this
vehicle "blocks" the pathway of through traffic. Most vehicles will go around the left
turning vehicle but some will wait until the left turn is executed.
Traffic Commission Meeting
March 6, 2008
Page 3 of 4
Table 1
Turning Movement Counts
On Muscatel Avenue at Valley Boulevard
The number of "by -pass" vehicles indicates more vehicles go around left turning
vehicles in the northbound direction. The northbound by -pass vehicles equal 66% of all
vehicles traveling through the intersection in the AM and 31% in the PM. The
southbound by -pass vehicles equal 18% of all vehicles traveling through in the AM and
PM periods.
The installation of northbound and southbound left turn lanes on Muscatel Avenue at
Valley Boulevard would require the removal of on- street parking. As shown in Exhibit B,
red curb would remove:
• -2 spaces on the east side of Muscatel Avenue north of Valley Boulevard,
—6 spaces on the east side of Muscatel Avenue south of Valley Boulevard, and
• —3 spaces on the west side of Muscatel Avenue south of Valley Boulevard.
This leaves available on- street parking on Muscatel Avenue:
• —5 spaces on the east side of Muscatel Avenue north of Valley Boulevard, and
• —3 spaces on the west side of Muscatel Avenue south of Valley Boulevard.
The installation of the dedicated left turn lanes would also require the relocation of traffic
signal detection on Muscatel Avenue. Therefore, a recommendation to install the left
turn lanes will require a signal modification plan. The modification plan will include the
left turn lane striping, red curb and signal detection.
Based on field observations of parking and turning movements, the installation of
dedicated left turn lanes on Muscatel Avenue at Valley Boulevard is recommended.
7:30 -8:30
AM
5:00 -6:00
PM
NB Left Turn
95
98
NB Thru
248
221
NB Right Turn
33
56
NB "By- pass"
98
68
SB Left Turn
54
38
SB Thru
238
142
SB Right Turn
94
70
SB "By- pass"
44
26
The number of "by -pass" vehicles indicates more vehicles go around left turning
vehicles in the northbound direction. The northbound by -pass vehicles equal 66% of all
vehicles traveling through the intersection in the AM and 31% in the PM. The
southbound by -pass vehicles equal 18% of all vehicles traveling through in the AM and
PM periods.
The installation of northbound and southbound left turn lanes on Muscatel Avenue at
Valley Boulevard would require the removal of on- street parking. As shown in Exhibit B,
red curb would remove:
• -2 spaces on the east side of Muscatel Avenue north of Valley Boulevard,
—6 spaces on the east side of Muscatel Avenue south of Valley Boulevard, and
• —3 spaces on the west side of Muscatel Avenue south of Valley Boulevard.
This leaves available on- street parking on Muscatel Avenue:
• —5 spaces on the east side of Muscatel Avenue north of Valley Boulevard, and
• —3 spaces on the west side of Muscatel Avenue south of Valley Boulevard.
The installation of the dedicated left turn lanes would also require the relocation of traffic
signal detection on Muscatel Avenue. Therefore, a recommendation to install the left
turn lanes will require a signal modification plan. The modification plan will include the
left turn lane striping, red curb and signal detection.
Based on field observations of parking and turning movements, the installation of
dedicated left turn lanes on Muscatel Avenue at Valley Boulevard is recommended.
Traffic Commission Meeting
March 6, 2008
Page 4 of 4
PUBLIC NOTICE PROCESS
This item has been noticed through the regular agenda notification process.
Submitted by:
Joanne Itagaki
Traffic Engineering Deputy
Exhibit A: Existing Conditions on Muscatel Avenue at Valley Boulevard
Exhibit B: Proposed Left Turn Lanes on Muscatel Avenue at Valley Boulevard
Q:Ajn 16774 -Rsd Retainer 07 -081Traffic Commission Agendas12008 March \Muscatel 8 Valley -Pkg resthct.doc
V
n
F ` 20' 20' ^ f
O '
9
n S
oD
Q
m m
`/
7
mm
A A
m
e ' `
4
A
D
�
I I I
I I I
o 15; 15'
— — — VALLEY
—
a
—
BOULEVARD — —
I
I
° gp N
0 15' 15'
>
�I
9 �0
i co
W i l l
l
fTl
m
o
N
m I F1 20' 20'
'
°
m
v m� W I
O
°
a
n n n
a m
v
m o
o
2 n a
11/ 1 8
� c rx. O
°
c m
I V
IIA1
m
!
1 i
o
�
[j 202JD',� §
.
>
(. j\
� w
�
a
� p
\ 18*
-- ¥A
\\ ,
BOULEVARD -- —
- -�
-:
- -
�r
4 -�- -
�
—
)
20- 20-
\I
.! - -
/2
F, • « M
'
� §
eS2
\
-
/� r a
.
(
§§
(
'
`m
ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
TO: THE HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND COMMISSIONERS
FROM: JOANNE ITAGAKI, TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DEPUTY
DATE: MARCH 6, 2008
SUBJECT: CITYWIDE BLUE CURB POLICY
SUMMARY
In recent months, the City has received several requests for the installation of disabled
persons /blue curb. Currently, the City of Rosemead has no formal guidelines or policies
for the installation of blue curb on city streets. Blue curb requests have usually been
reviewed on a case -by -case basis and have resulted in not installing blue curb but
addressing the residents concerns in other ways.
Staff Recommendation
Staff is requesting direction from the Traffic Commission regarding a citywide policy on
the installation of blue curbs.
ANALYSIS
Several cities in Los Angeles County have blue curb policies. Staff has contacted the
cities of Norwalk and Monterey Park to determine their policies /process regarding blue
curbs. Here is a summary of the process these agencies use.
