Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2/13/2003CITY OF DIAMOND BAR MINUTES OF THE TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION FEBRUARY 13, 2003 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Virginkar called the meeting to order at 7:15 p.m. in the South Coast Air Quality Manage me nt/G overnm ent Center Hearing Board Room, 21865 E. Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California 91765. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Vice Chairman Morris led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL: Present: Chairman Virginkar, Vice Chairman Morris, and Commissioners Kashyap, Pincher and Torng. Also Present: David Liu, Public Works Director, Fred Alamolhoda, Senior Engineer; Sharon Gomez, Management Analyst; John Ilasin, Assistant Engineer, Debbie Gonzales, Administrative Assistant and Deputy Mark St. Amant. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: 11. A. Minutes of January 9, 2003. Approval of the January 9, 2003 minutes was continued to the March 13, 2003 meeting. in. COMMISSION COMMENTS: None offered. IV. PUBLIC COMMENTS: None offered. V. CONSENT CALENDAR: None VI. ITEMS FROM STAFF A. Traffic Enforcement Update — Report by Deputy St. Amant - Received and filed on the following items: 1. Citations: 2002 versus 2001 Deputy St. Amant reported that in 2002 the department wrote 11,950 citations compared to 9,348 in 2001. Breakdown as follows: 7,621 hazardous citations compared to 7,278 in 2001 3,804 parking tickets compared to 1,136 in 2001 (increase due to street sweeping) 525 non -hazardous compared to 934 in 2001 534 collisions compared to 505 in 2001 363 non -injury compared to 378 in 2001 February 13, 2003 PAGE 2 171 injury compared to 127 in 2001 99 DUI — compared to 11 in 2001 2. Results of Traffic Operations 3. Future Deployment of the Radar Trailer T&T COMMISSION Responding to ChairNirginkar, Deputy St. Amant explained that the radar trailers are not used to record information. Generally, they are deployed to slow people down and to let them know the speed of their travel. Usually the trailer is deployed to areas of complaint. Once their speed exceeds the speed limit by about 12 miles per hour the trailer starts flashing to get driver's attention. Both trailers have the capability of recording, doing surveys, getting speeds and recording traffic counts. The second unit has a detachable unit that is less noticeable. The detachable unit is usually chained to a telephone pole. It has two lines that extend across the street to provide traffic counts, speed and times. B. ACS Redlight Enforcement/Radar Enforcement — presentation by Ray Pedroza, Brian Alloway and Lillie Lopez. ACS, is based in Dallas, Texas and is publicly traded on the New York Stock Exchange. Statistics quoted during tonight's presentation are found in the Commissioner's packets. The redlight enforcement/radar enforcement system supplements law enforcement in improving driver behavior and impacting public safety. The statistics are the result of a survey conducted in the City of Oxnard. Oxnard was one of the first cities in California to implement photo enforcement in 1998. The pre -implementation survey found that 70 percent of the residents favored implementation of a photo enforcement system. The statistics were obtained three years after implementation. Front and side collisions (T-bone collisions) are one of the more dangerous types of collisions, the primary cause of which is red light running. He cited the following statistics for violation and collision decreases: Indian Wells with 4 cameras, violations have decreased 66 percent. Ten cameras in Sacramento County have resulted in a 65 percent decrease at the specific intersections. Beverly Hills with 8 cameras has seen a 60 percent decrease. San Francisco has one of the more aggressive traffic calming progrms in the state of California and nationally. It includes additional traffic calming measures as well as photo enforcement. In California during September 2002, roughly 315,000 citations were mailed as a result of the ACS application. Mr. Pedroza explained that when a violation occurs a picture is taken of the vehicle license plate. With that information, a real-time name and address query for the registered owner of the vehicle as well as a secondary query to capture the driver's license information is made to the California DMV. February 13, 2003 PAGE 3 T&T COMMISSION The following is the current Southern California presence for ACS — the County of Los Angeles since 1999, the City of West Hollywood since 1999, Oxnard since 1998, the MTA blue line, the first photo enforcement program in California that protects rail crossings, the Metro -Link (a pilot program), and Beverly Hills. The City of Montebello went live today after completing their 30 -day warning period. Currently, Montebello has two cameras deployed with plans for implementation of approximately 10 cameras over the