The URL can be used to link to this page

TC - Agenda - 11-06-03AGENDA ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION 8838 East Valley Boulevard Rosemead, California 91770 Regular Meeting NOVEMBER 6, 2003 Call to Order: 7:00 p.m. Roll Call: Chairperson Knapp, Vice - Chairperson Matsdorf, Commissioner Quintanilla, Commissioner Baffo Pledge of Allegiance: Commissioner Quintanilla Invocation: Commissioner Baffo I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - October 2, 2003 II. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE - This is the time reserved for members of the audience to address the Commission on items not listed on the agenda. (Maximum time per speaker is three (3) minutes; total time allocated is fifteen (15) minutes. III. NEW TRAFFIC COMMISSIONER - SWORN IN (MICHAEL BENTAMIN) IV. OLD BUSINESS . A. REQUEST FOR RED CURB ON EMERSON PLACE OVER ALHAMBRA WASH BRIDGE B. REQUEST FOR RED CURB AT 7525 EMERSON PLACE V. NEW BUSINESS A. REQUEST FOR STOP SIGN AT THE INTERSECTION OF RAMONA BOULEVARD AND IVAR AVENUE B. REQUEST FOR STOP SIGNS AT THE INTERSECTION OF RUSH STREET AND ANGELUS AVENUE VI. STAFF REPORTS A. UPDATE ON CITY COUNCIL'S ACTIONS VII. COMMISSIONER REPORTS VIII. ADJOURNMENT - To the next regular meeting of the Traffic Commission on Thursday, December 4, 2003, at 7:00 p.m., Rosemead City Council Chambers, 8838 East Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, California 91770. Posted 72 hours in advance of the meeting at: Rosemead City Hall, 8838 East Valley Boulevard, Rosemead; the L.A. County Library, Rosemead Branch, 8800 E. Valley Boulevard; and at other locations pursuant to RMC Section 1.08. ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 2, 2003 ROLL CALL Present: Absent: Chairperson Knapp, Commissioner Matsdorf, Commissioner Quintanilla & Commissioner Baffo IMOME, Ex- Officio: Assistant Planner: Jennifer Villasenor Traffic Engineering Deputy: Joanne Itagaki CALL TO ORDER Pledge of Allegiance: Commissioner Matsdorf Invocation: Commissioner Quintanilla I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES It was moved by Commissioner Quintanilla, seconded by Commissioner Matsdorf, to approve the minutes for September 4, 2003. Vote Results: Yes: Chairperson Knapp, Commissioner Quintanilla, Commissioner Matsdorf Noes: None Absent: None Abstain: Commissioner Baffo Commissioner Baffo abstained his vote because he was not present at the September meeting. II. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE Speaking before the Commission was: Eddie Ochoa 2409 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead, California 91770 Mr. Ochoa stated that there are high speeds of traffic on Mingerman and Fern in the alleyway (west side), between the hours of 7:30 a.m. - 7:45 a.m., and again from 2:30 p.m. - 2:45 p.m. The alleyway is being used to drop off kids at Sanchez School. III. OLD BUSINESS - None IV. NEW BUSINESS A. REQUEST FOR RED CURB ON EMERSON PLACE OVER ALHAMBRA WASH BRIDGE Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki presented the staff report. RECOMMENDATION: The installation of R27 "No Parking on Bridge' signs and red curb adjacent to the Alhambra Wash bridge on Emerson Place was recommended. It was moved by Commissioner Baffo, seconded by Commissioner Matsdorf and carried unanimously to approve the Traffic Engineer's recommendation. B. REQUEST FOR RED CURB AT 7525 EMERSON PLACE Deputy Traffic Engineer Itagaki presented the staff report. RECOMMENDATION: The installation of 14 feet of red curb between 7525 and 7531 Emerson Place was recommended. Chairperson Knapp requested that staff send a letter to both addresses informing them of what is going to be done, and invite them to appeal it to the City Council. should they not agree with the recommendation. Assistant Planner Villasenor stated that a letter will be sent on Monday to both residents informing them of the Traffic Commissions recommendation. It was moved by Commissioner Quintanilla, seconded by Commissioner Baffo and carried unanimously to approve the Traffic Engineer's recommendation, with direction to staff to send out a letter to both residents. V. STAFF REPORTS Assistant Planner Villasenor stated that 3 items from the August and September meetings went to the City Council and were all approved. VI. COMMISSIONER REPORTS Chairperson Knapp congratulated Daryll Kelty on being appointed the new Planning Commissioner for the City of