City of Norwalk:
1. The Public Safety department is the lead on these requests.
2. The resident fills out an application and shows they are handicap by placard
registration or disabled person's CA license (sample attached).
3. Staff interviews the resident and reviews the location. This includes looking at
driveway space and use of garage.
4. Staff contacts the surrounding residents (on both sides and one across the street)
for support or opposition.
5. If the applicant is denied either at the staff level of at the Public Safety Commission
level, a letter is sent to.the resident informing them they can reapply in one year or
the decision can be appealed to the City Council.
6. If staff determines the applicant has met the previous criteria the item is scheduled
for the Public Safety Commission. If the Public Safety Commission approves the
Traffic Commission Meeting)
March 6. 2008
Paae 2 of 3
installation, the resident submits a statement form indicating the blue curb is valid for
one year and that the resident will advise the City if conditions change such that the
blue curb is no longer needed. If the Public Safety Commission denies the,
installation, a letter is sent to the resident informing them they can reapply in one
year or the decision can be appealed to the City Council.
7. After the resident accepts the conditions, Engineering completes a work order for
Public Services to install blue curb.
8. There is also an annual renewal process to retain the blue curb. This is also
handled through the Public Safety department. Requests are also received for
removal when new property owners arrive.
9. Residents are not charged for the blue curb installations or the analysis preceding.
City of Monterey Park (attached):
1. The Engineering department is the lead on these requests.
2. Staff receives a letter request from the resident. The resident shows they are
handicap by placard registration, disabled person's CA license, or by some other
means.
3. Staff then reviews the location and considers available parking, driveway use and
garage use.
4. At the staff level, the installation is approved or denied. Denials are confirmed to the
resident by letter. Appeals can be made to the Traffic Commission and then to the
City Council, if necessary.
5. There is no annual renewal process. Blue curbs are generally removed at the
request of new property owners.
6. Residents are not charged for the blue curb installations or the analysis preceding.
Discussion
The development of a blue curb policy has been prompted by the increase in requests
for blue curbs in residential neighborhoods. In the past, city staff has been able to
determine other measures that could assist residents in finding alternatives to blue curb.
However, these measures have not always been adequate to address the resident's
needs.
Currently, there is one blue curb painted in the city (3229 Isabel Avenue). This was
done as a "pilot" location to determine if any comments would be received. A follow -up
letter was sent to the address approximately 1 year after installation. No comments
have been received regarding this installation from the resident or the public.
The development of a policy or process for the installation of blue curb will be a time
consuming task. It will involve determining which department or departments would be
involved in the process, what monetary costs, if any, would be associated with the
process, how would the costs be paid for (funding), how would the installations be
monitored, and should the resident be charged for the installation /removal. Any policy
produced will require the approval of the City Council.
Traffic Commission Meeting
March 6, 2008
Page 3 of 3
Staff is requesting direction from the Traffic Commission regarding a citywide policy on
the installation of blue curbs.
PUBLIC NOTICE PROCESS
This item has been noticed through the regular agenda notification process.
Submitted by:
Joanne Itagaki
Traffic Engineering Deputy
City of Norwalk — Application Form
City of Monterey Park — Website Summary
p. \jnl6774 -Rsd Retainer 07- 081Traffic Commission AgendasQO08 MarcMBIue curb policy.doc
CITY OF NORWALK
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY
DISABLED PERSON =S PARKING ZONE RENEWAL APPLICATION FORM
The following information is required of all Disabled Person's Parking Zone recipient's, in order to
maintain a Disabled Person's Parking Zone (blue curb), in the public right -of -way, at the front of
his /her residence. Failure to return this application within 30 days of the postmark, or failure to
provide all required information will result in revocation of the approval and removal of the blue curb.
Upon completion, please return this document to: Norwalk Public Safety Department, 12700
Norwalk Boulevard, Norwalk CA 90650
NAME
ADDRESS
PHONE NUMBER
( )
BLUE CURB
( ] SAME AS ABOVE
LOCATION
PROPERTY OWNER
( ] YES (Letter Attached) ( ] NO [ ] SAME AS ABOVE
APPROVAL
VALID DISABLED
PLATE OR PLACARD # EXPIRES:
PERSON =S PLACARD
NUMBER OF
VEHICLES IN
# OPERATING # NON - OPERATING (STORED)
HOUSEHOLD
ADDITIONAL
COMMENTS
DRIVEWAY - Single _I Double
NUMBER OF
AVAILABLE PARKING
GARAGE 7 Single F Double
SPACES ON
Garage /Carport Available for Parking Yes -No (explain)
PROPERTY
CHECK LIST
Photocopy of Disabled Person's CA License or CA ID
i Photocopy of Disabled Person's Placard Registration
!l Photocopy of Disabled Person's Placard
Property Profile (Supplied by the Public Safety Department)
I CERTIFY THAT THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS TRUE AND CORRECT.
SIGNATURE: DATE:
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY:
OFFICER CONDUCTING REVIEW
NAME ID NO.
( ] CONTINUE [ ] REVOKE
RECOMMENDATION
CER #: PS#
REFERENCE NUMBER
Neighborhood Survey and Notification of Proposed Parking Restriction
Notice
The applicant has submitted a request to the City of !Norwalk to install a Disabled
Person's Parking Zone (blue curb) in the public right -of -way to the front of his /her
residence. If approved, this parking restriction will only be available to motorists in
possession of a valid California Disabled Person's Placard. This parking restriction would
be enforceable at all hours. Parking a vehicle, without a valid placard displayed, in a
marked Disabled Person's Parking Zone, is a violation of CVC 225O7(a).
Neighborhood Survey
The applicant must provide notice to all adjacent, and other affected residents, of the request for
restricted parking in the public right -of -way. The following information is required from each
household surveyed. Incomplete surveys will result in an automatic denial of the application
I am: Opposed ❑ Supportive ❑, of the applicant's request.