next 12 or so months. The implementation period for Montebello with the holidays and moratorium on construction was about eight weeks from groundbreaking until the cameras went into warning mode. The City of Los Angeles just implemented their 32nd camera during January. Los Angeles is currently discussing expanding their program. Currently, ACS has 97 cameras in operation in Southern California. Mr. Pedroza explained that ACS offers two solutions — a wet camera solution and a digital solution. All of the cities listed use the wet film camera for a variety of reasons. One, wet film technology provides the clearest pictures during daytime and nighttime and there is no other image capture system that gives 20 million pixels. Digital cameras used in this industry offer from 2 to 6 million pixels. Wet film technology uses 35 mm film similar to over-the-counter 35 mm film, but more industrious. All cameras are plug and play. All cameras are portable and can be relocated to another installation to accommodate rotation schedules. Cabinets can be installed at numerous locations and cameras can be moved from place to place without drivers knowing which cabinets are live. This system has stood the court test in California and is accepted by judges statewide and across the country. The digital cameras are the newest solution. Mr. Pedroza's presentation included a photo presentation showing installations of the ACS. He explained how the installations function and how they are maintained. He stated that ACS is a service and equipment provider — cities manage the program and have jurisdiction over project vision and oversight. In some cases cities elect to provide drawings, permitting and construction. Ultimately, citation approval would rest with the law enforcement agency, the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department. Mr. Pedroza emphasized that the key to the success of this program is public awareness and support. The close proximity to ACS's operation center in downtown Los Angeles offers an opportunity for Southern California clients to actively participate with ACS, visit the office, conduct audits, and participate in face to face meetings. Secure on-line information is immediately available to the user. ACS is available from point of contract through construction to the point the citation is issued. Additionally, ACS is a charter member of the Redlight Committee for the Valley County Superior Court and has been successful in implementing electronic data interchange with the courts in order to facilitate photo enforcement. Other vendors have benefited from the protocols that ACS has established through the February 13, 2003 PAGE 4 T&T COMMISSION committee. ACS has field technicians based in Los Angeles who visit every location on a prescribed schedule to service cameras, clean graffiti from cameras and signs and to make certain the poles are not damaged or rusted. ACS has a bilingual toll-free customer service center in downtown Los Angeles. ACS offers payment processing support and community and public relations education. ACS has an excellent working relationship with the Courts. ACS has approximately 40,000 employees. The Company was founded in 1988 and was acquired by ACS from Lockheed Martin about 18 months ago. His slide presentation included testimonials from the District of Columbia police chief and the Phoenix police chief. Chair/Virginkar asked if Mr. Pedroza could provide copies of slides not included in the Commissioner's presentation folders. C/Torng pointed out a chart contained in his folder and asked who manages this system. Mr. Pedroza explained that the program belongs to the City. ACS provides a service that includes all aspects of the photo enforcement program. Diamond Bar manages its own program. C/Pincher said she was not clear on how many lanes the camera would cover. Mr. Pedroza responded that the camera covers three lanes. If the City chose to enforce an approach for both left turns and straight through lanes, two cameras would be used. C/Pincher said she understood that ACS prefers wet film to digital but she also understood that there is less maintenance with digital. Mr. Pedroza explained that cameras are serviced several times a week depending upon the agreement as well as, the volume of occurrences at the intersection. With wet film cameras, maintenance personnel visit the site, retrieve the film and service the camera, pole and flashes. In addition, they remove graffiti and make certain the cameras are clean and properly operational. On average a camera is serviced three times a week. Some jurisdictions request five visits per week. The California Vehicle Code requires that a violator receive his citation within 15 days of the date of the violation. In the Los Angeles operations center, the average number of days before the citation is mailed out is 7 days creating a sufficient buffer to allow delivery within a 15 -day period. C/Pincher asked