Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4/11/2002CITY OF DIAMOND BAR MINUTES OF THE TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION APRIL 11, 2002 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Virginkar called the meeting to order at 7:07 p.m. in the South Coast Air Quality Management/Government Center Hearing Board Room, 21865 E. Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California 91765. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Chairman Virginkar led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL: Present: Chairman Virginkar and Commissioners Vinod Kashyap, Liana Pincher and Tony Tomg. Also Present: David Liu, Director of Public Works, John Ilasin, Assistant Engineer; Kirk Phillips, Associate Engineer, Sharon Gomez, Administrative Assistant, Debbie Gonzales, Administrative Secretary and Lt. Maxey. Absent: Vice -Chair Roland Morris ll. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: A. Minutes of March 14, 2002. C/Kashyap recalled that with respect to the three-way stop sign discussion the Commission requested staff to look into the possibility of whether a second study is required for the second set of stop signs or whether the existing criteria was sufficient to make a recommendation to the City Council. DPW/Liu stated he would check the tape and notes of the meeting. The matter will be presented as requested by the Commission to the City Council on Tuesday night for consideration. Approval of the March 14 minutes was continued to the next meeting. III. COMMISSION COMMENTS None Offered IV. PUBLIC COMMENTS Chery Cooper said she believed that at the last meeting the Commission also requested staff to look into updating the city information from various other cities (with respect to the speed hump issue). Tom Ortiz said that for the first time in 24 years, code enforcement cited him because his gates open to the street. At the time he had it built he secured the proper permits and variance to put a driveway and RV parking pad in his back yard. He and DPW/Liu have been unsuccessful in locating evidence of his permits and he has no records to provide he obtained a variance from the County of Los APRIL 11, 2002 PAGE 2 T&T COMMISSION V. Angeles. He asked that his case be reviewed and placed on the Commission's agenda for consideration. He stated for the record that he would comply with all laws and do whatever the city directs him to do. ChairNirginkar suggested that Mr. Ortiz present his case to the Planning Commission. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Parking Restrictions within the Limits of Freeway Overpasses/Underpasses. DPW/Liu presented staff's report. Staff recommends that the Traffic and Transportation Commission receive staff's report, discuss and recommend that the City Council adopt a resolution restricting parking within the limits of all freeway overpasses and underpasses within the City of Diamond Bar. C/Torng moved, C/Kashyap seconded, to recommend that the City Council adopt a resolution restricting parking within the limits of all freeway overpasses and underpasses within the City of Diamond Bar. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Kashyap, Pincher, Torng, ChairNirginkar NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: VC/Morris C/Kashyap asked for clarification about whether the restriction is intended to apply to the entire length within the CalTrans right-of-way. DPW/Liu said that CalTrans gives discretion to the cities. Staff and sheriff's department personnel determined that the restriction should be within the structure itself. VII. OLD BUSINESS A. Speed Hump Policy AE/Phillips presented staff's report. Staff recommends that the Traffic and Transportation Commission receive staff's report, discuss and recommend that the City Council adopt the Speed Hump Policy. Caroline Chiang, 1632 Kiowa Crest Drive, said she recently found out about the speed hump policy item and has discussed this issue with many of her neighbors who favor speed hump installation. Since Grand Avenue opened, there has been an influx of cut -through traffic in her neighborhood. The stop sign at Santaquin Drive has helped slow the speeding traffic somewhat; however, many children live in the neighborhood and she and APRIL 11, 2002 PAGE 3 T&T COMMISSION her neighbors are very concerned about their safety. She supports a speed hump policy that directs installation. Chery Cooper, resident of Diamond Point Club, commended staff for their excellent work on this very important issue. The stop signs at Del Sol Lane and Platina Drive dramatically decreased the speed of the traffic; however, the speed humps made the real difference. She recommended that the general policy in the third paragraph on Page 1 be amended to include a statement that "the residents would be notified if the city proposed to install, alter or remove...." She referred to Page 2, under Item 8, the statement that "speed humps shall not be installed on streets with lengths of less than '/ mile". On Page 5, Neighborhood Support, "speed humps shall not be installed on any street that does not obtain 67 percent of the residents in favor of the installation." Elsewhere in talks about "residents along the street in question and streets to which traffic might be diverted." Decorah Road runs from Briarcreek westerly to a point at which Decorah Road becomes Navajo Springs Road. The street exceeds 1/4 mile. The residents at the easterly end of Decorah Road never travel to the west -end of Decorah Road. Therefore, it seems to present a Nigh bar for the city. Perhaps the resolution to obtain 67 percent of the residents' approval within a '/4 mile