I would like to be notified of any hearings /meetings regarding this matter: Yes ❑ No ❑
My residence is: Adjoining ❑ Facing ❑, the applicant's residence.
Name: Address:
Ph #: Signature:
I am: Opposed ❑ Supportive ❑, of the applicant's request.
I would like to be notified of any hearings /meetings regarding this matter: Yes ❑
My residence is: Adjoining ❑ Facing ❑, the applicant's residence.
Name: Address:
Ph #: Signature:
I am: Opposed ❑ Supportive ❑, of the applicant's request.
I would like to be notified of any hearings /meetings regarding this matter: Yes ❑
My residence is: Adjoining ❑ Facing ❑, the applicant's residence.
Name: Address:
Ph #: Signature:
Upon completion, please return this document to:
City of Norwalk
Department of Public Safety
12700 Norwalk Boulevard, Room 15
Norwalk, CA 90650
(562) 929 -5732
Attention: Grissel Chavez
No ❑
.■
Welcome to the City of Monterey Park - Residential Street Disabled Parking
Page I of I
.• -^{ �q�, r
L li
0 ry 3vE v.r -ns�1v A <Ctn' ,rnyu g2s ::iIs' I
�,2 > j 7 >'��,, l S r _ �. I : , t� + ' t j tit' h. i i� � • yr �TTrJ`.l0 "e[' ='�
, 1'u�.ui ;err
How.
City Government n Public Works » Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
:, ' r Por 1 rnNy f.�rl I ,IP; Gu nnl ^fnl ! ^ h H I'.inYls , t r incrs m i5M1Y6 Q.w•t 'm i.5
CiU/ Hall . a i'i , r : mrk Ave: l,.r crey P.. t. A 9P -! t me rr:= i. nr :n U..i;, • 10" iTTY 9m ,p7,._, =,np
Ail
http: / /www.ci. monterey- park.Ca.us /hoine, /inclex.asp' ?page =324 2/26/3003
Residential Street Disabled Parking
P,,mu, ,.,orl,s
Activities & Events
Blue curb designated for disabled parking is available for residents in front of their homes. Although the
Ame:riran; mill ^.Gt
City is not required by the American's with Disabilities Act to provide this special program, it does in order
(ADA)
to improve the quality of life of its residents.
Rosiaen i,al St,^.ct Di?.ab'i::d
The following documents are necessary to request the installation of blue curb or Disabled Parking on
r Bids & Proposals
residential streets:
Construction Updates
Engineering
• Copy of valid handicapped permit registration from the California DMV
. Permits
• Copy of valid driver's license (if address is different than on permit)
* Written request for disabled parking at or near resident's address that specifies the reason on-
Storm Drains & Sewers
street disabled parking is needed.
• Streets & SBle:valks
. Traffic;
Please bring or mail these documents to the Engineering Counter located on the first floor in City Hall.
Trash & Recycling
Click here for location map. Blue curb and proper signage is installed at the discretion of the City
Engineer and Traffic Consultant after thorough review of the parking conditions in the requested area. In
. water
making this determination consideration is give to whether the on- street disabled parking space is the
Department Directory
closest and most accessible available parking to the residence.
1 I.octvtion Map
r Storm Update
:, ' r Por 1 rnNy f.�rl I ,IP; Gu nnl ^fnl ! ^ h H I'.inYls , t r incrs m i5M1Y6 Q.w•t 'm i.5
CiU/ Hall . a i'i , r : mrk Ave: l,.r crey P.. t. A 9P -! t me rr:= i. nr :n U..i;, • 10" iTTY 9m ,p7,._, =,np
Ail
http: / /www.ci. monterey- park.Ca.us /hoine, /inclex.asp' ?page =324 2/26/3003
ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
TO: TRAFFIC COMMISSION
FROM: CHRIS MARCARELLO, ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES OFFICER
DATE: MARCH 6. 2008
SUBJECT: PROCESS FOR CONDUCTING TRAFFIC STUDIES
SUMMARY
During Fiscal Year 2007 -08, staff has noticed an increase in the number of traffic study
requests. Due to budget constraints and the cost involved in preparing studies, staff
thought that it was important to review the process for requesting a special traffic study in
the City. This review will also help prepare the Commission and staff as we begin to
develop budget estimates for the City's Fiscal Year 2008 -09 budget.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Traffic Commission receive and file this report.
DISCUSSION
Per Section 2.32 of the City's Municipal Code, the Traffic Commission was established to
help the City Council and City staff address traffic - related issues in Rosemead. The
Commission serves as an important advisory body for the City, making recommendations
on issues like roadway markings, traffic studies, policy development, roadway signage, and
parking conditions. Traffic Commission meetings also provide a venue for residents to
actively participate in the City and help inform the City Council prior to making decisions
and setting policy.
This year the Commission has undertaken several special studies and projects for the City.
These studies have been conducted in response to citizen requests, petitions, and
business requests, among others. Due to funding constraints and the cost involved in
preparing special studies, staff thought that it was important for the Commission to start the
process of prioritizing special studies for next year's budget. It is important that this
process be started now to ensure inclusion in next year's budget.
Process for Undertaking Special Traffic Studies
It is important to remember that prior to conducting a special study, the Traffic Commission
must make a recommendation to.the City Council to approve the expense associated with
the study. Since the City Council has authority over the'City's budget, all studies must be
City Council Meeting
February 12, 2008
, Page 2 of 2
processed in this manner. Realistically this means that if the Commission wishes to
conduct a study, it would take approximately two months to process the request, review the
traffic study, and make a recommendation.
