The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About03-12-2003 - Minutes TC CITY OF ORANGE CITY TRAFFIC CQMMISSIDN Minutes of a Regular Meeting: _ March 12, 2003 I. 4PENING A. Flag Pledge B. Roll Cail: Present—Commissioners: D. Yarger, J. Fortier, F. Sciarra, F. Petronella, M. Burkhardt Present—Staff: T. Mahood, D. Allenbach, W. Winthers, C. Glass, Cpl. K. VanGorder P. Then Absent - Staff: Sgt. J. Burton, OPD C. Approval of Minutes: ♦ February 12, 2002 ACTION: Approve as published by the Recording Secretary. MOTION: F. Sciarra SECOND: M. Burkhardt AYES: Unanimous I1. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Request for the installation of red curb markings on both sides of the northerly driveway that services the business complex at 966 N. Main St. Peter DiStefano 966 N. Main St. Orange CA 92867 . Oral presentation is based on the written staff report; please refer to your copy. There was no discussion of this item. ACTION: Approved the installation of 30 ft. of red curb markings on both sides of the subject driveway. MOTION: D. Yarger SECOND: J. Fortier AYES: Unanimous ��'�� End of Consent Calendar �� Tape#CTG23.02 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. Is- �Printed on Recvcled Paper - ,..:�, .,.,. •:.: f.'._ �_�.,,� .: :>:,,::�,. ;:.:: '~��`,�,':�'�`� �:;:;.:(p��' g�• ;'4§'•^•.^^�-`e:..'x'+-:f:,;..E. ..�.-,.�__�.,...�a;v:a�;i+i�,3i - ,s3:.t.C,C ii&7`a�lb�F`t h:'�,:;��qG„1�j`;Y . Minutes of a Regular Meeting—City Traffic Commission—March 12,2003 pg.2 ill. CONSIDERATION ITEMS 1. Results of 3-month trial installation of speed humps on: a) Pampas St. between Lincoln Ave. and Brentwood Ave. b) Brentwood Ave. befinreen Pampas St. and Glassell St. Stacy Germain 2723 N. Pampas St. Orange CA 92865-2119 ` Oral presentation is based on the written staff report; please refer to your co PY• Chairman Yarger opened the public hearing for the following discussion: James Dunlap, 2586 N. Pampas St. - The speed humps have caused a substantial increase to r�y wife's back pain, to the point where it's creating a serious medicai problem. My wife tries to get outside as much as possible and often has to use the street to avoid sprinklers, which damage the wheelchair, and she has trouble getting over the speed humps. Since that speed hump has been put in my car has had to be towed 3 times because of rear axle trouble, I never had serious trouble like that before, it's cost me over$1,000. in repairs. Vice Chairman Fortier — Has any other neighbor experienced a mechanical difficulty to their vehicle attributable to the speed humps? James Dunlap — Not that I'm aware of. 1 believe this also brings up a discrimination issue because of the pain and the wheelchair access and I intend to pursue it if it's approved. Laurine Whitfield, 214 W. Brentwood Ave. — Not only did these speed humps now slow traffic some drivers were passing each other on Brentwood to get to the STOP sign at Glassell. Drivers only slow down to 15 mph as they go over the hump, don't they know the speed has been reduced in the entire neighborhood? We need these speed humps on a permanent basis. Comr�nissioner Burkhardt—Are there legal ramifications regarding handicap accessibility and speed humps? Wavne Winthers, Asst. Citv Attornev—Not that I'm aware of, I've never heard of any. Joshua Dunlap, 2586 N. Pamqas St. — My mother has need of emergency vehicles quite regularly and every minute in response time is critical to her. There are a lot of efderly people in this neighborhood who have need of emergency vehicles and depend on their timely response. I've heard that speed humps are a hindrance to ambulances. Linda Weatherford, 233 W. Brentwood Ave. — I drive a 1985 van over these speed humps with no problems. My husband also has severe medical problems and is in a lot of pain, he hasn't complained about the speed humps, he's glad they're there. �� Tape#CTG23.02 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. � �Printed on Recvcled Paper Minutes of a Regular Meeting—City Traffic Commission—March 12,2003 pg. 3 Lewis Heaney, 207 W. Brookshire Ave. — My first concern is the emergency response time for Police and Fire; and secondly, placing the speed humps on Pampas and Brentwood is forcing more traffic down my street, which does not have speed humps. I think that at this time of a budget crunch that it's a waste of money that could be better used elsewhere. Vice Chairman Fortier — Has there been any change in volume on these streets since the speed humps were installed that would divert traffic to other streets? Dave Allenbach, Transportation Analyst—We've noticed no change of volume on either Pampas or Brentwood, which would indicate we are not getting a lot of bypass traffic to begin with. The traffic volume for a single-family community such as this, on average, is about 10 trips a day per househofd. A volume of 500-600 vehicles a day is basically background traffic and we were looking to use that as a baseline. During this trial period we counted to see if the volume had decreased and people were using adjoining streets to bypass the humps, and we haven't seen that at all. Chairman Yarger—What were the results of the tests conducted of emergency vehicles going over the speed humps? Dave Allenbach, Transportation Analvst — We conducted a field test of various speed humps last summer. We put speed humps of four different heights on Struck Ave. in front of the Corporation Yard; the height of the humps were 2 inches, 2.