if there was a problem moving cameras and informing the public of its existence. February 13, 2003 PAGE 5 T&T COMMISSION Mr. Pedroza explained that every installation is a fixed installation and they are publicly identified at the beginning of the program. Ultimately, the law enforcement agency would decide where the camera is placed depending on the needs. In that event, according to code, there is no need to implement a 30 -day warning period. For instance, Los Angeles County has 15 housings and 10 cameras and the MTA has 34 housings and 16 cameras that they rotate on an as -needed basis. ACS maintains a log of camera locations on a daily basis. C/Pincher asked about challenges to the system in San Diego where the citations were thrown out and Mr. Pedroza confirmed that it was an ACS System. The changes that San Diego requested have been implemented as a result of an audit conducted by San Diego or by the state. C/Kashyap asked how picture quality compares between wet film and digital. Mr. Pedroza explained that the quality of wet film is many times better than the quality of digital. The increase in the number of pixels (2 million for digital versus 20 million for wet film) provides clearer resolution. Wet film is admissible in the court. Digital image has not gone through the Kelly 5 and can be challenged in court. Mr. Pedroza responded to C/Kashyap that there are approximately 150 installations in Southern California and the placement of the redlight camera loops and the presence loops are addressed during the design phase of the project. With effective communication among the various departments involved, damage is minimal. In the rare instance that a loop is cut, a crew is sent out to make repairs as soon as possible. The loop cuts are rectangular instead of round and easily identifiable as different from other loops located in the asphalt. In the event of a power outage, the system can identify a flashing red and move into a passive mode. At that stage it would not function. The system runs off of a direct power supply. Project vision, direction and oversight means that the program belongs to the City and the objectives are provided by the City. A variety of pricing options are available to the City. Once the City contracts with ACS, a partnership is formed — public sector/private sector. Ownership does not mean that the City is purchasing a commodity. Ownership refers to the City's identification of an issue and development of a solution, receiving input from constituents, law enforcement, service providers, etc. as part of the ownership process. Implementing the solution to mitigate the issue is part of the ownership process. Managing the solution, reviewing, analyzing and insuring that the solution continues to meet the City's objectives and expectations. With respect to cost effectiveness, there are many factors involved. The fixed fee pricing option is recommended in the San Diego case and the state audit. Depending on the number of cameras and who does the construction, a ballpark price for one installation with a dual camera system (front and back) either digital or wet film for three lanes can run from $4,000 to $7,500 per month per installation on a fixed fee. February 13, 2003 PAGE b T&T COMMISSION VC/Morris was concerned about the system not being able to capture a violation within the cone if there is a second vehicle in the cone. In heavy intersection traffic, there is a possibility of four vehicles running a red light and in this case, the system would not capture the violations. Mr. Pedroza stated that the cone is for speed enforcement. It is a laser system that points at a vehicle and if the vehicle is traveling at a speed that exceeds the threshold up to two pictures would be taken. From that point it is up to law enforcement to decide if they want to issue a citation. If more than one vehicle appears in the cone the judge may dismiss the case because there was another vehicle that could have been captured by the laser. The speed may not be that of the vehicle captured. Multiple vehicles running the same light would be captured by the system. If the vehicle stops before proceeding, a picture would not be taken. The system has a speed system. If a vehicle comes to a stop at the required spot in the intersection, a picture would not be taken. ChairNirginkar asked how this system would benefit Diamond Bar Assuming two cameras installed at three intersections, how would the contract work. Mr. Pedroza explained that if the City wanted a lease option with no capital outlay, ACS could structure the contract accordingly. The City and law enforcement would determine which intersections needed enforcement. Once the selection has been made, ACS conducts initial reviews, completes an engineering analysis and presents the results to the City. If the intersection is accepted, it proceeds to the next phase. Subcontractors are identified; ACS would do the construction that