12-10-2008 - Minutes TCCITY OF ORANGE
CITY TRAFFIC COMMISSION
Minutes of a Regular Meeting: December 10, 2008
Tape #CTC-28.11 of this City Traffic Commission meeting is available for your review.
Please contact the Recording Secretary at (714) 744-5536 in this regard, advance notice is appreciated.
Dec. ‘o8 [N:/Traffic/CTC/2008 Minutes]
Printed on Recycled Paper
I. OPENING
A. Flag Pledge
B. Roll Call
Present – Commissioners: J. Beil, W. King, N. Lall
Absent – Commissioners: L. Dick
Present –Staff: A. Farahani, D. Allenbach, G. Sheatz, Sgt. D. Adams, P. Then
C. Approval of Minutes
October 8, 2008
ACTION: Approved as published by the Recording Secretary.
MOTION: N. Lall
SECOND: W. King
AYES: Unanimous
ABSTAIN:
November 19, 2008 – Meeting cancelled lack of quorum.
II. ORAL PRESENTATIONS
None this meeting.
III. CONSENT CALENDAR
None this month.
End of Consent Items
Minutes of a Regular Meeting – City Traffic Commission – December 10, 2008 Pg. 2
Tape #CTC-28.11 of this City Traffic Commission meeting is available for your review.
Please contact the Recording Secretary at (714) 744-5536 in this regard, advance notice is appreciated.
Dec. ‘08 [N:/Traffic/CTC/2008 Minutes]
Printed on Recycled Paper
IV. CONSIDERATION ITEMS
1. Request for the trial speed humps on Shaffer St. between Meats Ave.
and Vista Del Gaviota Ave. to remain in place.
Tom Saenz
N. Shaffer St.
Orange Ca 92865
The oral presentation is based on the written staff report; please refer to your
copy. Chairman Beil opened the public hearing for the following discussion:
Commissioner King – It’s my understanding that Police and Fire have signed off
on the speed humps, is that correct? They go along with the idea of speed
humps?
Dave Allenbach, Transportation Analyst – About 10 years ago there was a
moratorium on installation of speed humps while we worked out some details to
make them satisfactory to both departments. Primarily we lowered the profile
from 3 ½ inches to 2 ½ inches, which permits all city apparatus including ladder
trucks to get over the speed humps safely. Also in trying to determine what
streets would present a concern for the Fire Dept. particula rly we tried to
determine if there was an area that received more fire calls than others; that data
was unavailable so we elected to prohibit speed humps on streets that may be
used as a secondary response route, namely streets such as Almond or Palm near
City Hall where we have Fire Station No. 1. If Chapman Ave. were blocked during
a particular call the Fire Dept. most likely would use those streets. Streets like
that, while residential in nature, are banned from having devices like speed
humps; however, this section of Shaffer St. does not fall into that category. In
this particular case, along with the restrictions we do have, the 85th percentile and
the average daily traffic volumes limits the amount of speed humps we have in
the City.
Chairman Beil – We had an e-mail attached to our report and it contained a
statement indicating different speed limits were posted. When I went out and
drove down the street, I forgot to look for those, and they’re claiming there is a 25
MPH and 15 MPH speed limit signs posted.
Dave Allenbach, Transportation Analyst – The speed limit on this residential
street is posted at 25 MPH, and there are 25 MPH signs. However, at each one of
the speed humps we have an advisory speed limit of 15 MPH. The difference is the
regulatory speed signs are black lettering with a white background while advisory
speed signs are black lettering with yellow background and that’s how we tell the
difference.
Minutes of a Regular Meeting – City Traffic Commission – December 10, 2008 Pg. 3
Tape #CTC-28.11 of this City Traffic Commission meeting is available for your review.
Please contact the Recording Secretary at (714) 744-5536 in this regard, advance notice is appreciated.
Dec. ‘08 [N:/Traffic/CTC/2008 Minutes]
Printed on Recycled Paper
Tom Saenz, N. Shaffer St. – In favor of keeping the speed humps. My immediate
neighbors to the right and left assisted in the surveying and as we went out we
found some strong support for the installation of the speed humps. I think we
had 2 basic objectives, to reduce the speed which was met, the other was to
reduce the traffic volume and that was partially met with the reduction of
approximately 100 cars per day. I would like to ask you to reconsider the “NO
RIGHT TURN ON RED” restriction for southbound Canal St. at Meats Ave. I think
removing this restriction would help us achieve our second objective of reducing
traffic volume.
Chairman Beil closed the public hearing and returned the item to the
Commission for further discussion and a motion.
Chairman Beil – I will go ahead and make the motion to approve the speed
humps for permanent installation. I think the data and support from the
neighborhood fulfill the requirements for speed humps.
ACTION: Approved the permanent installation of speed humps on
Shaffer St. and forward to the City Council for their final
action.
