02-12-1992 - Minutes TC � .;�� ;
:4'
CITY OF ORANGE ;:s,��,. . ��t�-��
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
CITY TRAFFIC COMMISSION
DATE OF MEETING: FEBRUARY 12, 1992
ROLL CALL: PRESENT - COMMISSIONERS: J. FORTIER, N. HOWER, B. LEMING
F. SCIARRA
ABSENT - COMMISSIONERS: D. YARGER
PRESENT - STAFF: B. DENNIS, B. HERRICK, C. GLASS
SGT. B. WEINSTEIN, D. ALLENBACH,
� P. THEN
I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - January 8, 1992
RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE AS PUBLISHED BY THE RECORDING SECRETARY.
MOTION: J. FORTIER
SECOND: F. SCIARRA
AYES: UNANIMOUS
il. CONSENT CALENDAR
1 . Request for the remova/of driveway vision zones at 832 N. Lemon St.
Burton Horn
832 N. Lemon St.
Orange, CA 92667
Burton Horn - 1 would like this red curb removed because it is no longer
needed at this location. The previous property owner/tenant had requested
the red curb because one of his employees had sight distance problems
exiting the driveway in one of their delivery vehicles and was almost hit by
another motorist coming down Lemon St.
I have a car dealership business and my inventory is parked on-site, so there
is no available parking for either my customers or myself. 1 need that one
parking space in between the two driveway's for parking. There is an
apartment complex across the street and those people park everywhere
there is an opening.
RECOMMENDATION: Continue to next meeting.
MOTION: B. LEMING
SECOND: N. HOWER
AYES: UNANIMOUS
2. Reques� far the instailation of a curb-side handicapped parking space on
Almond Ave. at the Orang� County Fire Dept. Headquarters.
Bruce Hunt, Communications Battalion Chief
Orange County Fire Department
180 S. Water St.
Orange, CA 9266�-0086
REC�MMENDATION: That the CTC, by Mation, APPROVE the installation of a
curb-side handicapped parking space on the Water St. fronfiage. �
MOTtON: B. LEMING
SEGOND: F. SCIARRA
AYES: UNANIMOUS
3. Request for the remova! of an intersection zone on Rose Ave. at
Cambridge St.
Marianne Prosser
�04 E. Rose Ave.
Orange, CA
RECOMMENDATION: Thafi th� CTC, by Motion, APPR�VE fihe request.
MOTICIN: B. LEMING
SEC4ND; F. SCIARRA
AYES: UNANIMOUS
III. CO►NSIDERATIOl� ITEMS
A. Requesfi for bus stop modifications on both sides of Almond Ave. westerly
of Batavia St.
John Rocha
Orange County Transportation Authority
11222 Acacia Parkway �
Garden Grove, CA 92642-3Q05
RECOMMENDATION: That the CTC, by Mo�ion, CONTINUE this request until the
Santa Fe Depot �tudy has been completed.
MOTION: F. SCIARRA
SECOND: B. LEMING
AYES: UNANIMOUS
B. Request to e/iminate /ett turn restrictions from Wayfie/d St, onto
Chapman Ave. in conjunction with the proposed auto center development.
Fred MacMurdo
Cardinal Development Co.
365 Bristol St., #5Q
Costa Mesa, California 92626
2
There was no written report available for today's meeting, the foilc��ing ora�
report by C. H. Giass, represents staff's findings in respon�� to the
applicant`s: request.
Chuck Glass - We have going before the City Council next month, a
praposal fio develop fihe northeast corner of Chapman/Wayfield; and th�
proposal consis�s af an autoplex center/development whic� vtir+����d �ncfud�e
things such as auto repair, tire dealerships, car-wash and perhaps c��her autt�
related businesses.
(n conjunction with the zone change, a Conditional Use Permit and �'Variance
will go b�fore the City Council, the proponent has requested that th�e
exisfiing 'right-turn only' restriction for southbound Wayfield St. at Chapma�n
be removed. I might point out that this"r�striction has been in exis�ence for
some rrumber of years and it restricts the egress onta Chapman to right-turn
only; ingress still has left-turn access, The primary concern we have with
this particular location and the request is: a� the proximity to the freeway
interchange; and, a) the prime arterial s�a��us of Chapman Ave. which carries
about 50,000 VPD in this area. There are some other concerns r��ative t�o
freeway impravements and rarnp madifications which will have an irr,pact �n
the property.
Currently the segment of Chapman between the Freevvay and T�ustin St.
allows a considerable number of driveways unlimited access, th�t is "left
turns in" and "left-turns out", "right-turns in" and "right-turns out". What
we are finding is that we are beginning to get alot of reported accidents in
this entire segment, not just at Wayfield. In fact Wayfield, in itself, because
there is vacant property and we do have fihe restriction, does r�ot have a
severe accident problem at this: point in time. Our cancern, howev�r, is that.
with afl tfie turns that are available we are probably going to see a scenario
similar to what occurred on Katella Ave. between the SR-55 Fwy. and
Tustin St., there we had alot of driveways, alot af (eft-turn, U-turn conflicts
and we eventually we had to remove left-turn access to most �f fihose
driveways. It is our opinion that we are probably headed for the s�me type
of scenario her� on Chapman Ave.
The CTC may also recall a similar situation on the other side of the
SR-55 Fwy, east of Yorba St. for the hospital complex where ,rve we�t
through a considerable number of hearings (between CTC and the City
Council I fihink there were over 10 hearings), to remove left t�rns where
there was in fact, an accident problem (Chapman/Loretta). It is our opinion
that if we open up and allow additional turn movements in this a��a we are
probably headed to creating a scenario that we will have to solve �ater on in
a similar manner as the two situations I just identified.
What we can do, to facilitate this development, is provide U-turn capability
at Tustin/Chapman. Currently there is 'left on left-arrow only', and we can
change that to left or U-turn on left-arrow.
3
That pretty much sums up our concerns, now I will show you on the
transparencies what I have pretfiy much described to you:
If the restriction is to be lifted we recommend that it be done oniy after the
project has been constructed, and reasonably occupied, we use one-half as
a reasonabie number. When the project is generaliy occupied this is when
we would recommend the restriction be lifted.
Last, if this is to be done we recammend that a condition of the CUP be that
the tenants be made aware of these parar�neters through some mechanism,
whether it be CC&R`s or whatever, and that this be subject tc� review by the
City Attorney. t think fihat basically wauld cor�clude our concerns other than
to add that th� Rolice Dept. has reviewed this as we{I as Traffic Engineering
and they rr�ay wish to discuss this issue, however, they are opposed to
removing the Ieft turn restrictions.