Example: July 3 — Commission Recommends Study
July 22 — City Council Approves Recommendation
Staff Begins work on Study
August — Study is Conducted, Report is Prepared
September 4 — Traffic Commission Reviews Study and Makes
Recommendation to Make Improvement, if necessary
Next Year's Budget
Next year, the City will set aside funds for "Special Traffic Studies ", similar to this year's
budget. It is estimated that the City will be able to conduct approximately 6 -7 special traffic
studies next year, depending on the number and types of studies that are requested.
Staff is requesting that the Commission review and discuss this item at its March meeting.
In order to coincide with the City's budget process, staff is asking Commissioners to bring
back a list of priority projects for discussion at its meeting in April. At the April meeting, the
Commission can discuss these items and use them to develop a priority list of traffic
studies and projects to recommend to the City Council for inclusion in next year's budget.
Submi�tt�e�d b
c i
Chris Marcarello
Administrative Services Officer
ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION
JANUARY 3, 2008
The meeting of the Rosemead Traffic Commission was called to order by Chairperson Knapp
at 7:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 8838 East Valley Boulevard, Rosemead.
PLEDGE OF ALLIGIANCE Commissioner Gay
INVOCATION Chairperson Knapp
ROLL CALL
Present: Chairperson Knapp, Commissioner Masuda, Commissioner Gay
Absent: Commissioner Hunter
OATH OF OFFICE
Mr. Brian Lewin was administered the oath of office by the City Clerk.
1
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Chairperson Knapp requested that on page 7, just above Adjournment, delete "to save
Savannah Cemetery" and replace with "to provide turkeys for the Christmas boxes for
the clients at People to People."
It was moved by Commissioner Gay, seconded by Commissioner Masuda to accept
and approve the amended minutes of the November 1, 2007 meeting.
Vote Results:
Yes:
Chairperson Knapp, Commissioners Masuda and Gay
Noes:
None
Absent:
Commissioner Hunter
Abstain:
Commissioner Lewin
2.
PUBLIC COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE
Speaking before the Commission:
Ms. Janet Chin
3158 N. Gladys Avenue
Rosemead, CA 91770
Thanked the Commissioners for the fortunate experience while serving her short time
on the Commission.
Encouraged Commission members to listen to all petitioners regarding the intersection
of Rush and Angelus.
Page 1
Speaking before the Commission:
Jim Flournoy
8655 Landis View
Rosemead, CA 91770
Light signal from Landis View on to Walnut Grove is not working. Recently people are
ignoring the light southbound Landis View, ignoring the intersection but stopping at San
Gabriel Blvd. Suggested removing the Do Not Block Intersection sign and installing a
signal right in the line of sight near Carrows.
3. OLD BUSINESS — NONE
4. NEW BUSINESS
A. REQUEST FOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL AT THE INTERSECTION OF RUSH
STREET AND ANGELUS AVENUE
Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki presented the staff report and study findings.
Recommendation
It is staffs recommendation that flashing yellow beacons or a traffic signal not be
installed at the intersection of Rush Street and Angelus Avenue at this time.
Chairperson Knapp asked for comments from the audience.
Speaking before the Commission:
Marlene Shinen
8447 Drayer Lane
South San Gabriel
Signal at north end of Delta Avenue (at Rush and Rice Elementary) is necessary.
There is a safety concern for school children and residents. South end is signalized at
San Gabriel. Described unsafe situation at southwest corner of Delta and Rush where
van was illegally park in front of fire hydrant; no red curb. The Sheriff was notified. On
June 25, 2007, Ms. Shinen met with City Manager Chi and requested that the signal
located at the Wal -Mart driveway be relocated to Delta and Rush. She has not received
a response from the City Manager since June, but Councilman Gary Taylor at a Council
meeting proposed a signal be installed at Delta and Rush.
Speaking before the Commission:
Erika Castillo
8332 Rush Street
Rosemead 91770
Representing neighborhood
Page 2
She is one of the petitioners. Her daughter attends Rice. Sees there are many
problems with traffic. Vehicles driving fast and not stopping for pedestrians. This is not
safe for children. Asked for help for safety of children.
Speaking before the Commission:
Lawrence Bevington
8372 Rush Street
Rosemead 91770
Addressed Condition of Approval number 41 regarding funding of a traffic signal. Latest
report from City staff indicates that the applicant had satisfied this condition and that
monies are deposited. Condition was put in there to alleviate the concern about the
school, the increased traffic and speed on Rush Street. But that flashing light has not
occurred. So what is the City going to do with that money? There is a report that the
light is justified but someone can later say no, it isn't needed. He is concerned that the
community was misled and fooled on the whole process.
Chairperson Knapp stated that the Traffic Commission was not involved in the Wal -Mart
planning, and she is unfamiliar with "condition 41. ".
Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki explained the item was part of the Conditions of
Approval placed on different projects, and for Wal -Mart there was a condition 41. To
her recollection, Wal -Mart was to deposit monies into a city account for future use in the
event that the need for a traffic signal or flashing beacon was identified. The intent was
to study it and at the point when the guidelines were met then the monies would already
be with the City to install it.
Speaking before the Commission:
Ari Franco
2509 Dubonnet
Rosemead 91770
Mr. Franco has two children attending Rice Elementary; he drives them to school.
There are trees in center median blocking visibility of crossing guard. There is a need
for a signal or flashing beacon to alert drivers that people are crossing there. Study
should be done at a more appropriate time when more people are there. Crossing
guard recently quit.
Speaking before the Commission:
Jim Flournoy
8655 Landis View
Rosemead, CA 91770
Parents drive students to school because they don't feel safe crossing the street there.