would include loops, poles and flashes. The image quality, camera alignment and general maintenance would be done on a regular basis. At that point the system goes into effect. In this scenario, the wet film would be retrieved three times a week and taken back to the downtown Los Angeles office. The film is developed and proceeds through the analysis process based on criteria established by the law enforcement agency. At that point the information is conveyed on-line to the law enforcement agency for their review and determination regarding citation issuance. ACS provides equipment to law enforcement and computer workstations to the City's Department of Public Works for data review. The citation is printed at the ACS office and prepared for mailing to the offender. The $4,000-$7,500 per month cost is for wet film or digital. After the citations are prepared for mailing there are a number of steps that follow. ACS manages the evidence, prepares court evidence when a case is scheduled for trial, interfacing and interacting with the courts to insure that subpoenas and court calendars are exchanged in a timely manner. ACS receives data back from the court for presentation to the City showing disposition of the case. When fines are paid the City receives a share. If the City selected a fixed-rate program, the entire fee goes to the City. The City's February 13, 2003 PAGE 7 T&T COMMISSION share of a red light violation of $324 would be about $140 to $145 per ticket paid. ACS offers a sliding scale depending on the size of the City. Mr. Pedroza confirmed to Deputy St. Amant that it possible for registered owners to view the evidence at the City offices. VII. OLD BUSINESS: None Vill. NEW BUSINESS: A. Traffic Concerns on Lemon Avenue and Willow Bud Drive. MA/Gomez presented staff's report. Staff recommends that the Traffic and Transportation Commission concur with staff to install multi -way stop signs at the intersection of Lemon Drive and Willow Bud Drive. VC/Morris asked Deputy St. Amant if following staff's recommendation would correct the problem or move it to another location. Deputy St. Amant stated that anytime you install a stop sign you slow traffic down. PWD/Liu responded to VC/Morris that the City's first concern is regarding the safety issue. Staff believes this is the best location for a stop sign. VC/Morris moved, C/Torng seconded, to concur with staff's recommendation to install multi -way stop signs at the intersection of Lemon Drive and Willow Bud Drive. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Kashyap, Pincher, Torng, VC/Morris, ChairNirginkar NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None B. School Traffic Concern at Mountain Laurel Way and Butternut Way. MA/Gomez presented staff's report. Staff recommends that the Traffic and Transportation Commission concur with staff to install 1) "Do Not Block Intersection" signs at the intersection of Mountain Laurel Way and Butternut Way; 2) "X -Walk" signs at the intersection of Mountain Laurel Way at Butternut Way, 3) install "No U-turn" signs on Butternut Way, and 4) install a "No U-turn" sign on westbound Mountain laurel Way just west of Spruce Tree Drive. VC/Morris moved, C/Pincher seconded, to concur with staff's recommendation to install 1) "Do Not Block Intersection" signs at the intersection of Mountain Laurel Way and Butternut Way; 2) "X -Walk" signs February 13, 2003 PAGE 8 T&T COMMISSION at the intersection of Mountain Laurel Way at Butternut Way, 3) install "No U-turn" signs on Butternut Way, and 4) install a "No U-turn" sign on westbound Mountain Laurel Way just west of Spruce Tree Drive. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Kashyap, Pincher, Torng, VC/Morris, ChairNirginkar NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None C. Request for Parking on Brea Canyon Road by Good Time Donut Shop. MA/Gomez presented staff's report. Staff recommends that the Traffic and Transportation Commission concur with staff to deny limited parking on Brea Canyon road. Mike Baldasare, 21215 Chocktaw Drive, spoke in favor of granting parking on Brea Canyon Road for the owners of Good Time Donut Shop. He has observed the situation during the past three years. He recalled that prior to the resurfacing of Brea Canyon Road, there was a sign immediately in front of the donut shop that declared "No Parking" from the sign back to the donut shop that allowed large trucks to legally park just past the sign. Some of the larger trucks cannot get into the center driveway. Since the sign was installed many people still park in the area. When he points out to drivers that the sign has changed, they are surprised because they have been parking there for the past 10 years. Because of the new parking restrictions, the donut shop has lost a good percentage of their breakfast and lunch trade. He suggested that as an alternative to the current sign, the City could paint the curb green and limit parking to 10 minutes