Commissianer Lemina - Can you give us some ba�kground as ta why and
when that restriction was put an Wayfield?
Chuck Glass - It had to do with the faGt that the Caltrans off-ramp was free-
flowir�g as opposed to being stopped, as it is today. There hav� been some
improvements here in the last two years where we have added an additional
Iar�e thraugh that ramp configuration. The area still, however, is a "weave"
area because the #3 lane does end as a 'right turn' lane at Tustin St.
Bernie Dennis - A legitimate question would be, "Why in view of the rather
dire economic conditions within the Gity and the County as a whale, would
- the traffiic staff be opposing a revenue generator?" We may not
necessarily be opposing the development per se at this site, our major
concern rests with some provisions that were made in conjunction with the
General Plan in 1989. State law says that your General Plan has to be in
balance with Circulation Element, and vice versa. The land use
entitlements both in the sense of generators, single-family residential as
proposed for E. Orange and attractors, which would be the case of the
employment centers proposed in W. Orange were of such a magnitude and
tfie balance was so critical we frankly, even with the impravement of
Chapman ta 8 Ianes, which is proposed on the General Plan document �r�d
will prabably occur, we cannot afford to introduce into this area any type of
capacity restraint, The capacity restraint, in this cas�, would be the
evenfival request for a traffic signal. This is not an unusual condition, we
have seen it for the last 20 years, if we allow a commercial development on
an unprot�cted cross-street onto an arterial street inevitably there will be a.
request for a signal; and the signal request is very generally subsfiantiated
and substantiated principally on the fact of accidents. We can say
professionally that we recagnize that you are having an accident history or
accident problem at an intersection, but we have a capacity problem. You
have absolutely no idea how shallow that sounds in court, it doesn't work
because the question is always brought up, "If you could anticipate an
accident situation occurring and you allowed the land use to be developed
you should have pre-determined that ultimately you would have an accident
4
history and probably would ha�e to install a traffic signal," so therein lies
� our bottorn-line concern. With the resfiriction that is in place now the
entire accident potential is not removed, there is still, for exarr�ple the
allowable eastbound and northbound left-turn move into the site and very
possibly, as you wi11 recatl from the Loretta condition, that's the move tha�
� was generating the accidents at that particular locafiion. �u�, wit�r the
resfiriction which was put in for an entirely different use here, as you wil(
recall there was a recreational activity on the site that was utilized by young
people in rather copious numbers, with the left turn restriction we have at
leasfi reduced one type of accident potential. So therein lies our concern
and it has no�hing to do with the land us� or the applicant.
Bob Herrick - I wauld like to make one point of clarificafiion with respect to .
the staff report. With respect to the conditianal nature of the removat of
. the turn it is best ta find the idea that the restriction could be re-imposed at
any time. To me it's important that we make clear that we are not entering
into some sort of binding agreement whereby the City wouJd surrender it's
police power right to terminate that removal of the re�triction at any time. It
felt it needed to, I would hate ta see there be some kind of criteria specified
in the conditions that would imply there was some sort af right to have that
restriction lifted until such time as certain specific facts could be proven. I
think the City needs to retain that discr�tionary power for reasons
concerning liability.
Commissioner LeminQ - Since the staff report talks aboufi Chapman firam
Tustin to the freeway, the possibility of doing something very similar to
what we did at Katella, which m�y include removing all left turns at a
number af driveways, at the Mobil Station, Thrifty Drugs, maybe one Qther
and then the shops acrass the street. If we were to remove it today and
then at some fufiure date come back even be�Fore the project may be
completed and remove all left turns for the whole se�ction would it be a
problem from that paint? Is that the Iegal question you are referring to? We
re,move it today and then 1 year fram naw we have a study that says we
. ought to remave all left �Curns through that area, what happens?
Bob Herrick - That's primarily what I am referring to. If the restriction were
to ae removed it would be my recommendation that it not be removed with
any specific canditions for reinstatement but rather that it be specified that
the city retain it's power ta reinsfiitute whatever restrictions it feels
necessary based an it's police power to regulate traffic. If a� study shows
that all left turns need to be removed in a year th�en there would be no
implication that the city has agreed to leave that restriction off for any
particular period of time.
s
Commissioner Sciarra - I can understand the restriction on the I�eft turn
because the off-ramp af the fre�way, however, the people exiting the Mobii
station are making left turns all the time which is causing cars coming south
on Wayfield to turn into the Mobil station to make their left turns. It
appears to me that with the STOP sign now at the off-ramp that particular
� restricfiiar� of left turn� fram Wayfi�fd wou�d not apply.
Carl Middleton� Cardinal Develo�ment aQent for fandowner Robert Smith -
With me is Joe Foust of Austin-Foust Assac. our consultant for this proj�ct.
We will keep our commenfis brief and staff has done a very thQraugh
analysis. We are really looking for a 'U' turn at Tustin St. and .I fihink staff is
irr concurrence with that; and rrve would like a 'temporary trade' of the two
left turn opportunities out of the gas station, to consolidate that into
Wayfreld and rnake one left-turn oufi of Wayfield. The gas station
movement, w� think, is more dangerous than th� movement out of V1/ayfield
and we are willing to give up thos� two left turns out o� the gas st�tion to
consoJ�date that into one left turn out of Wayfield. It works better for the
project circulation and I think it makes for a better situation for the c�ty toa
We have no problem in the future if the city determines thafi there is no left
turns allowed tl�rough there, that is the City's prerogative and c�rtainly
same things override the convenience of the customer and fihe landowner.
As far as the City Atto�rney's comments, we would be wifling to make a
representation that we would not oppose that, we would not request a �
signal installation nor would be suppart a signal, all we are looking fior on a
current basis is getting rid of the 2 left turns from the gas station and '
;
substituting those inta one "safe" left turn out of Wayfield, and it that needs ;
f
to be tal�en away in the future ther� so be it. We thought we had a
proposition here that was a "win - win", and works better for us, v�re have
the capability of substituting the fiurns out of the gas station because the
land is owned by same individual and we think it works better from an
overall flow situation and if we didn't own both pieces of property we
wouldn't have that capability.
