Loading...
03-10-1999 - Minutes TC - � .':;: CITY O F ORA�I G E � :..z CITY TRAFFIC COMMISSION � �:����� � lvtinutes of a Regular Meeting: March 10, 1999 �������������������������������������� I. OPENING 0 A. Flag Pledge Bo Roil Calis Present-Commissioners: D. Yarger,J. Fortier, F. Sciarra, V1/. Poutsma, . F. Petro�ella Absent: W. Winther� � Present-Staff: H. Bahadori, D.Allenbach, C. Glass, M. Binning, Sgt. B. Green, P. Then C. Approval4f Minutes: Not availabie at this time. De �#ems�o Be Confinued or Withdrawn �fone this meeting. � II. CONSENT CALENDAR � � 1 o Request for the installation of red curb markings on both sides of the driveway that services 2943 N. Cottonwood St. )anet May 2943-1 i�l. Cottonwood St. � Orange CA 92865 - Oral presentatron is based on the wri�ten staff report, please r�efer to your copy. There was no discc�ssion of tfiis request. ACT10N: Approve the installation of 20 ft. of red curb on both sides of the subject driveway. MOTION: D.Yarger � SECOND: F. Sciarra AYES: Unanimous � Tape#CTG99.01 of this City Traffic Commission meeting is available for your review. Please contact the Recording Secretary at(714) 744-5536 in this regard,some advance notice would be appreciated. � �Printed on Recycled Paper � Minutes of a Regular tileeting-City Traffic Commission-March i0, 1999 Page 2 II1.CONSIDERATION ITEMS 1. Request for a moratorium on speed hump installa#ions in the City pending an investigation by the Fire Department on their effect to response times and vehicle maintenance. Fire Chief Bonacker . ., O'range Fire Department Oral presentation is based on the written staff report, please refer to your copy. Chairman Yarger opened the public hearing for the following discuss�on: Bill Lanning, 2632 E. Adams Ave. - I was one of the speakers at the 2-23-99 City Council meeting; 1 support the action. Part of the agreement with the City Council was that they would also schedule a public hearing for the entire community between SR-55 Fwy, Katella �& Collins so we could all be heard on this subject. I didn't know if that is part of�your agenda or whether its done by the City Council, If you're the ones that do that then you should amend the agenda item to include the noti#ication to the public for a,public hearing. � 1-lamid Bahadori, City Traffic Engineer - That effort is being pursued as we speak. We bel;eve that the community meeting will be scheduled in the second part of April and al[ , the area residents will be notified. That effort does not need any action on your part. Chairman Yarger�On this moratorium what are you (ooking for time wise? Chief Vince Bonacker, OFD - My r.equest is that we formally review response times. As you know, the f�rst installation was put in directly in front of one of our fire stations so we did have an immediate impact; I think we can make an immediate analysis of response times from 1997-1998 compared to what they are now. We know that each hump will slow our apparatus to a certain degree but we also know they use alternate routes when . responding #o incidents. 1 have sent a memo to my personnel affected by the humps on � 5haffer St. and also potentially affected by them on Handy St. asking for specific information, specific calls, spe�ific opinions an damage to vehicles or increased maintenance and if they have there been any delays getting to specific incidents. As far as the amount of time I did not have a specific time in mind but 1 think I could probably get my data put together within the next 30-45 days and then t could make a report back. Vice Chairman Fortier- I think that's a fair assessmen�and maybe 2 months for review. It's a great deterrent for speed but we do need to look at other aspects, I wish we would have _ thought of that before the speed humps were in. Chairman Yarger-But we really wouldn't be able to make an assessment before the humps were in. Commissioner Sciarra -These have been in use in other cities for some time, do we have � any input they have had on city vehicles in these other communities� Chief Bonacker-As far as Fire Dept.