from the sign back to the driveway. Art Herrera, 1963 White Star Drive, a longtime resident of Diamond Bar and a longtime customer of Good Time Donuts, supported Mr. Villa in his effort to get parking for his business. Prior to the reconstruction of Brea Canyon Road, there was a sign in place that allowed parking on the easterly side of Brea Canyon Road just north of the little opening in the three-foot wall adjacent to the sidewalk. In fact, it was Mr. Baldesare who brought the sign change to his attention when he pulled up and parked on Brea Canyon Road in his usual spot. And then he heard staff say that the City replaced signs as they previously existed. He supported Mr. Baldesare's assertion that the previous sign indicated no parking back toward Brea Canyon. Now when he visits the donut shop he sees trucks pull up and not stop because of the new sign. The donut shop is a small business similar to many small businesses in the City and he does not believe the City wants to lose another business. February 13, 2003 PAGE 9 T&T COMMISSION PWD/Liu responded to Chair/Virginkar that staff had no record of previous signage. Prior to the construction, the City did videotape the existing conditions of the entire stretch of Brea Canyon Road. Staff could review the videotape to determine whether the previous sign exists. VC/Morris said that in the past it has been brought to the Commission's attention that during reconstruction or resurfacing, signage has been paved over and then disappear. When the City removes signage of any type staff should have a record of what is being removed and replaced. Perhaps there is signage that needs to be removed and changed. For signage to be removed without basis is not a good practice for the City to follow. He has no reason to doubt the prior speakers. He felt that staff should reconsider the matter and offer a compromise solution that did not include unlimited parking. C/Kashyap said he used to stop at the donut shop and park on Brea Canyon Road. The sign was there as the speakers have indicated. He has lived in the area since 1986 and believes Mr. Villa has the right to expect a compromise that would enhance his business. He believed Mr. Herrera's suggestion for 10 minute parking was a good suggestion. PWD/Liu responded to C/Pincher that tonight's testimony should assist with staff's recommendation. There may be an opportunity to provide about 60 feet of parking on Brea Canyon Road without jeopardizing the safety concern. C/Torng explained that the Diamond Bar Chinese-American Association is on the other side and they also have parking problems. Brea Canyon Road is a single lane street. He hopes staff could evaluate the situation for safety concern. VC/Morris said he would want to see limitations on the street parking so that truckers would not leave the freeway and park their truck for a long period of time. VC/Morris moved to request staff to re-evaluate the situation and take corrective action to allow limited parking with safety being the primary concern. C/Kashyap did not believe that limited parking would be a safety issue. Rather than put this off to the next meeting, the Commission should move to remedy the situation tonight. VC/Morris restated his motion as follows: That staff be requested to re- evaluate the parking opportunities on Brea Canyon Boulevard in front of the businesses to allow limited parking. February 13, 2003 PAGE 10 T&T COMMISSION PWD/Liu explained that with the Commission's recommendation, staff would work with the business owner to arrive at a suitable amount of time for limited parking such as "one hour". There would be no overnight parking. VC/Morris expressed concern that no one should be allowed to take advantage of limited parking to remain in the location for several hours. The Sheriff's Department would be the source for providing information about proper limited parking designations. C/Pincher seconded VC/Morris's revised motion. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Kashyap, Pincher, Torng, VC/Morris, ChairNirginkar NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None IX. STATUS OF PREVIOUS ACTION ITEMS: PWD/Liu reported that on January 21, 2003, the City Council held a study session on the proposed street sweeping modifications. As a result, the Council will hold a Town Hall meeting on February 25 to further discuss this matter. The Council is interested in hearing from the residents and businesses that have been effected by this program. At its January 21, 2003, meeting the City Council approved the Commission's recommendation for a multi -way stop sign on Great Bend Drive at Stirrup Drive. At the February 4, 2003, Council meeting, staff proposed left -turn signals at Fern Hollow Driveand on Pathfinder Road at Evergreen Springs Drive. Due to the ongoing discussions with Diamond Bar High School the item has been continued to March 4, 2003 meeting. X. ITEMS FROM COMMISSIONERS: C/Torng asked staff to