� Joe Foust, AFA - My presentation is nofi to try to sell this project to you ('m
simply here ta present to you why we "think" this offers an opportur�ity for
� a "win - win°' situation and frankly we see it that way. We understand
Mr. Dennis' concerr� about the potential for a traffic signal at the location,
we share that concern. As a professional traffic engineer I'm very
sympathetic to that, I see the problems #hat could arise were yo�a to be
pressured into that, w� acknowledge tk�at signalization of this interse+ction is
not a feasible or practical solution. All we are requesting is that w� think
there is a possibility to trade left turns from 2 driveways for left turns at one
location and see if that doesn't work better than the existing situation. We
acknowledge that neither one of these is the idea solution but we th�nk this
alternative offers a little bit better opportunities than the existing situation
particularly if this project is to proceed and then increase the volume of left
turns.
6
_ _ _ _
_
Let me illustrate first with the traffic valum� map that I have handed out to
you. We started this project in 1990, we identified the driveway's we did a
P.M. peak hour turn count of all turning movements that existed at that time
and two significant changes have occurred with the interchange since that
time as was painted out by staff, originally the soufihboun:d Wayfield left
turn was eliminated aased an the free-flow of the southbaunc� off-r��np. As
you ean s�e back in 199Q, when it was at that tim� a free-flow mavement
there was some 230 or so vehicles per hour, and not stopping. In the
interir�n that has become a STOP so that firaffic now stops, I don't whether
its statistic�lty sign�ficant or just an aberration, but you can see that the
volume that's using that ramp now is somewhat less, again I'm not
� suggesting that naw fihat they have to STaP there is less traffic just that on
that parfiicuJar day we counfied less.
The ather two changes are that (1) there are now 3 through lanes where
there was 2 westbound Ianes befo►re and; (�) the change for west�ound left
tuming traffic - th�re used ta b�e none, taday as yau a�re probably aware,
th�re is a diam�nd/car-pool lane that can avoid the weaving and instead of
going around the on-ramp they can now make a direct Ieft turn and avoid
that ver� sharp and tight weave section that occurs on the f'reeway where
Chapman Ioaps around and the on's and off's are very tight.
Now let me get into the volume of traffic. Driveway #3 for Thrifty Drugs
and alofi of traffic, for whatever reason, is really circumventing the Wayfield
'No Left Turn' by either going thraugh the Mobil driveways ta make fiheir
left turn at that point, or more of them are going through the Thrifty
driveway for their left turns because they are Iegal at that point. There ar�
a number af very clever commuter drivers who will make right turns
followed by either a U turn or left turn out of Wayfield or fihe Mobile
driveway and make the right turn or shoot straight across the street and go
through the car dealership or the Shell station and make a U turn that way.
C�rl Middleton - In summary, we would certainly be willing to live with
staff's conditions for the approval if the Commission saw it appropriate to
make this approval. We would also be willing to add a condition where w�
went on record and said we weren't going to request a signal or anything
that would afifect traffic flow tfirough there. And, finally we would be
willing to put in a condition that would restrict left turns out of the Mob�ii
driveway so we could complete that loop on a legal entitlemenfi basis.
Commissioner Lemin4 - How about a little clarification on removal of the
two driveways at the Mobil site. How would you propose to do that, you �
alluded to signing and the other one is difificult to make according to your
findings there is only one coming out of driveway #5.
Chairman Fortier - Do you own that property?
Carl Middleton - We are the lessee.
Chairman Fortier - So you can, because you are the lessee, put restrictions
on people coming out of those driveways?
7
Carl Middleton - Yes
Sy..t. Barry Weinstein, �PD - The Police Dept. would not be able to enforce
those signs put on private property.
Jo� Foust - V1/hat we are saying is that the project and the ownership of the
property would be on record in tMe future event that y�u go to this "Katella
treatment" when and ifi you had to eliminate left tums one of your potenfiial
opponents would be on record as no longer opposing that. �r� a prac��caf
manner other th�n signir�g it and perhaps telling th� customers that it's
iUegal for Ieft turns and you're liable ta get citations, the� enforcement
problems I don't know whether through a city-wide ordinance you can
enfarce such restrictions on private property or not. Then I guess it's a
ptacebo. -
Vice-Chairman Fortier - One observation l've made, even if this were
approved even though you have indicated you would not request the
installation af a traffic signal, I know others would. As soon as traffic
sta�rted backing up someone thafi either lives in those apartments back there
or somebody that wa� using Wayfield quite freq�:ently would bring this
request before us.
Joe Faust - You would have our recogni�ion at today �nd perhaps in public
testimony before the Ci�y Council if that is necessar°y, that we recognize
that a traffic signal is not a practical or feasible aiternative and your only
alternatives in case of that pressure is that we have to eliminate this and go
back to what we were, or go fio the 'Katella treatm�ent'. We would not
support anyone's request to signalize this intersection.
Commissianer Sciarra - I have a question far staff. ChUck made a comment
�arlier that yau would th�nk af lifting the restriction only after the project
was occupied. Haw would you go about doing that?
Chuck Glass - In essence we wouldn't immediately go out and remove that
restriction and change the. striping, we would wait for the project in fact to
develop and wait until there was some usage within that developrr�ent. If a
car wash opened and another store opens we would �wait fc�r that decision
until there was a demonstrated need far that.
� Keep in mind that the street currently serves more than just the service
statian, th�re are residential units back here as wetl.
Commissioner Lemin4 - I have a question for the proponent. Does your
project include a joint usage of the parking between the Mobil station and
the auto-plex?
Carl Middleton - Yes, there would be joint use ingress/egress and parking.
Commissioner Leminq - So there is a great possibility that they if they
� couldn't turn on Wayfield they are just going to go th�ough the Mobi!?
s
Carl Middleton - Yes, that's what we're afraid. is going to happen. They will
find the easiest way out which may not be the best way, so until something
occurs on the streefi let's make the best of inediocre situation.
Bernie Dennis - The cansideration at this point in time is for this project, this
specific prajeGt and the reason I say that is because th�se gentlemen have
. all the gQad intentions in the world of building just exactly what they say
th�y ar� goi�g to build, ar�d 'rn all likelihaod they may do just that, but if
three weeks down the line or 3 manths, whatever the case may be, the
auto-p�lex turns inta a motel or something else all bets are off. '
Vice Chairman Fortier - One observation I have, as I use this area frequently
and you made an excellenfi pre�entati:on, however, as I look at that area,
alot more traffic wi(I come out of there and as I look at the egress t consider
that a very dangerous street to come out and make a left turn from and I
have same great reservations of making thafi area more accessible with a
legal left turn of a major accident/s happening there.
Commissioner Hower - I have a quest:ion for Mr. Foust. Have you any idea
of the amount of traffic this project will generate?