of where the speed hump is placed is a good place to start. The 67 percent designation is pretty high. On Page 4 under "procedure for residential initiated consideration", the subsequent paragraphs apply to the installation, modification or removal of speed humps. Paragraph 5 refers only to notification of installation and she felt that "modification or removal" should be included. She again stated she is very concerned about obtaining consensus from 67 percent of people on adjacent streets. In the case of Navajo Springs Road speed humps, traffic has been diverted to Platina Drive. There has been no request to obtain consensus from 67 percent of the residents on Platina Drive. The only outlet from Platina Drive is Willapa Lane and then from Willapa Lane to Bower Cascade Place to Sunset Crossing Road. If the city intends to obtain consensus from 67 percent of those residents also, this is a significant change to the current practice. She is under the impression that the speed humps will become permanent; therefore, the policy ought to be somewhat less restrictive in terms of the percentage. AE/Phillips explained that speed hump installation and removal requires City Council action. The intent of the paragraph is to say that the city reserves the right to install, modify or remove, based upon the best interest of the city and its citizens. In the case where a person, whether driving lawfully or unlawfully, has an accident and the city is found to be liable for some reason, the City would reserve the right to remove the speed hump. Cities can be held liable and it is therefore prudent that they have the ability to remove the liability. In such instances it may not be the consensus of the residents who live on that particular street to remove the speed hump. APRIL 11, 2002 PAGE 4 T&T COMMISSION C/Kashyap pointed out that the spreadsheet attached to staff's report states the policy criteria for speed hump installation (sheet #1) indicates the cities of Agoura Hills and Thousand Oaks is 60 percent consensus. Both cities have terrain similar to Diamond Bar. Calabasas, a much steeper terrain, requires 66 percent. Other areas mentioned have much steeper terrain and require higher percentages. Based on the criteria 67 percent seems to be subjective. He recommended staff revisit this issue to determine if 67 percent is too high a percentage and determine whether 60 percent may be more appropriate. He questioned the figure of 2,500 cars per day on the street. Chery Cooper agreed that 60 percent would be more appropriate and she would support such a requirement. Ray Hallenbeck, 208 Navajo Springs Road, thanked staff for recommending a speed hump policy. He agreed with C/Kashyap's comments about terrain of other cities. He suggested including Montebello in the report. Montebello requires 60 percent consensus. He suggested stretching the five percent to six or seven percent and moving the speed humps closer to the curve of his street. if the City Council approves the speed hump policy, will the city get permanent speed humps or will the temporary speed humps remain in place? AE/Phillips explained that if City Council approves the policy, permanent speed humps would replace temporary speed humps. C/Torng asked staff how many Diamond Bar streets would meet the criteria. DPW/Liu explained that each area must be considered on a case by case basis and must meet all of the criteria. C/Pincher said that this is a very serious issue. As much as she would not want speed humps in her neighborhood, she understands the city needs to establish a policy. She believed it was important for all residents to understand what speed humps will look like on a daily basis so that there are no surprises. AE/Phillips responded to C/Pincher that the street legend would be painted white and the speed hump would be black with white chevron striping. Signs would be posted 100 feet or beyond to notify motorists that they are approaching a speed hump. In addition, a warning sign would be placed at the location of the speed hump. C/Pincher said that under the assumption that the speed hump policy is approved and other neighborhoods petition for speed hump installation, residents need to realize they may have a sign posted in their front yard and striping in front of their homes that may not be aesthetically pleasing. She APRIL 11, 2002 PAGE 5 T&T COMMISSION believed that residents should have full access to all pertinent information so that they understand the potential side effects of this policy. AE/Phillips agreed with C/Pincher and thought that the information including drawings or photos showing what the street would look like after installation could be included in the petition form. C/Kashyap said Caroline Chiang made an important point about the effects of traffic on residential streets following the opening of Grand Avenue. Long-term solutions should be researched to ward off potential problems. Staff's report stated speed humps should be used as a last resort. If they slow traffic, why should they be considered only as a last resort. AE/Phillips said that speed humps are considered last resort efforts because they are one of the most costly mitigation measures. It may be more cost effective for the city to install signs at a cost of $200 as opposed to a speed hump that costs the city in excess of $5,000. In addition, speed humps are much more permanent than signs. Some cities require the cost of removal to be borne by the residents who request removal within a certain time of installation. C/Kashyap suggested that discussion of the criteria should include input from Chery Cooper. C/Torng said his reason for asking how many