If there is no signal necessary at Angelus there certainly is none necessary at Wal -Mart,
Page 3
and there is no need for crosswalk at Southern California Edison at Walnut Grove
either. The condition of approval can have the flashing beacon set in stone and the
question by Gary Taylor was do we need a beacon or do we need a signal. It wasn't do
we need a beacon or a signal at all. We're going to have one or the other. Mr. Flournoy
stated he is going to the Planning Commission next Monday and ask them to review
their conditions of approval on this item. He believes the Traffic Commission should be
discussing at this meeting if we want a flashing beacon /signal at Delta or do we want to
have it at Angelus, not if one is needed.
Speaking before the Commission:
Peggy Baumann
8305 Scenic Drive
South San Gabriel
Intersection of Delta and Rush is dangerous. Traffic on Rush is fairly fast. Trying to
turn left from Delta is difficult. Visibility problems; condo people not happy if red curb
painted. Please consider a signal
Speaking before the Commission:
Lawrence Bevington
8372 Rush Street
Rosemead 91770
There have been two different crossing guards trying to help the kids to cross. The first
one told me something had to be done, she couldn't get drivers to stop. The second
guard put out two large bright orange cones. The guard said the traffic was terrible,
they don't slow down, even when he put up the crossing guard sign to slow them down.
He was just trying to alert the drivers of the people crossing there.
Speaking before the Commission:
Ms. Janet Chin
3158 N. Gladys Avenue
Rosemead, CA 91770
Again wanted to reiterate the importance of the Commission listening to the speakers;
many residents unable to attend but those in attendance represent and speak for those
not attending.
Chairperson Knapp asked for comments from the Commissioners:
Commissioner Masuda visited the location on a quiet day, but there some kids going to
school. As he was sitting there, a couple of elderly people were trying to cross but
because of the trees, width of road, and median, drivers didn't see them and just went
through as if no one was there. He observed that to happen twice during a 10 minute
period. He tried to imagine what it would be like if it was a busy day. He wondered
about Condition 41 and suggested that the Commission should make a
Page 4
recommendation to reinforce the fact that there was a condition. He believes the fact
that parents drive students because of concern for pedestrian safety should also be
taken into account, as this may have affected the traffic /pedestrian counts during the
study, i.e. fewer children using crosswalk because they were being driven to school. He
also suggested coordination of signals.
Commissioner Gay is very familiar with that street. Wonders if 40 mph is appropriate for
that area; this has been discussed before, but he believes it is too fast. He asked if
there were traffic counts done at Rush and Delta versus just at Angelus.
Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki responded that with the April and May counts were
taken at Delta. The counts on Delta were a little bit higher than an Angelus.
Commissioner Gay asked if counts were done at Wal -Mart and whether or not it was
feasible to have a traffic light there, or was it strictly for the benefit of the store?
Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki responded no counts were taken at the driveways of
Wal -Mart.
Regarding the survey done in April, Commissioner Gay stated that the children were on
break during April at the time of the survey, and if they're not specific as to the exact
date he believes something is being missed. Also, he believes the engineering staff
should let the Commissioners know that the surveys are going on so that the
Commissioners can be there if they so choose to witness and see what is going on.
Westbound traffic on Rush, condo tenants have to park in front, and trying to get out on
Delta to make a left, or right, is insane. Traffic traveling eastbound on Rush, even
before they get to Delta they are veering over to the right to get into the Wal -Mart lane
to make a right hand turn. That cuts down the driver on Delta who is trying to make a
right or left to be able to move forward. As cars are zooming by they can't even position
themselves to get out and look to see whether it's safe to make a left or right.
Need to hold Wal -Mart to the condition of approval. A synchronized signal can be put in
on both Angelus and Rush, just like they have on Mission and Rio Hondo at Valley
Boulevard.
Regarding 2003 standards, Commissioner Gay stated everyone knows that driving is
out of control. He does not believe 2003 standards are appropriate.
Commissioner Lewin went to the site yesterday and observed vehicles angling to the
right going eastbound on Rush to turn into the Wal -Mart. Both of the driveways out of
the apartment complex can be challenging because in the course of parking to observe
Commissioner Lewin actually turned in and came back out. It was very difficult to see;
you have to nose out and hope no one is coming.
Commissioner Gay indicated he understands the Wal -Mart signal has its purpose but
that we need to take care of the children and vehicles crossing Rush Street.
Page 5
Commissioner Lewin believes a signal at both Wal -Mart and Angelus would be in order.
He is not sure if taking away the Wal -Mart signal would be the best thing to do. That
signal helps people making left turns off of Delta, at least in terms of westbound traffic.
Leaving that signal there and installing one at Angelus would act as a check on the
eastbound traffic, and with synchronization could act as a check on westbound traffic,
and help Delta access.
Commissioner Masuda asked if a recommendation can be made to have a motor officer
at the location in the morning?
Chairperson Knapp responded that it may be added to the motion.
Commissioner Masuda also stated that perhaps a radar trailer would help slow traffic.
Concentrate on a.m. and p.m. when parents and children are crossing to /from the
school.
Speaking before the Commission:
Juan Nunez
2702 Del Mar
Rosemead
Reminded Commission that Angelus does not align with Delta and listed traffic
problems signals could cause.
Commissioner Gay indicated signals at Angelus and Delta at Rush would be
synchronized and problems outlined by Mr. Nunez would be avoided.
Speaking before the Commission:
Robert Castillo
8332 Rush Street
Rosemead
Wanted to support second notions of the residents and Commissioners. Enforcement
by motor officer has occurred; officer could write tickets every minute of the 2 hours he
is there in the afternoon and morning. Mr. Castillo lives in Applewood, his wife and
daughter do not use the crosswalk; he drives his daughter to school.
Commissioner Masuda wondered if in- pavement flashing lights, or some additional
markings, like diagonal lines within the crosswalk would help.
Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki stated "ladder' crosswalks could be installed, or in-
pavement flashing light. There are guidelines for in- pavement flashing lights that are
followed, but there are some new technologies available.
Chairperson Knapp added to the recommendation that a red curb be added near the
driveway. She also suggested a motor officer be there on Monday.
Page 6
Chairperson Knapp asked for a motion.
It was moved by Commissioner Lewin, seconded by Commissioner Gay, that the
Commission recommend to the City Council:
• that a signal be installed at the intersection of Angelus and Rush Street and Delta
and Rush, and that they all be coordinated with and including the Wal -Mart
signal;
• to install longitudinal lines (parallel to traffic flow) in the crosswalk on Rush Street
at Angelus Avenue until a permanent change in the existing traffic controls is
installed;
• to install red curb on the south side of Rush Street from Delta Avenue west to 15
feet beyond the existing fire hydrant at this location;
• to direct a strong and regular presence of enforcement personnel during the start
and release times of school until a permanent change in the existing traffic
controls is installed;
• to review the Condition of Approval #41 of the Wal -Mart development as a
means to fund these recommended improvements.
Vote Results:
Yes:
Chairperson Knapp, Commissioners Gay, Lewin, and Masuda
Noes:
None
Absent:
Commissioner Hunter
Abstained
None
Mr. Bevington thanked the Commission for its very lengthy and thoughtful discussion on
the problems, and for considering this item as a part of Condition 41. Also, the Planning
Commission is reviewing the condition and Wal -Mart is cooperating with the City.
B. REQUEST FOR EASTBOUND LEFT TURN SIGNAL PHASE AND "NO U
TURN" RESTRICTION ON MISSION DRIVE AT ENCINITA AVENUE
Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki presented the staff report and study findings.
Recommendation
It is staffs recommendation that no traffic signal modifications (eastbound left turn
signal phasing) be made to the intersection of Mission Drive and Encinita Avenue at this
time.
It is staffs recommendation that the Traffic Commission recommends the City Council
approve the installation of "No U turn" restrictions for eastbound Mission Drive at
Encinita Avenue at this time.
Chairperson Knapp asked for comments from the audience.
Page 7
Speaking before the Commission:
Jim Flournoy
8655 Landis View
Rosemead, CA 91770
He indicated previous recommendations made by the Commission have not been
installed.
Chairperson Knapp asked for comments from the Commissioners.
Commissioner Gay Many intersection accidents are not reported. Residents from
other cities use Encinita to bypass Rosemead Boulevard. How can we keep motorists
on Rosemead Boulevard? Two schools in that area and traffic is too busy.
Chairperson Knapp stated traffic cannot be kept from coming into the City. Planning
Commission is approving more development, more traffic will come.
Commissioner Masuda agrees with Commissioner Gay with the increase in traffic.
Commissioner Lewin believes there is need to study all the traffic including pedestrians
on Encinita. There is a lot of things going on on Encinita with park and schools.
Commissioner Gay stated previous recommendations need to be in place.
Speaking before the Commission:
Juan Nunez
2702 Del Mar
Rosemead, CA
Mr. Nunez stated there will be more traffic in the City; several projects on Del Mar and
Garvey have been approved by the Planning Commission.
Chairperson Knapp asked for a motion.
It was moved by Commissioner Masuda, seconded by Commissioner Lewin, to accept
staffs recommendations and request City Council to direct staff to expedite traffic
improvements previously approved.
Vote Results:
Yes: Chairperson Knapp, Commissioners Lewin, Masuda
Noes: None
Absent: Commissioner Hunter
Abstained Commissioner Gay
Page 8
S. STAFF REPORTS - NONE
6. COMMISSIONER REPORTS
Commissioner Masuda welcomed Commissioner Lewin.
Commissioner Gay welcomed Commissioner Lewin.
Commissioner Lewin thanked all Commissioners. Commissioner Lewin would like to
see a study at Encinita School including pedestrians and vehicles. There is a need to
improve situation at this location. Second item is the intersection of Mission to Valley.
The signals on the southeast corner of Rio Hondo/Valley are hard to see.
Chairperson Knapp: Rosemead Boulevard west side apartments north of Mission Drive
need to remove parking to allow vehicles to turn right at Mission. There is an existing
fire hydrant in front of apartments. Red curb should be placed to that point.
7. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting is
adjourned until February 7, 2008, at 7:00 p.m.
JI'mec (06160)
16774/1002/Min01
Page 9
ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 7, 2008
The meeting of the Rosemead Traffic Commission was called to order by Chairperson Knapp
at 7:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 8838 East Valley Boulevard, Rosemead.
PLEDGE OF ALLIGIANCE Commissioner Gay
INVOCATION Chairperson Masuda
ROLL CALL
Present: Chairperson Knapp, Commissioner Masuda, Commissioner Gay,
Commissioner Hunter, Commissioner Lewin
Absent: None
1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Approval of January 3, 2008, Commission Meeting Minutes has been deferred to the
next agenda in March.
2. PUBLIC COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE
Speaking before the Commission:
David Raymond
4208 Encinita Avenue
Rosemead, CA
Mr. Raymond stated traffic has increased on Encinita and some crosswalks on that
street are not lighted. He would like the Traffic Commission to take a look at those
things, and suggested looking at things such as crosswalk indicators powered by solar.
The street is adjacent to a park; there is a lot of youth activity going on, especially at
night, and it is dark. Particularly the crosswalk closest to Encinita School, there is
absolutely no street lighting. Especially during the summertime there are a lot of kids
crossing the street, a lot of activity. He believes the City should really take a look at the
area because the traffic really has increased. There are a lot of problems getting out of
the driveways. There could be some red zoning or red markings done in the residential
area. Requested that the City take a look at the problems there.