Joe Faust - Yes, we did a traffic study and in the P.M. peak we expect this
project will generate a demand for something on the order of 50 southbound
left turns, either out of these driveways or out of Wayfield St. We did a
capacity analysis; we looked out there and did a theoretical highway
capaci�y analysis based on the flows a�1ong here which indicated that for a
southbound to Ieft-turn capacity of approximately 35 vehicles per hour. We
are projecting that tf�e project will have something on the order of 50 so not
all of the project's own soufihbound to left-turn demand could be satisfied
out of such a left-turn. In addition to that we expect then that some of that
traffic, and again fartunately I think we are togeth�r on the U-turn, the
one's that really want to make a southbound Ieft-turn will make a right turn
folfowed by the U-turn at the Tustin/Chapman signa(. Incidenfially the
capacity of 35 is somewhat borne out as you look on driveway #3 in bofih
cases you see a couple of years ago it was 31 and now it's 30 for the
Thrifty driveway that's just a realistic look but again we projected 50
additionat wauld be generated by the project.
Commissioner L,eminq - It's a situation where its a major project going in an
area where it's heavily congested at this time but I have another question
for staff. Do you anticipafie looking at this whole area or starting a project
area of looking at and coming back with some recommendafiians similar to
what you alluded to earlier in the near future, is that 5 years away or 1 year
away? Are we going to be enhancing the Tustin/Chapman?
;
Bernie Dennis - This is an ongoing project that will be driven by what finally
: - � happens to San�iago Creek. If the Corps of Engineers reduces the que
: requirements the flow requirements for Santiago Creek to the point where
we can remove the existing Chapman Ave. bridge and replace it oivith a
culvert at significantly less cost obviously than would be involved with a
9
bridge widening, were that to take place then the physicai improvements o#
Chapman under the freeway, aithough expensive because of the retaining
walls required, can be achieved. The third major issue involved would be
the acquisition of additional right-ofi-way and needless to say that in this
area and pa�rticularly on the south side af the street an additional 12 ft. of
right-of-way has some rather severe impacts and would result in some cost,
So the best answ�r I can give you is that this is a contin�taus proje:ct
dependenfi upon several factors and not necessarily associated witt� what
these p�ople are proposing to do, but it's not som�thing t can give y+�u an
answer to tomorraw, or next week or even next month.
Vice-�hairman Fortier - Closes the public hearing and returns the iss�e to
the Commissio�n for final discussion and a motion.
Commissioner Sciarra - Would staff consider lifting t:he restriction if:
(1) 1Ne gofi the U-turn approved on Ghapman at Tustin?
�2) Approve the tifting of the restriction only after the project was
campleted?
* SECRETARY'S NOTE: DUE TO STATIC IN THE PUBLIC ADDRESS SYSTEM STdXFF'S
ANSWEf� WAS N�T LEGIBLE.
Commissioner Sciarra - No what I'm saying is that if we went ahea�d and
approved the U-turn at Chapman/Tustin allawing the wesfibound traf��� on
Chapman ta make a U-fiurn and go eastbound again, with that wo�al� you
- then be open to considering ta lifting the leffi-turn restriction on Wayfield
upon comptetion of the project and occupied?
Bernie Dennis - Certainly. And the re�son I say that emphafic�lly is
because then we would be working with a knawn quantity. I have all the
respect in the world for Mr. Foust's talents in proj�cting traffic dema�� and
� street utilization, but projecting ane and having one are two different things.
Vice-Chairman Fortier - I have a problem, based on the safety of �the area
residents and people using that stree�C, t think there will be cars back�d up
to make the Ieft-turn and others going around to make a turn from the gas
station d-riveways.
RECOMMENDATION: That we DENY the request to efiminate the left turr�
restriction from Wayfield St. to Chapman Ave.
MOTION: J. FORTIER
SECOND: N. HOWER
AYES: UNANIMOUS
10
C. Request for th� instailation of a pedestrian actuated traf�c signa! at the
intersection of Lincain Ave. and Oceanview Rd.
Kathy Martin
16571 Buena Vista #B
Orange, CA 92665
Oral presentation was based on t�re writ�en staff report, please refer to your
copy. Vice-Chairman Fortier ap�ned �rhe public hearing for discussion at the
conclusion of the staff report. �
Steven Martin, 1 C571 Buena Vista #A - Basically what's concerned is
crossing Lincoln Ave. far my wife and my son, who attends pre-schooi at
the Baptist Pre-Schaol on the southwest corner of Lincoln Ave. and Canal,
There is a considerable amount of risk in crassing Lincoln, which is basically
a highway and traffic that is headed we5�bound from Tustin St. around the
cucve reaches a considerably high rafie of speed as they reach #he
crosswalk, and no Iess than 6 times have my wife and child been
� endangered due to matorisfis not seeing fihem in time. In addition to that
there was anather instance when a vehicle pulling out from Oceanview
making a left headed eastbound on Lincoln Ave. was loaking westbound on
Lincoln and not in the direction of the crosswa�lk where if my wife hadn't
screamed she more thank likely would not be here. We are in desperate
need of something afi that painted crosswalk.
Dave Allenbach - We have perfiormed several turn count studies at this
location not only at Oceanview but alsa at Canal as both intersections are
clase together. The pre-school is on the southwest corner of Canai/Linc+�ln,
however, the crossw�lk is on the east leg of Oceanview and crosses Lincoln
Ave.. Lincoln ave. is classified as an augmented primary arterial, r�ght
now there are t:wo Ianes in each direction of travel and eventually as traffic
volume increases a third travet lane will be installed in each direction. There
is also a 10 ft. wide center median with left-turn lanes on this section of
Lincoln, there are also advance warning signs for this crosswatk and
pavement (egends. This section of Lincoln is curvilinear and it has a
hori:zontal curve of about 6OQ ft., however, the sight distance for
westbound traffic approaching this crosswalk is about 350 ft. which we
� estimate is adequate enough to see someone in the crosswalk and react
appropriately. 1 would like to say that botfi Canal/Lincoln and
Oceanview/Lincoln did not warrant the installation af a traffic signal based
on traffic volume or accident history. We reviewed the accident history at
�ceanview/Lincoln for the past 3 year period and we found there had b�een
only one accident recorded that involved an auto versus pedestrian, wh�ch
o►ccurred in September 1990, this involved a southbound bicyclist in #he
crosswalk who was struck by an eastbound vehicle. I would like to point
out that the bicyclist was held responsible for the accident and was cited for
� failure to yield right-of-way. It is our opinion that for whatever reas�n,
wether it be light traffic volume, we would like to point out that we counted
this area at least 3 times and at each time we only. counted 3 pedestrians
�1
crossing; they were counted in the evening peak hour (5:00 - 5:15 p.m.).