Rosemead. Commissioner Knapp also informed the Commissioner that Victor Ruiz chose not to sign his papers to be re- appointed as a Traffic Commissioner, therefore, there is now a vacancy on the Commission. VIII. ADTOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 7:30 p.m. The next regular scheduled meeting is set for November 6, 2003. Staff Report Rosemead Traffic Commission TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSSION FROM: JOANNE ITAGAKI, TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DEPUTY DATE: September 23, 2003 RE: Request for Red Curb on Emerson Place Over Alhambra Wash Bridge REQUEST Chairman Knapp requested staff to review the visibility on Emerson Place in the vicinity of the Alhambra Wash east of Falling Leaf Avenue. Chairman Knapp indicated residents have expressed concerns regarding visibility of vehicles coming over the bridge. CONDITIONS Exhibit A depicts conditions on Emerson Place in the vicinity of Alhambra Wash. The elevation at the bridge of the Alhambra Wash is higher,than the street level both east and west of the bridge. The greatest elevation difference appears to be west of the bridge. DISCUSSION Field observation of the location occurred in the afternoon. Traffic on Emerson Place was sporadic and no vehicles were observed parked on the bridge or in the immediate vicinity. However, field observation clearly identified the elevation difference between the bridge and the adjacent homes. This elevation difference did make visibility from driveways adjacent to the bridge difficult. If vehicles are parking on the bridge, visibility is reduced even further. The installation of red curb or "No Parking" restrictions over the Alhambra Wash would not directly affect the residential homes fronting Emerson Place. There appears to be several lots with multiple dwellings. However, each of these lots has on -site parking available for their residents. The installation of parking restrictions over the Alhambra Wash will not remove the need for caution to be taken by residents on Emerson Place. The proposed parking restrictions will provide some additional visibility but the elevation difference is the primary visibility restriction. At this time, staff is discussing the situation with the City Engineer to determine if any change to the elevation of the bridge is proposed in the near future. October 2, 2003 Traffic Commission Meeting Request for Red Curb on Emerson Place Over Alhambra Wash Bridge Page 2 of 2 RECOMMENDATION The installation of R27 "No Parking on Bridge" signs and red curb adjacent to the Alhambra Wash bridge on Emerson Place is recommended. These recommendations are depicted on Exhibit A. Attachment P: \06.160UI1\RSD\2003 Agendas & Documents \Oct - Emerson Plat Alhambra Wash.doc U O 2 N C = 33: w C C Z C O rr O V] d w O f0 C) U C Ln O d 2 P\ro m O � (O U N C 2 N V L d W O 0 N I Mlin �I■ iii O LO L 3 M w O ,.p U N O w O r ; f0 U C O N z o� cm N O h O Y i : r d m a) . E m TE Staff Report Rosemead Traffic Commission TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSSION FROM: JOANNE ITAGAKI, TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DEPUTY DATE: September 22, 2003 RE: Request for Red Curb at 7525 Emerson Place REQUEST A letter (attached) from Ms. Hazel J. Moyer and Ms. Karen Bayazid was received requesting the installation of red curb between their - driveway at 7525 Emerson Place and 7527 Emerson Place. They indicate the distance between driveways is not large enough for a vehicle but vehicles continue to park there especially when Emerson School is in session. CONDITIONS Exhibit A depicts conditions at the driveways of 7525 Emerson Place and 7531 Emerson Place. The 7531 Emerson Place address was observed (7527 Emerson Place was not visible). DISCUSSION Field observation of the location was made during the afternoon period after the school release period. There were no vehicles parked on Emerson Place in the vicinity of 7525 and 7531 Emerson Place. _ As identified in Exhibit A, the curb space between 7525 and 7531 Emerson Place is approximately 14 feet. This is less than the 20 foot minimum length used for parking spaces. The installation of red curb between 7525 and 7531 Emerson Place would not significantly affect the on- street parking on Emerson Place. There is parking space available on Emerson Place east and west of this location that vehicles associated with the school can utilize. RECOMMENDATION