CC SR 20151020 D - Stop and Yield Sign Traffic Control ImplementationCrTYOF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
MICHAEL THRONE, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS il!J
OCTOBER 20, 2015
SUBJECT:
REVIEWED:
APPROVAL OF STOP AND YIELD SIGN TRAFFIC
CONTROL IMPLEMENTATION AT THREE LOCATIONS
DOUG WILLMORE, CITY MANAGER (AA.Al
Project Manager: Melissa Countryman, Senior Engineer tfJ/tV
RECOMMENDATION
1. Approve the installation of:
a. Stop sign traffic control of Sparta Drive at the intersection of N. Enrose Avenue,
and 20 feet of red curb on N. Enrose Avenue north of Sparta Drive and 20 feet
of red curb on N. Enrose Avenue south of Sparta Drive
b. Yield sign traffic control of Chartres Drive at the intersection of Sattes Drive
c. Yield sign traffic control of Coolheights Drive at the intersection of Floweridge
Drive
FISCAL IMPACT
Budget Program: Traffic Management
Account Number: 101-3006-431-32-00
Budgeted Amount: $90,000
Additional Appropriation: N/A
New Amount Balance: N/A
Implementation Cost: $4,500
Fund Balance: $85,500
Approval of the recommended actions does not authorize additional expenditures beyond
the approved budget. Funds available are set and have been included in the final adopted
budget for FY 2015/16.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
The Public Works Department (Department) received three separate requests for stop
signs at the following three residential intersections in the City: Sparta Drive at N. Enrose
1
Ave, Chartres Drive at Sattes Drive, and Coolheights Drive at Floweridge Drive. These
three intersections are similar in that they are all T-intersections and are currently
uncontrolled. In response to these inquiries, Staff performed preliminary investigations of
these three locations in the field and subsequently requested the services of the traffic
engineering consulting firm, Willdan Engineering (Willdan), to further analyze these
locations and determine if the implementation of one-way Stop sign traffic control is
warranted at these three locations, in concurrence with the latest edition of the California
Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. Willdan prepared a report summarizing the
findings of this analysis, which was presented to the Traffic Safety Committee, along with
Staff's recommendations, on July 27, 2015 (included as Attachment A to this report).
Concerns presented in the traffic engineering study report for these three intersections
included limited sight visibility, and potential issues with interpreting right-of-way
designation, which was highlighted by the traffic volume counts performed. Upon reviewing
this study report and comments received from the community, the Traffic Safety Committee
concurred with Staff's recommendation to forward the implementation of the following to
the City Council for consideration:
(1) Stop sign traffic control of Sparta Drive at the intersection of N. Enrose Avenue
(2) 20 feet of red curb on N. Enrose Avenue north of Sparta Drive and 20 feet of red
curb on N. Enrose Avenue south of Sparta Drive
(3) Yield sign traffic control of Chartres Drive at the intersection of Sattes Drive
In addition, the Traffic Safety Committee recommended that instead of forwarding the
implementation of Stop sign traffic control of Coolheights Drive at the intersection of
Floweridge Drive to the City Council for consideration, that Yield sign traffic control for this
location be considered by the City Council instead. Therefore, it is recommended that
Yield sign traffic control be implemented at this location, and also that this location continue
to be monitored to determine if any additional measures need to be taken in the future.
Implementation of Stop sign traffic control would include the installation of a new Stop sign
and sign post, as well as new pavement markings for the Stop line and Stop pavement
legend. Yield sign traffic control would include the installation of a new Yield sign and sign
post, as well as new pavement markings for the Yield line (which consists of a row of solid
white isosceles triangles pointing toward the approaching vehicles to indicate the point at
which the yield is to be made) and Yield pavement legend. The implementation of the red
curb on N. Enrose Avenue, as described above, would coincide with the implementation of
the Stop sign traffic control on Sparta Drive to alleviate visibility issues at this intersection.
CONCLUSIONS
Adopting the recommendation will allow the Department to implement these traffic safety
improvements at these three locations in the City's residential areas, and monitor the
performance of these improvements. The cost of implementing these improvements is
estimated to not exceed $4,500 and is within the allotted budget for traffic safety
improvements in the City.
Attachments:
A) Staff Report from the July 27, 2015 Traffic Safety Committee Meeting (page 4)
B) Draft Meeting Minutes from the July 27, 2015 Traffic Safety Committee Meeting
(page 35)
C) Written Correspondence Received after the July 27, 2015 Traffic Safety
Committee Meeting (page 50)
2
ATTACHMENT A
3
MEMORANDUM RANCHO PALOS VERDES
TO:
FROM:
BY:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE
MICHAEL THRONE, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
MELISSA COUNTRYMAN, P.E., T.E., SENIOR ENGINEER r.if>..l
JULY 27, 2015
STOP SIGN REQUESTS FOR THREE LOCATIONS
RECOMMENDATION
Consider recommendation of the installation of:
( 1) Stop sign traffic control on Coolheights Drive at Floweridge Drive
(2) Stop sign traffic control on Sparta Drive at N. Enrose Avenue
(3) Yield sign traffic control on Chartres Drive at Sattes Drive
(4) 20 feet of red curb on N. Enrose Avenue north of Sparta Drive and 20 feet of red
curb on N. Enrose Avenue south of Sparta Drive
BACKGROUND
Requests were received from the community for the installation of Stop signs at these
three locations. In response, Staff performed preliminary investigations of these three
locations in the field and subsequently requested the services of the traffic engineering
consulting firm, Willdan Engineering, Inc., to further analyze these locations and
determine if the implementation of one~way Stop sign traffic control is warranted at these
three locations.
DISCUSSION
The following proposed improvements are described in the report for the following three
locations:
Coolheights Drive at Flowerldge Drive
The investigation of this intersection found that, while the recorded traffic collisions and
traffic volume conditions were not met, the sight distance condition was met due to limited
sight visibility at this intersection. The sight distance cannot be readily improved, and
therefore, it is recommended that Stop sign traffic control be implemented for Coolheights
Drive at the intersection with Floweridge Drive.
4
Stop Sign Requests for Three Locations
July 27, 2015
Page 2
Sparta Drive at N. Enrose Avenue
The investigation of this intersection found that, while the recorded traffic collisions and
traffic volume conditions were not met, the sight distance condition was met due to limited
sight visibility at this intersection. The sight distance cannot be sufficiently improved, and
therefore, it is recommended that Stop sign traffic control be implemented for Sparta Drive
at the intersection with N. Enrose Avenue. In addition, even with a Stop sign in place,
due to the unusual configuration of this intersection, it is recommended that parking be
restricted with red curb on the west side of N. Enrose Avenue (20 feet of red curb north
of the intersection with Sparta Drive and 20 feet of red curb south of this intersection) to
aid in improving sight distance. It is noted that the two residences directly adjacent to
these proposed portions of red curb would still have on-street parking available
immediately adjacent to their homes on Sparta Drive, since these two residences are
located on corner lots.
5
Stop Sign Requests for Three Locations
July 27, 2015
Page 3
Chartres Drive at Sattes Drive
The investigation of this intersection found that the recorded traffic collisions and sight
distance conditions were not met for implementation of Stop sign traffic control. However,
the relationship of the traffic volumes for the intersection approaches was found to have
the potential to cause drivers to be less cautious when entering the intersection, and
therefore, it is recommended that Yield sign traffic control be implemented for Chartres
Drive at the intersection with Sattes Drive.
6
Stop Sign Requests for Three Locations
July 27, 2015
Page4
CONCLUSION
Based on the guidelines presented in the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control
Devices and in accordance with the actions advised in the study report, it is recommended
that these improvements be forwarded to the City Council for its consideration.
End of report
Attachments:
Attachment A: Traffic Engineering Study Report -Willdan Engineering, Inc.
Attachment B: Correspondence/Public Comments
7
ATTACHMENT A
8
Ww1LLDAN I
Celebrating 50 years of service
July 23, 2015
Ms. Melissa Countryman
Senior Engineer
Department of Public Works
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
30940 Hawthorne Boulevard
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275-5391
Subject: One-Way Stop Studies for the Intersections of Chartres Drive at Sattes Drive,
Coolheights Drive at Floweridge Drive, and Sparta Drive at North Enrose Avenue
Dear Ms. Countryman:
Willdan Engineering has completed a traffic engineering study to determine if one-way stop
controls should be installed at the three-legged intersections of Chartres Drive at Sattes Drive,
Coolheights Drive at Floweridge Drive, and Sparta Drive at North Enrose Avenue in the City of
Rancho Palos Verdes (see Exhibit 1 ), in response to resident requests the City received for all
three locations.
Existing Conditions
Sattes Drive is a two-lane, 36-foot-wide, east-west residential street, with no traffic control, and
which dead-ends just east of Chartres Drive (see Exhibit 2). Sattes Drive, which is
approximately one-half mile long, has five intersecting streets, all Tee intersections. Three of
the intersections have one-way stop controls for the side streets. Chartres Drive is a two-lane,
36-foot-wide, north-south residential street that tees into Sattes Drive from the south, with a stop
sign at its southerly terminus at Cartier Drive. The configuration of Sattes Drive ending just east
of Chartres Drive affects the operation of the intersection, with the primary traffic movements
being the westbound left turn and the opposing southbound right tum. The speed limit for both
streets is 25 mph. Parking is currently allowed on both sides of both streets.