present the Commission with cost and efficiency comparisons between Redf lex and ACS. C/Kashyap did not believe the ACS system was cost effective. VC/Morris questioned the impact of the signal at Clear Creek Canyon Drive and Diamond Bar Boulevard regarding the ongoing problem of the center's driveway. There is no access from the Ralph's center to Clear Creek Canyon Drive. He suggested that the next time the City gets an intern, one of the projects could be to inventory the City's signage. PWD/Liu stated that staff was unable to find anything on the Brea Canyon Road sign that pre -dated the City's incorporation. Staff is looking into a GIS system that would capture the infrastructure improvements and appreciated tonight's public testimony on the matter. Chair/Virginkar liked the striping on Gold Rush Drive in front of Lorbeer Middle School. He noticed that signal lights are back up on Silver Hawk Drive and Diamond Bar Boulevard. He asked that the matter of the school safety study be February 13, 2003 PAGE 11 T&T COMMISSION placed on every Commission meeting agenda as an informational item for the next few months. He felt there was not enough time to satisfactorily complete the joint meeting with City Council this evening. It seemed to him that Council Member Chang and Council Member Zirbes had issues with the Commission they were unable to express due to lack of time. Perhaps staff could report back to the Commission as an informational item and schedule a follow up session with the Council in the next three months for a give and take session. VC/Morris commended ChairNirginkar for getting so much accomplished during the joint meeting. ChairNirginkar gave credit to Mayor Herrera for getting through the ambitious agenda. He felt the Commissioners could take her lead on parliamentary procedure. ChairNirginkar concurred with C/Kashyap that the ACS presentation was lacking. He wondered if staff planned to have more presentations. If staff could establish criteria for a system that would benefit Diamond Bar and determine what system would best meet that criteria for a reasonable cost, it would be helpful to the Commission in making a decision whether or not to recommend any system to the Council. VC/Morris felt it would be very helpful to the Commission for staff to ask ACS why Diamond Bar should consider their system over Redflex. ChairNirginkar asked staff to make their recommendation to the Commission as to which system they would recommend. PWD/Liu pointed out that because of the trouble ACS experienced in San Diego they are now recommending the flat fee option. Redflex benefited from ACS's problem and recommended the flat fee option. ChairNirginkar asked staff to evaluate whether wet film or digital was the preferred technology. C/Pincher pointed out that information regarding follow up, customer service, etc. was very important to the overall decision-making process. C/Kashyap said the City should ask itself if it really needs this system and if the answer is yes, what are the options, what is the most cost-effective option and even if it is cost effective, and what is the long-term impact on the community. Deputy St. Amant explained to the Commissioners that ACS was very forthcoming about their San Diego problems when they met to discuss the system. The reason they have steered away from doing the shared revenue program is because it implied a conflict of interest. In San Diego, the more tickets they write the more revenue they make so they decided to go to a flat fee to avoid a conflict of interest. As far as whether Diamond Bar needs this system, from a law enforcement standpoint, red light violations are one of the most difficult to enforce because it February 13, 2003 PAGE 12 T&T COMMISSION requires enforcement officers {two or three at a time} to be in the right place at the right time. Diamond Bar has problems at four or five intersections. Chair/Virginkar suggested the Commission might want to recommend a pilot program to the City Council. XI. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: A. Request for Proposal for Neighborhood Traffic Management Program. Yesterday staff held a pre -proposal meeting with six companies. Proposals are due on February 28. Upon receipt of the proposal staff will begin studying the information for recommendation. Recently, two Commissioners indicated an interest in being involved in the process. ChairNirginkar explained that this is a very important program. C/Kashyap and C/Pincher volunteered to assist staff in the selection process. B. January 9, 2003 Verbatim Account of Redflex Red Light Enforcement/Radar Enforcement. XII. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE CITY EVENTS — as agendized. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to come before the Traffic and Transportation Commission, Chairman Virginkar adjourned the meeting at 9:45 p.m. Respectfully,.. D�avl G. ` , Secretary Attest: Chairman Arun Virginkar v