#here is data on speed hump installation both pro and con from across the United S#ates, so you ca� get data either way depending on your position. I'm looking for specific information. My feeling was that if we had a street for , the initial installation where we put speed humps in we may or may not have had a call to respond to in an entire year, but having them out on Shaffer St. in front of the Fire Station virtually every response they go on there will be an effect and we will have immediate � Tape#CTG99.01 of#his City Traffic Commission meeti�g is availabie for your review. Ptease contact the Recording Secretary at(714}744-5536 in this regard,some advance notice would be appreciated. � i�Printed on Recycled Paper ivlinutes of a Regular Meeting-City Traffic Commission-March 10, 1999 Page 3 feedback. Going into them I certainly had questions and as 1 stated to the City Council any Fire Chief hesitates to put any obstacle between the fire fighters and the incident location. However, having said that and fiaving been a former field paramedic myself, 1 have seen firsthand the effect of vehicles and pedestrians. So I thought it was worth taking a (ook at and statistically traffic has slowed down, that is a proven fact and part of the , ` support out there from the neigfibors on Shaffer that have them in place, 1 personally have � not received any complaints about them. Right on the heels of Shaffer St. came Handy St. and 1 thought we might have a little more time between the two installations, my goal had � been after the humps had been installed on Handy St. that we request the moratorium and in the interim Council has delayed the installa#ion on Handy so we can get this information. 1 think 30-45 days is adequate. As far as hard objective data for us it will be response time comparisons. I expect there will be ��-30 second overali average response time difference. lf there is not that difference or if it's significantly longer than that then I have to take. into account what does this re�lly rrtean, what does this reflect and 1 would probably have to go back several years to this response to see if there were large swings in response time data from year to year when there were�o speed humps on that street. Commissioner Sciarra-Is .it possible to run some tests? Ch.ief Bonacker- I guess we could. I think that now we've had them in out there about 5 rnonths and we run approximately 20 calls a day in the City, and Engi�e I�io. 3 is one of our busiest units, so there are a lot of tests every day. 1've asked for hard objective data from the Fire Captains, personnel who drive the engines, and from the personnel driving the rescue ambulances I think that will give us pretty much what we're looking for. Chairrraan Yarger closed the public hearing and returned the item to the Commission for final discussion and a moti:on. ACTION: Approve the 60 day rnoratorium and return to the Commission at their meeting of May 12, 1999; and tha�the City Council approve the same. MOTION: D. Yarger , SECOND: ). Fortier , AYES: Unanir�ous 2. Request to add two streets to the Ci:ty's Neighborhood Parking Permit program Area "'I" ad jacent to McPherson Magnet School. - ,im Young 165 S. Swidler St. Orange CA 928b9-3838 � Oral presentation is based on the writ�en st�afif report,.please refer to your copy. Chairman Yarger opened the public hearing for the following discussion: Jim Young, 165 S. Swidler - One clarification on the petition. I think there were 10 signatures that represent 100% of all the people that were home at the time I circulated the � petition. Originally these streets were not included in the original plan for the athletic park and 1 was unaware of the changes and the other streets being added and I think that is � Tape#CTG99.01 of this City Traffic Commission meeting is available for your review. Please contact the � Recording Secretary at(714) 744-5536 in this regard,some advance notice would be appreciated. ' ��Printed on Recycled Paper Minutes of a Re�ular Meeting-City Traffic Commission-March 10, '1999 Pa�e 4 further put us into the area that is impacted by the parking and we also have been impacted by the commercial center to the north. Chairman Yarger-The athletic facility had their grand opening on 3-6-99 were you heavily impacted that day? _ im Youn -We were not impacted at a11. i made a point of driving by and looking and the ' new parking lot seemed to handle everybody that attended. Chairman Yarger-By�vhat you're saying the permit parking that we talked about going into fhat area is for the ir�pact from the athletic field, you basically told me you had no impact whatsoever from the athletic field, so in a previous conversation you mentioned something about this strip center and I'm wondering if that is the reason for this request for permit parking, is that correct? im Young - No, since Lamppost Pizza closed we have not had any problems from that center that I'm aware of. � Chairman