Floweridge Drive is a short two-lane, 36-foot-wide, east-west residential street, that connects
interior streets with Ganado Drive (see Exhibit 3). The street has one existing traffic control, an
all-way stop at the intersection with Ganado Drive. Coolheights Drive, a two-lane , 36-foot-wide,
north-south street, tees into Floweridge Drive from the north, approximately 150 feet south of
Ganado Drive. The speed limit for both streets is 25 mph. Parking is currently allowed on both
sides of both streets.
North Enrose Avenue, a two-lane north-south residential street, has one existing traffic control,
a Stop sign at its southerly terminus at Caddington Drive (see Exhibit 4). The width of North
Enrose Avenue transitions from 30 feet wide just north of Sparta Drive to 35 feet wide just south
of Sparta Drive. This widening across the intersection has resulted in an off-set on the west
side of the road. Two intersections tee into North Enrose Avenue, with no stop controls. Sparta
Drive, a two-lane, 36-foot-wide, east-west residential street, tees into North Enrose Avenue from
Engineering and Planning I Energy Efficiem:y and S\Jstalnablllty I Ananclal and Economic Consulting I National Preparedness and lnteroperablllty
562.908.sioo I 800.499.4484 I fax: 562.695.2120 I 13191 Crossroads ParKway North, Suite 405, Industry, Call!Omla 91746-3443 I www.wllldan.com
9
One-Way Stop Studies
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
July 23, 2015
Page2
the wEi5L The speed limit for both streets is 25 mph. Parking is ·currently allowed on both sides
of both streets.
Twenty-four hour daily traffic counts were collected for each leg of each intersection on
Wednesday, September 10, 2014. The traffic count data is provided in Attachment A. Traffic
collision data for the previous two years (April 1, 2012 -March 31, 2014) was supplied by City
staff.
One~Wav Stop Analysis
One-Wav Stop Warrant Requirements
The one-way stop study was based on the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices
(CA MUTCD} requirements for installing a one-way/two-way stop control. The CA MUTCD has
three basic conditions to be considered, any one of which can warrant installation of a one-way
stop. The CA MUTCD also requires that less-restrictive measures. such as a Yield sign, be
considered before installing a Stop sign.
Condition 1: One or more of the following conditions exist, indicating a Yield sign or Stop sign
should be used:
a. On the minor street, the normal right-of-way rules would not be expected to provide
reasonable compliance with the law.
b. On a street entering a designated through highway or street.
c. At an unsignalized intersection in a signalized area.
Condition 2: A full stop on the minor street is necessary at all times (a Yield sign is not
appropriate} due to one or more of the following conditions:
a. The vehicular volumes on the through street or highway exceed 6,000 vehicles /day.
b. A restricted view exists that requires road users to stop in order to adequately observe
conflicting traffic on the through street or highway.
c. Crash records indicate that three or more crashes that are susceptible to correction by
the installation of a STOP sign have been reported in a 12-month period, or that five or
more such crashes have been reported in a 2-year period. Such crashes include right-
angle collisions involving drivers on the minor-street approach failing to yield the right-of-
way to traffic on the through street.
Condition 3: Engineering judgment indicates that a YIELD or STOP sign should be installed,
based on the consideration of each of the following:
a. Vehicular, bicycle and pedestrian volumes on all approaches
b. Number and angle of approaches -
c. Approach speeds
10
One-Way Stop Studies
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
July 23, 2015
Page 3
OnV";.vcw Stop Warrant Analvsls
The results of each One-Way Stop Warrant analysis are discussed below (please refer to the
Warrants in Attachment B).
Sattes Drive & Chartres Drive
The intersection of Sattes Drive and Chartres Drive meets Condition 1 of the One-Way Stop
Warrant, indicating that either a one-way Stop or a Yield sign is warranted. Further analysis
showed that a Yield sign should be installed. Conditions 1.a. and 3.a. were met since the daily
approach volume on the minor street (Chartres Drive) is similar to that on the eastbound
approach and greater than that on the westbound approach of the major-street (Sattes Drive).
Drivers on Chartres Drive are likely to be less cautious when entering the intersection due to the
low traffic volumes on Sattes Drive. Although there were no collisions reported by the Sheriff's
Department in the last two years, a resident reported a right-angle collision at the intersection.
One collision is not enough to meet Condition 2.c., however, it is an indication of a situation that
should be considered. Since Condition 2 is not met, a Yield sign should be installed on
Chartres Drive.
One might think that it would still be okay to install a one-way Stop sign instead of a Yield sign.
The Warrant is clear, however, regarding which one should be used, based on an ongoing long-
term nationwide analysis of traffic collisions. Installing a Stop sign has undesirable
consequences if installed when not warranted. If an unwarranted one-way Stop sign is installed
where the approaching driver has an adequate view of cross street traffic, local drivers start to
"roll through" the Stop sign, essentially treating it like a Yield sign. Some drivers may go further
and start to ignore the Stop sign altogether, particularly if there is little traffic on the cross street.
The result could be preventable crashes. In the event of such a collision, the City would most
likely be held liable for not following the Warrant's findings.
Floweridge Drive & Coolheights Drive
The intersection of Floweridge Drive and Coolheights Drive meets Condition 2 of the One-Way
Stop Warrant, indicating that a one-way Stop sign should be installed. One traffic collision was
reported by the Sheriff's Department in the last two years, however, it was not included in the
analysis since it was not a type that could be corrected by a Stop sign. Condition 2.b. was met
since sight distance from Coolheights Drive is partially blocked by shrubs in the yard on the
northwest comer. Trimming the shrubs would not provide adequate sight distance. Partial
removal of the shrubs, which are on private property, would be necessary to provide adequate
sight distance. A stop would be necessary for drivers on Coolheights Drive to adequately
assess traffic approaching on Floweridge Drive. Condition 2.b. also indicates that a Stop sign
should be installed on Coolheights Drive.
North Enrose Avenue & Sparta Drive
The intersection of North Enrose Avenue and Sparta Drive meets Condition 1 of the One-Way
Stop Warrant, indicating that a one-way Stop sign or a Yield sign should be installed. Further
analysis showed that a Stop sign should be installed. No traffic collisions were reported by the
Sheriff's Department in the last two years. An unusual Intersection configuration (North Enrose
Avenue is 5 feet wider south of Sparta Drive than north of Sparta Drive) results in an angled
11
One-Way Stop Studies
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
July 23, 2015
Page4
aiJ1-J•Oach for Sparta Drive, which reduces sight distance. Aiso, the houses on the west side of
North Enrose Avenue are set very close to the street, blocking the view of North Enrose Avenue
from motorists on Sparta Drive until almost at the intersection. Conditions 2.b and 3 indicate
that a Stop sign should be installed on Sparta Drive.
Red curb should also be installed on the west side of North Enrose Avenue on both sides of
Sparta Drive to improve sight distance. The recommended length of red curb is 20 feet (one car
length) on both sides. The two residences that would be affected, 28633 North Enrose Avenue
and 28707 North Enrose Avenue, both face Sparta Drive, where parking would not be restricted.
Conclusions and Recommendations
The one-way stop study shows that all three of the study intersections meet the CA MUTCD's
requirements for installing a one-way stop control/Yield sign at a three-way intersection. At one
of the study intersections, the analysis indicated that a Yield sign would be sufficient. The other
two intersections, however, should have Stop signs installed. The following actions are
recommended:
1. Install a Yield sign on Chartres Drive at Sattes Drive.
2. Install a Stop sign on Coolheights Drive at Floweridge Drive
3. Install a Stop sign on Sparta Drive at North Enrose Avenue.
4. On the west side of North Enrose Avenue, install 20 feet of red curb north of Sparta
Drive and 20 feet of red curb south of Sparta Drive.
We appreciate this opportunity to continue to serve the City of Rancho Palos Verdes. If you
have any questions, please contact me at (657) 223-8525 (new phone number) or at
ruthsmith@willdan.com.
Very truly yours,
WILLDAN ENGINEERING
Ruth Smith, TE, PTP
Project Manager
Attachments
W( .
"••o
12
··-
Legend:
• = Study Intersection
Vicinity Map
EXHIBIT 1
Stop Sign Analyses
Summary Report (#101471)
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
13
•• a.le
Legend :
• =Study Intersection
.J.&/WILLDAN I -W Engineering
Study Area
Chartres Drive & Sattes Drive
EXHIBIT 2
Stop Sign Analyses
Summary Report (#101471)
City of Rancho Paloa Verdes
14
.......
Legend:
• = Study Intersection
...... r-w1LLDAN I W Engineering
Study Area
Coolheights Drive & Floweridge Drive
EXHIBIT 3
Stop Sign Analyses
Summary Report (#101471)
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
15
.......
