HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-08-2006 - Minutes TCCITY OF ORANGE
CITY TRAFFIC COMMISSION
Minutes of a Regular Meeting: March 8, 2006
Tape #CTC-26.02 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.
I. OPENING
A. Flag Pledge
B. Roll Call
Present – Commissioners: J. Beil, N. Lall, F. Petronella, J. Pyne
Absent – Commissioners: L. Dick
Present – Staff: T. Mahood, D. Allenbach, W. Winthers, Sgt. S. O’Toole, P. Then
C. Approval of Minutes
February 8, 2006
ACTION: Approved as published by the Recording Secretary.
MOTION: F. Petronella
SECOND: J. Beil
AYES: J. Beil, F. Petronella
ABSTAIN: N. Lall
II. ORAL PRESENTATIONS
None
III. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Request for the installation of “NO PARKING” between 9 PM and 6 AM on both
sides of Crest De Ville Avenue south of Goldenrod Lane.
William Reinking
5806 E. Crest De Ville Ave.
Orange CA 92867
ACTION: Approved the request.
March ‘06 [N:/Traffic/CTC/2006 Minutes]
Printed on Recycled Paper
Minutes of a Regular Meeting – City Traffic Commission – March 8, 2006 Pg. 2
B. Request for the installation of red curb markings in front of 425 W. Fletcher
Ave.
Daniel Gaudin
425 W. Fletcher Ave.
Orange CA 92865
ACTION: Approved the installation of 40 feet of red curb on the east side of
the driveway at 425 W. Fletcher Ave.
Tape #CTC-26.02 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.
A. Request for the installation of red curb markings in front of 180 S. Anita Dr.
Stephen Brown
180 S. Anita Dr., #103
Orange CA 92867-8777
ACTION: Approved the installation of 20 feet of red curb on both sides of
each of the four driveways at 180 S. Anita Dr.
As there were no speakers to any of the Consent Items; Chairman Beil called
for the vote:
ACTION: Approved the Consent Calendar Items as recommended.
MOTION: F. Petronella
SECOND: N. Lall
AYES: Unanimous
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
..............................................End of Consent Items ..........................................................
March ‘06 [N:/Traffic/CTC/2006 Minutes]
Printed on Recycled Paper
Minutes of a Regular Meeting – City Traffic Commission – March 8, 2006 Pg. 3
IV. CONSIDERATION ITEMS
1. Request to add Santiago Canyon Road from Jamboree Road to the south city
limits to the Speed Zone Section of the O.M.C. (Section 10.14.050).
Traffic Engineering Division
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:
Chairman Beil – I think in your oral report you said the speed limit south of the
County territory is 50 MPH, but it’s 55 MPH contiguously.
ACTION: Approved the establishment of a 55 MPH speed zone on Santiago
Canyon Road between Jamboree Road and the south city limits.
Despite the 85th percentile speed limit showing 65 MPH due to the
analysis done by City staff indicating the design speed of 55 MPH.
MOTION: N. Lall
SECTON: J. Beil, I just want to say that there is going to be a lot of things
going on in that area in the future with the East Orange and
Santiago Hills II development going on, and there will be new
intersections being built in that area, and I’m sure City staff will be
doing additional analysis for future changes along that section as
development occurs over the next number of years.
AYES: Unanimous
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
Tape #CTC-26.02 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.
March ‘06 [N:/Traffic/CTC/2006 Minutes]
Printed on Recycled Paper
Minutes of a Regular Meeting – City Traffic Commission – March 8, 2006 Pg. 4
2. Request to remove the “One-Way” STOP control at southbound Highland St.
behind Home Depot and install “NO PARKING ANYTIME” restrictions on the south
and west sides of Highland St. from the existing STOP sign to Taft Ave.
Traffic Engineering Division
CITY OF ORANGE
The oral presentation is based on the written staff report; please refer to your
copy. As there were no speakers to this request Chairman Beil called for the
vote:
MOTION: Approved the request to remove the “One-Way” STOP control at
southbound Highland St. behind Home Depot and install “NO
PARKING ANYTIME” restrictions on the south and west sides of
Highland St. from the existing STOP sign to Taft Ave.
MOTION: F. Petronella
SECOND: N. Lall
AYES: Unanimous
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
3. Results of the three-month trial of speed humps on Heim Avenue between
Orange-Olive Road and Canal Street.
Miriam Heinicke
705 E. Heim 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:
Chairman Beil – The work that will be done on Heim Ave., it will necessitate
replacing some of the speed humps as that work is done. I’m talking about the
issue of the “lips”. The mold that was created has that little vertical lip at the
bottom that we have to figure out what to do with.
Tape #CTC-26.02 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.