Yarger- In looking at a map the area you are talking about is 4 blocks away from the school that's why 1 baffled why permit parking would be necessary that far away when you have no impact from the athletic field. �im Young- 1 don't know that yet, it rema�ns to be seen. But I feel that now is the time to speal� up and address it oth�r than down the road. My first choice is that nobody ever wants permit parking but we also don't want any future problems fighting over parking , spaces. . Vice Chairman Fortier- Usually when we approve a permit parking area it's because some entity is impacting the neighborhood and making it yery inconvenient for residents. There are some bad things about perm�t parking for example if someone parks in front of your � house and you don't give them a permit immediately to put on their car they can get a tickete 1t's a rea� nuisance some time to try and find your permits. �ommissioner Sciarra-It appears to me that I don't think they will need permit parking alf the way up Swidler and if anything l would like to see what impact the facility has on these streets before we approve any type of permit parking restrictions. im Youn�-I woufd support that because my first choice is not to have permit parking but if we have a need can we set up an appeal process so we don't have to pay the full weight. � Chairman Yarger- t understand that in your area there would be no charge if you chose ta . wait to file the application. �hairman Yarger closed tlie public hearing and returned the item to 'the Commission for �inal discussion and a motion. ACTION: Deny the request for permit parking adding the following streets to Neighborhood Parking Permit Program Area "'I": i) Almond Ave. from Olympia Way to Swidler St. 2) East side of Swidler St. from Chapman Ave. to Almond Ave. 3) West side of Swidler St. from the southerly side of the commercial area to Almond Ave. , +� Tape#Cl"C 99.0) of this City Traffic Commission meeting is available for your review. Please contact the � � Recording Secretary at(714) 744-5536 in this regard,some advance notice would be appreciated. i�Printed on Recycled Paper Minutes of a Regular Meeting-City Traffic Commission-March 10, 1999 Pa�e 5 IV.ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS A. Report regarding traffic conditions at the intersection of Santiago Canyon Rd. and Kennymead St. and the feasibility of constructing a cul-de-sac on Kennymead St. at Santiago Canyon Rd. . Traffic Engineering Division CITY OF ORANGE Hamid Bahadori, City Traffic Engineer-We have received written comments from bot1� the Fire and Pol;ce, they were received after the agenda packets were delivered but both departments stated their preference for Alternative No. 2, NLEFT AND RIGHT TURN IN ONLY" onto Kennymead St. from San#iago Canyon Rd. Chairman Yarger opened the public hearing for discussion on this item. This is for discussion p�rposes only and no formal decision will be made at today's meeting. Mary Vaughan, 1458 N. Mustang Ave. - Our concern essentially is getting the emergency vehicles and our convenience in, we would support Alternative #2 as workable for the community. Dana Calderwood, 7428 E. Santiago Canyon Rd. - I'm at the corner of Santiago Canyon Rd. . � and Kennymead St. �s it a fact that Santiago Canyon Rd. will become 6 lanes? I-lamid Bahadori -Yes, ultimately, but there are no pending plans a#this time. Dana Calden�vood - I'd like to recomrnend the option of making this a cul-de-sac. This is � the only street that is not controlled by a traffic signal and #he way peopte turn into this street at high rates of speed is ve.ry dangerous. We are open�to giving up part of our . � properry if we need to for a cul-de�ac as well as using part of our p:roperty for a large entry . gate f�r emergency vehicle use if you don't put in a cul�e-sac. Laura Thomas, 72i 1 E. Clydesdale Ave. - 1 back to Santiago Canyon Rd. and 1 use Kennymead to get out to Santiago Canyon Rd. but I tell my children not to. It doesn't have the greatest visibility. Alternative No. 2 would be okay, if a decision was made to make this a cul-de-sac I v�ould not like to see any kind of a block wall but more of a gate with , landscap;ng because that is more in keeping with the rura� atmosphere of �range Park Acres Specific Plan, also to have a pedestrian/horse exiting in and out of that area so it's not totally blocked. When people enter Kennymead the speed of traffic on Santiago'Canyon has increased. Some of t�e residents closer to Stallion St. which