streets in Diamond Bar qualify for speed humps was because of his concern about the cost of installation and removal. Therefore, he would like this information included in staff's report so that all data is available for discussion. C/Kashyap asked if staff had pursued alternative financing for speed humps. Chair/Virginkar asked staff to provide rationale for its criteria. He made the point that in most cities where speed humps are installed, traffic returns to normal after six months. In addition, those who break speed laws continue to do so whether or not speed humps have been installed. He asked staff to provide additional related information for next month's discussion. ChairNirginkar stated that VC/Morris was unable to attend tonight's meeting and asked that the matter be held over so that he would be available to participate in the decision-making process. C/Torng believed an agreed upon set of criteria was an essential first step before considering installation of speed humps. Chery Cooper wants the Commission to consider that this issue has been before the residents for more than two years. She strongly urged that next month's work product be complete to the point of Commission action. She APRIL 11, 2002 PAGE 6 T&T COMMISSION agreed with ChairNirginkar's request for rationale. She felt that no right or left turns during commute hours would solve the problem. She asked the Commission to direct staff to provide input regarding experiences of other cities. Ray Hallenbeck agreed with the request for rationale. However, he also agreed that this matter has gone on for two years and he would like a conclusion to the issue. He felt the rationale and statistics were adequately covered in the voluminous material provided to the Commissioners at the previous meeting. He believed the cost for speed humps is minimal compared to the cost of enforcement. If VC/Morris is not present next month the matter should be concluded and forwarded to the Council without his vote. The Commission concurred to continue this matter to the May 9, 2042 meeting. B. Sheriff's Department Traffic Safety Program DPW/Liu introduced Lt. Maxey who spoke about the city's recently revised Traffic Safety Program. He reported on the first draft of the program, copies of which had been provided to the Commissioners. C/Torng recommended that the city consider incorporating portions of the Garden Grove safety program such as safe telephone number (hotline) to report speeding. Perhaps the Neighborhood Watch program can help. Lt. Maxey said that residents do not have to wait to report a speeder, they can call the department any time and the department will contact the person and let them know they have been observed speeding. VII. NEW BUSINESS A. Summitridge Drive Traffic Concerns. AA/Gomez presented staff's report. Staff recommends that the Traffic and Transportation Commission receive public comments and discuss the conditions of the intersection of Summitridge Drive and Softwind Drive and concur with staff's recommendation for a multi -way stop. Abbas Rajaee, 1426 Summitridge Drive, appreciated staff's report. Summitridge Drive suffers a very serious safety problem. With construction of the Community/Senior Center, the residents foresee additional problems. He contacted all of his neighbors between Softwind Drive and Grand Avenue and every resident feels the threat of being in danger of cars passing through Summitridge Drive with low visibility due to the curvature of the street. Residents do not believe that a multi -way stop at Summitridge APRIL 11, 20Q2 PAGE 7 T&T COMMISSION Drive and Softwind Drive is sufficient to mitigate the possibility of a serious accident. All of the residents in the area have children. When events occur, visitors park their vehicles along Summitridge Drive and it further hampers the view of people in the vicinity of the park driveway. There have been a number of close calls and because the park is an attraction for the residents who live across the street, there should be some type of pedestrian crossing with traffic signals. Additionally, the sidewalk on Summitridge Drive is a danger zone for pedestrians because of the excessive speed of the vehicles. David Taquera, 1302 Summitridge Drive, said there is no multi -way stop at Brookwood Drive. They experience speeders at their intersection also. In fact, coming down the hill toward Grand Avenue, vehicles are traveling much faster than they travel at Softwind Drive. He asked the Commission to revisit this issue. Residents in the area would appreciate a three-way stop at Brookwood Drive on Summitridge Drive. Following discussion, C/Kashyap moved, C/Pincher seconded, to accept staff's recommendation for a multi -way stop sign at the intersection of Summitridge Drive and Softwind Drive. C/Torng asked that the motion be amended to include a six month report to the Commission regarding the effectiveness of the installation and include recommendations for possible installation of a multi -way stop at the intersection of Brookwood Drive on Summitridge Drive. C/Kashyap accepted the amendment. C/Torng seconded the amended motion. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Kashyap, Pincher, Torng, ChairNirginkar NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: VC/Morris B. Adelphia Parking Needs on Brea Canyon Road. DPW/Liu presented staff's report. Staff recommends that the Traffic and Transportation Commission receive public comments, discuss the issues and concur with staff's recommendation to retain the red curb markings on the westerly side of Brea Canyon Road from Lycoming Street beyond the Adelphia driveway. There was no one present who wished to speak on this matter. DPW/Liu responded to C/Kashyap that staff invited the applicant and adjacent businesses to tonight's meeting. Deputy Dodd said that Adelphia employees have been warned not to park in the red curb area. Employees responded to her that they had an APRIL 11, 2002 PAGE S T&T COMMISSION agreement with the city to park in the red curb area. According to DPW/Liu there is no such agreement. Realizing this matter was on tonight's agenda, she waited to see if the matter could be resolved before her department began issuing citations. Initially, Adelphia requested the red curbing because big rigs parked in the area. Since that situation has been resolved employees started parking in the same area. Once the red curbing is removed, the same problem will exist. She suggested a permit system be initiated. C/Torng suggested signage to permit parking during business hours only. C/Kashyap reiterated staff's belief that if Adelphia reconfigures their lot to accommodate sufficient employee and company vehicle parking, the problem is solved. C/Torng moved, C/Kashyap seconded to continue this matter to the May 9 meeting to allow the applicant an opportunity to respond to questions and concerns. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Kashyap, Pincher, Torng, Chair/Virginkar NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: VC/Morris C. Recreational Vehicle Parking on Peaceful Hills Road Road. AE/Ilasin presented staff's report. Staff recommends that the Traffic and Transportation Commission concur with staff to forward a request to the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department for increased oversize/overweight parking enforcement. Jerry Wood, 20801 E. Rocky Point Lane, said he initially contacted the city and Sheriff's Department because a resident living on Crest Lane has parked his mini motor home on Peaceful Hills Road for the past several months. At the suggestion of the Sheriff's Department he tried to be a good neighbor and asked the resident to park the vehicle on his own property which he did for approximately three days. The motor home ended up back on Peaceful Hills Road instead of on his street. He believes the individual is aware of the 72- hour rule because he moves the motor home on a daily basis. Aside from the fact that this situation irritates him, it presents a sight visibility problem for through traffic on Peaceful Hills Road. Residential streets are designed to move traffic, not to be a convenient parking lot for RV's and RV's should not be used to mitigate traffic. He asked the Commission to take appropriate actions to institute a ban of parking oversized vehicles on residential streets. The ordinance should include provisions for allowing individuals to have their RV on the street for loading and unloading purposes only. APRIL 11, 2002 PAGE 9 T&T COMMISSION ffffl Chery Cooper said that staff's report seems to be taken directly from the city's code. The code that begins at 10,000 pounds may not address this issue because of the weight of the mini -motor home. She said she seriously considered leaving Diamond Bar. They picked out a home in a neighboring community and decided not to move because that community did not allow RV parking. For those of us who moved to Diamond Bar knowing they could park their RV's on the street, the idea that they may no longer be able to do so is alarming. C/Pincher moved, C/Torng seconded, to concur with staff's recommendation to forward a request to the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department for increased oversize/overweight parking enforcement. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES, COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: STATUS OF PREVIOUS ACTION ITEMS: Kashyap, Pincher, Torng, ChairNirginkar None VC/Morris DPW/Liu reported that during its April 16 meeting the City Council would consider the Commission's recommendation to install multi -way stop signs on Palomino Drive at Platina Drive and on Palomino Drive at La Bonita Road. Also that night, Council will receive a report on the sidewalk improvement and fence replacement projects along the Los Angeles County Golf Course on Grand Avenue, Golden Springs Drive and Prospectors Road. IX. ITEMS FROM COMMISSIONERS: C/Torng recommended that all new Commissioners review the School Traffic Study report completed a few years ago. Chair/Virginkar said the study was interesting and resulted in several joint effort mitigation measures. This is an ongoing effort with annual reviews. C/Pincher said Council Member Zirbes referred a letter to her from a resident living on Gold Rush Drive. She requested the Sheriff's Department consider placing the radar trailer in the area of concern. Deputy Dodd reported that the radar trailer was placed on Gold Rush Drive on April 10. ChairNirginkar pointed out that by the time Deputy Dodd presents her report, the audience members have left the meeting. APRIL 11, 2002 PAGE 10 T&T COMMISSION DPW/Liu said he thought the radar trailer was placed on Gold Rush Drive west of Diamond Bar Boulevard and not in the area of Great Bend Drive. He asked Deputy Dodd to check on the matter. X. ITEMS FROM STAFF A. Traffic Enforcement Update — presented by Deputy Dodd. XI. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: A. Future Agenda Items — as indicated. XII. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE CITY EVENTS — as agendized. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to come before the Traffic and Transportation Commission, ChairNirginkar adjourned the meeting at 10:47 p.m. Respectfully, id Liu, Secretary Attest: OC\' Chairman Arun Virginkar