Lege nd :
• = Study Intersection
.... & /w1LLDAN I W Engineering
Study Area
Sparta Drive & Enrose Avenue
EXHIBIT 4
Stop Sign Analyaes
Summary Report (#101471)
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
16
ATTACHMENT A
Traffic Count Data
17
Counts Unlimited, Inc Page 1
City of Rancho Palos Verdes PO Box 1178
N/S: Chartres Drive Corona, CA 92878
E/W: Sattes Drive Phone: 951-266-6268 RPV001EW
24 Hour Entering Volume Count email: counts@countsunlimited.com Site Code: 007-14306
Start 10-Sep-14 Eastbound Hour Totals Westbound Hour Totals Combined Totals
TlfT)p \l)lpQ Morning A.flefr10Q!1 MJlmlr)g.. Aftwni:ion Morning ... ,llflprnoo.n l~qrnh)g Aflern(Jon Morning Aflefrt()OJ1
12:00 0 6 0 0
12:15 0 3 0 0
12:30 2 3 0 1
12:45 0 5 2 17 0 0 0 2 18
01:00 0 4 0 0
01:15 0 4 0 0
01:30 0 8 0 0
01:45 0 4 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 20
02:00 0 4 0 0
02:15 0 7 0 0
02:30 0 6 0 0
02:45 0 4 0 23 0 0 0 0 0 23
03:00 0 3 0 0
03:15 0 6 0 1
03:30 0 4 0 0
03:45 0 9 0 22 0 0 0 0 23
04:00 0 3 0 0
04:15 0 4 0 0
04:30 0 3 0 0
04:45 2 6 2 16 1 0 0 3 16
05:00 0 2 0 0
05:15 0 4 0 0
05:30 0 7 0 0
05:45 0 5 0 18 0 0 0 0 0 18
06:00 0 9 0 0
06:15 0 4 2 1
06:30 1 7 0 0
06:45 0 6 26 0 0 2 3 27
07:00 1 7 0 0
07:15 5 1 0 0
07:30 3 4 0 0
07:45 3 4 12 16 0 0 0 0 12 16
08:00 4 5 0 0
08:15 0 7 0 0
08:30 2 5 0 0
08:45 3 8 9 25 0 0 0 0 9 25
09:00 3 0 2 0
09:15 6 3 1 0
09:30 0 2 0 0
09:45 5 1 14 6 1 0 4 0 18 6
10:00 1 1 0 0
10:15 4 3 0 0
10:30 5 0 0 0
10:45 4 1 14 5 0 0 0 0 14 5
11:00 3 0 1 0
11:15 2 1 0 0
11:30 2 1 0 0
11.45 o. 0 ! 2 Q Q 1 0 ~ ;l
Total 61 196 61 196 8 3 8 3 69 199
Combined 257 257 11 11 268 Total
AM Peak 10:15 09:00
Vol. 16 4
P.H.F. 0.667 0.500
PM Peak 06:00 12:00
Vol. 26 1
P.H.F. 0.722 0.250
Percentag 23.7% 76.3% 72.7% 27.3% _e
ADT/AADT ADT268 AADT268
18
Counts Unlimited, Inc Page 1
City of Rancho Palos Verdes PO Box 1178
N/S: Chartres Drive Corona, CA 92878
EfW: Sattes Drive Phone: 951-268-6268 RPV001NS
24 Hour Entering Volume Count email: counts@countsunlimited.com Site Code: 007-14306
Start 10-Sep-14 Northbound Hour Totals Hour Totals Combined Totals
TinJQ. .W~SL M.01Nr.m Afl~.rno.011 MQJJ1if1.9 A.!t.emoon fv1ornlng. Aft~rno.~m Mo.r11lng bH.em.qqn Mprnio}J. Af!.emo9n
12:00 0 2 0 0
12:15 0 2 0 0
12:30 0 5 0 0
12:45 0 4 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 13
01:00 0 5 0 0
01:15 0 3 0 0
01:30 0 3 0 0
01:45 0 3 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 14
02:00 0 6 0 0
02:15 1 4 0 0
02:30 0 5 0 0
02:45 0 7 22 0 0 0 0 22
03:00 0 3 0 0
03:15 0 5 0 0
03:30 0 4 0 0
03:45 1 7 19 0 0 0 0 19
04:00 0 4 0 0
04:15 0 5 0 0
04:30 1 2 0 0
04:45 2 4 3 15 0 0 0 0 3 15
05:00 0 5 0 0
05:15 0 3 0 0
05:30 1 3 0 0
05:45 1 6 2 17 0 0 0 0 2 17
06:00 0 4 0 0
06:15 2 1 0 0
06:30 4 3 0 0
06:45 2 3 8 11 0 0 0 0 B 11
07:00 4 6 0 0
07:15 7 4 0 0
07:30 6 2 0 0
07:45 11 1 28 13 0 0 0 0 28 13
08:00 8 2 0 0
08:15 8 2 0 0
08:30 6 1 0 0
08:45 5 3 27 8 0 0 0 0 27 8
09:00 6 2 0 0
09;15 2 0 0 0
09:30 6 1 0 0
09:45 9 0 23 3 0 0 0 0 23 3
10:00 5 1 I 0 0
10:15 4 0 0 0
10:30 5 0 0 0
10:45 3 0 17 0 0 0 0 17
11:00 1 0 0 0
11:15 5 0 0 0
11:30 5 0 0 0
11:45 . § 9 1§ 0 Q 0 Q 0 16. 0 iolai 126 136 126 136 0 0 0 0 126 136
Combined 262 262 0 0 262 Total
AM Peak 07:30
Vol. 33
P.H.F. 0.750
PM Peak 02:00
Vol. 22
P.H.F. 0.786
Percentag 48.1% 51.9% 0.0% 0.0% e
ADT/AADT ADT 262 AADT 262
19
Counts Unlimited, Inc Page 1
City of Rancho Palos Verdes PO Box 1178
N/S: Coolheights Drive Corona, CA 92878
E/W: Floweridge Drive Phone: 951-268-6268 RPV002EW
24 Hour Entering Volume Count email: counts@countsunlimited.com Site Code: 007-14306
Start 10-Sep-14 Eastbound Hour Totals Westbound Hour Totals Combined Totals
:r1rn~. W!ld J~qrolog Alt!lm()()l1 Mgrnlrig /1(tern0Qr1 .M()ming Aftern()qn MomillfJ Afl!lff\90.Jl f\1orning .Afternoon
12:00 0 4 3 12
12:15 0 7 2 9
12:30 0 6 3 10
12:45 0 8 0 25 1 4 9 35 9 60
01:00 0 7 0 7
01:15 1 6 1 7
01:30 0 6 0 16
01:45 0 11 30 0 9 39 2 69
02:00 0 9 0 7
02:15 0 4 0 5
02:30 0 3 0 11
02:45 0 4 0 20 0 10 0 33 0 53
03:00 0 3 0 19
03:15 0 7 0 13
03:30 0 5 0 12
03:45 0 4 0 19 0 9 0 53 0 72
04:00 0 13 1 12
04:15 0 4 0 13
04:30 1 2 0 15
04:45 2 8 3 27 0 10 50 4 77
05:00 1 4 0 9
05:15 3 7 2 15
05:30 4 8 2 11
05:45 1 4 9 23 1 17 5 52 14 75
06:00 4 5 1 18
06:15 7 3 2 12
06:30 8 2 0 9
06:45 6 2 25 12 1 11 4 50 29 62
07:00 4 4 4 8
07:15 4 1 7 10
07:30 14 2 4 12
07:45 9 6 31 13 6 18 21 48 52 61
08:00 12 4 10 9
08:15 6 2 11 9
08:30 17 1 11 6
08:45 9 3 44 10 11 10 43 34 87 44
09:00 17 1 9 11
09:15 7 0 9 4
09:30 3 1 9 4
09:45 6 0 33 2 7 4 34 23 67 25
10:00 9 3 11 4
10:15 3 0 5 6
10:30 7 0 3 1
10:45 7 0 26 3 3 3 22 14 48 17
11:00 3 1 8 3
11:15 7 0 7 0
11:30 6 0 8 1
11.:4i; 5 ~.J) .... 2.1 1 7 CJ! 30 .4 51 §
Total 193 185 193 185 170 435 170 435 3tfa 620
Combined 378 378 605 605 983 Total
AM Peak 08:30 08:00
Vol. 50 43
P.H.F. 0.735 0.977
PM Peak 01:15 05:15
Vol. 32 61
P.H.F. 0.727 0.803
Percentag 51.1% 48.9% 28.1% 71.9% .. !L.
AADT9S3 ADT/AADT ADT983
20
Counts Unlimited, Inc Page 1
City of Rancho Palos Verdes PO Box 1178
N/S: Coolheights Drive Corona, CA 92878
E/W: Floweridge Drive Phone: 951-268-6268 RPV002NS
24 Hour Entering Volume Count email: counts@countsunlimited.com Site Code: 007-14306
Start 10-Sep-14 Northbound Hour Totals Hour Totals Combined Totals
Time Wed Morning Afternoon Morning Afte.rn.o.on Mmntn9 .. f\ftf)ff)()Qn M2rn111g /\fteTQ()(l11 M9mi!19 /\fl\'l[!l()()1l ·fa:oo 1 ········· 3 0 0
12:15 0 4 0 0
12:30 0 3 0 0
12:45 0 3 13 0 0 0 0 13
01:00 0 1 0 0
01:15 0 4 0 0
01:30 0 2 0 0
01:45 0 4 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 11
02:00 0 s 0 0
02:15 0 6 0 0
02:30 0 2 0 0
02:45 0 4 0 17 0 0 0 0 0 17
03:00 0 5 0 0
03:15 0 4 0 0
03:30 0 2 0 0
03:45 0 2 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 13
04:00 0 4 0 0
04:15 1 2 0 0
04:30 0 5 0 0
04:45 1 0 2 11 0 0 0 0 2 11
05:00 0 4 0 0
05:15 2 1 0 0
05:30 0 5 0 0
05:45 3 3 5 13 0 0 0 0 5 13
06:00 2 2 0 0
06:Hi 4 4 0 0
06:30 3 3 0 0
06:45 7 3 16 12 0 0 0 0 16 12
07:00 5 3 0 0
07:15 4 0 0 0
07:30 7 1 0 0
07:45 6 3 22 7 0 0 0 0 22 7
08:00 5 3 0 0
08:15 10 3 0 0
08:30 8 3 0 0
08:45 7 1 30 10 0 0 0 0 30 10
09:00 11 4 0 0
09:15 2 1 0 0
09:30 9 0 0 0
09:45 2 0 24 5 0 0 0 0 24 5
10:00 2 1 0 0
10:15 2 1 0 0
10:30 3 0 0 0
10:45 2 0 9 2 0 0 0 0 9 2
11:00 5 0 0 0
11 :15 5 0 0 0
11:30 2 0 0 0
1 t:<!§ 4 0 .. rn. •... () () () () 0 1.El. .0
Total 125 114 125 114 0 0 0 0 125 114
Combined 239 239 0 0 239 Total
AM Peak 08:15
Vol. 36
P.H.F. 0.818
PM Peak 01:30
Vol. 17
P.H.F. 0.708
Percentag 52.3% e 47.7% 0.0% 0.0%
ADT/AADT ADT.239 A.ADT239
21
Counts Unlimited, Inc Page 1
City of Rancho Palos Verdes PO Box 1178
N/S: Enrose Avenue Corona, CA 92878
EM/: Sparta Drive Phone: 951-268-6268 RPV003EW
24 Hour Entering Volume Count email: counts@countsunlimited.com Site Code: 007-14306
Start 10 11-Sep-14 Eastbound Hour Totals Hour Totals Combined Totals
Timi'! Wed .Ifl.\J Morqir19 .. NtemoQn Mornirig t\f)ernqon .Morninfl Afternoon Morning Afternoon Morning Afll)rno.o.n.