The installation of 14 feet of red curb between 7525 and 7531 Emerson Place is recommended. This recommendation is depicted on Exhibit A. Attachments PA06 -160V I1 \RSD\2003 Agendas & Documents \Oct -7525 Emerson PI Red Curb Request.doc Hazel J. Moyer (owner) Karen L. Bayazid 7525 PI. Rosemead, CA 91770 -2209 (626) 571 - 2690/(626) 280 -3345 August 27, 2003 City of Rosemead 8838 E. Valley Blvd. Rosemead, CA 91770 Attn: Don Wagner Dear Mr. Wagner: I am writing this letter in regards to the curbed area separating my driveway at 7525 Emerson PI. and the driveway next door at 7527 Emerson PI. This curbed area is short and cannot accomodate vehicle parking without the parked vehicles blocking the sloped portion of my driveway. The Emerson elementary school is across the street and when in session vehicles are constantly parking there; mostly SUVs which don't fit and which hang over my driveway. We are backing out blind causing a difficult and dangerous situation for everyone. I am a 76 year old senior and have my disabled daughter living with me. It is imperative that we have easy access in and out of my driveway. There are many doctor appointments which must be met. I am hereby requesting this curbed area be painted red. This will greatly reduce the danger of accidents due to poor visibility as well allowing free access in and out of my driveway. I thank you in advance for your prompt attention in this matter. Yours Sincerely, Hazel J. Moyer Karen L. Bayazid 7. To Stevens Ave. v 4 C y W Install 14 feet / of red curb. To PmspectAve. Not to Scale Emerson pl. 9y Emerson pl. 9 531 f� OCf.28 15:09 Staff Reoo►t Rosemead Traffic Commission TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION #{ U19 P.002 FROM: JOANNE ITAGAKI, TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DEPUTY (� DATE: OCTOBER 28, 2003 l RE: Request for Stop Signs at the Intersection of Ramona Boulevard and Ivar Avenue REQUEST A letter (attached) from several residents in the vicinity of Ramona Boulevard and Ivar Avenue was received requesting the placement of stop signs at this intersection. The residents are concerned with the collisions that have occurred at the intersection. They indicate a recent collision occurring on 7/20103 was a hit and run involving a vehicle hitting a gate and leaving the scene. Ramona Boulevard is a 32 -foot wide east/west roadway with one lane of traffic in each direction separated by a single yellow skip stripe west of Ivar Avenue and a double yellow centerline east of Ivar Avenue. East of Ivar Avenue, the width of Ramona Boulevard also decreases to 28 feet wide. The posted speed limit on Ramona Boulevard is 30 mph. Ivar Avenue is a 36 -foot wide north/south residential roadway with one lane of traffic in each direction. There are no stripes separating opposing traffic lanes. Ivar Avenue creates a "T" intersection with Ramona Boulevard and is stop controlled at this intersection. The prima facie speed limit of Ivar Avenue is 25 mph. Ramona Boulevard begins to turn southerly approximately 350 feet east of Ivar Avenue. There are curve warning signs on the approaches to this curve. Exhibit A depicts conditions at the intersection of Ramona Boulevard and Ivar Avenue. DATA The reported collision history of the intersection of Ramona Boulevard and Ivar Avenue was reviewed for the period from January 1, 1999 through December 31, 2001. During this three -year period, one collision was reported at the intersection of Ramona Boulevard and Ivar Avenue is summarized on the following page: OCS.28 15:09 November 6, 2003 Traffic Commission Meeting Request for Stop Signs at the Intersection of Ramona Boulevard and Ivar Avenue Page 2 of 3 Location & Description PCF• At Ramona/lvar. . Improper Turn Northbound left turning vehicle broadsided a westbound vehicle proceeding straight. •PCF = Primary Collision Factor s�eiy e.uus Date. Time & Day 1/25/00, 9:10 AM, & Tuesday The residents indicated that there was a recent collision in 2003. Therefore, staff will obtain additional collision data regarding the intersection of Ramona Boulevard and Ivar Avenue through the newly installed collision database system. This system is currently in the Engineering Department of the City. This current information will be available at the Traffic Commission meeting. Twenty -four hour approach counts were taken on Ramona Boulevard and Ivar Avenue. These counts identified the. following: Ramona Blvd. Approach