Commissioner Gay stated Mr. Raymond lives up the street from him and Mr. Raymond
has frequently come to him and talked about the traffic and the fact that on the
weekends when the park is busy, the cars are parked and blocking the driveways. It is
really hard to get out without taking a chance of backing out and someone running into
your vehicle.
Rosemead Traffic Commission Meeting February 7, 2008 Page 1
Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki thanked Mr. Raymond for coming. She stated that
Commissioner Lewin had asked her at the last meeting to take a look at the whole area
of Encinita. She wants to get as much data and information as possible. With Mr.
Raymond indicating that weekends are also problem, that issue will be added to the list
of data collection times. She will be taking a look at that whole area of Encinita,
basically between Lower Azusa and Mission to see what improvements, if any, can be
made.
Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki is very familiar with some of the technologies Mr.
Raymond spoke about and all the items mentioned by Mr. Raymond will be considered,
including the crosswalk up by the school. Staff will look at pedestrians, especially
during school time, and maybe pedestrians on Saturdays. , requested by
Commissioner Gay, the Commission will be notified of the taking of ata collection.
With regard to previous Encinita work that needs . to be done, Deputy Traffic Engineer
Itagaki stated she has reviewed and looked into it, and Engineering did pass it on to the
Code Enforcement personnel (Don Anderson). She does not know why the work has
not been done, the information has been given to them. Engineering is no longer the
ones handling that, but she will keep up on it.
3. OLD BUSINESS — NONE
4. NEW BUSINESS
A. REQUEST FOR GREEN CURB AT 9442 EAST VALLEY BOULEVARD,
TONY'S LIQUOR STORE
Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki presented the staff report and distributed pictures of the
location.
Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki was contacted yesterday, February 6, by the owners of
the liquor store. They indicated they would not be able to attend the Traffic Commission
meeting. They did reiterate their need for short-term, 20- minute parking due to the
adjacent shop, and people visiting the medical center further west also parking in front
as well. The owners were aware of this item being on the agenda at this meeting.
Recommendation
It is staffs recommendation that based on the lack of available off - street parking and the
field observation, the installation of approximately 31 feet of green curb with the "20
minute" stencil on it be installed in front of 9442 East Valley Boulevard, Tony's Liquor.
Chairperson Knapp asked for comments from the Commissioners.
Commissioner Lewin commented that a liquor store of the nature of Tony's actually is a
20- minute type parking situation. Unless the store has many patrons at the same time,
the average customer generally spends no more than 10 minutes in such a store. He
believes the request is a reasonable one.
Rosemead Traffic Commission Meeting February 7, 2008 Page 2
Commissioner Gay agrees with the staff recommendation.
Chairperson Knapp requested a motion.
Commissioner Gay made motion to accept staff recommendation that the Traffic
Commission recommend the approval of the 31 feet of 20- minute green curb at 9442
East Valley Boulevard, also known as Tony's Liquor.
Commissioner Hunter stated that sometimes stores that have limited parking have
signs indicating, for example, "For Tony's Liquor Store Only." She wondered if that is a
possibility.
Deputy Traffic Engineering Itagaki stated on- street parking is public parking and the City
cannot state it is for a particular use. If somebody wants to run into the adjacent
business for 20 minutes, they can park there. What the 20 minute parking designation
provides is an opportunity for the owners, if they believe the person parking will be there
for a longer period, to get some enforcement of the 20 minute parking restriction.
Commissioner Masuda had no comments.
Commissioner Lewin seconded to accept staffs recommendation.
Vote results:
Yes: Chairperson Knapp, Commissioner Gay, Commissioner Masuda,
Commissioner Hunter, Commissioner Lewin
Noes: None
Abstain: None
B. REQUEST FOR RED CURB ON WEST SIDE OF ROSEMEAD BOULEVARD
NORTH OF MISSION DRIVE
Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki presented the staff report.
Recommendation
Based on the available off - street parking and the minimal impact to on- street parking,
staff recommends the installation of the red curb on the west side of Rosemead
Boulevard starting approximately 130 feet north of Mission Drive.
Staff also recommends the repainting of the existing red curb.
Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki also commented that she received a phone call from the
management company of the apartment complex. They were concerned that parking
would be removed from in front of the apartment. She indicated to them that there is an
existing fire hydrant, and vehicles should not be parked there; actually they would only
Rosemead Traffic Commission Meeting February 7, 2008 Page 3
be losing about one spot. The person she spoke with indicated he would take a look at
the location; he did not return a call to her, but he had expressed his concern was that
the apartment tenants like to park on the street.
Chairperson Knapp wished to add painting "right turn only" on the street.
Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki stated that one of the reasons that was not included as
part of this item was because Rosemead Boulevard is under the control of Caltrans.
She would like to start with the red curb and then make a request to Caltrans for a "right
turn only" lane.
Commissioner Hunter asked why the red curbing is not maintained? Is Caltrans
responsible for that?
Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki indicated it might be Caltrans, she is not sure. She
agreed it is pretty bad. She does not want to contact Caltrans before receiving approval
from the Commission and City Council.
As far as the red curb is concerned, the City can probably repaint it; it's something that
she'll have to check with Administration about the maintenance of red curb on
Rosemead Boulevard.
Commissioner Hunter stated it would make the street look better, newer; it looks old and
tacky in its current condition.
Commissioner Masuda asked what is the required clearance on either side of a fire
hydrant?
Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki answered 15 feet on either side.
Commissioner Masuda asked if the cars parked there are illegally parked?
Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki responded with yes. She indicated they try not to put a
red curb at every fire hydrant because, as Chairperson Knapp said, hopefully people
know they're not supposed to park there. However, there are instances where there
has been difficulty and the red curb will be installed.