is the farther .end of the tract are concerned about having more cars coming through their tract. Richard Siebert, 1388 N. Kennymead St. -The people on Randall and Meads have not been notified and those two streets will be impacted if Kennymead is closed the only exit to a traffic signs would be these other streets and those people have nat been notified. Again, Mr. Siebert steps away from the microphone and his comments cannot be distinguished. Randall is a small street that has as lot of equestrian activity on this side so they have a lot of parking of equestrian vehicles on this side of the street which narrows the street, I think Randall St. is important because its going to impact them. Going out on Kennymead will it be just the 4 lanes that it is today going easterly and turning (Alternative No. 3) '�RlGHT TURN IN ONLY"onto Kennymead from Santiago Canyon Rd. is fine if it's 4 (anes, but when it goes to 6 lanes we are then going to lose that curb-side lane to get out of the traffic that is � l'ape#CTG99.01 of this City Traffic Commission meeting is availabte for your review. Please con#act the � Recording Secretary at(714) 744-5536 in this regard,some advance notice would be appreeiated. Z�Printed on Recycled Paper Minutes of a Regular Meeting-Gty Traffic Commission-March 10, 1999 Pa�e 6 � ' going 70 MPH. From Newport Bivd. wester(y to the first signal is a Nfreeway". The only � way you can make a safe entry going left into Kennyme�d is to get right ne�ct to the curb because you have to get out of the way from the people behind you. My recommendation, . as a resident on Kennymead, would be either Alternative No. 1 '�cul{le-sac"; or Alternative No. 3 NRIGHT TURN IN ONLY" onto Kennymead from Santiago Canyon Rd. " When you're going westerly and you're in that left-turn iane it's not that it's not safe to turn left into Kennymead what's not safe is getting into the left turn lane on a down-grade because of the speed of traffic. Talking about emergency vehicles I guess it depends where you live and how you feel about this but when you look at Mustang and Wilderness you're really not cul-de-sacing Kennymead you are making a cul{le-sac this whole area so t haven't seen a real detrimental effect to Kennymead or Mustang, Mr. Siebert steps away from the microphone and his comments are not distinguishable. Chairman Yarger - Coming from the Fire Station going westerly on Santiago Canyon Rd. they would make a left turn onto Kennymead where if that was a cul-de-sac they would have to come clear down to Meads then easterly 3 streets to Kennymead then north again, and when they looked at that response time it looked close to a m;nute, and their philosophy is that a minute can make a big difference in somebody's life. , 1s there a traffic count of vehicles exiting Kennymead onto Santiago Canyon Rd.? � Dave Allenbach, Asst. Fngineer-Yes. Exit Kennym�ad St Right Tum into Lef# Tum into onto Santiago Canyon Kennymead St. from Kennymead St: from Rd. Santiago Can on Rd. Santia o Can on Rd. A.M. Peak is 7:30-8:30 13 17 1 P.M. Peak is 4:30-5:3fl 8 7 10 Chairman Yarger-For one hour you had 13 cars exiting Kennymead onto Santiago Canyon Rd., so if#hat were closed it would actually only put 13 vehicles going back over to Meads and exiting; t can't see where 13 vehicles would impact a street at ali in an hour's time. So apparently the trips in and out of that street are not as heavy as some other areas from your data. In the a�ternoon you only had 8 vehicles exiting Kennymead and if you move �hem over to Meads in an hours time that works out to a car every 7-8 minutes, that's not a very � heavy impact of additional traffic. Commissioner Sciarra-What is#he posted speed limit on Santiago Canyon Rd.? Dave Allenbach -50 MPH, and the 85�' Percentiie is 54 MPH. Keep in mind fihat 15% of the vehicles that we did survey are travelling faster than 54 MPH. According to the � California Vehicle Code we have to go out every 5 years and re-zone the streets that we post for various speed limits in the City and they are adopted by an ordinance thr.ough the City Council. The vehicle code suggests that we post each o# the streets, unless there is some hindrance to the motorists that they would not be aware of such as a design constraint, grade separation., things of that nature, that we should post the speed limit _ within 5 MPH of the 85`�' Percentile. The 85�' Percenfiile is taken from a random sampling of a 100 cars during an off-peak period. We are saying that 85% o#the traffic is