Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout7/25/1996CITY OF DIAMOND BAR MINUTES OF THE TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION JULY 25, 1996 CALL TO ORDER: Chair/Istik called the meeting to order at 7:12 p.m. at the South Coast Air Quality Management District Room CC -6, 21865 East Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by Vice Chair Leonard. ROLL CALL: Commissioners: Chair/Istik, Vice Chair Leonard, Commissioners Nice and Tamaya Absent: Commissioner Virginkar Staff: City Engineer George Wentz; Deputy Director of Public Works David Liu; Assistant Engineer Rose Manela; Administrative Assistant Tseday Aberra; Sergeant Rawlings; and Recording Secretary Carol Dennis I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Minutes of May 9, 1996. VC/Leonard made a motion, seconded by C/Nice, to approve the minutes as presented. Without objections, the motion was so ordered. B. Minutes of June 13, 1996. C/Tamaya made a motion, seconded by VC/Leonard, to approve the minutes as presented. Without objections, the motion was so ordered. II. COMMISSION COMMENTS - None III. PUBLIC COMMENTS Tom Ortiz requested Mr. Shields, a Diamond Bar resident, receive recognition for assisting the Walnut Sheriff's Department. He stated his concerns regarding the street condition in the area of 23000 Golden Springs Drive. He reiterated his concerns about the parking problems around the City's schools. He offered to assist VC/Leonard with the Placentia School video. July 25, 1996 Page 2 T&T Commission Craig Clute, Fountain Springs, asked for smaller warning signs on Fountain Springs Road. He requested the City research the Diamond Bar High School parking restrictions and signs. He suggested the City consider diagonal parking in the redesign phase of Brea Canyon Road. DDPW/Liu responded to Chair/Istik that the conceptual Brea Canyon Road improvement plan is complete. Discussion for this item is slated for the October Traffic and Transportation Commission meeting. Chair/Istik asked DDPW/Liu to make the plans available to Mr. Clute. V. OLD BUSINESS A. Cul-de-sacing Sunset Crossing Road from SR 57 off - ramp to the westerly City limit. 1_7 Chair/Istik asked staff to revise the report to include discussion of narrowing Sunset Crossing Road from the SR 57 off -ramp to the cul-de-sac. DPW/Wentz stated the City Council directed staff to determine the feasibility of cul-de-sacing the end of Sunset Crossing Road and installing a pocket park. He indicated staff is aware of the Commission's concerns regarding the width of Sunset Crossing Road with respect to current and future street use. With the Traffic and Tranpsortation's request, staff will research additional alternatives and pursue further City Council consideration. Chair/Istik stated the narrowing of Sunset Crossing Road would be consistent with the approved cul-de-sacing. DPW/Wentz responded to Chair/Istik that raised barriers are proposed for the end of the cul-de- sac which causes the traffic to enter the parking area. The parking will extend to the existing curb and gutter on both sides and will be striped 7-7 on the existing pavement. The pocket park will be the full width of the westerly street extending - about 70 feet easterly from the City limit. City July 25, 1996 Page 3 T&T Commission Council has approved the design process of Phase II. C/Tamaya stated Mayor Pro Tem Huff is concerned about the potential cost to narrow the street. DPW/Wentz responded that staff will consider each alternative offered by the Commission and estimate the costs involved. C/Tamaya indicated that although the MRF is being relocated, it is feasible to believe that the City of Industry intends to develop the area at some future date. C/Nice suggested the Sunset Crossing Road residents be surveyed. DPW/Wentz concurred. Responding to Chair/Istik, DPW/Wentz stated the intent of Phase II is to remove a portion of asphalt and create a lack of continuity between the City's limits. Chair/Istik stated that some of the right-of-way could be vacated to make it unavailable for connecting the two cities. VC/Leonard stated her approval of a street median alternative. VC/Leonard made a motion, seconded by C/Tamaya to request DPW/Wentz to confer with the City Manager regarding the Commission's direction and direct staff to present recommendations and related costs at the Traffic and Transportation Commission's September meeting. Without objections, the motion was so ordered. VI. NEW BUSINESS A. Draft Speed Hump Policy for the City of Diamond Bar. DDPW/Liu read the staff report into the record. Staff recommends the Traffic and Transportation Commission discuss and address the issues raised in the report. Chair/Istik conducted a straw poll of the July 25, 1996 Page 4 T&T commission Commission which resulted in VC/Leonard, C/Nice and C/Virginkar (by proxy) being opposed to speed humps and C/Tamaya and Chair/Istik in favor of speed humps with restrictions. DDPW/Liu responded to C/Tamaya that he believes the City of Chino Hills' speed bumps were installed by San Bernardino County. Chair/Istik asked for public comments. Craig Clute stated he is in favor of speed humps with restrictions to slow the residential traffic. He asked for the opportunity to review the City's proposed speed hump policy. Don Gravdahl stated that in his opinion, speed humps are a liability and believes the City Attorney would recommend no speed humps in Diamond Bar. DDPW/Liu