Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-12-2005 - Minutes TCCITY OF ORANGE CITY TRAFFIC COMMISSION Minutes of a Regular Meeting: October 12, 2005 Tape #CTC-25.08 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 Present – Staff: T. Mahood, D. Allenbach, W. Winthers, Sgt. S. O’Toole, P. Then C. Election of Chairman & Vice-Chairman 1. Nomination for Chairman, a two-year term, scheduled to expire October 2007 ACTION: Elected J. Beil, as Chairman MOTION: N. Lall SECOND: J. Pyne AYES: Unanimous 2. Nomination for Vice-Chairman, a two-year term, scheduled to expire October 2007 ACTION: Elected N. Lall as Vice-Chairman MOTION: F. Petronella SECOND: J. Pyne AYES: Unanimous D. Approval of Minutes Š September 14, 2005 ACTION: Approved as published by the Recording Secretary. MOTION: J. Pyne SECOND: N. Lall AYES: Unanimous October ‘05 [N:/Traffic/CTC/2005 Minutes] Printed on Recycled Paper Minutes of a Regular Meeting – City Traffic Commission – October 12, 2005 Pg. 2 II. ORAL PRESENTATIONS None III. CONSENT CALENDAR None this meeting. IV. CONSIDERATION ITEMS A. Request for the installation of a “One-Way” STOP control at the intersection of Crown Parkway and Parkhurst Dr. Jim Gross 2272 N. Parkhurst Dr. 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: Jim Gross, 2272 N. Parkhurst Dr. –I don’t know the study based on Eaton and Portico but basically they look almost the same. Anaheim Hills Elementary School is towards Kendra, so in the mornings people are dropping off their kids at the school and they are going around Crown at a very high rate of speed to the STOP sign. Parkhurst is an exit road up to Anaheim Hills Elementary School and also for southbound traffic. Based on your pictures, the first photo is of the blank spot of Crown at Parkhurst, you had last week where it’s a long driveway, (provides photographs of those). Based on what Mr. Allenbach said that there was a sight distance issue at Kendra and the other one. There is a sight distance issue on Crown and Parkhurst because my wall goes all along that edge, there’s no houses over there. You showed that there did exist STOP signs throughout all the exiting portions, well you’re proposing to put in a STOP sign in an entry loop. All the new areas in that exhibit and all the areas in there, those are all exit streets. Crown Parkway to Parkhurst is exiting so putting in the STOP sign is going to exacerbate the situation of them coming around a blind corner where there are two driveways within 25 ft. of that corner. Tape #CTC-25.08 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.  October‘05 [N:/Traffic/CTC/2005 Minutes] Printed on Recycled Paper Minutes of a Regular Meeting – City Traffic Commission – October 12, 2005 Pg. 3 Tape #CTC-25.08 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. There are 16 kids under the age of 6 within 250 ft. of that corner, so motorists know they are going to STOP are going at a higher rate of speed. I purposely park my car legally on that corner so people do not come around that. I definitely do not want red on both sides because now I’m going to have 60 ft. of NO PARKING at my house. So I definitely don’t want red curb where there’s no STOP sign. I’d rather have a STOP sign and red curb just because my front door is 50 feet from that corner and based on the pictures we got back last week you can see the tire marks burned into the rubber. There is another picture I submitted showing about 80 ft. of wall but you can see the tire marks, they come at a high rate of speed and turn that corner. Putting a STOP sign there will help the non-residents know that is an exit. I almost get hit every morning backing out of my driveway. Based on the number of children in that area and that being the closest exit to the school for this neighborhood I would propose putting the STOP sign on the other side. Kendra, Portico and Eaton all have 3-Way STOP’s. We don’t want a 3-Way, we petitioned the neighborhood to put a STOP sign to slow down non-residents and protect the people living on Parkhurst. Carl Scultzure, 7477 E. Crown Parkway – This is a long street and it goes by a park that is about ½ mile down the street. If you put in the STOP sign, in my opinion, on the north end on Parkhurst going north all you’re going to do is aggravate the problem. They know now that the people coming in have to stop so they can just cruise right on through there. If we’re not going to put something on the eastbound side of Crown Parkway then I propose we do nothing. There is a long wall and you cannot see anyone around that corner. That’s why we’re proposing putting in the STOP sign going that way. A 3-Way STOP might be the most appropriate but at least one going eastbound. Chairman Beil closed