Volume AM Peak PM Peak Eastbound 2,583 198 (7:45) 374 (5:30) Westbound 712 42 (7:30) 65 (7:15) Ivar Avenue Northbound 2,422 263 (7:30) 232 (5:15) DISCUSSION Field review of the intersection of Ramona Boulevard and tear Avenue was made during the mid -day period. There did not appear to be any visibility constraints for vehicles stopped on Ivar Avenue. Vehicles traveling on Ramona Boulevard appeared to be traveling at or slightly below the posted speed limit of 30 mph. The installation of Stop signs is based on guidelines developed by Caltrans. These guidelines, or warrants, are based on the most recent reported accident history, traffic volumes entering the intersection, delay and the number of pedestrians crossing the major street. "Stop" control is intended to assign positive right -of -way at intersections. The control is usually established on the street with the least volume of traffic. Additional control, beyond the basic right -of -way assignment, is usually reserved for those locations where the volume of traffic exceeds 500 vehicles per hour for any eight hours of an average day and where both streets having about the same amount of traffic, lends credibility to the higher level of intersection control. Without credibility, voluntary compliance is poor and without voluntary compliance, traffic safety is severely compromised. OGT.28'2003 15:10 #5819 P.009 November 0, 2003 TrIOMC COMMISSron Meeting Request for Stop Signs at the Intersection of Ramona Boulevard and Ivar Avenue Page 3 of 3 Exhibit B depicts the Caltrans guidelines as applied to the intersection of Ramona Boulevard and Ivar Avenue. The guidelines indicate the intersection of Ramona Boulevard and Ivar Avenue does not satisfy the guidelines for the installation of Stop signs. Field observations and favorable reported collision history reinforce this determination. The installation of stop signs on Ramona Boulevard and Ivar Avenue is not recommended at this time. Caltrans guidelines, including a favorable reported collision history, and field observations indicate motorists travel through the intersection with due care. Attachments p...%WjSDU11 \RSD\2003 ApMas & DocumemsWov -RUSE & Angelus Stop Sign Request.doc OGT.28'2O03 15:10 #5819 P.0O5 Attention Tref z Commissioner & Code Embrcement Sdpczviwr W. Milan M Mrakich This letter is to re*=9 two stop signs at the corner of rvar and Ramona in order to prevent more accidents at this comer. Tho most rmmt deco occuind on 7/20/03. We live at the comer of Ivar and Ramona A 4 lost of his vehicle, cawbed against the gate of my house, throwing the gaze dawn, ly bitting my crr. The driver left the scene. The local Shentrwas Inter informed abou the aceideat. TrdSe at this corner is too much Most drivers tend iq' speed more at Bight, early in the morning, duff the week, and on weekends- i ==that that about a mile away on Ramona, there is a "mini- market ", and they Itave stop signs, and we hardly bear about aceidem because afthe stop signs. So phase, we Wyowhelptoincvwgmare accidents at this corner, by requesting stop signs' at the , nerof1wandRamona for your coupmytion Request by H�� wners: 3. meet 3YG9 L�yR 4 ( / /. ✓4 y. Av- ve -ercoal C.P. 9 / /7o r A-veo !e•ce. Ce 9//7 0. cuoGO Q - /COS.�c�od GsQ //7 n. rr ry /� S4 /OAd &,A,- CAA 0//70, wood 4V• /l�scwrroJ Gj pa,. ASCVur1 efff. /»o OGT.28'2003 15:10 #5819 P.006 it 3 a J No SCALE 2 IT EY04it A OGT.28'2003 15:10 9ebly r.uur Dim CITY OF RO,JE MULTI-WAY STOP SIGN WARRANTS (FROM CALTRANS TRAFFIC MANUAL) LOCATION: 1arvMonp' 8lvd. ,/ Syar• Ave. DATE: fo 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. ( ( Qolh -jtiDn in ZOOO 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 Aoy: 414 c Boo Satisfied. Yes 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 Ads 1Z9 4 ZOOa"MZ 4'r- Satisfied: Yes 0 (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 ®o VOLUME WORKSHEET Guideline 4� ,�� A evb < v� pc b �� (a) Total Volume (0(350) 1 3tH 1393 1 3t 1325 I +ZAI 6 Z.I 4 ' 14 " (b) Combined Volume (9 (140) 1 24 It7B 1 145 1 [44 1160 1 ZZ5 I I 71 1 17q No peo@ey4rtav� rncluolr�l ivy c av�o.l�{9'� oc1'.28 15:10 Staff Report Rosemead Traffic Commission Abtl19 Y.VVU TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS ROSEMEAD TRAFFIC COMMISSION FROM: JOANNE ITAGAKI, TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DEPUTY DATE: OCTOBER 27, 2003 RE: Request for Stop Signs at the Intersection of Rush Street and