With this in mind it is our recommendation that the crosswalk is functioning
properly now and I think that the pedestrians that use it are aware of the
conditions that exist and are exercising proper caution. Therefore it is our
recommendation that the request for an pedesfirian �ctuated traffic signaJ be
deni�d. .
Vice-Chairman Forti�r - Mr. Martin, what time does your wife cross here?
Stev�n Martin - She crosses approximately 8:15 a.rn. and 12:00 noon.
Unfartunately, I think wha�t isn't laoked at is the excess of speed because
it`s pureiy douvn-hill and anything if traffic is coming from Nohl Ranch Rd.
and th� light is green at Tustin it's straight down-hill and the traffic is way
in excess of the speed limit.
Commissioner Leminq - Barry, what's the speed limit out there?
Sgt. Barry Weinstein - { don't reca�ll.
Qave AllenbaGf� - I believe it's 4Q MP�I and the 85th percentile is around
47 MPH.
Commissioner LeminQ: - It seems to me this is a speeding problem and a light
isn't going to benefit ifi. If someone comes speeding around that corner a
light isn't going to stop fihem. Motorists that use a roadway regularly which
has flashing yellow fights eventually staps paying attention to the lights; and
� the pedesfirians seem to think that those flashing yellow lights is the same
as an ir�visible wall and think they can just walk out in the street, those
lights are not absolute protectian against oncoming traffic.
Bernie Dennis - Is th� request for a crossing device pri'ncipally to serve the
pre-schoot?
Kathy Martin - Yes the school would like that. They would like to use
Eisenhawer Park acrass the street.
� � Berr�ie Dennis - Perhaps, just as a matter of information and a question at
the same time, under the supervision of our police department we allow
. private crossing guards, would you or your schaol like �o be in the crossing
guard business?
Kathy Martin - Yeah, I think that wouJd be a good idea.
Steven Martin - In addition to that, there is a shopping center right there and
several of the area residents use this and with the exceptian of using
Orange-Olive Rd. or going to Tustin St. where there are signals you are
taking your life in your hands to cross Lincoln Ave. anywhere else.
_ � Bernie Dennis - It is in our long-term plans to signalize Lincoln/Canal, and
� when we do this the crosswalk at Oceanview will be removed. We didn't
come up with any children when w� did our count, when we conduct a
count particularly for a school control device and we're talking about some
expense here, whether it be a flashing ped signal at $25 - $30,000.0� or an
12
580,040.0(J traffiG signal it's really hard for us to go before the City Council
� and say we would realiy like to do this but we didn't have an pedestrian
crossing during the time when they should be crossing.
Vice-Chairman Forfiier - I agree that there is a speed problem here.
Commissiorrer Leminq - l th�ink what we need right now is some a�ditional
police enforcement activity in the area.
Sat_Barry Weinstein, OPD - We work that area actively and regularly. Our
officers are very often sifiting in the Qenny's parking lofi working speed with
radar. Keep in mind that with a posted speed limit of 40 MPH and the 85�h
percentiie at 47 MPH, 47 MPM is a lawfut speed and we wi11 not cite for
that. We'll increase fihe enfiorcement at the crosswalk in regards to the
complaint, but you�have to realize that afi 47 MPH a pedestrian is going to
look at that and it will appear they are going 60 MPH and it is a fast speed
but it is fawful.
Bernie Dennis - Perhaps one option that might be considered the
schoal/church could possible provide a crossing guard until such a time as
we could put in the signal. I couldn't tell you wh�n that wo-uld be �n�Cil after
July this yea�r when our budget is approved. That vuould seem to provide
for whafi is the principat issue here at this point, and that is to get
elementary age pedestrians back and forth across a v�ry busy street. We
have spent the money before, that's no problem for us but we haue to have
some reason ta do that and perhaps in this particular case if you did your
share then we will do our share as quickly as we can within fihe dictates of
our financial ability; but we will do it in the form of a signa( and n�t as a
' warning flasher.
Kathv Martin - I don'fi understand, are you going to have someb�dy out
there helping us across the street?
Bernie Dennis - What you would da is when you go into this kin�d of an
operation you have ta assure them that yau are going ta be there e�rery day
at the same hours to provide this level of crassing protec�tian and wer� I
doing it I would cansult with the Palice Dept. for the training necessary to
f�ave that happen. It's not a real inexpensive or a non-time consuming
undertaking, its very labor intensive. May I suggest that you get together
with the pre-school and discuss the private crossing guard situation.
RECOMMENDATION: That the CTC, by Motion, DENY the request.
MOTIC?N: F. SCIARRA
SECOND: N. HOWER
AYES: UNANIMOUS
13
D. Request for protected/eft-turn phasing on Meats Ave. at Santiago B/vd.
Lynn M. Bonas
2345 N. Rockridge Cr.
Orange, CA 92667
Or�l pr�senfiation is based on the written staff r�port, plea�� r�#�r to your
cop�. There was na discussion on this item.
FiECUMMfNDA710N: That the CTC, tay Motion, A:PPRCIVE the request, and
inctude this signal modification in next year's 7-Year Capital Improvement
Pragram.
MQTtON: B. LEMING
SECONQ: N. HOWER
AYES: UNANlMOUS
E. Request for a pedestrian actuated signa/ on Town & Country Rd. at the
Tawn & Country Shopping Center.
Debra Murray
777 S. Main St., Suite 133
Qrange, CA 92668
Oral report is based on the written staf� report, plea�e refer to yaur copy.
Vice-Chairman Forfiier opened the public hearing far discussion on this item.
Debra Murra�, 777 S. Main �t. - With the freeway and bridge construction
that necessifiated the closure of certain on-ramps, atot more traffic is finding
� its way down Town & Country Rd., and alot of motorists are ignoring the
pedestrians in the crosswalks. There is alot of pedestrian activity across
Town & Country and its not limited to the painted crosswalk, alot of people
cross wherever they feel like it and it's becoming a real traffic hazard.
� Debra Murra�v - Is there a crosswalk across Town & Country at the freeway
entrance?
Bernie Dennis - Yes, there is one at the STOP sign.
� Debra Murr�v - May I suggest that if there isn'fi a crosswalk at the SR-22
Fwy. off-ramp intersection already perhaps one could be installed?