travelling at or below 54 MPH but 15% of that 100 cars we observed are travelling faster than 54 MPH. � Tape#CTC 99.01 of this City Traffic Commission meeting is available for your review. Please contact the Recording Secretary at(714}744-5536 in thi.s regard,some advance notice would be appreciated. �s � �h�Printed on Recycled Paper Minutes of a Regular Meeting-City Traffic Commission-March 10, 1999 Pa�e 7 Hamid Bahadori, City Traffic Engineer-This section of Santiago Canyon Rd., on the City's Circufation Element is shown as an uaugmented primary arterial highway". At this time the City does not have any plans whether conceptual or iong-range plans #o go to a 6-lane . facility. There is a strong possibility that the developments in the East Orange, depending on what happens, will force a 6-fane. At that time an augmented primary arterial section is designed to accommodate, if there is a need for a 6-lane facility. This is not something#he City is planning on so I don't want anyone leaving this room today thinking that the City is going to widen this section of Santiago Canyon Rd. to 6 lanes in the near future. Rebekah Wan, 7106 S. Clydesdale-My biggest concern is, when you're talking about only 13 cars, is that they happen to go down my street. I have two other small children and that curve is almost an �'L". � have alrnost been hit coming out of my driveway because I have to back my car out to go acoun� that curve and that is almost a blind curve. You're t�lking about bringing traffic into a residential area like down on Randall, there are children (iving there, this particular neighborhood has more smaller children. For our perspective we're very concerned with people coming down that street going around a blind curve, 1 cannot see Stallion St. from my driveway and 1 live right there on the corner. I specifically moyed here so my children c�u�d play in the neighborhood. Chair.man Yarger-Over the years we've done a lot of surveys, the deve(opment you're in, the way your streets are laid out the only traffic you are going to get in your neighborhood is your neighbors. Your design is not a "through"design at a11. Nina Maginnis, 1546 S. Stallion St. - I'm directiy across from Rebekah and my property b�cks Santiago Canyon. 1Nhether they're neighbors coming through the street the traffic is at time pretty incredible and we've seen some near misses with people zooming around the curve and not staying in the right lane and cutting across. t have heard that on Meads where it intersects with Wilderness years ago there �nras a #atality there as we11 due to � somebody speeding d�wn Meads and they are very concerned about increased traffic. We don't know what will happen�ith the property up at Ridgeline and we don't know if we're �oing to have increased traffic coming through our neighborhood. The people on Meads didn't know about this meeting and they are concerned w'rth increased firaffic coming through their street trying to get�out to Santiago Canyon if Kennymead is closed ofif. Chairman Yarger- Unfortunately we do have to pay some pric�s for living in paradise, this - � is the greatest place in the world to live. As it continues t� b�ild we see this continually, when you sit down and analyze the City of l7range and try to move traffic east and west we basocally only have two street� to go, Chapman and Santiago Canyon Rd., and unfortunately that's the way the terrain is and the roads run right now and you just hope that people within your own neighborhood are little more patient and take their time driving through their s#reets. You are fortunate where you live, 1'd bet 99% of your traffic is your neighbors. From the years we've spent on the Commission and seen the design of the streets you don't live on a street that somebody wants to drive on in order to make a - short-cut, there is no short cut here. . _. - � �° Tap�#C�6C-99.01 of this City�'raffic Commission meeting is available for your review. Please contact the Recordi.ng Secretary at(714) 744-5536 in this regard,some advance notice would be appreciated. �Printed on Recycled Paper Minutes of a Re�ular Meeting-City Traffic Commission-March 70, 1999 Page 8 Nina Maginnis- Does the fact that Meads is closed affect your traffic study? Dave Allenbach -We are aware that Meads is closed right now. We wanted to get some sort of traffic volume information but as I had noted earlier the traffic on Kennymead is � around 400 vehicles a day on an average, and that is with Meads closed. .I suspect that this is a