the public hearing and returned the item to the Commission for further discussion and a motion. Chairman Beil – I heard the issues about the sight distance and really when I look at the sight distance caused by the wall that belongs to Mr. Gross’ house, to me that almost justifies a need for the STOP sign on northbound Parkhurst. It would really be for people making a left turn to have sight distance of what is coming down the street. Generally it’s not a right-of-way assignment issue for sight distance. I agree with what you say, yes, from a safety perspective. You’d like to be able to see around a corner if you don’t have any controls at the corner. The tire marks, I’ve been out there a couple of time and sat and watched people  October‘05 [N:/Traffic/CTC/2005 Minutes] Printed on Recycled Paper Minutes of a Regular Meeting – City Traffic Commission – October 12, 2005 Pg. 4 going through that intersection, actually it’s a very clean street and to me it looks like normal wear. When you look at traffic counts that’s the predominant traffic pattern, I don’t see it as having any indication of speed or anything else, it is the predominant traffic pattern in that direction. I do hear what you say that you’re 15 ft. from that corner, I find it quite amazing that the development is allowed to put a front door that close to a corner. That’s very close to the corner I agree with you there and basically you cannot see the driveway and I can see the issue that you may be faced with. If you’re trying to back out of your driveway you can’t see vehicles coming, not necessarily the vehicles seeing you backing out, it’s you that cannot see. Vice Chairman Lall – I agree with the concerns of the homeowner’s. For staff the “Tee” intersections are the regulated intersections he has listed. How do they compare to our Parkhurst – E. Crown Parkway intersection? Dave Allenbach, Assoc. Transportation Analyst – When those “3-Way” STOP’s were established I suspect they were most likely a requirement of the development. We will get a plan and obviously the street is not constructed yet so it’s impossible for us to do a traffic study. In reviewing the plans you take a look at where you think the STOP’s are most likely going to be required. You require the developer to put them in. The fact that we have some hard turn counts on Portico Terrace and Eaton Court is because I had processed two requests in that general area for speed humps. The traffic volume that we see at the subject intersection are based on the peak hour turn count. One of the things to consider is that typically one does not stop for “1-Way” STOP for an eastbound through lane. There is a right turn volume but that is because this is the exit out onto Serrano. The majority of the residents in this area are coming to this intersection to access Serrano. Either they come up the hill to the school or down and off to work. But also keep in mind that this is a cul-de-sac in this area, there are very few homes over here and one of our concerns would be that if we put in a “3-Way” STOP, or even a “1-Way” STOP as the proponent has suggested there would not be any compliance with that stop. If you’re not getting compliance that could set up a dangerous condition as well. Vice Chairman Lall – The new development that appears to be going in north of this small segment where the petitioner has called attention to, is that going to exit into E. Crown Parkway and cause more traffic flow? Tape #CTC-25.08 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.  October‘05 [N:/Traffic/CTC/2005 Minutes] Printed on Recycled Paper Minutes of a Regular Meeting – City Traffic Commission – October 12, 2005 Pg. 5 Dave Allenbach, Assoc. Transportation Analyst – What you’re seeing here is terracing and weed abatement and slope generation area. Chairman Beil – Do you have a picture of the front of Mr. Gross’ house? Looking north on Parkhurst Dr. can you go eastbound on Crown Parkway? I’m mostly concerned with the safety issue of Mr. Gross trying to back out of his driveway in the morning peak when everyone is running all the kids to school, and you just don’t know what’s coming around that corner. Dave Allenbach, Assoc. Transportation Analyst – We have a side view looking eastbound. Our proposal doesn’t really show the front of his house. Chairman Beil – If we made a proposal to put in a sign for eastbound Crown Parkway at that corner, what is the issue of installing it as a “1-Way” STOP? Should we do that “2-Way” coming out of the other cul-de-sac on the other side also? Tom Mahood, City Traffic Engineer – A “1-Way” STOP as you’re suggesting is really non-standard, I can’t think of any place in the City that we have anything like that, and I can’t think of any