stated the City Attorney's opinion is that speed humps are a roadway design feature and not a traffic control device. He advises that a speed hump policy is dependent upon a risk benefits analysis. Consideration would be limited to speed humps on streets with a grade of 5 percent or less. DPW/Wentz stated staff's policy is no speed humps. The discussion concerns whether the Commission wishes to recommend that the City Council adopt a different policy. C/Tamaya reiterated he favors a restricted speed hump policy for streets of less than 5 percent grade and with 75 percent of the community favoring a policy with speed humps placed in residential areas where small children are present. He indicated his concern that residents should be notified prior to any installation taking place. C/Nice respectfully disagreed with C/Tamaya. He suggested that any resident who may wish to consider a speed hump in their neighborhood be July 25, 1996 Page 5 T&T Commission provided City literature explaining the reason for the City's "No Speed Hump" policy. Chair/Istik stated he believes speed humps may be beneficial in some instances. He further stated that the City of Pasadena has indicated the vehicle speed has decreased by three to five miles per hour as a result of speed hump installations. VC/Leonard recommended "No Speed Hump" policy and cited the potential liability and the implementation costs. She reminded the Commission that C/Virginkar has expressed his opposition to the speed hump policy. B. Request to install a stop sign and centerline striping at the intersection of Morning Canyon Road and Presado Drive; and, C. Request to install a stop sign on Minnequa Drive at Bower Cascade Place. AA/Aberra stated staff has investigated both intersections in question and is presenting these items to the Commission for consideration under its previously established policy. Chair/Istik asked for public testimony. Mr. Gravdahl reiterated his request for a stop sign on Minnequa Drive at Bower Cascade Place. He indicated that in his opinion, potential exists for a fatal accident at the intersection. DPW/Wentz stated that the potential liability involving speed humps rests with the City. C/Tamaya made a motion, seconded by Chair/Istik to continue with the City's current policy of "No Speed Humps". The motion passed with the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: C/Tamaya, Vice Chair Leonard, C/Nice NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Chair/Istik ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: C/Virginkar B. Request to install a stop sign and centerline striping at the intersection of Morning Canyon Road and Presado Drive; and, C. Request to install a stop sign on Minnequa Drive at Bower Cascade Place. AA/Aberra stated staff has investigated both intersections in question and is presenting these items to the Commission for consideration under its previously established policy. Chair/Istik asked for public testimony. Mr. Gravdahl reiterated his request for a stop sign on Minnequa Drive at Bower Cascade Place. He indicated that in his opinion, potential exists for a fatal accident at the intersection. July 25, 1996 Page 6 T&T Commission Mr. Clute stated that in general, stop signs are permanent and require warrant justification and enforcement. DPW/Wentz stated that if the Commission finds merit for installation of a stop sign at one leg of an intersection, the Commission must state the reasons for justification. If the Commission recommends stop signs at all three legs of an intersection, staff recommends a warrant study. With respect to Item C., C/Tamaya made a motion, seconded by VC/Leonard, to install a stop sign on Minnequa Drive at Bower Cascade Place. Without objections, the motion was so ordered. With respect to Item B., VC/Leonard made a motion, seconded by C/Tamaya, to install a stop sign on Presado Drive at Morning Canyon Road. The motion failed with the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: VC/Leonard, Tamaya NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Nice, Chair/Intik ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None The Commission concurred to accept staff's recommendation for no centerline striping at the intersection of Morning Canyon Road and Presado Drive. DPW/Wentz indicated that it is staff's intention not to put stop signs at T -Intersections unless there is potential need based upon sight distance, grade and/or other vision related problems. In the future, staff reports will detail, in an adopted standardized format, the basis upon which a conclusion has been reached as a foundation for staff's recommendation. In addition, as policies are adopted, they will be included in a Policies Handbook. D. Standard of practice for installation of centerline striping for residential streets in the City of Diamond Bar. July 25, 1996 Page 7 T&T Commission DDPW/Liu read the staff report into the record. Staff recommends that the Traffic and Transportation Commission concur with staff's recommended standard of practice for installation of centerline striping for residential streets in the City of Diamond Bar. Chair/Istik asked for public testimony. Debbie O'Connor, Bower Cascade Place, referred to Commission at her letter of July 25. She indicated that if it is the City's practice to visit the residential street, complete an analysis of the number of reported accidents, and the width, length and grade of the street, visibility, sight