MOTION: J. Beil
SECOND: W. King
AYES: Unanimous
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
2. Request for the installation of an “All-Way” STOP control at the
intersection of Harwood St. and Palm Ave.
Traffic Engineering Division
Public Works Department
CITY OF ORANGE
Chairman Beil – I have been made aware of an issue and with the City Attorney’s
help in the language we will need to continue this item to our next meeting.
Gary Sheatz, Asst. City Attorney – I have been made aware that one of the
Commissioners has a conflict due to ownership of property in the immediate
area. Because of the conflict they couldn’t participate but their presence at the
dais is necessary because if they left there wouldn’t be a quorum. So I
recommend someone make a motion to continue this item with the af fected
Commissioner remaining at the dais and record an abstention as their vote, so
they don’t participate in the vote.
Minutes of a Regular Meeting – City Traffic Commission – December 10, 2008 Pg. 4
Tape #CTC-28.11 of this City Traffic Commission meeting is available for your review.
Please contact the Recording Secretary at (714) 744-5536 in this regard, advance notice is appreciated.
Dec. ‘08 [N:/Traffic/CTC/2008 Minutes]
Printed on Recycled Paper
ACTION: Continue to the next regular meeting.
MOTION: J. Beil
SECOND: W. King
AYES: J. Beil, W. King
NOES:
ABSTAIN: N. Lall
3. Request for the installation of red curb markings on the west side of
Kathleen St. north of Lomita Ave.
Charles DeMarco
Santiago Blvd.
Villa Park Ca 92861-4113
The oral presentation is based on the written staff report; please refer to your
copy. There were no speakers to this item, and limited comments from the
Commission:
Chairman Beil – Going out and visiting the neighborhood it’s one of the areas
where the living quarters must be very dense, there is a lot of vehicles in the area.
There are cars that actually park on the curb returns going around the corner, it’s
very heavily parked and there are liquor bottles lying adjacent to this area. I will
be supporting this request.
ACTION: Approved the installation of 30 ft. of red curb on the north
leg of Kathleen St. at Lomita Ave.
MOTION: N. Lall
SECOND: J. Beil
AYES: Unanimous
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
Minutes of a Regular Meeting – City Traffic Commission – December 10, 2008 Pg. 5
Tape #CTC-28.11 of this City Traffic Commission meeting is available for your review.
Please contact the Recording Secretary at (714) 744-5536 in this regard, advance notice is appreciated.
Dec. ‘08 [N:/Traffic/CTC/2008 Minutes]
Printed on Recycled Paper
4. Request for the installation of red curb markings for OCTA bus stops at:
a) Eastbound Taft Ave. on the far side of Shaffer St.
b) Northbound Glassell St. on the far side of Richland Ave./Riverbend Pkwy.
c) Southbound Glassell St. on the near side of Riverbend Pkwy./Richland St.
Mark Strickert, Stops & Zones
Orange County Transportation Authority
550 S. Main St.
Orange Ca 92863-1584
The oral presentation is based on the written staff report; please refer to your
copy. Chairman Beil opened the public hearing for the following discussion:
Chairman Beil – I have a question about the bus stop at northbound Glassell St. –
why did they put the bus stop beyond the existing red curb?
Dave Allenbach, Transportation Analyst – It has to do with the distance they like
for deceleration and pulling over. The bus stop actually is in existence at this
point so they are asking for an additional 40 ft. I’m not exactly sur e why they
didn’t put it a little closer to the intersection; however, as you can see in the
photograph a little closer there is a telephone pole, what looks like a phone
company utility box and also our controller cabinet. I’m not sure exactly what the
ridership level is at this location but that’s very little room for passengers to stand
waiting for a bus.
Chairman Beil closed the public hearing and returned the item to the
Commission for further discussion and a motion:
ACTION: Approved the red curb markings for all three locations.
MOTION: W. King
SECOND: N. Lall
Chairman Beil – Does OCTA always bring their bus stop locations to the City for
review prior to putting them in?
Amir Farahani, City Traffic Engineer – Yes they do. Every time they come to the
City with a proposed location to either the far side or the near side and the City
will either approve or deny their request.
AYES: Unanimous
Minutes of a Regular Meeting – City Traffic Commission – December 10, 2008 Pg. 6
Tape #CTC-28.11 of this City Traffic Commission meeting is available for your review.
Please contact the Recording Secretary at (714) 744-5536 in this regard, advance notice is appreciated.
Dec. ‘08 [N:/Traffic/CTC/2008 Minutes]
Printed on Recycled Paper
5. Request for the installation of a “NO PARKING” zone on the south side
of Dunton Ave. between Glassell St. and Hartman St.