%2 inches, 3 inches and the highest hump was 3 %z inches. We ran all of our emergency and non- emergency vehicles over these humps to determine which, if any, vehicles had any problems. We found that the.police vehicles, particularly the motorcycles, seemed to handle all the speed humps fairly well. The ambulance had trouble with speed humps higher than 2 %2 inches; and the ladder truck was affected by anything over 2 inches. After the test we realized a compromise to keep speeds at a reasonable level was to put in 2 % inch high speed humps. The original profile of speed humps was 3—3 %2 inches. Chairman Yarqer — So fire engines and ambulances are most affected by the speed humps. Dave Allenbach, Transqortation Analvst — Primarily the fire engines. I believe the ambulances are affected because they are vans, and vans tend to be lighter in the rear than passenger cars, and vans tend to bounce around. Members of the City Council rode in the back of the ambulance during these tests. The ladder truck had the biggest problem, however, when they slowed to 15 mph they could negotiate a 2 and 2 % inch hig h speed hump fairly easily, it was the 3 and 3 %2 inch speed hump that caused problems. Stacv Germain, 2723 N. Pampas St. — I believe the speed humps have made a difference in the quality of life in our neighborhood, especially on Pampas and Brentwood. I would like to encourage you to make the humps permanent, as they have been very effective in reducing speed. I have a letter from the Executive Vice President of Volt Technical acknowledging use of the residential streets by their employees and encouraging them to obey the speed laws, (copy of letter to file). ��. Tape#CTG23.02 of this City Traffic Commission meeting is available for your review. ,� � Please contact the Recording Secretary at(714)744-553G in this regard,advance notice is appreciated. �Printed on Recvcled Paper Minutes of a Regular Meeting—City Traffic Commission—March 12,2003 Pg.4 Larry Nunez, 217 UV. Brookshire Ave. — I'm opposed to the height of the speed humps and I want emergency vehicies to reach my home as soon as they can. I've seen people in this room and others who live in the neighborhood regularly drive in excess of 4� mph. I know this because I've followed them in my car. I have an issue with Pampas because it is the main access for the emergency vehicles. Otherwise if people want speed humps they should put them on their own street and not force the cars onto our street. Commissioner Burkhardt— If you understand that Pampas is an entrance to the tract and will have more traffic than some of the interior streets, why would residents of the interior streets be concerned with speed? Chairman YarQer— I was in your neighborhood observing traffic when I saw a car enter the tract that was speeding. Out of curiosity I followed him, and it was someone who lived on Crystal View. Tonv Dunn, 1733 N. Shaffer St. —Several years ago I petitioned you to install the speed humps on Shaffer and I have noticed that I had a 97% approval rating even with the fire station and a public park on the street. The complaints came from people who don't live on Shaffer who don't want motorists to speed on their street, but they wanted to speed on Shaffer to get home. Some residents even said they bought a home on a cul-de-sac so they wouldn't have a speeding problem, and if we didn't want cars to speed on our street we should sell our home and move to a cul-de-sac. That isn't the answer; quality of life is for the entire city not just people who live on a cul-de-sac. I feel that speed humps are the most effective 24-hour speed deterrent there is because it's there and on duty at 3 a.m. Cars have excellent suspension systems now and people don't rea(ize how fast they are really going. I would like to see us adopt an aggressive traffic management system throughout the city, installing speed humps, street closures, turn restrictions, everything. Today's drivers no longer obey the speed laws, their idea is that if there is no cop there they didn't do anything wrong. There is now a noticeable reduction in traffic speed and flow of traffic on Shaffer St. since the speed humps have been installede Chairman Yarger closed the public hearing and returned the item to the Commission for further discussion. Commissioner Burkhardt— I know our staff has spent a great deal of time working on the Neighborhood Traffic