place in general I’ve come across in Orange County. I’m not saying it’s not possible but its extremely unusual and you’d need some kind of compelling reason. Some practical alternatives to that would be the “1-Way” STOP that we’ve talked about, do noting and leave it as it is today, or an “All-Way” STOP. Any one of those would be superior to a “1-Way” STOP. Vice Chariman Lall – This is really a tough one. To a large extent what the applicant is requesting doesn’t meet any of our standards. I don’t think staff’s recommendation solves the problem, I can understand why they made that recommendation but I don’t think it helps the situation. I think the builder did a huge disservice to the way they positioned that property and there is a tremendous line of sight issue, it’s a hazard, I wouldn’t recommend we follow the STOP sign on Parkhurst Dr. I agree with the Traffic Engineer that a single STOP sign on Crown Parkway would be inappropriate, and I think it would be misleading to other drivers as to what is going on since it’s so unique. I’m torn between leaving it alone entirely or going with the “3-Way” STOP sign. Tape #CTC-25.08 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.  October‘05 [N:/Traffic/CTC/2005 Minutes] Printed on Recycled Paper Minutes of a Regular Meeting – City Traffic Commission – October 12, 2005 Pg. 6 Commissioner Pyne - I went up and sat at the intersection during the weekend and saw some of the concerns that the petitioner had made with people cutting that corner, as they do at most intersections. I see another concern that we have a possible issue that could arise and I think it could be alleviated by putting in the “3-Way” STOP signs at that location and take care of the problem now before it has an opportunity to become an issue. ACTION: 1. Denied the installation of a “1-Way” STOP sign for eastbound Crown Parkway at Parkhurst Dr. 2. Denied the installation of a “1-Way” STOP control for northbound Parkhurst Dr. at Crown Parkway. MOTION: J. Beil SECOND: F. Petronella Chairman Beil – I’m thinking we approve the installation of an “All-Way” STOP control at Parkhurst Dr. and Crown Parkway; to include the standard levels of red curb for any sight distance issues that would be needed. I’m assuming this is looked at on a case-by-case basis, based on sight distance needs, therefore when you look at the westbound Crown Parkway would that include red curb approaching the STOP sign? Dave Allenbach, Assoc. Transportation Analyst – We typically will put in 30 ft. of red curb in advance of the STOP primarily to keep over-size vehicles from obstructing the view of the STOP sign. On the north side of the street however, in this area, depending on exactly where the STOP would go in relation to that address’ driveway, there may be less red curb because you can’t park in front of a drive approach. So that basically counts and keeping the area clear. Chairman Beil – It’s not the norm for putting this in but as mentioned I see this as an issue out there, particularly the way the Gross’ house is situated, and the ability to get out of those driveways. Is there any need for additional notification for modifying this amendment? Wayne Winthers, Asst. City Attorney – It would depend on what the notice said. Tape #CTC-25.08 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.  October‘05 [N:/Traffic/CTC/2005 Minutes] Printed on Recycled Paper Minutes of a Regular Meeting – City Traffic Commission – October 12, 2005 Pg. 7 Dave Allenbach, Assoc. Transportation Analyst – Basically the notice said it was a proposal for a “1-Way” STOP at the subject intersection. Staff was proposing a STOP installation similar to what you see on the screen and along with this we had a picture of this proposed STOP installation. We also notified the area residents that vehicular noise could increase as a result of the proposal, specifically when dealing with the proposal for an “All-Way” STOP but the notification did go out that we were considering a STOP control at this intersection. Wayne Winthers, Asst. City Attorney – Do we know the addresses of the residences where the STOP sign might be in front of? Dave Allenbach, Assoc. Transportation Analyst – No, I can’t tell you exactly which houses they would be. Basically I would say the STOP would go in this area and depending upon how much full height curb we have easterly of there between this residence and the one next door, that will determine how much red curb we put in. It may not actually be a “legal” parking space, it may be less than 20 ft. in which case that really is not a legal parking space to begin with, even though it is not painted red at the time. Chairman Beil – Can you show us on the map where you would install the STOP sign for the westbound traffic? Dave Allenbach, Assoc. Transportation Analyst – Probably we will avoid this mailbox, but roughly in this area. Chairman Beil – It wouldn’t be on the other side of that driveway? Dave Allenbach, Assoc. Transportation Analyst – No, because you’re into the intersection at this point. Chairman Beil – This gentlemen pointed out that 7521 and 7543 were both on the list and I think those two houses are what we’re talking about, and we can certainly confirm they received the notification letter. Tape #CTC-25.08 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.  