Carole Graf
E. Dunton Ave.
Orange CA 92865
The oral presentation is based on the written staff report; please refer to your
copy. Chairman Beil opened the public hearing for the following discussion:
Vice Chairman Lall – It looked like there is ample parking in that neighborhood
yet there were 3 cars parked in that particular area, it is a little tight. Is there any
idea where those cars are coming from, and why would they want that one
particular spot?
Dave Allenbach, Transportation Analyst – Through the course of our study we
found that 3 of the vehicles (refers to 2 specific vehicles in photograph) belong to
people who pull in and park and then leave on foot. We are assuming that they
work at the businesses up near Lincoln Ave., about 200 ft. away from this
location. If that is indeed the situation it is something the Code Enforcement
should look at because these businesses should have enough parking for their
staff and their customers.
Vice Chairman Lall – What can Code Enforcement do about it?
Dave Allenbach, Transportation Analyst – That’s out of my area so I’m not
exactly sure; we can mention it to them. They are supposed to have off-street
parking.
Carole Graf, E. Dunton Ave. – It is absolutely correct that it’s the people who are
parking in this space, and it’s now sometimes up to 5 cars as they work around
Hartman, as they work at the carwash on the corner of Glassell St. and Lincoln
Ave. We see them park there in the morning and the cars are usually stacked up
by 8 a.m. and then they walk up there. There are a few that are now parking that
now work at the deli, so the word is out that if you need a place to park in the
neighborhood that’s the spot. We have a very active neighborhood watch and we
have pictures and all of this going on and it’s quite a concern to us.
Chairman Beil – You understand that if we were to approve this that the cars will
likely move down Dunton to where you live.
Carole Graf – We thought that. The problem is, when you’re coming down
Glassell St. which is posted at 45 MPH and at certain times of the day it’s quite
busy and when you’re trying to make a safe and smooth transition and there is
someone trying to exit Dunton Ave., even though you are driving carefully there’s
still some concern. There are two handicap the dips down, they consistently park
Minutes of a Regular Meeting – City Traffic Commission – December 10, 2008 Pg. 7
Tape #CTC-28.11 of this City Traffic Commission meeting is available for your review.
Please contact the Recording Secretary at (714) 744-5536 in this regard, advance notice is appreciated.
Dec. ‘08 [N:/Traffic/CTC/2008 Minutes]
Printed on Recycled Paper
within three feet of those areas. If an emergency vehicle were to come down
Dunton a safe, smooth and rapid entry into our neighborhood could be
compromised.
Vice Chairman Lall – Have you talked to these business owners about how their
employees are affecting you?
Carole Graf – I have not. One did speak to the deli and he says they are not
directing their employees to park there; and of course at the car wash , I don’t
think we’re going to get much cooperation with them.
Vice Chairman Lall – My fear is that if we put the red curb in we’re just going to
push the problem in to the neighborhood and still cause you problems. I would
hope that even though they don’t direct their employees to p ark there, they could
direct them not to. Whatever decision is achieved today there is still going to be a
problem out there and that you will be better served to talk to these business
owners and see if they will cooperate. The next step after that is a neighborhood
parking permit program which is restrictive for all the residents. You might want
to consider that whatever we decide. Those are public streets and anybody can
park there for whatever the reason so I don’t believe Code Enforcement is going
to be your answer.
Robert Graff – In favor of restriction. Carole and I both attended the Orange
Police Dept. Citizen Police Academy a few years back and we started the
neighborhood watch in our neighborhood. This really comes from approximately
50 people active in our neighborhood watch program, from a neighborhood of
100. I notice you have a list of addresses when you did the survey and I think it
affects the whole area. You didn’t have a map up there but basically we’re a
landlocked area with 2 entrances in and out, both of them off Glassell. Anyone
going south has to use this exit because the one further to the south is on the
bend. There’s high speed through there, and several people have told me they use
the north entrance to go south, and usually it stacks up 2 cars, one going left and
one going right onto Glassell. I think that further congests this intersection and
at your suggestion I would prefer to have the cars parking further down a little
bit, there is ample parking in our neighborhood so that wouldn’t be an objection
for me. Another thing, I’ve also heard from neighborhood watch people that they
have seen people park their cars and then go and get on the bus, but they park
right there instead of further down Dunton, so I would be fine if that area were
clear because I would like to avoid an accident.
Mark Landay, E. Dunton Ave. – I am in favor of the parking restriction. About 2-
3 years ago our street was re-paved and these cars have been parking here for
about the last year and a half, and since they have been here they have leaked a
lot of oil all over the place. If you’re wearing tennis shoes and you’re in that area
you can’t even stand up because there is so much oil on the ground on both sides
Minutes of a Regular Meeting – City Traffic Commission – December 10, 2008 Pg. 8
Tape #CTC-28.11 of this City Traffic Commission meeting is available for your review.
Please contact the Recording Secretary at (714) 744-5536 in this regard, advance notice is appreciated.