Bernie Dennis - We can take care of that.
� Vice-Chairman Fortier - Can we install a crosswalk here?
; Bernie Dennis - It is� a state ramp but the point is well taken. You have a 4-
way STOP with full crosswalks going into an island into a right-turn island
that doesn't have a crosswalk and as she indicates one is needed, and she
is right.
�
�
�
14
RECOMMENDAT{ON: That the CTC, by Motion, DENY the request.
MOTION: J. FORTIER
SECOND: F. SCIARRA
AYES�: UNANIMOUS
RECOMMENDATIQN: That the CTC, by Motion, to install a crosswalk �t the
4-Way STQP right-turn island.
MOTfON: J. FORTIER
SECOND: F. SCtpRRA
AYE�: UNANIMOUS
Bern're Dennis - Lang term plan is to install a pedestrian bridge at �his
location. �
F. Request for left-turn phasing on Hewes St. at Chapman Ave.
Erma Valenzu�la
114Z2 N. Earlham St.
Orange, CA 92669
Qral presentatiQn is based on the written staff report, please refer �o your
copy. Vice-Chaicman Fartier opened the public hearing for discussion an
this item.
Commissioner Leminp - It seems to me, knowing that corner quite we11, why
is that it doesn't warrant protected teft-turn phasing?
Chuck Glass - That's correct, for left-turn phasing we primarily go with the
Caltrans guidelines or warrants and these warrants are based on two
factors: (a) accident history; or correctable accidents; and �b) left turn
volumes versus thraugh volumes.
We reviewed the Iocation for accidents over the la�t 3 yea�rs and there has
been one accident in 1989, one in 1990, and two through September 1991,
that were left-turn types that would be considered susceptible to correction
� with left�turn phasing. Caltrans recommends that you dan't consider left
turn phasing unless you have 5 or more accidents in a 12 manth period. So
the accidents do not indicate thafi left turn phasing should be considered.
Caltrans warrants on volumes looks at the product of the left-tur� versus
the through movement which is a conflicting mov�s and they recommend
that you do not recommend left turn phasing unless that product is 100,00�
or higher. In this case the 1ef� turn volumes versus through volum�es don'fi
even come close to that number. You've got to remember that the separate
signai phasing for protected left turns reduces the green time available for
� other phases so whether or not necessary in this case particularly where our
observations were that northbound/southbound left turns, in almost all
cases, cleared on every cycle and there wasn't that much volume that there
were left turn vehicies backing out the turn pocket into the #1 through lane.
15
To make tfie intersection operate more efficiently and maintain the safety
we recommend denial of I�ft turn phasing.
Vice-Chairman Fortier - Closed the public hearing and returned the request
to the Commission for further discussion and/or a motion.
RECOMMENDATIQN': That the CTC, by Motion, DENY the requesfi.
MaTION: F. SCIARRA
SECONQ: N. HOWER �
AYES: UNANIMOUS
G. Requesfi for the implementation af a neighborhoc�d parking permit program in
front of 238 S. Cambridge St.
Paul J. Mitchell
238 S. Cambridge St,
Orange, CA 926�6
Oral presentation is based an the written staff report, please refer to your
copy. Vice-Chairman Fortier opened the public hearing on this item.
Paul Mitchell, 238 S. Cambridge St. - This s�arts off and has the appearance
of being a request for a single home in the city but I am confident in saying
that the difficutty is experienced by many. In our case, when we moved
here, there were 4 homes across the street and in the ensuing years these
_ houses ha�e been developed into multiple housing and where there were
ance 4 homes there is now 14 homes. Each dwelling location has 2 Qeople
per unit and approx. 2 vehicles per dwelling unit so there are now 28
vehicles here and there isn't coom to put all of them on-site so they use the
street.
The burden tt�is places on us, �hough be of a smaller scale, is nat dissimilar
to that in the Ghapman University situation where over a period af years
there is tremendous influx of vehicles and individuals who do not have
access to the front of their own homes for themselves or their guests and
you have chosen ta designate a broad area as a parking permit area.
My problem is much sm�ller but tfiere is always one car parked overnight,
several during the day and usually one or two on the weekends.
Vice-Chairman Fortier - Do you understand Mr. Mitchell tfiat we cannot
� create permit parking areas for an individual? If the other residents in the
area were to indicate they all had the same problem you could come down
to the city and get a petition, and perhaps we would look at this differently,
but there is a legality aspect here.
Chuck Glass - We looked at this area with regard to permit parking and the
policy criteria thafi was developed by staff and adopted by the CTC last
year. I don't believe, in any case, this neighborhood would quality.
16
a� The program shall not be approved merely because of neighborhood
density. Weil that's exactiy what you're talking about here.
b) The area must abut an institutional, commercial ar industrial use
which is generating the parking intrusion. This is not the case here,
this is a neighbarhood that has higher density so I don't think th�re is
a number that could come down that would satisfy these criteria.
Vice-Chairman Forfiier - Thank yau. Mr. Mitchell do you understand that this
� doesn't meet the crifieria af aur palicy? ,
Pau1 M'itchell - Yes I und�rstand that. However, n�w criteria could be
developed if it was deemed necessary; and I honestly believe that the city
should address this matfier of the number of vehicles that are on the streefis.
I say that because every study that I have �ver seer� of
neighborhood/eommunity deterioration always starts with automobiles, trash
and graffiti soon follow but the beginning is always wifih the� autom:obile.
I believe permit parking would force the property owner to resolve their own
problem and they would have to use their garages.
Vice-Chairman Fortier - Permit parking would not necessarily elirr�inate the
numb�er of vehicles on the streets, those cars are there and they won't
change with permit parking because they would afso have permits and they
could park there legally. This is not going to solve your prabtem, and that's
why we have these criteria. We're looking far people coming in that don't
live in the neighborhood that ar� taking your parking places and this isn't
the caSe.
RECOMMENDATION: That the CTC, by Motion, DENY the request.
MOTfON: F. SCIARRA
SECOND: J. FORTIER
AYE5: UNANIMOUS
H. Request to estab/ish a bus stop for northbaund Newport Blvd, north vf
Chaprnan Ave., and another bus stop on westbour�d Chapman Ave, at the
far side of Trai/s Encl.
Dan Gates
Orange Caunty Transit Authority
11222 Acacia Parkway
Garden Grove, CA 92640-5208
� Oral presentation is based on the written staff report, please ref�er to your
copy. Vice-Chairman Fortier opened the public hearing for discussion.