Management Program and speed humps. I think Chairman Yarger has stated before that vehicles today are now equipped to drive faster than ever before, and people don't realize how fast they are driving because of the new suspension systems. It has the preponderance to give the false impression that just by slowing down you will be able to maintain a quality of life, and that's not true. The reason why there are cities having aggressive traffic management programs and the studies that have been done with speed humps and neighborhood traffic management programs implementing other measures is because of the need resulting from unsafe driving on the street. The speed humps on Shaffer St., in front of a fire station seem to be working just fine. I'm in favor of the program and I'm in favor of the installation of these things ,��,. Tape#CTC-23.02 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. �Printed on Recvcled Paper Minutes of a Regular Meeting—City Traffic Commission—March 12,2003 Pg.5 and I think it would be a detriment to both our staff and this Commission not to support these things. Vice Chairman Fortier—After listening to everyone, whose concerns are valid, I think it all comes down to what's best for that community. I've heard that the speed has reduced quite a bit. We know that if people are speeding through these neighborhoods and it has now been reduced 11-12 mph below the prima facia 25 mph speed limit, that definitely has to improve safety. We've checked with emergency agencies and they don't seem to have a problem going over those humps. It comes down to safety and what's the best way to have safety in that neighborhood, and I can see no other way than this to do it. Commissioner Sciarra — My only concern is that it appears that traffic is being diverted over to the other two streets, which is not favorable. Commissioner Petronella — Why wasn't Brookshire and Crystal View included on the . petition? Why haven't those people come in saying there's an overflow of traffic resulting from these temporary speed humps and yet they're not on the petition. Dave Allenbach, Transportation Analyst — Initially the only street considered was Pampas. After looking at the map and listening to the proponent who feft, at the time, that traffic was bypassing the Glassell/Lincoln intersection in favor of using Pampas and Brentwood to get from Lincoln over to Glassell. Pampas and Brentwood are a direct route, however, the traffic volume we were seeing did not bear that out, that these streets were being used to bypass arterial traffic. {f the streets were being used we would have expected the traffic volume to be somewhere at 3,000-4,000 vehicles a day. Brookshire and Crystal View were not considered because they don't form a direct route and we had no evidence there was speeding on those streets. We conducted some background traffic counts on both those streets initially, you may have traffic diverting to bypass the speed humps but by and large when you're looking at volumes of 500-600 vehicles a day you're really not dealing with a bypass problem. Commissioner Burkhardt — What is the criteria for a street to qualify for installation of speed humps? Dave Allenbach, Transportation Analvst — Upon receipt of a written request staff evaluates the street and there are a number of considerations. The street cannot have a grade of more than 4%, it has to be residentially developed and it cannot be on what we have determined to be a secondary emergency response route. Typically these are streets such as Almond Ave. or Palm Ave., which are local collector streets but run parallel to an arterial. Depending on the time of day when an emergency call may occur it may not be advantageous for the Fire Dept. to use an arterial, in which case they would use one of these streets to get around the traffic on the arterial to get to their destination. Both of these streets fulfilled the initial criteria. When we are asked for speed humps, or some type of speed attenuation, the 85t" percentile on the street has to be 33 mph or higher. In this case I believe it was 35.8 mph. Because this program was approved by a resolution, if the 85th percentile comes out to be 32.9 mph then we would advise the proponent that the street does not meet the criteria, on the other hand if the 85th percentile was 33.1 mph we would continue to the next step. �� Tape#CTC-23.02 of this City Traffic Commission meeting is avaiiable for your review. �� Please contact the Recording Secretary at(714)7445536 in this regard,advance notice is appreciated. �Printed on Recvcled Paper Minutes of a Regular Meeting—City Traffic Commission—March 12,2003 pg.6 A request for speed humps requires support of the neighborhood where they are to be installed. Staff generates a petition; which the proponent circulates through the neighborhood. Attached to the petition is an aerial photograph indicating exactty where the speed humps would be