Tom Mahood, City Traffic Engineer – With the sewer line project going in this
summer and the street will be torn up and the humps will be replaced as part of
this project. I have talked with our Maintenance Div. About removing the lips
March ‘06 [N:/Traffic/CTC/2006 Minutes]
Printed on Recycled Paper
Minutes of a Regular Meeting – City Traffic Commission – March 8, 2006 Pg. 5
and I found out it is not just a factor of the template having a lip, they will need
to grind into the pavement and they have promised to give me an estimate on
that. They didn’t seem to think it was terribly expensive so for future
installations we will probably grind into the existing pavement and feather that
out so we create “lipless” humps.
Miriam Heinicke, 705 E. Heim Ave. – Thank you, I believe the speed humps have
helped, a number of area residents have told me they have. There is only a 66%
approval on the final petition because I didn’t get signatures from 10 households,
I went door-to-door a couple of time and was unable to find them at home. The
speed humps are a necessary evil, they do their job and it’s unfortunate the
speeds have been so fast.
Linda Jones, 812 E. Heim Ave. – Thank you for putting these in, it really has
made a difference. I have noticed a reduction in the number of vehicles and the
large delivery trucks or tow trucks that were using it as a cut-through are gone
now, and the only trucks I see on the street are making a delivery. If you could
put a speed hump closer to Orange-Olive Rd. that would be perfect because
motorists are speeding as they turn onto Heim from Orange-Olive.
Steve Williams, 822 E. Heim Ave. – The amount of commercial traffic has been
greatly reduced. The number of people using this as a cut-through has been
reduced and the speed has really decreased. I would really like to see the speed
humps stay there; they have done a good job for our neighborhood.
Tom Everts, 2538 N. Dunbar St. – I have not experienced any issues with Heim
Ave. the speed and safety of traffic there. There are two “All-Way” STOP signs
that mitigate a lot of the traffic speed. From time to time I have seen people run
these STOP signs but I see them do the same thing other places as well. In my
opinion over the last trial period is that the speed humps have added risk to the
safety of people traveling on Heim Ave. Personally I have slowed down prior to
driving over the humps and have nearly been rear-ended by people behind me
who don’t know the humps are there. I understand those speed humps cost the
City approximately $300,000. I know that we’re getting ready to tear those out
and put them in again. I know the speed humps are out of spec and I believe the
cost to put them back in and maintain them is not warranted. I don’t know if
you have any data in terms of anybody being hurt or any accidents along that
street but I would challenge you to show me there has been any physical damage
Tape #CTC-26.02 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.
March ‘06 [N:/Traffic/CTC/2006 Minutes]
Printed on Recycled Paper
Minutes of a Regular Meeting – City Traffic Commission – March 8, 2006 Pg. 6
or anybody substantially at risk to warrant the $600,000 that we’re spending on
these speed humps. When the STOP light goes in at Orange-Olive that should
slow people down a bit. Widening the street will make it safer. I think the whole
neighborhood should be petitioned as to their feelings about this and not just the
people on Heim Ave. If this goes forward I plan to appeal it.
Tom Mahood, City Traffic Engineer – Typically our costs per speed hump is
$1,600 including labor and materials for installation. So with 4 humps on this
street it would probably run about $6,500 for the whole job.
Tom Mercier, 922 E. Heim Ave. – I’m in favor of the speed humps and in fact I
think there ought to be 2 or 3 more speed humps on the street. While these have
reduced both the traffic volume and the speed by 10 MPH I think 27 MPH on an
average is still too fast because there are cars and big trucks that go much to fast
on this street. When the vehicles drive over the speed humps and they hit those
lips, it creates quite a noise.
Dana Lilland, 2597 N. Dunbar St. – Opposed to the speed humps. My bigger
issue is with the Traffic Commission because we didn’t get notified and I spoke
with someone on the phone. When I suggested the residents of Dunbar be
included in knowing what was going on the answer I got was, primarily, that I
could have gone to the City’s website. I don’t go to the City’s website on a
regular basis, but I did and I put together all the information and created a
questionnaire and walked around to all the people on Dunbar and Heim and
Lisa. I only count 21 homes on Heim Ave. that would be affected by the speed
humps and it’s not the 43 referenced. Of the 18 homes on Dunbar St. 16
households are opposed to the speed humps. I did not talk to everybody on
Heim because they weren’t home during the times I could go out. The majority
of people I talked to Heim were in favor of the speed humps but I also found out
they have been dealing with this for a year and a half. Two people told me they
cut through the school parking lot in order to avoid the speed hump.
Windy Jones, 533 E. Heim Ave. – I’m in favor of the speed humps. I have noticed
a reduction in speed. I would also be in favor of addition speed humps and I
think they have greatly improved traffic safety on Heim Ave.
Tape #CTC-26.02 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.
March ‘06 [N:/Traffic/CTC/2006 Minutes]
Printed on Recycled Paper
Minutes of a Regular Meeting – City Traffic Commission – March 8, 2006 Pg. 7
Gordie Page, 532 E. Heim Ave. – In favor of the speed humps, I think there
should be more humps installed closer to Orange-Olive Rd. I actually think the
lip is a good thing; it makes you slow down even more. If the speed hump is
smoother it makes you drive over it faster. If you shorten the length of the
humps people will use that space to bypass the hump. You can drive over these
speed humps faster than 15 MPH and there is space to increase speed between
the humps so I think the space in between the humps should be shortened a little
bit and more humps installed. $6,400 to install 4 speed humps is reasonable. I
don’t know where the $600,000 for speed humps came from. Maybe you put a
“KEEP CLEAR” within the intersections of Dunbar and Delta to maybe help
them out a little.
