Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5/11/1995CITY OF DIAMOND BAR MINUTES OF THE TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MAY 11, 1995 CALL TO ORDER . Chairman Istik called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. at the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Hearing Room, 21865 East Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by Commissioner Gravdahl. ROLL CALL Commissioners: Chair Istik, Vice Chair Leonard, Commissioners Chavers, Gravdahl, Ortiz Staff: Senior Engineer, David Liu; Consultant Engineer, Michael Myers; Administrative Assistant, Tseday Aberra; Sergeant Rawlings; and Recording Secretary, Carol Dennis I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. 2. Meeting of March 30, 1995. A motion was made by C/Chavers and seconded by C/Ortiz to approve the minutes as submitted. The motion was approved unanimously with the following roll call: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Meeting of April 13, 1995. Chavers, Ortiz, Gravdahl, VC/Leonard, Chair/Istik None None None Chair/Istik indicated that the minutes do not reflect the conversation on the 25 MPH streets and he had made comments which should be reflected in the minutes under VII. STATUS OF PREVIOUS ACTION ITEMS. A motion was made by C/Chavers and seconded by C/Ortiz to approve the minutes as amended. The motion was approved unanimously with the following roll call: May 11, 1995 Page 2 T&T Commission AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Chavers, Ortiz, Gravdahl, VC/Leonard, Chair/Istik NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None II. COMMISSION COMMENTS: C/Ortiz stated that he responded to Frank Dursa's inquiry regarding posted radar enforcement signs as follows: There are posted radar enforcement signs within the City limits at Pathfinder Road and Brea Canyon Road, Brea Canyon Road and Diamond Bar Boulevard, Grand Avenue and Longview Drive, Temple Avenue and Golden Springs Drive, Temple Avenue and Diamond Bar Boulevard, and Lemon Avenue and Golden Springs Drive. C/Ortiz continued that the second item he researched for Mr. Dursa was whether there is a boundary line sign indicating the City of Diamond Bar on Brea Canyon Road and there is none. He further stated that he recalls there used to be such a sign at that location. Mr. Dursa is requesting a City of Diamond Bar boundary sign at that location. C/Ortiz stated that he and VC/Leonard attended a Contract Cities Workshop. He offered a copy of the Commissioner's Handbook received during the seminar as a guide for the rules and regulations for the Traffic and Transportation Commission. VC/Leonard stated the Contract City's event that she and C/Ortiz attended was outstanding and informative. She continued that there was some interesting information regarding Youth Commission Program's which she will give to SE/Liu. C/Chavers stated that in driving Diamond Bar Boulevard, there seems to be varying interpretations of the "No -Parking" and "When Parking is Allowed" in front of some of the Churches. It seems to him that there is parking in front of St. Denis Church on days other than the allowable Sunday parking days. In particular, there were parked vehicles in front of St. Denis on the west side of Diamond Bar Boulevard on Monday, May 8, 1995 in the evening. He indicated he is concerned that the City went out of its way to provide Sunday parking and he feels that the parishioners may think that anytime the Church is busy it is okay to park on the street. He asked staff to contact the Church and find out what occurred on Monday, May 8, 1995 in the evening and to remind St. Denis not to 1 f] 1 May 11, 1995 Page 3 misinterpret the policy of Parking" or whenever there ar because abuse of the privilege Sunday parking privilege. TST Commission "...Except on Sundays", "No Church activities occurring could result in a loss of the Chair/Istik asked staff to draft an appropriate letter to both St. Denis and the Evangelical Free Church on behalf of the Commission to advise them about the potential for problems if the hours that were set for parking on Diamond Bar Boulevard are not followed. C/Ortiz stated he supports C/Chavers' comments and further stated that during a Sunday afternoon activity, St. Denis neglected to cover the "No -Stopping Any Time" signs. He reminded staff that during the March 30, 1995 meeting, he had requested that a letter be forwarded to the Monsignor referencing the parking at the fire zone/red curb. He indicated he had recently contacted the Monsignor and the Monsignor stated he had not received the letter. He discussed the parking situation with the Monsignor and asked that the the parties attending functions at the Church be notified of the parking stipulation. He stated that the Monsignor response was that there was no way the Church could control the actions of Church guests. VC/Istik thanked Sgt. Rawlings for the 1995 California Vehicle Code books presented to the Commissioners. III. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Craig Clute, 21217 Fountain Springs Road, stated that with respect to the April 13, 1995 minutes for the Neighborhood Traffic Management Workshop he did not suggest limiting parking to one side of Fountain Springs Road. He was speaking of streets like Sunbright Drive. He further stated that he does not believe there is a lighting problem, he was only reflecting concerns from other citizens. In addition, he does not understand the minutes regarding Mr. Sanchez's statement about Commercial trucks. He indicated he believes the minutes should reflect two to five percent of Commercial traffic or 60 to 160 Commercial vehicles on Diamond Bar's streets. He asked for further clarification of "Commercial Trucks" and "truck route". Responding to Mr. C1ute, Chair/Istik asked if it would be Mr. Clute's desire to have Diamond Bar Boulevard designated as a May 11, 1995 Page 4 T&T Commission truck route to which Mr. Clute responded in the affirmative indicating Diamond Bar Boulevard was the designated truck route. Chair/Istik stated that Diamond Bar Boulevard was not designated as a truck route because it was thought that commercial trucks would avoid the congested freeway and use the street for a cut -through to get to Chino Hills or Pomona. The truck routes were designated for Lemon Avenue and Brea Canyon Road for exiting south from the City of Industry to get to the freeway. Sgt. Rawlings stated that the way the ordinances are written, trucks are allowed to deviate from a truck route in order to get to a place of pickup or delivery. Mr. Clute stated that, in his opinion, the City has an obligation to clearly post the City's ordinance and desires with respect to commercial traffic. In response to Mr. Clute, C/Chavers stated that Mr. Clute is referring to two levels of control for trucks. The first level is what the City currently has as an ordinance and the signs regarding what truck routes are and are not truck routes and are posted at the City's limits. This keeps the bigger vehicles from cutting through the City. The second level includes trucks that have a right to be in the City with the required bill of lading, then it is a matter of how their paths are controlled. At that point, it is up to the City to define, neighborhood by neighborhood and posting accordingly, as to whether commercial vehicles traffic is allowed. Typically, postings are seen which prohibit truck traffic over 10,000 GVW. Therefore, carriers such as Federal Express vans and UPS vans are not prohibited from travelling those neighborhood streets since such vehicles are under the 10,000 GVW. With regard to Mr. Clute's earlier statement about Mr. Sanchez's response to C/Chavers, he inferred that with regard to pneumatic hoses which are activated by vehicle tires, Mr. Sanchez could not tell if it was a four or six -wheeled vehicle that passed over the hose. All he could count is axles. C/Chavers further stated that he had read the minutes and the minutes accurately reflected the question put forth. He indicated that if Mr. Clute wants to stop commercial traffic from going into his neighborhood, that can be at an ordinance level and posted to say "commercial vehicles over certain pounds weight prohibited". These signs can be posted at the gateways to the neighborhood and then it becomes an enforcement issue. SE/Liu stated, in response to C/Chavers, that he is not aware of any enforcement signs in the City. May 11, 1995 Page 5 T&T Commission C/Chavers indicated these issues should be taken up at the June Neighborhood Traffic Management Workshop since it is a neighborhood by neighborhood issue. Chair/Istik stated that if this was a Citywide issue and most of the City was not in favor, none of the City would get the signs. The place to begin is with the Neighborhood Traffic Management study and address this item at the next workshop. Mr. Clute stated his second concern is with enforcement of the neighborhood street speed limits. Chair/Istik suggested that some answers to his concerns may come out of the Neighborhood Traffic Management Workshop. Mr. Clute reiterated that he would like to see something done with respect to the prima facia issue. SE/Liu responded that the City spoke with a judge of the Pomona traffic court and according to him, the definition