installed. We also provide a photograph showing what the speed hump installation would actually look like, and a list of the pros and cons associated with their installation. Hopefully the residents would review all of this information and then indicate their position on the petition. There has to be a 75% majority of people in favor of this before we even bring it to the City Traffic Commission to begin the trial phase. Commissioner Burkhardt—So they did meet the 75% of required resident's signatures in favor of the speed hump installation? Dave Allenbach, Transportation Analvst— I believe they had an 83% majority,i�+atiy.' Chairman Yarger— I've got mixed emotions on it and if you're really going to be honest the speed humps may slow speed now but it probably won't take them too long to figure out that if they get up to 35-40 mph those speed humps are non-existent and speeds will go back up. Commissioner Burkhardt— Speed humps have been pretty effective on Shaffer St. and I don't think there has been an increase of speed there. Chairman YarQer— I think Shaffer's speed humps are quite different than these. Tom Mahood, Citv Traffic Enqineer— Based upon the number of homes on Brentwood and Pampas we'd expect about 800 trips daily, it sounds like a lot but it's typically what we generate. If we put our traffic counters at each end of this stretch that's about what we'd get. Now our counters in the mid-block are picking up about 400-500 trips daily � suggesting there is probably some cut-through traffic, but not a tremendous amount, maybe�about 20% so generally most of the traffic that we're seeing is generated either on that street or the adjacent streets and it's been our experience in the traffic field that pretty much everyone speeds until they get on the cul-de-sac where they live before they slow down, it's just human nature. There are a number of speed hump designs and we did a lot of researching�to find the ideal shape, hence the testing with the emergency vehicles. The Shaffer units are a lot more abrupt, these are flatter. We have instances where speed "bumps" cause significant delay to emergency vehicles but the end product that resulted from our program was a "hump" or an undulation that the emergency responders were content with. I'm hesitant to discuss lowering response times for emergency folks because they have a{ready approved these things and they're happy with them. They have asked that we not put them on arterial highways or their secondary response routes but beyond that they are satisfied they can still meet their response requirements with these installations. Chairman Yarger closed the a►iscussion and asked for a rr�otion. ,,�,. Tape#CTC-23.02 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. �Printed on RecvcIed Paper Minutes of a Regular Meeting—City Tra�c Commission—March 12,2Q03 pg.7 ACTION: Approved the speed humps on both Pampas St. and Brentwood Ave. and that because of the requirement of our Commission that we forward this to the City Council. MOTION: M. Burkhardt SECOND: J. Fortier AYES: Fortier, Petronella, Sciarra, Burkhardt, NOES: Yarger ACTION: Approved installation of a speed hump at 501 &511 E. Brentwood Ave. MOTION: M. Burkhardt SECOND: F. Petronella - AYES: Fortier, Petronella, Sciarra, Burkhardt NOES: Yarger �� End of Consideration Calendar �� iV.ADMINISTRATIVE REPt)RTS None this month. V. ORAL PRESENTATIONS Harriett Abbott, 2712 N. Pamaas St—You're planning to install one of these speed humps in front of my house and I would like to request you move it closer to Lincoln Ave. Dave Allenbach. Transportation Analvst — As long as we heard from the residents to the north, in writing, before we go out to put these in, we could move this 3 feet or so and not have a problem. There is a space between these 2 driveways that would work well for a speed hump. ��e Tape#CTG23.02 of this City Traffic Corrunission meeting is available for pour review. �� Please contact the Recording Secretary at(714)744-553G in this regard,advance notice is appreciated. �Ir'Printed on Recvcled PaUer Minutes of a Regular Meeting—City Traffic Commission—March 12,2003 pg,g VI. ADJOURNMENT After discussion of today's Agenda items 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 at 7:00 p.m. The next regular meeting of the City Traffic Commission is scheduled for Wednesday— April 16, 2003 at 5:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, CITY O.F ORANGE Phyllis Then Recording Secretary Traffic Engineering Division CITY OF ORANGE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DIVISION 300 E.CHAPMAN AVE. ORANGE CA 92866 PH: (714) 744-5536 FAx: (714) 744-5573 �3 March`03 [C:1MyDoclThenplTraffic Commission12003 Minutes] ,,��.,.. Tape#CTC-23A2 of this City Traffic Commission meeting is available for your review. �` Please contact the Recording Secretary at(714)7445536 in this regard,advance notice is appreciated. ��,,! �1�'Printed on Recvcled Paper