Angelus Avenue K =lam yl A letter (attached) from Ms. Marie Saldivar, 8388 Rush Street, was received requesting the placement of stop signs at the intersection of Rush Street and Angelus Avenue. Ms. Saldivar is concerned with the speed of vehicles traveling on Rush Street. Ms. Saldivar Is also requesting the red curb on the west side of the condominium driveway be extended for visibility of on coming vehicles. CONDITIONS Rush Street is an 86 -foot wide east/west collector roadway with two lanes of traffic in each direction separated by a raised 4 -foot wide center median. There is a yellow crosswalk on the east leg of Rush Street at Angelus Avenue. The posted speed limit on Rush Street is 40 mph. Angelus Avenue is a 40 -foot wide north/south residential roadway with one lane of traffic in each direction. There are no stripes separating opposing traffic lanes. Angelus Avenue creates a "T" intersection with Rush Street and is stop controlled at this intersection. The prima facie speed limit of Angelus Avenue is 25 mph. Directly across from Angelus Avenue is a 22 -foot wide driveway entrance to the condominium complex on the south side of Rush Street. There are approximately 5 garages with direct access to Rush Street at this driveway. There are another 10 to 13 garages that could also use this driveway. Exhibit A depicts conditions at the intersection of Rush Street and Angelus Avenue. DATA The reported collision history of the intersection of Rush Street and Angelus Avenue was reviewed for the period from January 1, 1999 through December 31, 2001. A review was also made of reported collisions in the vicinity of Rush Street and Delta Avenue.. During this three -year period, one collision was reported at OCT.28 15:10 #5819 P.009 November S, 2003 TmOle Commission Mooring Request for Stop Signs at the Intersection of Rush Street and Angelus Avenue Page 2 of 3 the intersection of Rush Street and Angelus Avenue (no collisions reported for Rush Street/Delta Avenue) and is summarized below: Location & Description PCF• Date. Time & Dav 28 feet east of Rush /Angelus Ped. Violation 3/21/00, 7:31 AM, & Northbound pedestrian collided Tuesday with eastbound vehicle. •PCF = Primary Collision Factor Twenty -four hour approach counts were taken on Rush Street and Angelus Avenue. These counts identified the following: Rush Street Approach Volume AM Peak PM Peak Eastbound 3,439 351 (7:30) 431 (5:00) Westbound 4,103 486 (7:30) 404 (5:30) Angelus Avenue Southbound 863 117 (7:30) 30 (6:00) Turning movement and pedestrian counts were also taken at the intersection during school start and release periods. These counts are depicted on Exhibit B. DISCUSSION Field review of the intersection of Rush Street and Angelus Avenue was made during school release times of Rice Elementary. During this review, pedestrians were observed crossing Rush Street in the crosswalk and vehicles were observed to stop for pedestrians. No vehicles were observed, exiting the condominium driveway. Vehicles traveling on Rush Street appeared to be traveling at or slightly above the posted speed limit of 40 mph. The installation of Stop signs is based on guidelines developed by Caitrans. These guidelines, or warrants, are based on the most recent reported accident history, traffic volumes entering the intersection, delay and the number of pedestrians crossing the major street. "Stop" control is intended to assign positive right -of -way at intersections. The control is usually established on the street with the least volume of traffic. Additional control. beyond the basic right -of -way assignment, is usually reserved for those locations where the volume of traffic exceeds 500 vehicles per hour for any eight hours of an average day and where both streets having about the same amount of traffic, lends credibility to the higher level of intersection control. Without credibility, voluntary compliance is poor and without voluntary compliance, traffic safety is severely compromised. OGT.28'2003 15:11 #5819 P.010 November 6, 2003 TrvMc Commission NoWng Request for Stop Signs at the Intersection of Rush Street and Angelus Avenue Page 3 of 3 Furthermore, numerous studies have concluded that °Stop° signs are ineffective as a speed deterrent. These studies found that slowing only occurred within 150 to 200 feet of the actual "Stop" location. Those motorists who slow for the controls at unjustified locations often teach higher speeds between