under Vehicle Code Section 40802, the criteria for local streets is not more than 1/2 mile of uninterrupted lane and interruptions shall include official traffic control devices, which he concludes are traffic signals, as defined in Section 445. The City attorney has been requested to give his opinion with respect to this issue. Mr. Clute asked the Commission to look at the following three Sections of the Vehicles Code: 21450, 445 and 440. Sgt. Rawlings responded that Section 40802 states that traffic signals must be included in "things that are interruptions". It does not say that these interruptions are exclusive. Some courts consider a cross street sufficient to constitute an interruption. Chair/Istik stated that radar can be used at the current posted speed of 30 miles per hour. He again referred to the June Neighborhood Traffic Management Workshop for solutions to these items. IV. CONSENT CALENDAR: A. San Gabriel Valley Bikeway Master Plan. AA/Aberra stated that approximately one month ago, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LACMTA) gave cities who are participating in the San Gabriel Valley Bikeway Master Plan study an opportunity May 11, 1995 Page 6 T&T Commission to review and comment on the proposed bikeway map. In correspondence dated April 21 and May 3, 1995, staff requested LACMTA include the comments expressed in the letters. Copies of the correspondence are attached for the Commission's information. Staff recommends that the Traffic and Transportation Commission receive and file this report. Responding to Chair/Istik, AA/Aberra stated that this plan deals with the County of Los Angeles and a bike path from Diamond Bar to Brea could involve Orange County. However, in working with LACMTA, the San Gabriel Valley Bikeway Masterplan involves cities in L.A. County. In response to C/Chavers, CE/Myers indicated the second paragraph under bullet one in the April 21, 1995 letter from the City of Diamond Bar to Art Cueto, LACMTA, should be a new paragraph. The City has requested that the San Gabriel Valley Area Bikeway Master Plan include the Brea Canyon Road route, the Grand Avenue, the Chino Hills Parkway and Chino Avenue, as well as the upgrading of the existing Class III bike route along a portion of Golden Springs Drive between Diamond Bar Boulevard and Sylvan Glen Road. Chair/Istik ask that the connection through the Sphere of Influence and an extension to the City of Brea to complete the bikeway be included in future letters. CE/Myers responded that contained within the General Plan a directive that the City shall prepare a master plan of bikeways. Such a plan would be agendized for the Traffic and Transportation Commission with opportunities for public comment. In addition, there may be public workshops held with respect the master bikeway plan. Chair/Istik instructed staff to receive and file the report. In response to Mr. Clute, Chair/Istik stated this is a first effort to get the cities to work together. C/Chavers indicated that the counties work within the agencies of their respective jurisdictions and the boundary agencies are left to work with boundary agencies from the next county to make connection. Because the City of Diamond Bar is on the cusp of two county May 11, 1995 Page 7 T&T Commission boundaries, it is up to the City to extend the San Gabriel Valley Plan to neighboring jurisdictions. Similarly, Brea is charged with integrating the Orange County master plan with Diamond Bar. Chair/Istik stated that it would be an advantage to connect a cut -through bike path with the existing Chino Hills State Park bikeways. B. Neighborhood Traffic Management Study. Area bounded by Pathfinder Road, Diamond Bar Boulevard, and Brea Canyon Road. Staff recommends that the Traffic and Transportation Commission receive and file the report. Chair/Istik so ordered. V. OLD BUSINESS: A. Policy on Protected -Permissive Left -Turn Signal Phasing. SE/Liu stated that the Design and Operational Guidelines established by the Orange County Traffic Engineering Council regarding protected/permissive left -turn signal phasing is included in the Commissioner's packets for their review. The guidelines, dated April, 1995, were prepared by the Orange County Traffic Engineer Council. He further stated that this is an information report which represents the current majority opinions of the Committee. Staff recommends that the guidelines be reviewed by the Traffic and Transportation Commission. C/Chavers ask how the City is going to develop a policy AA/Aberra reported that the Traffic and Transportation Commission, staff and DKS Associates held the first of two public workshops and met