Dec. ‘08 [N:/Traffic/CTC/2008 Minutes]
Printed on Recycled Paper
of the street. If you’re coming up Glassell St., which is posted at either 40-45
MPH and if you going to make a right turn, all of a sudden there is a car parked
immediately after the curb return, and if there is another car trying to turn out
onto Glassell St. then there is about 6 ft. available for you to maneuver past the
parked cars.
Chairman Beil closed the public hearing and returned the item to the
Commission for further discussion and a motion.
Chairman Beil – To respond to your comments what probably contributed was
that a little over a year ago, the City reconfigured some of the striping on Lincoln
Ave. and took away parking on Lincoln Ave. in front of the Orange Tree Deli on
the eastbound direction and some on the westbound side also. Also for safety
reasons, we’ve put vision zones on Glassell St. north of Lincoln Ave. removing
parking there also. This is what is probably creating the spill-over parking by
employees of the businesses along Lincoln Ave. It was about a year or a year and
a half ago we did that.
Commissioner King – I have to go along with staff’s recommendation to deny the
request, they have done a lot of work in the area and the idea brought up by my
colleague that we’re probably just going to move the parking further into the
neighborhood. There’s going to be a parking problem in either case.
ACTION: Deny the request.
MOTION: W. King
Vice Chairman Lall – No I can’t second that, I see this as a safety issue from what
I saw when I was out there. I would rather push the problem further in the
neighborhood and let them go back to the business owners and see if they do
something with them. I think we should clear out those cars from the
intersection. I hate taking away parking but I don’t see this as a parking issue as
much as where they are parking.
SECOND: None, motion dies for lack of a second.
ACTION: Denied staff recommendation, and Approved the
installation of 56 ft. of “NO PARKING” on the south side of
Dunton Ave. between Glassell St. and Hartman St. by
whatever means staff feels will work best.
Dave Allenbach, Transportation Analyst – It’s such a short area it probably would
be best to just paint it. It would also be more visible to motorists when somebody
is pulling in you would have a sign right at the curb return. We would probably
remove the ‘No Parking Street Sweeping’ sign and put a ‘No Parking’ and an
“END” plate right there, and move the “No Parking Street Sweeping” sign to the
other side of the street. It could be done either way.
Minutes of a Regular Meeting – City Traffic Commission – December 10, 2008 Pg. 9
Tape #CTC-28.11 of this City Traffic Commission meeting is available for your review.
Please contact the Recording Secretary at (714) 744-5536 in this regard, advance notice is appreciated.
Dec. ‘08 [N:/Traffic/CTC/2008 Minutes]
Printed on Recycled Paper
Chairman Beil – The other sign closer to Glassell is probably the Neighborhood
Watch sign. It is a very narrow street and to me when you drive it and sit on
Dunton looking out onto Glassell St. there are high speeds, there are differing
sight distances on the grades. I couldn’t even get out of there making a lef t, I just
made a right and darted over the left-turn lane and made a U-turn. I can see the
point and it is an issue that I believe came about by the elimination of parking
elsewhere.
MOTION: N. Lall
SECOND: J. Beil
AYES: J. Beil, N. Lall
NOES: W. King
6. Reconsider Traffic Engineering staff’s denying installation of speed humps
on Trenton Ave. east of Cambridge St.
Donna Thompson
E. Trenton Ave.
Orange Ca 92867
The oral presentation is based on the written staff report; please refer to your
copy. Chairman Beil opened the public hearing for the following discussion:
Vice Chairman Lall – We’ve been out there twice. I appreciate the diligence on
the part of the homeowner. The first study was short on vehicles; it had 32
vehicles over the minimum and 3/10 MPH under our speed requirement. We
moved the counters further down and the location staff chose was probably a
better location to see the speed volume, we’re close all the way around except on
the 2nd sampling where the speed was quite a bit slower and was well under our
limits. If a homeowner still feels there is a problem with speed how long would it
be reasonable for them to wait before requesting staff take another speed survey?
Assuming staff doesn’t go ahead with the speed hump recommendation?
Dave Allenbach, Transportation Analyst – In general we would recommend at
least a year. In this particular case it’s unlikely the sampling is going to change
since this street is a cul-de-sac and it really has a finite level of traffic. The
residents fronting both sides of Trenton in this area, and the mobile home park,
whose only access point is a driveway at the cul-de-sac. Given those
circumstances there is no chance for by-pass traffic here for people from any
other area. It’s doubtful any other time of year would produce a higher result. In
general if someone has an issue with the results of our initial study we have
recommended they wait a year and send in another request and we will process it
at that time.
Minutes of a Regular Meeting – City Traffic Commission – December 10, 2008 Pg. 10
Tape #CTC-28.11 of this City Traffic Commission meeting is available for your review.
Please contact the Recording Secretary at (714) 744-5536 in this regard, advance notice is appreciated.