Bernie Dennis - On the second location would yau specify that these are bus
stops and nat bus lay-over areas, and secondly would yau specify that the
Newport Blvd. bus stop would be installed in conjunction with a bus bay.
17
RECOMMENDATION: That the CTC, by Mation, APPROVE the request to
install these bus stops with the canditions proposed by the City Traffic
Engineer.
MOT10N: J. FORTIER
SECOND: F. SCIARRA
AYES: UNANIMOUS
IV. ORAL PRESENTATIONS
� PUBLIC PARTI�IPATI�N - At the canclusion of the meeting af itecr�s I�st�d on
this agenda, members of the public may address the City Traffic
Cammission regarding items of interest to the public that are within the
subject jurisdiction of the Cifiy Traffic Commission.
1 . discussion of parking problems in the 2000 block ofi W. Mapie Ave.
David C. Yinger
2020 W. Map(e Ave.
�range, CA 926�8
David Yinger, 2Q20 W. Maple Ave. - I'm here in reference to a long process
in aur immediate neighborhood having to do with traffic over-run from a
commercial concern on W. Chapman Ave. I have been working with Code
Enforcement for many months dealing with the problem on our street and
we seem to have accomplished what we have s�t out to do. I'm here today
to hear the results of an investigation into the parking probl�m which has
been caused by a technical schaol in our area that does nat pravide
adequate parking for the square footage allowed for their student
- population, consequently there has been an over-run of commercial parking
on a residential streets through the day of the business hours of their school
operation. I would be better suited to prabably answering your questions
� after a brief presentation.
There is a technical school or� the premises af 2011 W. Chapman Av+�,, it's
a double commercial building next to McDor�ald's and Adray's between
Feldner and Eckho�f, There is a dental t�chnical schoo! and one drafting
school at this Iocation.
Dave Allenbach - The area in question is a residential streefi. Maple is one
block north of Chapman. The business/school actually has a Chapman
; address, however, their parking lot extends north and abuts Maple Ave.
�' There is pedestrian access from Maple through the parking lot and into the
. schools and the area is heavily parked. There are also a number of
residential apartments also on Maple in proximity to the study area which is
easterly of Eckhoff St. You may remember that a year or so ago we had a
18
request to instalf some Street Sweeping signs on Maple Ave. between
� Eckhoff and Poplar, the basis of the request was the large amount of on-
street parking in the are� that may or may not have been caused by the
schooi. This is the extent of our study and background information, I
would like to turn this over to Jim Donovan of the Planning Dept. for an
overview of hi� departm:ents findings.
Jim Danvvan - As an amendment to Dave's report I should add t�rat there
was a pedestrian gate on Maple Ave. but as part of Mr. Yinger's original
inquiry a Code Enfarcement citation was issued, there is a provision in the
4MC that does not allaw pedestrian access betw�en commercial prop�rties
a�nd resider�tial neighbarhoads. The original development was built with a 6
ft. divisiQr� wall that would preclude pedestrian access which was what
attra�cted a�lot of traffic on Maple Ave., a� least that was what we perceived
where people were given immediate access to the street and could just walk
through the gate. To my knowledge, I inspected this site and I know they
did seal off fihis gate as a result of th� original Code Enforcement citation.
Evidently the communication has not been very good between our
department and Mr. Yinger, sometime about January 12th, MTI was cited
for the occupation of the building because the building was originally
develaped for a prafessional office building and the parking that was
provided was at a rate of 4 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. of floor area within the
offiices. That amounted to somewhere around 200 parking spaces and
with a �rade school the parking rate goes up to about 30 spaces for every
� 1,OOQ sq. ft. so it's quite an impact on occupancy rates ar�d parking
requirements. Overall we calculafied just with MT1 the parking facility is
deficient by about 400 parking spaces, this doesn't even count the dental
school in the other building. Around January 12th, MTI was cited and
given 6Q days to vacate �he building and find another place and do
whatever was necessary ta, by way of a CQnditional IJse Permit or Variance
elsewhere. We know they are not going to be able to apply far eifiher one
� at this laca�ian and we will be acting similarly with the dental school as
well.
David Yinger - The problem has been moved and shifted two blocks toward
Chapman down Eckhoff vuhere the students from MTI and possibly the
dental school are naw parking on Arbor Way as we11 as the intersection and
the De0 Taco parking lot at Chapman/Eckhoff. Quring Mon. - Fri. the
parking spaces provided for the residents of this street are being used by
the students so we have had some success on W. Maple.
Code Enforcement suggested permit parking but we don't really support
that since we think the problem belongs in the personal sector. In #he
meantime there needs to be something done to accommodate these vehicles
and get them off the street and back where they belong until such time as
provision can be made for those schools to find different locations.
Vice-Chairman Fortier - Staff, what other options are there excluding permit
parking that might address this problem?
19
Dave Alienbach - Probably the only other alternative we have right no�v
would be to install some 'TIME LIMIT' parking signs, we can set th� limit to
whatever is reasonable, 1 Hour - 2 Hours. This will provide some turn-ov�er
parking, the students may still come and go to class then they �eave b�t
they have to make sure they move their car within fihe specified limit. The
police do enforce tht�se rather vigorously and the b�nefit of tMis posting is
that time limit parking ceases ta function after business hours and is not in
effect on the weeken�'s or holiday's, which allows for those havir�g
company in evening hours or weekends so they won't have to worry abc��t
running permits out to their guests. Basically we install the signs and begin
enfarcement, if fihis sounds reasonable to the residents here today ma�b�e
that's an avenue we could pursue.
David Yinger - Wh�at is the date that we wi11 experience reliefi from this
parking problem?
Jim Donovan - In a worst case scenario they could, if they ��nt to be
stubbarn and my communica�ion with them indicates that they woutd rath�r
move �han fight this, they would be issued a citation on March 12th,
technically fihey have been given a Notice of Violation which is t�� pro�r�n
method af cade enforcement where the citation would automatically send it
to a� court and so the court would decide on the merits of the vic�lation and
what the punishments would be. It could take langer than 3/12192. T�e
dental school has not yet been cited and to be consistent we are going ta
issue a citation to them as well.
David Yinqer - If this goes to court I would imagine it would be a lc�ng dra�►n
out affair.
Jim Donovan - It doesn't narmally wock that way in code enforcement
situations, it's normally pretty simple and usually the result would be seen
within two months.
Commissioner Lemina - How long woutd it take once a reque�t has com� to
the CTC to ir�nplement the time limit parking?