with residents in the subject Neighborhood Traffic Management Study area on April 13, 1995. Residents had the opportunity to express and discuss their concerns. The Department of Public Works mailed out the second questionnaire on April 28, 1995 for the second public workshop to be held on June 8, 1995. The questionnaire is included in the Commissioner's information packet. The questionnaire and attachments have been reviewed by both the Steering Committee and the Chairman of the Traffic and Transportation Commission. Staff recommends that the Traffic and Transportation Commission receive and file the report. Chair/Istik so ordered. V. OLD BUSINESS: A. Policy on Protected -Permissive Left -Turn Signal Phasing. SE/Liu stated that the Design and Operational Guidelines established by the Orange County Traffic Engineering Council regarding protected/permissive left -turn signal phasing is included in the Commissioner's packets for their review. The guidelines, dated April, 1995, were prepared by the Orange County Traffic Engineer Council. He further stated that this is an information report which represents the current majority opinions of the Committee. Staff recommends that the guidelines be reviewed by the Traffic and Transportation Commission. C/Chavers ask how the City is going to develop a policy May 11, 1995 Page 8 T&T Commission for determining left -turn signal warrants. Currently, the CalTrans guidelines is for either extreme of no left turn indication or exclusive phasing. The current proposal is to look to what other states are doing and that is to have the in-between opportunity of Protective - Permissive (green arrow followed by green ball). He stated he has reviewed the report and likes what is states. Responding to C/Chavers, SE/Liu stated the process utilized by the City for the past three years is that each time a signal warrant study is conducted, the City requests the designer/traffic engineer to consider the Protective -Permissive option. This option is considered prior to implementation of the exclusive protected left turn operation. As a result of the request from the Traffic and Transportation Commission, the City has requested Austin -Foust to provide a feasibility of utilizing Protective -Permissive left turns for the intersections of Brea Canyon Road at Golden Springs Drive, Diamond Bar Boulevard at Golden Springs Drive and Diamond Bar Boulevard at Mountain Laurel Way. The conclusion of the report by Joe Faust is that Protective - Permissive left turn phasing may be used for these intersections. C/Chavers stated his understanding that Mr. Foust,s first letter recommended Exclusive phasing and that he had not considered Protective -Permissive until staff went back and asked Mr. Foust to consider this alternative. He indicated he was upset by what had been recommended by the consultant without consideration of whether there was a need for Exclusive phasing. SE/Liu responded that this consideration can be made during the design phase. C/Chavers suggested the Traffic and Transportation Commission recommend to staff that warrant studies for potential signals include a complete left turn evaluation (i.e., (1) whether a signal is warranted; (2) whether left -turn signalling is warranted, and (3) what variety the signalling could or should be). Responding to C/Gravdahl, C/Chavers stated that the left turn onto north Golden Springs Drive should be an .-., Exclusive left turn phasing. He indicated he would never make a dual left turn for a Protective -Permissive phasing. IThe Golden Springs Drive left turn has a May ii, 1995 Page 9 T&T Commission Protective -Permissive lead left arrow turn. He stated he prefers Protective -Permissive for both the north and south approaches of Golden Springs Drive at Diamond Bar Boulevard. In response to C/Gravdahl, Chair/Istik stated he would not take an existing Protective left turn and turn it into a Protective -Permissive Left -Turn Signaling. Accidents occur more frequently immediately after a Protective left -turn is turned into a Protective - Permissive left turn. C/Chavers concurred with Chair/Istik. He indicated that once a control is Exclusive, he would never backup into a Protective - Permissive control. The correct method is to start out with Permissive and move up to more restrictive measures. SE/Liu stated travelling northbound on Golden Springs Drive there is one left turn pocket with a Protective - Permissive phasing. Mr. Foust recommends a Protective - Permissive phasing for the southbound left -turn lane on Golden Springs Drive. With respect to the Diamond Bar Boulevard/Golden Springs Drive intersection, SE/Liu indicated he