Commissioner Gay stated it only makes sense. It's a big apartment complex, and if fire
trucks cannot get in there, that could be pretty bad. One question about spacing of the
lanes, as you travel southbound on Rosemead approaching Mission, spaces are 21 feet
and 11 feet, would that technically be enough to get that right turn lane in?
Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki stated that the width is pretty narrow. In the northbound
direction, they are all 11, which is minimal. If she was to go to Caltrans with the design
of a street that had 11 foot curb lanes, they would not accept it. But because it is an
existing situation they might be more flexible.
Rosemead Traffic Commission Meeting February 7, 2008 Page 4
Commissioner Masuda wondered if a "right turn" lane is too long will it encourage
drivers to sneak through and go straight, because the street is so wide you can
comfortably fit two cars there.
Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki stated that with the existing parking all along Rosemead
Boulevard it would take only one time to try to do that and realize that they'll have to
sneak back in on the other side of Mission because there are cars usually parked there
too. But she acknowledged that that is a good point.
Commissioner Lewin wondered if the City is allowed to restrict parking along Rosemead
Boulevard as appears will be done, what exactly can and cannot be done by the City.
Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki responded that generally in the past, with regard to any
parking restrictions on Rosemead Boulevard, Caltrans has been open to allowing the
City to make whatever restrictions the City feels necessary. Generally Caltrans has not
denied us requests for red curb; usually they are very open asking if we have given
public notice, gone to public meeting, and they are generally not going to deny that.
Commissioner Lewin asked why was the point of 45 feet chosen for the apartment
complex? What criteria was used to decide the length?
Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki stated that actually it was at the request of Chairperson
Knapp. She wanted to go beyond the fire hydrant. It's 15 feet beyond the fire hydrant.
Commissioner Lewin stated this will actually clean up part of that street. He travels this
route a lot and in front of that complex there is frequently cars that have been broken
into, cars that have been hit, usually a lot of broken glass and trash and such in front of
that area, so this will actually effectively remove 64 feet of "storm water" issues. He
believes that perhaps in the future it could be taken even further, but this is a very good
start and hopefully it can be done quickly.
Chairperson Knapp moved that the Commissioners accept the recommendation of staff,
seconded by Commissioner Hunter.
Vote Results:
Yes: Chairperson Knapp, Commissioner Gay, Commissioner Masuda,
Commissioner Lewin, Commissioner Hunter
Noes: None
Abstain: None
5. STAFF REPORTS - NONE
6. COMMISSIONER REPORTS
Commissioner Masuda had no report.
Rosemead Traffic Commission Meeting February 7, 2008 Page 5
Commissioner Hunter had two items. One is a recommendation for a situation she
believes could cause a very serious accident. At the Chamber office there are two
adjacent driveways and no red curbing. Because of parked cars near the two
driveways, it is practically impossible for drivers leaving the location in those driveways
to see cars turning from Valley Boulevard onto. She has noticed it is getting worse all
the time because of more traffic. She suggests red curbing going north, all the way
from the driveway on Muscatel to Valley.
The second item is to apologize for her recent absences from Commission meetings,
but the absences were unavoidable.
With regard to Commissioner Hunter's report, Commissioner Masuda asked if that were
to be looked at in terms of a red curb from the driveway all the way to Valley, has a left -
turn lane been looked at going north on Muscatel.
Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki stated that one of the reasons a left turn lane cannot be
put in is because parking is allowed. She is not familiar with the width of Muscatel but
parking would probably need to be removed on both sides of the street to fit a left -turn
lane.
Chairperson Knapp stated she believes there is only one parking spot on the east side
of Muscatel, and it is just behind the driveway in front of the library.
Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki suggested staff look at the area and the possibility of
adding left -turn lanes on Muscatel.
Commissioner Lewin asked about the possibility of counting the number of times drivers
drive around a car waiting to turn left. He recalled times when cars behind left- turning
cars would pull around the turning car and suddenly appearing from behind the car
waiting to turn left.
Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki stated that that count can be done too.
Commissioner Lewin stated the idea of looking at Muscatel is definitely worth
considering. He will keep an eye out now that it has been mentioned, though there are
probably many other intersections that could be looked at; this is something the
Commissioners need to keep an eye on in driving around the City.
Commissioner Gay offered an update regarding the study on Encinita. Right now the
ROA League (girls softball and boys baseball) is starting to play and there are over 400
kids playing. i With summertime coming on, the park will be very crowded. The
basketball courts are continuously crowded with young adults. At any given time there
is anywhere from 20 to 100 kids playing basketball. And when baseball isn't going,
there will be AYSO and adult softball in the evening. There is a whole lot of activity
there. Those are some prime times, especially on the weekends and in the evening,
after 4:00 or 5:00 at night.
Rosemead Traffic Commission Meeting February 7, 2008 Page 6
Chairperson Knapp asked if the side streets are being utilized by people, meaning
crossing the streets.
Commissioner Gay stated they are, there is not enough parking at the park.
Chairperson Knapp asked if the school ground is available for parking.
Commissioner Gay stated the school ground is available after hours and people use it,
but there's not that many spaces.
Chairperson Knapp wondered if the suggestion should be made to the City that another
parking lot be built someplace. Discussion followed about taking away from green
space, and Commissioner Gay stated AYSO is making parking available off Lower
Azusa. but this is still insufficient.
Mr. Raymond again spoke about the problems at Encinita and Chairperson Knapp cited
the work done several years ago that appeared to resolve a serious problem at that
time, and only recently have problems again been brought to the Traffic Commission.
7. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting is
adjourned until March 6, 2008, at 7:00 p.m.
Jl:mec (06160)
16774/1002/Min02
Rosemead Traffic Commission Meeting February 7, 2008 Page 7