Dec. ‘08 [N:/Traffic/CTC/2008 Minutes]
Printed on Recycled Paper
Robert Delaney, E. Trenton Ave. – When I first moved in the street went through
all the way to Tustin St. and we had a large amount of traffic diverting away from
Katella by using Trenton; then they created the cul -de-sac and we thought that
would eliminate a lot of our problems. Trenton is approximately ½ mile long it’s
approximately 3 city blocks. The demographics have changed since I’ve moved
into the neighborhood. There are more rental units now and a much younger age
of residents. These younger people don’t drive as safely as the older drivers. We
have only had one accident where a resident was hit when pulling out of their
driveway. If we can put a speed hump on Adams between Cambridge and Tustin
because a school is a block away, this should be considered because it is a hazard ,
and it is only going to get worse.
Chairman Beil closed the public hearing and returned the item to the
Commission for further discussion and a motion.
Chairman Beil – We have the guidelines that are set up, and we can respond to
the statement on the comparison of Adams Ave. speed humps. There are some
speed hump installations under the old guidelines, the threshold numbers were
raised because of the amount of traffic on most residential stree ts in Orange.
Because a lot of residential streets would meet the old threshold then we would
have speed humps all over so there was an effort to tighten up those thresholds.
Vice Chairman Lall – When I was out there I was actually surprised at how slow
cars were going because of the length of the street, I would have seen that as
more of a drag-strip and I would have expected to see it as a bigger problem. I
understand the residents concern, I would hate to go against our minimum
thresholds unless there was a large public outpouring of about 10-20
homeowner’s here saying they had a problem, but without more neighborhood
support I’d have to look toward supporting staff’s denial.
ACTION: Approved staff recommendation and denied the
installation of speed humps on Trenton Ave. east of
Cambridge St.
MOTION: J. Beil
SECOND: N. Lall
AYES: Unanimous
Minutes of a Regular Meeting – City Traffic Commission – December 10, 2008 Pg. 11
Tape #CTC-28.11 of this City Traffic Commission meeting is available for your review.
Please contact the Recording Secretary at (714) 744-5536 in this regard, advance notice is appreciated.
Dec. ‘08 [N:/Traffic/CTC/2008 Minutes]
Printed on Recycled Paper
7. Request for the installation of an “All-Way” STOP control at the
intersection of Linda Vista St. and Elsinore Ave.
Traffic Engineering Division
Public Works Department
CITY OF ORANGE
The oral presentation is based on the written staff report; please refer to your
copy. Chairman Beil opened the public hearing for the following discussion:
Nancy Hughes, Linda Vista St. – Opposes STOP sign. There are already 2 speed
humps on the north and south end, most of the time those are averted by going
around and I would say when I’ve observed it about 75% of the drivers go around
the speed humps, very few people actually stop for the speed hump. Also you
have installed signs indicating it is a School Zone and to be cautiou s because of
that. My feeling is that a “4-Way” STOP sign is another band-aid and my reason
for saying that is because observing what I have already seen I don’t believe it will
be honored. It will be a quick stop and then they will take off again. People drop
their children off and many of the people who don’t’ have to go through the STOP
sign will drop their children off then take off like a bat out of wherever and they
do not have much consideration for the fact that there are other children in the
neighborhood. What is the solution, I really don’t know. I believe, although I
haven’t done the research, I believe that originally that Elsinore exit and entrance
into the school probably was a safety issue which has now turned into an ongoing
entrance and exit to the school ground and because of that I believe children are
really at danger. I think the real problem is the fact that there is even an entrance
and exit for the children in that large huge number rather than at their school is
in another area where people aren’t really paying attention in the morning.
Anna Marzolino, Linda Vista St. – Opposed STOP sign. I have 3 children that
attend Linda Vista Elementary School. During the years I have lived in the
neighborhood I cannot tell you the number of times I have had a child dart in
front of my car during drop-off and pick-up, no STOP sign will stop a child from
darting in front of a car. I have called the Police Dept. who usually show up late, I
have called the City, and I have called the School District, they are willing to pay
for a STOP sign. You’re saying that we don’t meet any of the criteria and they say
the same thing about a crossing guard, they say you don’t have enough children
for a crossing guard. You said it was temporary (the gate) but it’s become
permanent. The only way to keep the kids safe is to have a crossing guard there
and they’re not willing to do that. A STOP sign is not going to stop, you’re going to
hit a bump then you’ll go into a ditch and within 6 ft. you hit 2 bumps and a STOP
sign, it’s not going to stop the problem. The reason we have this problem is
because when construction started on Cannon St. you also changed all the
crosswalks all the handicap the same 2 weeks and we had chaos at the back of
that school for 2 weeks, that’s how this all came about, not because people are
Minutes of a Regular Meeting – City Traffic Commission – December 10, 2008 Pg. 12
Tape #CTC-28.11 of this City Traffic Commission meeting is available for your review.