12:00 0 1 0 0
12:15 0 0 0 0
12:30 0 2 0 0
12:45 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 3
01:00 1 0 0 0
01:15 0 2 0 0
01:30 0 1 0 0
01:45 0 2 5 0 0 0 0 5
02:00 0 1 0 0
02:15 1 0 0 0
02:30 0 4 0 0
02:45 0 6 11 0 0 0 0 11
03:00 0 0 0 0
03:15 0 2 0 0
03:30 0 6 0 0
03:45 0 3 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 11
04:00 0 0 0 0
04:15 1 1 0 0
04:30 0 2 0 0
04:45 1 1 2 4 0 0 0 0 2 4
05:00 0 5 0 0
05:15 2 1 0 0
05:30 0 2 0 0
05:45 0 4 2 12 0 0 0 0 2 12
06:00 0 2 0 0
06:15 2 0 0 0
06:30 3 5 0 0
06:45 0 3 5 10 0 0 0 0 5 10
07:00 0 3 0 0
07:15 1 2 0 0
07:30 5 3 0 0
07:45 3 0 9 8 0 0 0 0 9 8
08:00 4 0 0 0
08:15 5 0 0 0
08:30 4 3 0 0
08:45 1 0 14 3 0 0 0 0 14 3
09:00 4 1 0 0
09:15 2 0 0 0
09:30 1 1 0 0
09:45 3 0 10 2 0 0 0 0 10 2
10:00 2 0 0 0
10:15 2 1 0 0
10:30 2 0 0 0
10:45 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 6
11:00 2 0 0 0
11:15 1 0 0 0
11:30 1 0 0 0
'1.1:4~ .2 0 .Jl. 0 0 0 0 0 . ft Q
Total 56 70 56 70 0 0 0 0 56 70
Combined 126 126 0 0 126 Total
AM Peak 07:30
Vol. 17
P.H.F. 0.850
PM Peak 02:45
Vol. 14
P.H.F. 0.583
Percentag
........... ~ .. 44.4% 55.6% 0.0% 0.0%
ADT/AADT ADT 126 AADT 126
22
Counts Unlimited, Inc Page 1
City of Rancho Palos Verdes PO Box 1178
NIS: Enrose Avenue Corona, CA 92878
EfW: Sparta Drive Phone: 951-268-8268 RPV003NS
24 Hour Entering Volume Count email: counts@countsunlimited.com Site Code: 007-14306
Start 10-Sep-14 Northbound Hour Totals Southbound Hour Totals Combined Totals
Time \f\lecj Mpming AIJerno,or:i M()rr~ng J\Mrnoqn Morning J\ftefn()Qn Mornir:ig . Nt!!tnoQD Mgr1Ji11g l\fternoon
12:00 0 3 0 0
12:15 0 2 0 0
12:30 0 1 0 0
12:45 0 4 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 10
01:00 1 2 0 1
01:15 0 2 0 0
01:30 0 4 0 1
01:45 0 2 10 0 1 0 3 13
02:00 0 1 0 0
02:15 2 1 0 1
02:30 0 4 0 0
02:45 1 2 3 8 0 1 0 2 3 10
03:00 1 5 0 0
03:15 0 4 0 1
03:30 0 3 0 2
03:45 0 3 15 0 0 0 3 18
04:00 0 2 0 2
04:15 0 5 1 3
04:30 0 4 0 4
04:45 0 2 0 13 1 0 2 9 2 22
05:00 1 6 0 1
05:15 0 4 0 0
05:30 0 2 0 0
05:45 0 2 14 0 2 0 3 17
06:00 1 2 0 3
06:15 0 3 0 0
06:30 0 4 1 1
06:45 2 1 3 10 3 1 4 5 7 15
07:00 0 4 2 0
07:15 0 4 0 2
07:30 3 4 0 1
07:45 1 5 4 17 0 0 2 3 6 20
08:00 1 5 1 1
08:15 6 2 0 0
08:30 4 1 2 0
08:45 4 4 15 12 2 0 5 20 13
09:00 4 1 2 1
09:15 3 3 0 0
09:30 1 1 1 1
09:45 3 0 11 5 1 1 4 3 15 8
10:00 3 1 1 1
10:15 2 2 0 0
10:30 6 1 2 0
10:45 3 0 14 4 3 0 6 20 5
11:00 2 0 1 0
11 :15 1 0 1 0
11:30 1 1 0 0
11:4§ 3. .. o. .7 ..J. 0 0 ... 2. jJ. 9 .. 1
Total 60 119 60 119 25 33 25 33 85 152
Combined 179 179 58 58 237 Total
AM Peak 08:15 10:30
Vol. 18 7
P.H.F. 0.750 0.583
PM Peak 07:15 03:45
Vol. 18 9
P.H.F. 0.750 0.563
Percentag 33.5% 66.5% 43.1% 56.9% e
AbT237
.. -·----~.-·-·---·----
ADTIAADT AADT 237
23
ATTACHMENT B
One-Way Stop Warrants
24
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
ONE-WAY STOP WARRANT
INTERSECTION: Sattes Drive & Chartres Drive
MAJOR STREET: Sattes Drive (EW) 85th %tile Speed: 30 mph DATE: 12/16/2014
~~~~__._--'~~~~~~~
MINOR STREET: Chartres Drive (NS) 85th %tile Speed: 30 mph BY: R. Smith
Required Condition/Warrant
The One-Way Stop Warrant is met if one or more of the following three conditions is satisfied:
1. One or more of the following conditions exist, indicating a YIELD or STOP sign should
be used:
a. On the minor street, the normal right-of-way rules would not be expected to provide
reasonable compliance with the law.
b. On a street entering a designated through highway or street.
c. At an unsignalized intersection in a signalized area.
2. A full stop on the minor street is necessary at all times (a YIELD sign is inappropriate)
due to one or more of the following conditions:
a. The vehicular volumes on the through street or highway exceed 6,000 vehicles /day.
b. A restricted view exists that requires road users to stop in order to adequately
observe conflicting traffic on the through street or highway.
c. Crash records indicate that three or more crashes that are susceptible to
correction by the installation of a STOP sign have been reported in a 12-month
period, or that five or more such crashes have been reported in a 2-year period.
CONDITION
SATISFIED?
YES NO
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
3. Engineering judgment indicates that a YIELD or STOP sign should be installed, based on _I _x ___ _
the consideration of each of the following:
a. Vehicular, bicycle and pedestrian volumes on all approaches ~~
b. Number and angle of approaches
c. Approach speeds
One-Way Stop Warrant Satisfied? X*
* Based on the analysis, a YIELD sign would be the appropriate traffic control device.
NOTES:
1. Traffic count data (attached) was collected on Wednesday, September 10, 2014.
2. Major street traffic volume is 268 vehicles per day (EB = 257, WB = 11 ); minor street traffic volume is 263 vpd.
3. The prima facia speed limit is 25 mph on both streets. It was assumed that the 85th percentile speed is 30 mph.
4. No traffic collisions at/near the intersection was reported by Los Angeles County Sheriffs Department in the
previous two years. One traffic collision, a right-angle collision, was unofficially reported by a resident.
5. Conditions 1.a. & 3.a.: Since the minor street approach volume is similar to that on the major street
EB approach and greater than the WB approach, it is more likely that drivers on the minor street are less
cautious when going through the intersection.
6. Since Condition 2 was not met, a YIELD sign should be installed instead of a STOP sign.
25
I
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
ONE-WAY STOP WARRANT
INTERSECTION: Floweridge Drive & Coolheights Drive
~~~~~-=-~~~~~~-=~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
MAJOR STREET: Floweridge Drrve--{-EW)
MINOR STREET: Coolheights Drive (NS)
85th %tlle Speed: 30 mph
85th %tile Speed: 30 mph
-·6ATE: 12/15/2014
Approach Volumes (veh/day):
NB= 239 SB= O EB= 378 WB= 605
Required Condition/Warrant
The One-Way Stop Warrant is met if one or more of the following three conditions is satisfied:
1. One or more of the following conditions exist, indicating a YIELD or STOP sign should
be used:
a. On the minor street, the normal right-of-way rules would not be expected to provide
reasonable compliance with the law.
b. On a street entering a designated through highway or street.
c. At an unsignalized intersection in a signalized area.