distance and other potential concerns, she would like to see the results of the study for her neighborhood prior to installation of the of the double yellow centerline striping. She stated that since her March inquiry to the Department of Public Works, she has not had a response. Mr. Gravdahl asked when the City plans to finish the centerline striping on Minnequa Drive. He suggested the centerline striping consideration include street width. C/Tamaya asked if Mr. Gravdahl believes the Minnequa Drive striping should be a double yellow centerline striping. Mr. Gravdahl responded that either a single or double yellow centerline stripe may be acceptable. Mr. Clute stated in his opinion, centerline striping is not effective. Stop signs appear to be more effective in causing motorists to stay on the proper side of the street. DDPW/Liu responded to C/Tamaya that in accordance with the Commission's request, the question of centerline striping on Minnequa Drive will be readdressed by the Commission after the Commission has established a centerline striping policy. In response to Mrs. O'Connor, the City did not, at the time of centerline striping the residential streets, notify the residents. Staff agrees that July 25, 1996 Page 8 T&T commission notification should be considered with respect to future requests. He indicated the residents views are mixed with respect to vehicles passing on the wrong side of Minnequa Drive. VC/Leonard stated that she believes a single yellow centerline stripe on Minnequa Drive would suffice. Double yellow centerline striping is overkill. She indicated she was able to drive on the proper side of the street except in the curved area where the motorhome is parked. In general, sight visibility is good and she observed motorists driving safely. Chair/Istik voiced his concerns that too many stop signs and too much striping is being installed within the City. He stated he would prefer to have certain criteria such as sight distance and accident history trigger a yellow center line installation. DDPW/Liu responded to C/Nice that staff's observations are reflected in the staff report presented to the Commission. Responding to Mrs. O'Connor and VC/Leonard, DDPW/Liu indicated that the Commission could request staff to re-evaluate and/or sandblast certain portions of a street in order to remove a double yellow centerline stripe. Staff's recommendation is to keep the Minnequa Drive double yellow centerline striping in place. DPW/Wentz stated staff will reconsider the double yellow centerline striping on Minnequa Drive and bring a recommendation back to the Traffic and Transportation Commission on September 12, 1996. C/Tamaya made a motion, seconded by C/Nice, if staff's recommendation is to stripe the unstriped areas of Minnequa Drive, that it be striped with dashed yellow centerline striping. The existing double yellow centerline striping will be reconsidered for dashed yellow centerline. i DPW/Wentz responded to Chair/Istik that staff will 1 1 1 July 25, 1996 Page 9 T&T Commission agendize the centerline striping policy item ahead of the Minnequa Drive centerline striping. The motion was approved with the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Tamaya, Nice, VC/Leonard NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Chair/Istik ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None DDPW/Liu responded to C/Tamaya that arterial streets and collector streets have a higher priority for centerline striping consideration than residential streets. VII. STATUS OF PREVIOUS ACTION ITEMS - None VIII. ITEMS FROM COMMISSIONERS - None IX. ITEMS FROM STAFF A. Parking restriction on the west side of Brea Canyon Road at Pathfinder Road. B. Monthly Traffic Enforcement Update: Sgt. Rawlings presented the June Traffic Enforcement update. The June enforcement index was 57.8. He estimated the average enforcement index for the contract cities was 20-25 percent. C. Future Agenda Items: C/Tamaya requested discussion of the Diamond Bar High School parking restrictions and signs be agendized. DPW/Liu stated the 4th Neighborhood Traffic Workshop will be held on August 1, 1996. Centerline striping on Prospectors Road from Golden Springs Drive to Sunset Crossing Road. Request to further restrict parking on the east side of Brea Canyon Road between Lycoming Street July 25, 1996 Page 10 T&T Commission and Washington Street. X. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: A. The 1140 MPH" sign located on Sunset Crossing Road at southbound SR 57 off -ramp and westbound SR 60 on-ramp will need to remain as currently posted in order to inform motorists that they are entering a 40 MPH zone on Sunset Crossing Road. B. K -Mart's shopping cart rack has been relocated from in front of the red curb. C. The Diamond Ranch High School secondary access will be an unimproved emergency access road. A fully improved second road will not be required until student enrollment reaches 1,200. C/Tamaya urged the Commission to immediately j consider the secondary access to Diamond Ranch ! High School and make a recommendation to the City Council. He asked staff to provide the Commission with an analysis. D. Planning Commission Agenda for July 22, 1996. XI. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Traffic and Transportation Commission, Chair/Istik adjourned the meeting at 9:58 p.m. to the August 8, 1996. Respectfully, Iia _ G. Liu Secretary Attest: J14� Jag,k Istik C it