Chairman Beil closed the public hearing and returned the item to the
Commission for further discussion and a motion.
Tom Mahood, City Traffic Engineer – If I may address some of the comments
that have been raised. A couple of folks mentioned the Shaffer St. speed humps
and I should point out that those were the first speed humps installed in the City
and as such they have a rather unique design. They are what led the City to
doing a lot of experimentation and testing various designs with out Fire and
Police Departments to find a height they would be comfortable with. The Shaffer
humps are quite a bit higher and narrower than the ones we use today and they
are very abrupt. We don’t use that style any more. Both the Fire Dept. and the
residents of Shaffer St. are pleased with the speed humps and want us to keep
them there. We will look into the width of the humps although the height is
more significant and we are working toward getting rid of the lip. The original
humps were rubber and had a lip and the Maintenance Division made a template
from the rubber device and they retained the lip and in the future they will be
grinding them into the pavement. We may be taking out 1 or 2 of these speed
humps for the sewer project on Heim this summer and if so we will probably put
in the lipless humps if at all possible. If it’s feasible we will try to do this with
the other ones as well.
Tape #CTC-26.02 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.
Chairman Beil – I heard a lot of comments about the intersection of Orange-Olive
Rd. and Heim Ave. and sight distance is pretty bad at that intersection. It’s kind
of scary when you’re pulling out of Heim trying to get onto Orange-Olive so
future improvements will be well worth while at that intersection. I agree with
keeping the speed humps, I agree there should be a plan to paint in the ‘KEEP
March ‘06 [N:/Traffic/CTC/2006 Minutes]
Printed on Recycled Paper
Minutes of a Regular Meeting – City Traffic Commission – March 8, 2006 Pg. 8
CLEAR” pavement legends in the intersections of Delta and Dunbar so residents
can have an opportunity to make left turns into those streets during peak hour
traffic which backs up on Heim Ave.
The data show the speeds have been reduced along that segment of Heim Ave.
and the speed humps have done their job as intended as far as speed reduction
and that’s what they’re really supposed to do. Speed humps are not intended to
be diverters and divert traffic; their intent is to reduce speed. As far as the
notification I think staff has learned from this issue. As far as the secondary
petition is concerned, what streets did this go to?
Dave Allenbach, Transportation Analyst – The second petition was exactly the
same as the first in that it was the residents along the Heim Ave. corridor that
were on it, including the church at the corner of Heim and Canal and also the
school that is mid-block. According to the resolution it’s the properties that
either front or side, it makes no difference if they are residential or commercial,
they have a say or an address on a petition. The 29 residents we referred to were
the additional notifications along Dunbar and Delta. The petition involved 39
properties.
Chairman Beil – I count the same number of addresses on Heim as you did Dave.
Tom Mahood, City Traffic Engineer – I’d like to expand a little on that subject.
The RNTMP really is directed towards the folks who are fronting or have direct
access to the street, in this case Heim Ave. notification and polling. What we
have learned from this is that there are other residences affected by our actions
and even though the folks on Dunbar and Delta may not be experiencing the
problem directly of the speeding issues on Heim they do need to be notified of
anything like this so they have an opportunity to come here and voice their
concerns and to find out what is going on. As such, at a staff level, at Council
direction we modified our approach that any streets taking sole access off a street
that we are considering for some type of treatment will be notified of hearings.
Right now the program doesn’t allow for them to be polled as part of the voting
process but we have included them as part of the notification so they can come
here like they did tonight and let us know their feelings and make sure that gets
into the record and is part of the testimony before you folks make a decision.
Chairman Beil – I think that’s the clarification I was looking for.
Tape #CTC-26.02 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.
March ‘06 [N:/Traffic/CTC/2006 Minutes]
Printed on Recycled Paper
Minutes of a Regular Meeting – City Traffic Commission – March 8, 2006 Pg. 9
ACTION: Approved the permanent installation of speed humps on Heim
Ave. and forward to the City Council for final decision.
MOTION: J. Beil
SECOND: F. Petronella
AYES: Unanimous
Chairman Beil – I would like to direct staff to have “KEEP CLEAR” pavement
legends installed on Heim Ave. at Delta and Dunbar St.
Commissioner Lall – It’s unfortunate we didn’t run into this issue concerning the
notification prior to this meeting, I think staff has corrected this oversight and
any frustrations that came from that we have corrected.
777777777777777 End of Consideration Items 77777777777777777
V. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS
None this meeting.
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 – May 10, 2006
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
Tape #CTC-26.02 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.
March ‘06 [N:/Traffic/CTC/2006 Minutes]
Printed on Recycled Paper