2. A full stop on the minor street is necessary at all times (a YIELD sign is inappropriate)
due to one or more of the following conditions:
BY:
a. The vehicular volumes on the through street or highway exceed 6,000 vehicles /day.
b. A restricted view exists that requires road users to stop in order to adequately
observe conflicting traffic on the through street or highway.
c. Crash records indicate that three or more crashes that are susceptible to
correction by the installation of a STOP sign have been reported in a 12-month
period, or that five or more such crashes have been reported in a 2-year period.
R. Smith
CONDITION
SATISFIED?
YES NO
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
3. Engineering judgment indicates that a YIELD or STOP sign should be installed, based on I x
the consideration of each of the following:
a. Vehicular, bicycle and pedestrian volumes on all approaches rn~
b. Number and angle of approaches
c. Approach speeds
One-Way Stop Warrant Satisfied? I X I
NOTES:
1. Traffic count data (attached) was collected on Wednesday, September 10, 2014.
2. Major street traffic volume is 983 vehicles per day; minor street traffic volume is 478 vehicles per day.
3. The prima facia speed limit is 25 mph on both streets. It was assumed that the 85th percentile speed is 30 mph.
4. One traffic collision at/near the intersection was reported by Los Angeles County Sheriffs Department in the
previous two years. It was not included since it was not a type that could be corrected by a STOP control.
5. Condition 2.b. was met due to high shrubs on private property on the west side of Coolheights Dr., that tends to
block sight distance.
6. Due to Condition 2.b., a STOP sign should be installed instead of a YIELD sign.
26
INTERSECTION:
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
ONE-WAY STOP WARRANT
North Enrose Avenue & Sparta Drive
MAJOR STREET: N. Enrose Avanue (NS) 86th %tile Speed: 30 mph----DATE: 3/17/2015
MINOR STREET: Sparta Drive (EW) 85th %tile Speed: 30 mph BY: R. Smith
---~~~---~--~~~~~~
Approach Volumes (veh/day):
NB= 179 SB= 58 EB= 126 WB= 0 CONDITION
SATISFIED?
Required Condition/Warrant YES NO
The One-Way Stop Warrant is met if one or more of the following three conditions is satisfied:
1. One or more of the following conditions exist, indicating a YIELD or STOP sign should
be used:
a. On the minor street, the normal right-of-way rules would not be expected to provide
reasonable compliance with the law.
b. On a street entering a designated through highway or street.
c. At an unsignalized intersection in a signalized area.
2. A full stop on the minor street is necessary at all times (a YIELD sign is inappropriate)
due to one or more of the following conditions:
a. The vehicular volumes on the through street or highway exceed 6,000 vehicles /day.
b. A restricted view exists that requires road users to stop in order to adequately
observe conflicting traffic on the through street or highway.
c. Crash records indicate that three or more crashes that are susceptible to
correction by the installation of a STOP sign have been reported in a 12-month
period, or that five or more such crashes have been reported in a 2-year period.
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
3. Engineering judgment indicates that a YIELD or STOP sign should be installed, based on ... I _x ____ I
the consideration of each of the following:
a. Vehicular, bicycle and pedestrian volumes on all approaches ~XX
b. Number and angle of approaches
c. Approach speeds
One-Way Stop Warrant Satisfied? I X I I
NOTES:
1. Traffic count data (attached) was collected on Wednesday, September 10, 2014.
2. Major street 2-way traffic volume is 237 vehicles per day; minor street 2-way traffic volume is 252 vehicles per day.
3. The prima facia speed limit is 25 mph on both streets. It was assumed that the 85th percentile speed is 30 mph.
4. No traffic collisions aUnear the intersection was reported by Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department in the
previous two years.
5. Conditions 2.b & 3.b. were met due to the intersection configuration -North Enrose Ave is wider south of
Sparta Dr than north. The result is an angled approach for Sparta Dr, with reduced sight distance. Also, the
houses on the west side of Enrose are set very close to the street, blocking the view of North Enrose Ave from
Sparta Dr until almost at the intersection.
6. Due to Condition 2.b., a STOP sign should be installed instead of a YIELD sign.
7. Red curb should also be installed on North Enrose Avenue to improve sight distance.
27
ATTACHMENT B
28
Melissa Countryman
From:
Sent:
To:
\..(;;
Subject:
John MacAllister <jmacallister@doradoindustries.com>
Friday, July 17, 2015 10:27 AM
Melissa Countryman
'Carol MacAllister'
RE: Traffic Safety Committee Meeting -July 27
Thank you, Melissa. Most helpful.
John
John MacAllister
Dorado Industries
310.544.1316
310.614.2523 Mobile
From: Melissa Countryman [mailto:MelissaC@rpvca.gov]
Sent: Friday, July 17, 2015 10:22 AM
To: John MacAllister
Cc: 'Carol MacAllister'
Subject: RE: Traffic Safety Committee Meeting -July 27
Dear Mr. MacAllister:
Thank you for contacting me. The resident request came from Mr. and Mrs. Rangappan of 6307 Sattes Dr, and a traffic
engineering study was performed in accordance with the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. As
stated in the letter, the full report will be posted on the City's website in advance of the Traffic Safety Committee
meeting. Please let me know if you have any additional questions.
Thank you,
Melissa Countryman
Senior Engineer
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Public Works Department
30940 Hawthorne Boulevard
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
310.544.5256
meljssac@rpyca .gov
www.rpvca.gov
WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF SWITCHING TO A NEW WEB AND EMAIL DOMAIN. IF YOU HAVE ME IN YOUR CONTACTS,
PLEASE SWITCH MY EMAIL FROM MELISSAC@RPV.COM TO MELISSAC@RPVCA.GOV
From: John MacAllister (mallto:jmacallister@doradoindustries.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2015 11:18 AM
To: Melissa Countryman
l
29
Cc: 'Carol MacAllister'
Subject: Traffic Safety Committee Meeting -July 27
Melissa,
Carol MacAllister, President of the Palos Verdes Monaco HOA, has asked that I attend the upcoming TSC meeting which
will be addressing the request for a stop or yield sign at th" f'orner of Chartres and Sattes. PVMHOA has not been party
to this request and would like to know more about who filed the application and what steps have been taken to vet the
issue. In that way, we can participate in the July 27 meeting in a more informed manner. Anything that you can forward
to us prior to the meeting would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks.
John
John MacAllister
Dorado Industries
310.544.1316
310.614.2523 Mobile
2
30
Melissa Countryman
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Hi,
Ela Heyn <elhe@cox.net>
Sunday, July 19, 2015 9:47 AM
Traffic
Stop sign at corner of Coolheight Dr.
We come up Flowerridge Dr and are cut off at the intersection again and again. Since it is a T-intersection, cars coming
out of Coolheights Dr. ,should stop,-but very few do :-( Because of this dangerous situation, it would be wise to install a
stop sign, like at the corner of Hightide. This way nobody can blame the city and others of not acting to prevent an
accident! Worth the price of a stop sign.
ETH
1
31
Melissa Countryman
From:
Sent:
To:
-Subject:
Hello,
Veena <veenarangappan@msn.com>
Monday, July 20, 2015 11:24 AM
Traffic
Yield sign on Chartres.
We live at 6307 Sattes Dr. We requested a stop sign on Chartres at the Sattes intersection a while ago. We had a few
close calls with drivers on Chartres turning left on to Sattes and almost hitting us while we were going straight on Sattes
Dr.
Thank you for now providing a yield sign at that intersection, though we still feel a stop sign would have been even
better. This will improve safety for all of us.
Sincerely,
Veena Rangappan
Sent from my iPad
1
32
Melissa Countryman
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Dear Melissa,
thebunnyl@cox.net
Tuesday, July 21, 2015 10:16 PM
Melissa Countryman
Stop sign v11 Intersection of Coolheights and Floweridge
It was a pleasure to talk to you today. As we discussed, I think it is a great idea to put in the stop sign at the intersection
of Coolheights and Floweridge. Many times the cars leaving the area do not slow down for the traffic on Floweridge. All
too often they pull out onto Floweridge without slowing down and looking. It will be much safer to have the stop sign in
place. Hopefully, they will make a complete stop and proceed when safe. It will also provide more protection for the
children, runners and walkers. Safety must come first.
Thank you.
Rochelle Krieger
Owner of the home on the corner of Floweridge and Coolheights
1
33
ATTACHMENT B
34
2nd DRAFT MINUTES
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES, CALIFORNIA
TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE
REGULAR MEETING
MONDAY, JULY 27, 2015
CALL TO ORDER: Chair Self called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. at the Rancho
Palos Verdes Community Room, 30940 Hawthorne Blvd., Rancho Palos Verdes,
California 90275.
ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Chair Self, Vice Chair Vlaco, and Committee
Members Guerin, Kramer and Ott
ABSENT: None.
ALSO PRESENT: Melissa Countryman, Senior Engineer, Nicole
Jules, Deputy Director, Public Works Department; Nadia Carrasco,
Assistant Engineer and Acting Recording Secretary, Public Works
Department; Ruth Smith, Consulting Traffic Engineer, Willdan;
Deputy John Schloegl, Sheriff Department
FLAG SALUTE: Committee Member Ott led the assembly in the Pledge of
Allegiance.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
ACTION TAKEN:
Committee Member Kramer requested that New Business item no. 2, Stop Sign
Requests for Three Locations, be moved before New Business item no. 1, due to the
number of speakers present at the meeting.