worst case scenario and that once Meads is again open the traffic volume on K�nnymead will drop slightly, but �00 cars a day is really not very much traffic at all because basically it is local traffic. Mara Brandman; 73�9 Equitation Way - Unless I drive my husband's car I cannot get � enough speed to get out and clear that turn left onto Santiago Canyon Rd. Orange Park Acres is a community that works together and we are working now to lower the traffic in another particular issue. We know about the possibility of increased traffic at Ridgeline and we're going to deal with that. I'm sure that when the people on Randall and Meads are polled they are going to understand the wisdom of helping to protect their neighbors on Kennymead. My personal feeling is that when this is cul-tle-sac and that's the scenario that 1 would prefer you do in order to avoid any fatalities but I always go on rec,�rd for saying that 1 don't th i nk you get al I the accident reports, I sti I1 mai ntai n that there are more accidents than are on the final records. ! personally feel that if you cul-de-sac Kennymead you are going to get a lot less peop:le going through Clydesdale and Stallion, and most � people when th�y know they can't get out on Kennymead are going to go down Randall through Orange Parl� Blvd. Heidi Lemieux, 1387 Kennymead St. - 1'm at the corner of Randall and Kennymead. I see a11 the cars as they're coming down and going to turn onto Santiago Canyon or they make � the turn onto Randall and then go down to Meads. Most of the cars using these streets (ive up on Ridgeline and they're either coming up or down from their and I think they are going to choose to use Amapola, nobody's has really mentioned it, t really don't think it's going to impact the other neighborhood that greatly. I have seen an increase both in the number of cars and speed o:n Santiago Canyon since the Eastern Transportation Corridor has opened and people think they are already on the toii �oad. I would like to see the street made into a cu I-de-sac; t th i nk that is the safest th i ng to do. teon Richmond, 1515 Kennymead St. -! fee! the same and 1 did see an accident that wasn't reported to the Police, they were turning left out of Kennymead and was hit by someone going east on Santiago Canyon. I think it's very dangerous to make a left here, but even making a right turn you have to go up a hiit.and even with a lot of engine power the cars on Santiago Canyon still come up right behind you, and I have to jump on it to get out of there. I think a cul-de-sac is best so you can't get out of there at all. Doug Limoux, 1387 Kennymead St. - I am in favor of a,full cul-de-sac. There is really no , safe way to mitigate an ingress/egress from Kennymead�onto Santiago Canyon. 1 think that ' the added traffic that everyone is concerned about through Mustang and Clydesdale I don't see where that is going to be a problem because why would someone want to make 7 tums to get from Meads over to Kennymead when they can just make 3 turns by going down Meads to Randall. Charmin Yarger-You travel Randall to Meads in order to exit onto Santiago Canyon, what time of day do you travel? Do you experience much traffic on Randall St.? � Tape#CTC-99.01 of this City Traffic Commission meeting is available for your review. Please contact the � Recording Secretary at(714)744-5536 in this.regard,sorr�e advance notice would be appreciated. �Printed on Recycled Pape� Minutes of a Regular Meeting-City Traffic Commission-March )0, 1999 PaRe 9 Doug Limoux- i leave about 7:30-9:00 a.m. and 1 come home between 5:00-7:00 p.m.; no there is no traffic at all, it's a breeze, usually there is no more than one other car on the road at the same time and the same thing when I get to Meads. 1t's about the same when t return home in the evening. Chairman Yarger- So you don't feel you're really heavily impacted with traffic going out Randall to Mead and then out Meads to Santiago Canyon? Doug Limoux- No, not at all. Unidentified Speaker-Could you restate the accident history? � Dave Allenbach. - Two reported accidents within the last calendar year which was 1998. The first accident was on 3-22-98 and a westbound motorcyclist on Santiago Canyon lost control of his vehicle and veered off�he road, that accident was a fatality. The 2"� reported accident was on 4-03-98 involved 2 westbound vehicles, one was travelling at a high rate of speed and side-swiped another westbound vehicle and this occurred on a rainy day. Un�den�ified Speaker- is there