would not change the current signal on Diamond Bar Boulevard. Responding to C/Gravdahl, C/Chavers stated the cost to upgrade from Permissive to Protective -Permissive would be approximately $500. In response to Chair/Istik, SE/Liu stated that the guidelines established by the Orange County Traffic Engineering Council will be incorporated into new signal designs. He indicated he is not aware of any similar studies now in circulation. VI. NEW BUSINESS A. Mid -Block Pedestrian Crossing on Grand Avenue. CE/Myers stated that Councilman Harmony requested that this item be agendized for the Traffic and Transportation Commission. The request is for a mid -block pedestrian crossing on Grand Avenue from the Daisy Apartments to the Library/medical office buildings. Upon receipt of the request, staff conducted a field investigation and the results are contained in a report included in the Commissioner's packets. If a pedestrian crossing was May 11, 1995 Page 10 T&T Commission considered directly across from the driveway/front door of the Library, approximately 660 feet (2 x 3001) would be saved for those residents of the apartments crossing Grand Avenue. Consideration of a cross -walk in this location is not recommended by staff. Staff further recommends a targeted promotion of the hazards of jaywalking, particularly within the Daisy Apartment complex. the Library and the businesses on the south side of Grand Avenue. CE/Myers continued that the hazards of a mid -block crossing on a street such as Grand Avenue are much greater than the inconvenience to the citizenry. There are currently signalized cross -walks at Grand Avenue and Diamond Bar Boulevard, as well as Grand Avenue and Montefino Avenue. Responding to C/Chavers, Sgt. Rawlings indicated he was not aware of any pedestrian accidents or enforcement issues at this location. In response to C/Chavers and in accordance with Councilman Harmony's request, CE/Myers stated the analysis was conducted with respect to the Library/medical office building driveway and the Daisy Apartments driveway. Chair/Istik suggested a pedestrian crossing that vehicle traffic might not be expecting mid -block could be a liability to the City. CE/Myers, responding to C/Chavers, indicated he had not witnessed any pedestrians crossing at the location. C/Chavers stated he agrees with Chair/Istik and further suggested placement of "Not a Pedestrian Crossing" signs should be placed at the location during the resurfacing and restriping of Grand Avenue. C/Gravdahl suggested that a request could be addressed to the manager of the Daisy Apartments for inclusion of jaywalking information in the complex's newsletter. C/Ortiz stated that he met with Councilman Harmony who stated that he was forwarding this request from one resident who was notified to be present at tonight's meeting. C/Ortiz further stated that he feels that such May 11, 1995 Page 11 T&T Commission a cross walk is totally unsafe because it gives a false sense of security assumed by the pedestrians. A motion was made by C/Ortiz and seconded by C/Gravdahl to accept staff's recommendation. The motion was approved unanimously with the following roll call: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Ortiz, Gravdahl, Chavers, VC/Leonard, Chair/Intik NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None VII. STATUS OF PREVIOUS ACTION ITEM - None VIII.ITEMS FROM COMMISSIONERS: C/Ortiz suggested that the City upgrade the traffic signal control box at the K -Mart Shopping Center on Diamond Bar Boulevard. Chair/Istik indicated the sprinkler could be adjusted to avoid promotion of rust on the box. IX. ITEMS FROM STAFF: A. Future Agenda Items. Chair/Istik again requested that the issue of Prima Facia 25 Mile Per Hour speed limit be forwarded to City Council for consideration. Chair/Istik stated he would like the issue of the City's street maintenance contract agendized for the next Traffic and Transportation Commission meeting. X. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: C/Ortiz stated the Southern California Automobile Club will be moving to Diamond Bar. He indicated he spoke with Mrs. Ann Gonzales who stated the Club has training and educational materials regarding pedestrian safety, bicycle safety and vehicle inspection, drivers training for senior citizens, etc. which they will be offering the City. VC/Leonard announced she will not be present for the June 8, May 11, 1995 Page 12 T&T Commission 1995 Traffic and Transportation Commission meeting. XI. ADJOURNMENT Chairman Istik declared the meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m. Res lly, avid G. Liu Secretary Atte5 Jaq# Istik Ch rman