Committee Member Kramer moved to approve the Agenda as amended, seconded
by Committee Member Guerin.
Motion approved:
Ayes 5, Nays 0
CHAIR'S COMMUNICATION:
Chair Self mentioned that there will be a Mayor's breakfast meeting this coming Friday,
July 31 51 .
Traffic Safety Committee Draft Minutes
July 27, 2015
Page 1of14
35
SHERIFF'S STATUS REPORT:
Deputy Schloegl distributed two separate handouts, one being the Intersection Collision
Type Summary and the other containing the total number of collisions for each month
for the current year. He reported that there were thirty-two traffic collisions for the
month of April, thirty-one in May and twenty-seven in June. Deputy Schloegl also
indicated that the number of hazardous citations increased in June from 186 to 302 and
that he did not have a reason for that increase.
Committee Member Kramer noticed that last month Deputy Johnson was present at the
Traffic Safety Committee meeting. Deputy Schloegl stated that Deputy Johnson is on
vacation, and therefore, he had to fill-in for him tonight.
Committee Member Kramer mentioned that the feedback that they have received
concerning Deputy Johnson has been positive. He asked Deputy Schloegl what the
Sheriff's Department's perspective is regarding Deputy Johnson's enforcement in the
community. Deputy Schloegl stated that the Sheriff Department has not received any
complaints, and that although Deputy Johnson does not have as many citations as
Deputy Knox, he is certain that he eventually will.
Senior Engineer Countryman communicated that on July 13th of this year, a City
Consultant was detained, while performing field inspections, by the Sheriff Department
due to a resident's concern of suspicious activity. She also stated that the City has
taken some measures to make sure Staff and their Consultants have proper
identification with them and decal magnets placed on their vehicles with the City's logo
in order to prevent this from happening again. She also mentioned that the City would
like to continue coordinating with the Sheriff's Department, reminding them that they can
always call City Hall to verify that the contractor is working for the City.
Committee Member Kramer asked if there was a possibility for the City to notify the
Sheriff's Department of the work taking place in the field. Senior Engineer Countryman
stated that this is a possibility but did not know if that would be feasible, due to the large
amount of work performed by contractors throughout the City. She also reiterated that
the City is taking steps to provide additional identification in order to prevent this from
happening again.
Chair Self asked if the City had experienced this type of incident before. Senior
Engineer Countryman stated that she was not aware of this ever happening in the past.
Vice Chair Vlaco asked in which neighborhood this incident happened. Senior Engineer
Countryman stated that it was on the east side of the City in a neighborhood off of
Western Avenue.
Deputy Director Jules asked Deputy Schloegl about an incident involving an ambulance
on Palos Verdes Drive West and at the Point Vicente Interpretive Center a couple of
Traffic Safety Committee Draft Minutes
July 27, 2015
Page 2of14
36
weeks ago. Deputy Schloegl stated that the ambulance was crossing the intersection
when exiting the Interpretive Center, and that it had failed to yield to the oncoming traffic
on Palos Verdes Drive West, causing a vehicle traveling on Palos Verdes Drive West to
clip the rear end of the ambulance, which then rolled over. He also stated that no one
was injured during the incident. Deputy Director Jules asked if the ambulance driver
wanted to turn left onto Palos Verdes Drive West as it was coming out of the Interpretive
Center. Deputy Schloegl stated that that was correct.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
None.
NEW BUSINESS:
2. STOP SIGN REQUESTS FOR THREE LOCATIONS
Recommendation:
Consider recommendation of the installation of:
(1) Stop sign traffic control on Coolheights Drive at Floweridge Drive
(2) Stop sign traffic control on Sparta Drive at N. Enrose Avenue
(3) Yield sign traffic control on Chartres Drive at Sattes Drive
(4) 20 feet of red curb on N. Enrose Avenue north of Sparta Drive and 20 feet
of red curb on N. Enrose Avenue south of Sparta Drive
Senior Engineer Countryman proceeded to give a brief history of the item. She
indicated that the City received three separate requests from the community for a Stop
sign at various locations in the City, and therefore, Staff decided to combine the
requests into one report and one traffic study. She also stated that Staff went out to the
field to do some preliminary investigations and then contacted the consultant, Willdan
Engineering, to perform further investigations and to check conformance with the
California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD) for placing a Stop
sign at each location. Senior Engineer Countryman proceeded to introduce Consulting
Traffic Engineer, Ruth Smith, with Willdan Engineering, who had a presentation for the
Committee regarding this item.
Consulting Traffic Engineer Smith stated that the locations for the study took place on
Chartres Drive at Sattes Drives, on Coolheights Drive at Floweridge Drive, and on
Sparta Drive at Enrose Avenue. She also stated that two-way traffic volume data was
collected for a 24-hour period on each of the streets at each intersection, and traffic
collision data from April 2012 to March 2014 for each location was obtained from the
Sheriff Department. She indicated that there were no official traffic collisions reported
that could have been corrected by a Stop sign, but that there was an unofficial traffic
collision reported by one of the residents on Sattes Dr. that was noted for the study
purposes. Consulting Traffic Engineer Smith explained that the analysis was based on
the CA MUTCD requirements, which consider both Stop and Yield signs. She stated
Traffic Safety Committee Draft Minutes
July 27, 2015
Page 3of14
37
that these requirements indicate that a less controlling option, such as a Yield sign,
should be considered first, if this option is sufficient for that particular case. She also
mentioned that there are cases where a Stop sign should be used, such as when there
is a high volume of vehicles, a high number of collisions, or if vehicles need to come to
a full stop in order to have adequate sight distance.
Consulting Traffic Engineer Smith stated that a Stop sign at Coolheights Dr. at
Floweridge Dr. meets the warrant requirements due to the sight distance limitations.
She mentioned that a Yield sign is not appropriate at this particular intersection, since a
full stop is required in order to see the oncoming traffic, and therefore, a Stop sign is
recommended at this location.
Consulting Traffic Engineer Smith proceeded to present the next case, Sparta Dr. at
Enrose Ave., where she stated that a Stop sign is recommended at this intersection as
well, due to the sight distance limitations on Sparta Drive and due to the need to come
to a full stop. She also recommended that twenty feet of red curb be added on both
sides of Enrose Ave. at Sparta Dr., in order to increase the sight distance at this
intersection.
Consulting Traffic Engineer Smith stated that the recommendation for Chartres Dr. at
Sattes Dr. is to install a Yield sign. She explained that the traffic collisions and sight
distance conditions are not met for a Stop sign, but that it does meet warrants for a
Yield sign, since the traffic volumes on both streets are the same and thus it can be
unclear who has the right of way.
Committee Discussion and Staff Questions
Committee Member Guerin commented that he visited all three intersections to observe
the traffic. He stated that he spent about 30 minutes at Sparta Dr. and Enrose Ave. and
that his observation was that a tree that is too bushy on Enrose Ave. limits visibility from
Sparta Dr. He also stated that he believes that this tree is in the City's public right-of-
way and therefore he would like to see if it could be trimmed. Committee Member
Guerin added that he also noticed that drivers on Sparta Dr. would pass through the
intersection so fast and that some drivers did not even look.
Committee Member Ott asked why a Yield sign is necessary on Chartres Dr. instead of
on Sattes Dr. Consulting Traffic Engineer Smith explained that major streets are
through streets and that collector streets sometimes are considered through streets,
and that it is the law for all vehicles on a side street that come to a through street to
yield. She added that, in this case, Sattes Drive is considered the through street.
Committee Member Kramer asked if the CA MUTCD dictates how far the sight distance
should be or if it is up to the engineer. Consulting Traffic Engineer Smith responded
that it is up to the judgment of the engineer, who may reference the sight distance
layouts of the state manuals to figure out the sight distance, based on the speed and
Traffic Safety Committee Draft Minutes
July 27, 2015
Page 4of14
38
length of the road. In this case, she opted for checking the field conditions rather than
doing the sight distance layout.
Committee Member Guerin asked Deputy Schloegl if the California Vehicle Code
dictated that when in a T-intersection, the driver's speed should not exceed 15 mph and
that the vehicle should yield the right of way -the same as when driving in an alley or
when crossing a railroad track. Deputy Schloegl responded that he believes that is
correct. He added that at an uncontrolled intersection, whoever arrives first has the
right of way, and that the speed limit in a residential area is 25 mph.
Chair Self asked if the unreported collision on Chartres Drive was from a resident in the
area. Senior Engineer Countryman responded that the unofficial reported collision was
from the resident at 6307 Sattes Dr.
Committee Member Guerin mentioned that there is a hedge on Floweridge Dr. that
blocks the view of Coolheights traffic. Consulting Traffic Engineer Smith concurred.
Committee Member Kramer asked why this intersection does not have the same
conditions as the other T-intersections. Senior Engineer Countryman responded that
there is a Stop sign at the intersection of Floweridge Dr. and Hightide Dr, and the other
intersection, Eaglehaven, is a short cul-de-sac street. Consulting Traffic Engineer Smith
explained that unless there is a collision problem at a T-intersection, a Stop sign is
usually not placed in residential areas, due to the low volume of vehicles and the low
travel speeds.
Chair Self Opened the Public Hearing.