October‘05 [N:/Traffic/CTC/2005 Minutes] Printed on Recycled Paper Minutes of a Regular Meeting – City Traffic Commission – October 12, 2005 Pg. 8 Vice Chairman Lall – I think additional notification might be proper because now we’re going to be stopping people exiting the cul-de-sac, and then the people in the intersection on the north side of the street might want notification that our proposal now is a “full” STOP and not just a STOP on Parkhurst. Chairman Beil – I don’t like having the driveway in the middle of the intersection. Actually when I looked at the Agenda item on page 2, the aerial showing Crown Parkway and Parkhurst, it appears to me the curb line lines up with that west side of that driveway. Tom Mahood, City Traffic Engineer – We have some latitude on where we put the STOP bar and we could probably move it to within 10 or 15 ft. to best place it, and we may have to move it forward in order to do that. If we do move it forward then the presence of the driveway would probably negate the need to put in red curb because obviously we can’t park there. That picture is a little hard to tell because of the angle but if you look at the aerial photo it looks a little more like that spot to the left of the driveway we are seeing would line up with perhaps an appropriate STOP sign placement. Chairman Beil – Do you want to go with a continuance with a revised recommendation from the Commission with their new notification of the area and we can make sure that everyone that needs to be notified out there is so notified? Jim Gross, 2272 N. Parkhurst Dr. – We actually wanted a “3-Way” STOP but we didn’t think we would actually get it. Dave Allenbach, Assoc. Transportation Analyst – There is a 15-day appeal period. If instead of continuing the item if you elected to approve it tonight we could send a notification to the affected homes where the “3-Way” STOP’s would go and advise them of what had been approved and that they have 15 days to appeal. At that time it would go to the City Council. Chairman Beil – Is there a fee to appeal? Dave Allenbach, Assoc. Transportation Analyst – No there is no fee to appeal. But the appeal does have to be made in writing. Tape #CTC-25.08 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.  October‘05 [N:/Traffic/CTC/2005 Minutes] Printed on Recycled Paper Minutes of a Regular Meeting – City Traffic Commission – October 12, 2005 Pg. 9 ACTION: Approved installation of a “3-Way” STOP control at this 3-leg intersection, with a notification letter to affected residents in the area that they would have 15 days to appeal this decision. MOTION: J. Beil SECOND: F. Petronella Chairman Beil - To me this is an unusual situation, this request doesn’t meet warrants, STOP signs are for the assignment of right-of-way, however the uniqueness of the geometry is the driving factor. Vice-Chairman N. Lall – Again, just to reiterate. It’s extremely unusual, we generally don’t like this type of application but it is unique geometrically. Chairman Beil – Called for the vote. AYES: Unanimous 2. Request to add both sides of the 100 block of N. Center St. and the south side of Maple Ave. between Center St. and Shaffer St. to the Chapman University Permit Parking Area (Area ‘A’). Jeffrey Miller 153 N. Center St. Orange CA 92866 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. (There were no comments from the public on this topic.) Chairman Beil – One thing I do formally request, is for an aerial of the Chapman University Permit Parking Area, so we can see what areas are left, and what areas we may see in the future requesting to be included. ACTION: Approved the request for permit parking. MOTION: F. Petronella SECOND: J. Beil AYES: Unanimous Tape #CTC-25.08 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.  