controls to make up the time lost at the "Stop" sign. As previously indicated, many drivers fail to stop and others do not bother to slow due to the perception on nonexistent potential cross conflict. Exhibit C depicts the Caltrans guidelines as applied to the intersection of Rush Street and Angelus Avenue. The guidelines indicate the intersection of Rush Street and Angelus Avenue does not satisfy the guidelines for the installation of Stop signs. Field observations and favorable reported collision history reinforce this determination. Ms, Saldivar has also requested the installation of additional red curb on the west side of the condominium driveway. There is 16 feet of existing red curb at this location. On the other side of the driveway is the yellow crosswalk with no red curb beyond the crosswalk. Based on the need to provide visibility of pedestrians at the crosswalk, which also helps increase visibility from the driveway, it is recommended the existing red curb be increased to 30 feet and an additional 30 feet of red curb beyond the crosswalk. Exhibit A depicts these recommendations. RECOMMENDATION The installation of stop signs on Rush Street at Angelus Avenue is not recommended at this time. Caltrans guidelines, including a favorable reported collision history, and field observations indicate motorists as well as pedestrians negotiate the intersection with due care. However, staff does recommend selective enforcement of the speed limit on Rush Street by Sheriffs officers. The extension of the existing red curb to 30 feet on the south side of Rush Street west of the condominium driveway is recommended. In addition, 30 feet of red curb is recommended on the south side of Rush Street east of the existing yellow crosswalk. Exhibit A depicts these recommendations. Attachments P.106- 1SDU111RSM2003 AgeMes & DocUmontswW- Rush & Angelus Stop Sign Request.doc OCT.28'2003 15:11 AUG. -26' 031TUE) 07 ;56 CITY OF ROSEMEAD November 20. 2M City of Rosemead 6838 E. Valley Blvd. Rosemead, CA 91770 Attn: Traffic Commission To Whom It May Concern: TEL :626 -307 -9218 115819 P. 011 This is to express my concerns related to traRle safety and parking issues on Rush Street and to request an evaluation of the current traffic flow. My recommendation to Improve safety in the area is to place a stop sign at the Intersection of Angelus and Rush. In addition to the stop sign I would also recommend increasing the red zone ante on the north side of Rush Street directly in from of the Amberwood Complex Attempting to exit the complex is very dangerous during rush hourtratflc and there have been far too many near misses. Not only is the traffic extremely fast during rush hour it continues to be fast throughout the night In October 2000 1 wrote the City asking to have speed bumps/humps installed to help reduce the speed to no avail, The speed limit is 35 miles per hour, however, at all hours of the day and night vehicles speed by at 50 to W miles per hour. I understand that enforcing the speed is not the City's Concern but rather the Sheriffs responsibility. I strongly recommend that this situation be evaluated as soon as possible. I look forward to hearing from you soon. Sincerely, Marie fiver P. 003 8368 Rush Street Rosemead, CA 91770 (626) 280 -9042 OCT.28'2003 15:11 $7tl1`1 Y.UlG WAN t ai EKhib'tfi �d OCT.2e 15:11 w 7 Q 3 �O I Hf J c111 Ie U91i J j1 00/0 �� a1/1�/le Z LEGEND � j — 'ruQNIN6 Ho%JrH&Nr 11 4 - - + Pumb RI AW Moit H ear ^ a N T.3p-$ ;3O/l1'•15- LZ:15�2:OO -3��0 #5919 P.013 NO .'ALE I'+✓9 /LS/92 ' •. Z /fy /3 39�15� EKkii ;+ 3 OOT.28 15:11 - 05819 P.019 ]. a z * !�" MULTI -WAY STOP SIGN WARRANTS (FROM CALTRANS TRAFFIC MANUAL) LOCATION; '(- DAT E: (D 03 The installation of multi -way STOP signs are based on the following: 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 -tum collisions as well as right -angle collisions. 1 Co1�;g1oN re�rler� '�•+ �� 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 A iW 676 7 350 -! + Iln6. Satisfied: Ye No C ,Fgoe> (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 A, g6 <!4 O 9.�de1�n� `� (T� � ZoO� 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 ,vp �AA� Q� �'Z� h�� Guideline ,6� ,�� ^ '1• 13 v 'h V 95 '� �1V6 (a) Total Volume 500 350 1 721 7444 571155V 610 Q5j1,6Z514611 6716 (b) Combined Volume 200 (140) 186 1 10'7 1 q$ 166 1 175 1 1 - 6 01 50 1 84 $�ca�C9 peG�A9'1'M C4u�El1 a + g�hcaal EKk ip {{ t+C /+ char *�relet�ge `limr!5