Betty Riedman
Ms. Riedman distributed some photographs of the intersection to the Committee and
stated that she lives on Cliffsite Dr. She mentioned that Floweridge Dr. is a small street
that has five streets feeding into it, and that only one of these streets, Hightide Dr., has
a Stop sign, which she feels often gets disregarded and needs to be enforced. Ms.
Riedman stated that she is against the placing of a Stop sign at Coolheights Dr. and
Floweridge Dr., since she has never been aware of any accidents at that intersection.
She explained that she feels that her photos show a good line of sight in both directions
when stopping at Coolheights Dr. to turn onto Floweridge Dr. She added that if people
were to drive and stop as they should when arriving at the intersection, there would not
be a problem. She concluded by mentioning that the problem she sees is that people
do not stop at the intersection of Ganado Dr. and Floweridge Dr and that she would be
okay with a Yield sign being placed at the intersection of Coolheights Dr. at Floweridge
Dr.
Bob Nelson
Mr. Nelson stated that, although he is a member of the Planning Commission, he is
instead representing his son tonight, who lives at the end of Enrose Ave. He explained
Traffic Safety Committee Draft Minutes
July 27, 2015
Page 5of14
39
that his son, Robert, is in favor of the Stop sign on Sparta Dr. at Enrose Ave., since
Robert has commented to Mr. Nelson that on several occasions he has barely missed
collisions at that intersection. Mr. Nelson added that his son also stated that people
coming down from Sparta Dr., when going towards Caddington Dr., do not stop, and
therefore, his son is in favor of placing a Stop sign at this location as a safety measure
for the community.
John MacAllister
Mr. MacAllister stated that he is the treasurer of the Monaco HOA, which includes 300
homes. He stated that he is speaking in favor of the Chartres Dr. and Sattes Dr. Yield
sign and also commented that by placing a Yield sign here, this intersection would bring
it up to standard with other similar T-intersections in the neighborhood. He added that
people are moving at a good rate of speed through this intersection and that he feels it
will bring a certain level of safety.
Chair Self Closed the Public Hearing.
Discussion ensued among the Committee members.
ACTION TAKEN:
Committee Member Kramer moved to reject Staff's recommendation for
implementation of a Stop sign on Coolheights at Floweridge and recommended
the implementation of a Yield sign there instead, as well as to accept Staff's
recommendation to implement a Stop sign on Sparta Drive at Enrose and 20 feet
of red curb north and south of Sparta Drive on Enrose Avenue and the Yield sign
on Chartres Drive at Sattes Drive, seconded by Committee Member Ott.
Discussion ensued among the Committee members and Committee Member Guerin
requested that a separate motion be made for each location.
Committee Member Kramer withdrew his motion.
Committee Member Kramer moved to reject Staff's recommendation for
implementation of a Stop sign on Coolheights Drive at Floweridge Drive and
recommended the implementation of a Yield sign there instead, seconded by
Committee Member Ott.
Discussion ensued among the Committee members.
Chair Self asked for roll call votes.
Motion approved:
Committee Member Guerin: Nay
Committee Member Kramer: Aye
Traffic Safety Committee Draft Minutes
July 27, 2015
Page 6of14
40
Committee Member Ott: Aye
Vice Chair Vlaco: Aye
Chair Self: Aye
Committee Member Kramer moved to accept Staff's recommendation to
implement a Stop sign on Sparta Drive at Enrose Avenue and red curb 20 feet
north and south of Sparta Drive on Enrose Avenue, seconded by Vice Chair
Via co.
Motion approved:
Committee Member Guerin: Aye
Committee Member Kramer: Aye
Committee Member Ott: Aye
Vice Chair Vlaco: Aye
Chair Self: Aye
Committee Member Kramer moved to accept Staff's recommendation to
implement a Yield sign on Chartres Drive at Sattes Drive, seconded by Committee
Member Ott.
Motion approved:
Committee Member Guerin: Nay
Committee Member Kramer: Aye
Committee Member Ott: Aye
Vice Chair Vlaco: Aye
Chair Self: Aye
1. WESTERN AVENUE IMPROVEMENTS
Recommendation:
Review and provide feedback on the Draft Western Avenue Design Guidelines
and identify a "Preferred Option" for the Street Improvement section as a
recommendation that will be forwarded to the City Council for final review and
approval.
Deputy Director Jules gave a brief explanation of the process the Western Avenue
Design Guidelines have gone through and will continue to go through. She mentioned
that these guidelines have been presented to the Planning Commission. She also
stated that the creation of such guidelines have been the collective effort of the City of
Rancho Palos Verdes, the City of Los Angeles, CalTrans, and stakeholders, including
business owners, residents and other interested parties. Deputy Director Jules
explained that within these guidelines the corridor was divided into three separate
segments (northern, middle and southern). She also stated that, although the entire
guidelines package had been distributed to the Committee, the only portion that was
going to be covered tonight was the portion that proposes improvements within the
Traffic Safety Committee Draft Minutes
July 27, 2015
Page 7of14
41
public right-of-way. She indicated that the public right-of-way, which includes the
sidewalk, parkway, and roadway, is from the edge of the east side of the private
property on one side of the road to the edge of the west side of the private property.
Deputy Director Jules reiterated that the purpose of tonight's meeting is to evaluate the
options recommended, from a traffic safety point of view, and to come up with a
preferred option to be forwarded to the City Council. She proceeded to present all of
the options recommended.
Deputy Director Jules explained that Option A does not include bike lanes, reduces the
existing travel lane widths by a foot or two in order to improve the medians by adding
trees and landscaping, retains the existing on-street parking, adds parkway planting,
takes the existing utilities underground, adds lighting to the street and pedestrian areas,
and maintains fifteen-foot-wide sidewalks.
Deputy Director Jules then provided the details for Option B, which included a slight
reduction in travel lane widths, improved medians, maintaining the existing on-street
parking, the addition of Class A bike lanes on each side of the road adjacent to the
travel lanes, landscaped parkway, the addition of street and pedestrian lighting,
underground utilities, and fifteen-foot-wide sidewalks.
Option C -Hybrid, as described by Deputy Director Jules, consists of the reduction of
travel lane widths, improved medians with landscaping and trees, accommodating a
cycle track (outside of the roadway and adjacent to the parkway) on each side of the
road, on-street parking, and adding curb extensions (bulb-outs) to accommodate
landscape. She reiterated that the main difference between Option B and Option C is
the placement of the bike lanes: Option B places the cyclist between the travel lanes
and the on-street parking, and Option C takes the cyclist off the roadway and places
them in a protected area within the parkway.
Deputy Director Jules explained that Option Dis essentially the same as Option C, with
the difference that Option D has a protected, two-way cycle track on one side of the
roadway, no on-street parking on the roadside where the cycle track would be placed,
and no curb extension on either side of the road.
Deputy Director Jules concluded by stating that multi-use corridors are being pushed for
and that accommodating for pedestrians, bicyclists, and vehicles within the public right-
of-way is the new design standard.
Committee Discussion and Staff Questions
Committee Member Kramer commented that Option D, in his opinion, is the worst
option, for he believes that this option brings a lot of unintended consequences. He
explained that this option currently exists in the City of Redondo Beach, where he
observed that vehicles are getting confused when coming out of the driveway and have
driven into the bike track. He stated that the City of Redondo Beach later put some tall
poles in the middle of the bi-directional bike track to discourage vehicles from driving on
Traffic Safety Committee Draft Minutes
July 27, 2015
Page 8of14
42
it, which then caused a hazardous situation for the cyclists. Committee Member Kramer
explained that in that same area, the road configuration has the bike lanes placed
adjacent to a median, followed by on-street parking, and then the travel lanes. He
stated that he noticed that vehicles wishing to enter a driveway have limited visibility,
since the vehicles parked on the street block the view of the bike track, which forces
vehicles to stop before the bike lanes and end up blocking the traffic on both sides of
the road. Committee Member Kramer also commented that, in his experience, he has
noticed that the bicycle lanes get narrow when they are placed next to each other,
which causes a lot of head-on bicycle collisions. He reiterated that this option is his
least favorite. He also added that in some places, the bike lanes are placed where the
gutter joins the road, which creates a hazardous situation for the bicycles when their
tires could end up in that joint. He also mentioned that it is very difficult for the cyclists
to cross an intersection with this type of configuration.
Committee Member Kramer commented that Option C has the same conflicts as Option
D, especially at every driveway where there is limited visibility due to the vehicles
parked on the street and the vegetation.
Committee Member Kramer stated that he agrees with Deputy Director Jules when she
stated that Option B presents a conflict when the vehicles' doors are opened and block
the bike lanes, which forces the cyclists to move closer to the vehicle travel lanes. He
also mentioned that his biggest concern is that, in general, Western Avenue is not a flat
street and that bikes will go fast downhill, which will create a dangerous situation if
parked vehicles open their doors in front of them. He added that the bike lane users will
not be children nor people in beach cruisers, but rather recreational and avid cyclists.
Committee Member Kramer stated that he is not in favor of any of the bike solutions for
the reasons above mentioned, and therefore, his preferred option is Option A, and
Option B is his second preferred option.
Chair Self stated that his first option is Option A and that Option B is his second
selection, for he believes it is the safest choice for the bicyclists.
Committee Member Ott commented that initially his first option was Option D, but after
listening to Committee Member Kramer's comments, he believes that Option A is the
best choice, followed by Option B as his second choice.
Committee Member Guerin commented that he prefers Option D, since he likes the
dedicated right-of-way and believes that it is safer for the cyclists on Western Avenue.
He selected Option Bas his second preferred option.