October‘05 [N:/Traffic/CTC/2005 Minutes] Printed on Recycled Paper Minutes of a Regular Meeting – City Traffic Commission – October 12, 2005 Pg. 10 3. Request to prohibit left-turns from westbound Spring Street onto northbound Esplanade Street, during El Modena High School’s arrival and release times. Helen Koshak El Modena High School 3920 Spring St. Orange CA 92869-3599 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. (There were no comments from the public on this topic.) Vice Chairman Lall – It seems to me the area in the request is within the County’s jurisdiction. I think the staff has done a great job in trying to look beyond that and see what the City of Orange can do. I think we are better served if we put together a comprehensive plan for that area, including the schools, the County and City of Orange to look at this and address the overall problem(s); and let us take a look at that plan when those entities come back with it. Commissioner Petronella – This is going to be tough with two jurisdictions. Unfortunately just about any school site you go to now at either the arrival or release time is chaos, I don’t really know how you’re going to solve this, except to have staggered times and schools don’t want to do that. Chairman Beil – I guess the item is written, one is to refer this to the County of Orange, but exactly what we’re referring is critical and I think the referral should be that we try to work together to figure out what that ultimate solution is. I believe the suggested changes on the left-turn restrictions could potentially impact the City operations on adjacent streets, so that may not be the best alternative. Looking at this whole intersection this has been problematic intersection for an awful long time. I do believe the staff is correct, the median island out there will help facilitate traffic and in all ways I think it’s a really good idea. My one concern with that though is what kind of bicycle counts are there for eastbound Spring St., particularly in front of a high school. My one big concern is that outside lane width, if it is just a 12 ft. lane, that is a pretty minimal width for a 35 MPH street so from a safety perspective my only problem with the median plan is in the recommended action is the outside lane width of 12 ft. for eastbound Spring St. I’m very concerned with the bike interaction there. Tape #CTC-25.08 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.  October‘05 [N:/Traffic/CTC/2005 Minutes] Printed on Recycled Paper Minutes of a Regular Meeting – City Traffic Commission – October 12, 2005 Pg. 11 Commissioner Petronella – I don’t see a problem with denying it because you’re going to study it with the County, you’ll be studying the whole street as well as that intersection so I assume it can be addressed then and we would have more information on way of travel, lane widths, etc. Wayne Winthers, Asst. City Attorney – You may want to move on Action Item #1, deny Item #2 with direction to staff to work with the County with the understanding that the item will not be brought back until they have had some discussion with the County and can come back with some ideas. Chairman Beil - This is a problem intersection that we can’t throw back and forth onto each other’s shoulders to resolve, particularly with the high school, private school and other schools in the proximity. ACTION: 1. Denied the request for the installation of a STOP control for eastbound Crown Parkway at Parkhurst Dr. 2. Denied the installation of a “One-Way” STOP control for northbound Parkhurst Dr. at Crown Parkway, and 30 ft. of red curb on both sides of the intersection for sight distance. 3. Approved a recommendation to refer this to the County of Orange; and directed the City of Orange to work jointly with the County of Orange, on a plan for the best operation of this intersection. I’d like to have you explore and have some discussion with the County about signalization. MOTION: J. Beil SECOND: F. Petronella AYES: Unanimous Chairman Beil – I’d like to give direction in this referral to the County that we really try to sit down and take a look at what is in the best interest of the County island that’s out there, County operations jointly with the City of Orange’s operations of this intersections that are all adjacent to each other and all work as one complex. 777777777777777 End of Consideration Items 77777777777777777 Tape #CTC-25.08 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.  October‘05 [N:/Traffic/CTC/2005 Minutes] Printed on Recycled Paper Minutes of a Regular Meeting – City Traffic Commission – October 12, 2005 Pg. 12 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 – November 9, 2005 Respectfully submitted, CITY OF ORANGE Phyllis Then, Recording Secretary Traffic Engineering Division pthen@cityoforange.org CITY OF ORANGE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DIVISION 300 E. CHAPMAN AVENUE ORANGE CA 92866 PH: (714) 744-5536 FAX: (714) 744-5573 Tape #CTC-25.08 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.  October‘05 [N:/Traffic/CTC/2005 Minutes] Printed on Recycled Paper