any record of the accident occurring around Oct Dec of an 18-wheel semi truck that smashed into a Pontiac Firebird and nearly killed him? A driver was eastbound on Santiago Canyon ahead of the 18 wheel truck and he attempted to make a U-turn right at that curve. Dave�Ilenbach -At this time my record input is up through September 1998, so there may be one that I haven't included in computer :program. Please keep in mind that none of these accidents, includi�g this one, involve vehicles exiting Kennymead and that is what we would be looking to correct. What's happened on Santiago Canyon Rd. ;s respective � of the road and the characteristics of that road and all these cases the motorcycle was a tragic error, the other accident in Apri1 was basically s,�mebody driving too fast for the existing conditions, now #�e may not have been driving at 50 MPH but it was raining that day and the road surface was wet and he was not driving according to those conditions. If the driver of the Pontiac did make a U.-turn in the middle of the road that is also something that we cannot correct with what we are proposing here. What we're trying to do is try to res.pond to something before we have a problem, we are aware af the sight distance constraint,we're happy that t1�e accid�ents we have had have not involved any vehicles exiting Kennymead onto Santiago Canyon; and now that we are aware of a problem we're trying to take actio.n before somebody gets hurt as a resu(t of this. �/Vith atl three options we have presented today they are prohibiting any type of exiting Kennymead onto Santiago Canyon. We're trying to fi�d �out what would be .better for the residents as a whole to accept and what is best, cost wise to the City as well. We've heard from both the Police and Fire Dept. and they are both in favor of Alternat'rve No. 2; it's not going to restrict any of their response time. Richard Siebert - If Alternative No. 2 prohibits any turns at all from Kennymead but still allows turns from Santiago Canyon into Kennymead, I suggest that you make the left turn lane ionger so that the people are aware of it at the top of the hilL As you start to sbw down to get into the 1eft turn lane people are right on your back end. Chairman Yarger closed the public hearing. � Tape#CTG99.01 of this City Traffic Commission meeting is available for your review. Please contact the � Recording Secretary at(714) 7445536 in this regard,some advance notice would be appreciated. ��Printed on Recycled Paper Minutes of a Re�ular Mee#ing-City Traffic Commission-March 70, 1999 Page 10 Chairman Yarger- This is strictly an Administrative Report and we will hear it next month as an agendized item forformal �ction. Dave, you will notify everybody in the area about t�e meeting next month to inciude Nteads Av�e., Randali and notify that compiete area of the meeting. Why don't we see going westerly if there is any way to extend that left turn pocket into Kennymead. � � ACTION: Receive&File report. lNOTION: D. Yarger SECOND: F. Sciarra AYES: Unanimous V. ORAL PRESENT�TION Chairman Yarger- requested that a study and report be prepared on the use of cameras for red light violations be returned fio the City Traffic Commission in 120 days (August 11, �999 rneeting). Earlier last year the Police Dept. staff and myself went to Westwood to see how they are using it and 1'd like us to conduct a more intense study for a recommendation to the .City Council with the information we find so maybe we can s�art implementing this in the City of Orange see if we can reduce tne amount of red light violation that seems to be rampant in our Cityo Vi.ADJOURNMENT �fter discussion of today's Agenda items of the C�ty Traffic Commission was concluded, and as there were no further requests for action under Oral Presentations,the Chairman adjourned this session of the�ity Traffic Commission at�4:00 p.m. Yhe next regularly scheduled meeting of the City Traffic Commission will be Wednesday - April 14, 1999. � Respectfully submitted, CITY OF ORANGE Phyl�is Then �_ Recording Secretary Traffic Engineering Division CITY OF ORANGE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORK5 TRAFFIC ENGINEERlNG DIVISION 300 E.CHAPMAN AVE. ORANGE CA 92866 PH: (714) 744-5536 �AX: (714) 744-6961 � MINUTES-MARCH [DISK#20�THENP] � Tape#CTG99.01 of this City Traffic Commission meeting is available for your review. Please contact the � Recording Secretary at�714)7445536 in this regard,some advance.notice would be appneciated. �Printed on Recycled Paper