Please contact the Recording Secretary at (714) 744-5536 in this regard, advance notice is appreciated.
Dec. ‘08 [N:/Traffic/CTC/2008 Minutes]
Printed on Recycled Paper
avoiding the little dip in the street. Nothing is going to stop those kids unless we
have a crossing guard. The City or the School District needs to make sure there is
a crossing guard there at all times and if they’re not willing to pay for it then the
PTA should.
Chairman Beil – Do your children use that rear access to the school? If you didn’t
have that rear access, how would you get them to school?
Anna Marzolino, Linda Vista St. – I think they should stop it. I’ve told this to
every Principal there and what they have told me, they will send a teacher out
there, and the teacher has said to me that it is not in their job description to be a
crossing guard.
Chairman Beil – That’s not what I was talking about, I am suggesting closing that
access to the school yard, but it would have to be an all or nothing decision.
Anna Marzolino, Linda Vista St. – It would be safer to close the access or just to
allow the kids in the neighborhood, they know who they are. If it kept them safe
the kids can walk around.
Jon Schrank, Morada Dr. (PTA President) – I observe the actions of some of the
parents driving in the back of the school and dropping off kids and it’s sad to say
it is atrocious how some people drive. I think a crossing guard is definitely
something that needs to be considered. It’s my understanding that we’re taking
that crossing guard from another location and now they are left without a guard.
Whether it’s a combination of a STOP sign and a crossing guard I’m not sure.
Unfortunately with what’s happening in the front of the school it’s quite busy so it
has spilled over so a lot more parents are using the back of the school to drop-off
their kids. Perhaps maybe after that is completed this should be reassessed to see
what is the amount of people dropping of children in the back of the school as a
result of the opening of Cannon. It seems to me that you have put a highway in
front of a school, and in my opinion that’s not the smartest thing.
Lee Campbell, Linda Vista St. – Neither strongly opposed or in favor of a STOP
sign. I concur with my neighbors that a STOP sign will probably do very little
good, I would hope it would slow people down and prevent them from swinging
out to avoid the speed hump. That is about the only thing it would do, and I
think the real issue is that they shouldn’t be dropping off children there, it’s not a
drop-off area and the kids still have go clear across the school playground to get
to school. The speed on Linda Vista, if anything there should be speed humps
between the 2 STOP signs to keep the traffic down where there are children. The
number of children counted in the late afternoon is probably due to soccer . I
don’t think a STOP sign is going to solve the issue, I believe a crossing guard might
do a better job.
Minutes of a Regular Meeting – City Traffic Commission – December 10, 2008 Pg. 13
Tape #CTC-28.11 of this City Traffic Commission meeting is available for your review.
Please contact the Recording Secretary at (714) 744-5536 in this regard, advance notice is appreciated.
Dec. ‘08 [N:/Traffic/CTC/2008 Minutes]
Printed on Recycled Paper
Deborah Pracilio, Granada Dr. – I’m opposed to the STOP sign at this time. I
think it’s not going to have much of an affect at this time. I think it would be
appropriate to assess it after the construction on Cannon is complete; it’s a
premature decision at this time. There has been tremendous diversion
throughout the area east of Cannon. I think we should be waiting until after the
construction is complete, the traffic has been normalized within the
neighborhood and then make an assessment; not only on Linda Vista but on all
the neighborhood streets around the school and at the front of the school and
let’s determine if there are any outstanding issues that remain after the
construction is completed and is under operation. I think you should also
maintain the crossing guard at this point because there are issues back there with
people and parents and some of it is the number of children and some is the
behavior of the parents. We should be thinking about the best way to provide a
comprehensive education program to the parents because personally I would not
like to see the back gate closed.
Valerie Nolan, Granada St. – Sent a letter opposing the STOP sign, requesting a
crossing guard be retained.
Alice Porayh, San Remo Pl. – Supports STOP sign. I walk down this street every
morning and take my 3rd grade son to school, there are a lot of kids going to
school this way. I have tried to go around onto Cannon and drop -0ff my kids at
the front of the school which always has been difficult. I’ve been a crossing guard
in the school crosswalk for a year and there are all kinds of issues, I’ve seen 2
children almost run over in the parking lot and my son was almost hit by a car on
Linda Vista this year. It is extremely dangerous. I think a STOP sign is a
reasonable answer for the time being at least it gives some people the idea that
there is some repercussion to just driving through while there are children in the
crosswalk. I think a crossing guard is absolutely essential. I like having the
entrance to the back of the school, accessing the front of the school is much more
dangerous. It’s a dangerous situation for both parents and children trying to get
to school safely, I don’t know what the answer is from either direction but
definitely a STOP sign. Even on Sunday’s while out walking I observe people are
trying to avoid STOP signs because of all the heavy traffic on Cannon. You can
drive through my neighborhood now with no STOP sign. So people drive really
fast down Cannon and whip down my street to get out quicker to their jobs in the
morning.