D►ave Aflenbach - I would like to point Qut fihat what we would #irst v�rant �o
do is identify the area, not just where the students are parking now 'b�t
where they would be likely ta go, and we would want to include that area �n
this posting. Secondly, once we have identified �hat we would Iike to mail
the proponent a petition form that covers all those area and have �aim
circulate it for signature by the neighborhood and similar to the park�r�g
permit process a simple majority rules, this takes some time in itself. Ma�rbe
the best thing is to wait until March and if nathing is going to happen with
the school certainly Mr. Yinger could call us and we w�uld be more t:han
happy to go out and look over the area and send him a petition.
20
Bernie Dennis - We don't want to put you in the position of providing
parking for a non-conforming use. We are willing to spend the money to do
this ifi after 3/12/92, if they don't go. The problems we face are
administrative, if we go into a restrictive parking program we are compelied
to natify those people in the neighborhood who woutd be affected by this
and it's a simpl� courtesy, this would probably take 2 weeks. 7'he signs are
readily avaitable and are no problem, parking permit programs are a little
lengthier process and requires the same kind of petition and more leg work.
Bob Herrick - Just for the record and so the residents don't �ee that we
have in any way led them away from it and that is that the city has Gertain
time limits and restraints an the way we can work through Code
Enfarcement and through the courts to get things dane. There may be
� pcivate rights of action on the basis of nuisance or something else that you
would have to consult your awn atfiorney's with that yau could take that
the ci�y can't. So that may be something e(se that you could Iook at on a
group basis if this problem isn't resalved quickly enaugh for you; such as an
injunction or something like thafi.
Public nuisance action brought by governments is that there is a long series
of notifications, the 60-day notice and this, that and the ather and courts
tend to hesitate to grant injunctiv� relief in favar of a city to shut down a
private business. On the ofiher hand th�y tend to look a little rnore favorably
on civil actions brought by private parties as they are impacting your
property, etc. Often times courts look more favorable on a group of peQple
coming araund and saying this guy is bringing down our property values and
he is impacting our us af our private enjoyment of our property, they are
parking across aur driveways, or whatever than they are at letting
governments appear to be kicking peaple aut of their busin�sses without a
full process and in some cases the restraining orders can be issued in a little
15-20 days and other cases the courts are very reluctant to grant them at
all until they have heard the full facts of the case and so that is why Code
. Enforcem�nt can't promise you that on the 60th day it's going to go away.
It may invalve litigation and the city's iitigation processes can sometimes be
stower than private litigatian.
Bernie Dennis - What would happen if the CTC elected to take an action
that recognized this probtem as not being resultant: of any activity wifihin
their imm�diat� neighborhood, but of a non-conforming use gave the
conditions or the circumstances having to do with the Gode Enforcement
actions to evict these folks and said that 3/12/92 is the magic day and if
they aren't out of there by 3/20/92 then we will recommend that you
authorize us to act and we go from there?
Bob Herrick - You can take actions tfiat have trigger dates in the future, the
� problem here is that there is a process of notifying impacted residents. The
CTC couldn't take any act:ion today, there is no action agendized for them
to take, so they would have to act at their next meeting and there would
have to be public notice given and a public hearing held.
21
� Bernie Dennis - One ofi the reasons there isn't an agendized recommendation
is because in talking about this we find this is only remoteJy a traffic
problem, but we felt if we brought this to the attention of the City Council
again outlining the aGtions, as an infarmational item then we could proceed
from there based on what the CounCil decides.
Bab Herr'rck - The CTC can certainly make recQmmendations as ta how this
prob�lem shauld be appraach�d, but as fiar as taking formal a�tir�r� to �p►prove
a parfiicular parking restriction, you can't do that afi this p►articular meeting
because the ordinanee h�sn't be�n followed iBrown Act1. '
Je�s Waters. 138 N. Eckhoff - It is a traffic problem �nd it is a traffic hazard
trying �o get o�ut of tl�e driveway v�hen the street is parked Iike it is every
day. Everyane on my street will sign whatever you want them to sign. The
firs� three houses on Eckhoff north of Chapman fiind it very difficult to get
out Qf their drivewa�s because the of the students parking.
Bob Herrick - What we are saying is that fihis isn't your typical traffic
solution that's within the jurisdiction of tfie CTC because the main problem
is a code violation which is a land use iss�ue and it has serious traffic
� symptoms but the real solutian f�as �Co be achieved through a different
jurisdiGtion. Qne tt�ing that does accur to me is that perhaps fih� CTC could
direct staff that the petiti:on process be allowed ta camrnence now so tha�C if
in fact 3/12/92 comes and the problem still exists they could already be
underway for a public hearing set for the March meeting and there wouldn't
have ta be anott�er month's delay while we went through that notice
process.
Bernie Dennis - Ifi w�s suggested that we could get them the informatian on
what they need to do so they could get back ta us probably the first af next
week and this could be agendiz:ed for the next meeting.
Cornmissioner Lemina - Our next meeting is on 3/11/92 1 believe.
Bob Herrick - At that point �he CTC could take actian to say that i# the .
problem hasn't been cleared by the end of a parfiicular time periad (5-10
days) they cauld institute the time limit parking r�strictions.
Bernie D�nnis - When the residents come in the door at the 3/11/92 meeting
everything we would n�ed from them would be done and the CTC could
take whatever action is appropriate at that point in time and we could be at
� the City Council on 3/24fJ2.
Commissioner Lemin4 - If you want time limit parking you're going to have
to post an area large enough that it doesn't just move the problem to the
next block similar what happened to Arbor Way. How far away are people
�
willing to walk from where they park and where they want to go, so other
neighbors may be impacted.
22
David Yinaer - We want the schools shut down and the people moved out.
There is no way they can provide ample parking for their use after the fiact.
I'm going to continue to be patient and my neighbors and myself will
continue to follow the course of action recommended by �his Commission.
Vice-Chairman Fortier - In summation we could ha�e everything put together
. and ready to go at tfie next meeting and implemenfi with a trigger date a:nd
if we don't need it fine.
K. ADJOURNMENT
Discussion of all of taday's agenda items being complete, and there being
no further requests� under Oral Presentations, it has been moved to adjourn
this session of the City Traffic Commission to it's next regularly scheduled
meeting of March 11, 1992.
MOTION: J. FORTIER
SEC�ND: F. SCIARRA
AYES: UNANiMOUS
Respectfully submitted,
CITY OF ORANGE
� � I
l� 1 ��
Phyllis Then
Recording Secretary
City Traffic Commission
23