Chairman Beil – Do you think a lot of that is due to the current construction on
Cannon?
Alice Porayh, San Remo Pl. – I think that’s just the beginning because the current
construction is widening Cannon so is that going to become a super highway, I
don’t know. There is so much traffic going into a tiny parking lot with 420
parents, how are we all supposed to get in there in the morning? I’ve se en the
Minutes of a Regular Meeting – City Traffic Commission – December 10, 2008 Pg. 14
Tape #CTC-28.11 of this City Traffic Commission meeting is available for your review.
Please contact the Recording Secretary at (714) 744-5536 in this regard, advance notice is appreciated.
Dec. ‘08 [N:/Traffic/CTC/2008 Minutes]
Printed on Recycled Paper
traffic backed up in the morning on Cannon all the way down to Santiago Canyon
Rd. because they’re trying to get their kids in the front.
Chairman Beil closed the public hearing and returned the item to the
Commission for further discussion and a motion.
Vice Chairman Lall – I think the residents made some good points about the
construction on Cannon perhaps being part of the problem right now and that
would be a temporary issue. With your knowledge of that intersection, and the
geometry, and what they’re doing on Cannon out in front of the school, when they
are complete will that facilitate a safer drop-off and pick-up where those people
currently going to Linda Vista went back to Cannon for this?
Amir Farahani, City Traffic Engineer – The issue of drop-off and pick-up is a
serious one and there are problems partially due to the number of students and
partially due to the construction. Part of the problem will be removed after the
construction is completed but still the problem will exist, there isn’t enough room
for circulation, drop-off of the big busses and also drop-off by parents. We met
with the school, the PTA and the School Board and we came up with a 3-phase
solution, first is to propose these STOP signs, which we think is going to provide
additional safety for the kids when being dropped -off on Linda Vista. As
mentioned, mixing the students with the cross-gutters and the drivers going
relatively fast and avoiding the dips is a safety issue which we have serious
concern and at this time due to lack of room on Cannon additional parents are
going to drop-off their kids on Linda Vista. The next phase will be to bag the
“NO LEFT TURN” signs from the school to northbound Cannon St. temporarily to
try it out, and a 3rd phase if none of these work, we might consider having a
temporary STOP on Cannon on the school site for 1 hour during the day for the
drop-off and pick-up of the big busses. We will assess after the construction and
if you approve the STOP signs we will put them in place.
Chairman Beil – Did you have any discussion with the School District about the
access point, how do they deal with playground security, is this only open for
morning and afternoon access? Why do they have this access?
Michael Christensen, Facilities Manager for OUSD – The access was put in when
the school was built many years ago, because you may remember, many years ago
we all used to walk and ride bikes to school. That has changed, now many more
parents drive their children to school and pick them up in t he afternoon on their
way to work or for safety reasons, or what have you. It’s the nature now around
all elementary schools that traffic is now atrocious. The access gate is unlocked in
the morning for students to get access from the neighborhood to the school. The
gate is then locked during the school day, and at the end of the school day we
unlock the gate, not only for students to leave but also for the community to use
the green space. As you heard the fields are used for soccer, there’s basketball
Minutes of a Regular Meeting – City Traffic Commission – December 10, 2008 Pg. 15
Tape #CTC-28.11 of this City Traffic Commission meeting is available for your review.
Please contact the Recording Secretary at (714) 744-5536 in this regard, advance notice is appreciated.
Dec. ‘08 [N:/Traffic/CTC/2008 Minutes]
Printed on Recycled Paper
games, running, etc. In the Orange Unified School District a gate is unlocked at
each school for community use as we do have 2/3 of the green space in the City.
That’s what we’re supposed to do.
Chairman Beil – There are numerous schools where it doesn’t, Palmyra,
Cambridge and when we used those for Little League, we had to obtain keys to
get into those fields after hours.
Michael Christensen, Facilities Manager for OUSD – You should not have to.
Chairman Beil – I just wondered why this school was so different. I went to
Orange H S and there was the old gate that went down the alley to Cambridge
and we used to walk to school through that alley, and then all of a sudden that
gate was locked and they said we could no longer access that.
Michael Christensen, Facilities Manager for OUSD – I want to compliment staff
who has met with us numerous times trying to come up with a solution to this
problem. We’ve met with the Police Traffic Bureau; City staff has really gone out
to help find a solution. I’ve heard the residents and parents say they would like a
crossing guard. A crossing guard is actually a City function and is paid for by
them and everything has probably been analyzed and this is probably more cost
effective.
Vice Chairman Lall – The gentleman from the PTA questioned why the City would
put a highway in front of a school. I have a big issue with that too and I made a
big issue of that with the former Council and Mayor and the Mayor at that time
indicated that Cannon St. had been on the County’s Map of Arterial Highways for
years, and it had been on the map before the school was built and we’re going
ahead and build the road. Do you have any history or knowledge of that
situation?
Michael Christensen, Facilities Manager for OUSD – No I don’t, usually when I
come in here I know it’s my fault. I know the school has been there for a long
time and if conditions change and the school goes in and it’s not safe to do
something then I would think that prudent people wouldn’t make that decision.
Vice Chairman Lall – I just wanted to get that on the record so the PTA knows the
history of this, I’m not trying to put you guys in a b ad light. Personally if I was on
the Council at that time I would have blinked and that road wouldn’t have been
made that wide, I wouldn’t have done that to my kids.
Commissioner King – I have to support the STOP sign. I know several people say
it wouldn’t solve the problem and maybe it won’t solve it, but I think it may be
helpful. I don’t understand the controversy abou t a crossing guard. Surely you
Minutes of a Regular Meeting – City Traffic Commission – December 10, 2008 Pg. 16
Tape #CTC-28.11 of this City Traffic Commission meeting is available for your review.
Please contact the Recording Secretary at (714) 744-5536 in this regard, advance notice is appreciated.
Dec. ‘08 [N:/Traffic/CTC/2008 Minutes]
Printed on Recycled Paper
can get a crossing guard. I understand the City is responsible for that and they
have one temporarily, but why is it such a problem?
Michael Christensen, Facilities Manager for OUSD – I can’t speak for them but I
would imagine it’s a budget issue quite frankly.
Commissioner King – I will pursue this, I’ll ask around. My house backs LaVeta
School and I go through the front of LaVeta School almost every morning
between 7:30 – 8:00 and McPherson School on Prospect St. that is a problem. I
think all the schools have a traffic problem about 8:00 a.m. I don’t think anyone
is picking on this school in particular, I think it’s universal for all schools. I think
the STOP sign will be helpful.
Chairman Beil – Generally I know we’ve had other STOP sign requests we’ve
denied because of cross-gutters. The issues on the previous requests at other
locations were not necessarily the safety issue for pedestrians it was more of a
speed control and we don’t use STOP signs for speed control, STOP signs are to
assign right-of-way at an intersection. Those are fairly deep cross-gutters. Have
we had a historic problem there with gouging; do we know from the operations
side?
Amir Farahani, City Traffic Engineer – We don’t have a history of any accidents
or incidents, we just have some marks in the concrete.
Chairman Beil – Also on the Cannon construction, what is the current schedule
for completion?
Amir Farahani, City Traffic Engineer – They are grinding the intersection today
and I believe by the end of December, by the Holidays it will have four travel
lanes open, two in each direction south of Cannon.
Chairman Beil – I’m not real familiar with the Capital Improvement Project but
was that closely coordinated with the School District as far as the circulation?
Amir Farahani, City Traffic Engineer – We believe so.
Vice Chairman Lall – Many of the speakers brought up issues that are not in our
jurisdiction. We do not assign crossing guards; we have nothing to do with that.
We make decisions on STOP signs and speed humps, most of you have sat through
most of the meeting so you have a good idea of what we do. So there are other
departments and agencies that need to be addressed to take care of this issue, we
can only look at the STOP sign issue.
Minutes of a Regular Meeting – City Traffic Commission – December 10, 2008 Pg. 17
Tape #CTC-28.11 of this City Traffic Commission meeting is available for your review.
Please contact the Recording Secretary at (714) 744-5536 in this regard, advance notice is appreciated.
Dec. ‘08 [N:/Traffic/CTC/2008 Minutes]
Printed on Recycled Paper
ACTION: Approved the installation of an “All-Way” STOP control at
the intersection of Linda Vista St, and Elsinore Ave.
MOTION: W. King
SECOND: N. Lall
AYES: Unanimous
Chairman Beil – I do encourage continued discussions with the school dist rict on
any circulation issues particularly on Cannon St. after the construction has
concluded to see how things transpire.
End of Consideration Items
V. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS
None this month.
VI. ADJOURNMENT
After discussion of today’s Agenda the City Traffic Commission meeting was
concluded, and as there were no further requests for action under Oral
Presentations, the Chairman adjourned this session of the City Traffic
Commission.
The next meeting of the City Traffic Commission is scheduled:
5:30 P.M.
Wednesday - February 11, 2009
Respectfully submitted,
CITY OF ORANGE
Phyllis Then, Recording Secretary
Traffic Engineering Division
pthen@cityoforange.org
CITY OF ORANGE
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
300 E. CHAPMAN AVENUE
ORANGE CA 92866
PH: (714) 744-5536
FAX: (714) 744-5573