Vice Chair Vlaco stated that her preferred option is Option A. She also commented that
she is making a second choice only because it has been asked from the Committee to
select two options, and therefore her second choice is Option D.
ACTION TAKEN:
Traffic Safety Committee Draft Minutes
July 27, 2015
Page 9of14
43
Deputy Director Jules proceeded to summarize the Committee's selection for the
Western Avenue Corridor Options, stating that the general consensus of the
Committee is Option A as their preferred option and the Committee agreed.
Deputy Director Jules stated that due to the Committee's understanding of the
process and political will, the majority of the Committee has opted to choose
Option B as their second preferred option, and the Committee agreed.
Chair Self added that the reason for choosing Option A is due to the type of cyclists that
would be engaged with the Western Avenue traffic, which will likely be the avid cyclists.
Chair Self Opened the Public Hearing.
Bob Nelson
Mr. Nelson stated that he is speaking as a member of the Planning Commission and on
behalf of the Planning Commission, and that the Commission did not approve Option D,
despite the comment shown on Option D of the guidelines presented. He stated that he
will take his comments to the Commission tomorrow night regarding the Los Angeles
and CalTrans participation, since he has not seen anything in writing proving that. He
also mentioned that what they had discussed at the Commission meeting is that the City
is to remove graffiti, trim trees, and clean the streets in this area. Mr. Nelson also stated
that one of the problems they will face is the land use along Western Avenue, since
there are no height restrictions on the Los Angeles side, compared to the forty-foot
height limitation for the City of Rancho Palos Verdes side. Mr. Nelson reiterated that
the Commission did not like any of the options presented, and that they did not approve
Option D, despite what the Consultant says and the written statement in the document
presented tonight. He stated that this item will be seen again on August 11 1h and that
the audience will include Los Angeles City Councilmember Buscaino and Rancho Palos
Verdes City Manager, Doug Willmore, and welcomed the Traffic Safety Committee
members to attend. He also mentioned that he has thirteen pages of comments on
Western Avenue from the Commission for the first review. Mr. Nelson explained that
after that, it will appear before the City Council on September 151h. He also asked Chair
Self about a traffic study that was mentioned at the Mayor's breakfast that needs to be
done for this project.
Chair Self asked Staff about a traffic study for this project and Deputy Director Jules
responded that at this "high level," a traffic study is not needed, since the design
guidelines are at a conceptual, or visionary, stage. She also added that there was a
traffic study performed for the Ponte Vista project, and for the corridor operational
improvements in 2007. She also mentioned that she has not been informed if a traffic
study will be performed for this project and who would pay for it. Deputy Director Jules
added that she believes that a traffic study will be needed and warranted at some point,
but not necessarily at this level. She stated that once the interested parties agree on
how the vision plan is going to look, then a traffic study will be needed to look at the
numbers, such as traffic volumes and speeds, and to see how it will work, operationally.
Traffic Safety Committee Draft Minutes
July 27, 2015
Page 10of14
44
Vice Chair Vlaco commented that looking at this, and seeing how the Council
responded to the Parks Master Plan Improvements, it seems to her that these are grand
visions beyond what anyone thought they were going to be getting. Deputy Director
Jules responded that the City Council has expressed their desire to maintain the
existing infrastructure along the corridor.
Chair Self Closed the Public Hearing.
COMMITTEE MEMBER ORAL REPORTS
None.
INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
1. Residential Streets Rehabilitation Project -Areas 1, 58, and 9
Senior Engineer Countryman stated that this project is coming to an end and that the
contractor is going through the punch-list items, which includes re-doing slurry
application at a few locations, signage installation, and street-sweeping in some areas.
Committee Member Kramer asked if this program is in an eight-year cycle. Senior
Engineer Countryman responded that it is intended to be a seven-year cycle.
Committee Member Kramer asked what cycle the program is on. Senior Engineer
Countryman replied that it varies by area, since some areas needed to be divided into
two areas due to budget constraints, but that the goal is to get back to the seven-year
cycle.
2. Del Cerro Area Parking Issues Update
Senior Engineer Countryman mentioned that the City is currently working on ordering
the materials needed to implement the permit parking programs in the three
neighborhoods, such as the signs and parking decals. She also stated that the main
goal is to have everything ready before making any changes on Crenshaw Blvd., in
order to avoid any parking "spillover" into the neighborhoods.
Committee Member Guerin asked if the installation of the signs and decals will come
before re-striping the road. Senior Engineer Countryman replied that yes, for the area
that includes the Del Cerro HOA, Valley View Rd. or Countryside HOA, and Island View
neighborhoods, those are the first steps to start the process.
Committee Member Guerin asked if this would be completed by December. Senior
Engineer Countryman responded that it would be before that, and perhaps as soon as
in three weeks or so. Deputy Director Jules added that at the most it would be a month,
since the design plans and stripers are ready, and the City is working with the
community to put the program in place. Deputy Director Jules also mentioned that the
Traffic Safety Committee Draft Minutes
July 27, 2015
Page 11 of 14
45
only thing that might delay the program would be if the permit signs were not in-stock,
but otherwise, the signs will be put in place and the decals will be issued. Senior
Engineer Countryman added that there will be a lag time before enforcing the program
in order to make sure that the public has been given ample time to be made aware of
the new permit parking program in place.
3. Channelview Court Parking Issues Update
Senior Engineer Countryman stated that this item is expected to go before the City
Council on August 4th for consideration and that the City Attorney is currently reviewing
the Staff Report. Senior Engineer Countryman added that the City has started to
receive comments on both sides of the issue, since this item has been publicly noticed.
Committee Member Guerin asked if the Coastal Commission had to approve the permit
parking program. Senior Engineer Countryman responded that, no, the City Council
has the authority to implement the program, and the only issue would be that if a protest
is received, then the Coastal Commission could possibly appeal the program to have it
removed entirely or have modifications made to it.
Committee Member Guerin also asked if the program would go through if no complaints
were received. Senior Engineer Countryman responded that, yes it would, if that is
what the Council chooses to do.
Committee Member Kramer asked if there were any public comments not in favor of the
program. Senior Engineer Countryman responded that, yes, there were. Committee
Member Kramer asked if the comments were from residents and Senior Engineer
Countryman responded that, yes, they were.
4. Subcommittees/School Liaison Reports
None.
5. July 4th Independence Day Celebration
Chair Self asked who from the Committee attended the 4th of July celebration.
Committee Member Kramer and Vice Chair Vlaco responded that they attended.
Deputy Director Jules added that Committee Member Ott was at the event all day.
Committee Member Ott shared that the "Drive 25 mph" blue yard signs were very
popular. Deputy Director Jules also suggested that the Committee consider creating a
new slogan and little favors or souvenirs to encourage the public to visit the
Committee's booth at the next Whale of a Day event to inform them about traffic safety.
Vice Chair Vlaco mentioned that the little EDCO trash cans and the quiz at the Public
Works counter attracted a lot of people.· Deputy Director Jules suggested having a "spin
wheel" with various categories to ask the public about, and whether they answer
correctly or not, they would still get a gift. Vice Chair Vlaco commented that the prizes
brought a lot of attention amongst adults and kids.
Traffic Safety Committee Draft Minutes
July 27, 2015
Page 12of14
46
Committee Member Kramer asked about the Miraleste Dr. resurfacing project. Deputy
Director Jules responded that the goal is to start the design in the next couple of months
in order for it to be in construction in the summer of 2016. She also stated that, unlike
Palos Verdes Drive East, this should be a straightforward design that will include
grinding and overlay, maintaining the on-street parking, and taking care of the
sidewalks. She explained that the medians will remain, and that traffic operations at the
intersection of Miraleste Dr. and Palos Verdes Drive East will be looked at for
improvement. She added that there will be a new crossing guard at Miraleste Dr. and
Palos Verdes Drive East by the Fire Station starting in September, in order to assist
students in crossing the street safely in big groups and to help prevent traffic from
backing up on Palos Verdes Drive East.
Committee Member Kramer asked where the funding is coming from to pay for the
crossing guard. Deputy Director Jules responded that it is coming from the City's traffic
budget.
Vice Chair Vlaco asked if the crossing guard was only for the afternoon time period.
Deputy Director Jules replied that the crossing guard will be there in the mornings and
in the afternoons, but that this could be modified, since the contract allows for it to be
changed, depending on the current needs.
Committee Member Kramer asked about the bots dots on Miraleste Dr. Deputy Director
Jules responded that the goal is to remove them, but that the City needs to hear from
the community first. Committee Member Kramer asked if the item was going to be
brought to the Committee. Deputy Director Jules replied that, yes, it would.
Committee Member Kramer asked about the sharrows on Palos Verdes Drive East.
Deputy Director Jules responded that new stencils are being ordered because the
public was having a difficult time identifying the old markings. Committee Member
Kramer asked if thermoplastic is going to be used. Deputy Director Jules replied that,
no, thermoplastic is not going to be used and that the markings might be paint, or
perhaps a different type of plastic, that will not be slippery when wet. Committee
Member Kramer also asked if there was funding for that. Deputy Director Jules stated
that, yes, there is, and that there are some other equestrian-related items pending as
well.
Committee Member Kramer congratulated Staff for the work performed at the
intersection of Palos Verdes Drive East and La Vista Verde.
Deputy Director Jules updated the Committee about the drinking fountain at the
intersection of Palos Verdes Drive South and Palos Verdes Drive East. She stated that
the improvements, including the installation of the fountain, bike rack, and bench, will be
installed within the next couple of weeks.
Traffic Safety Committee Draft Minutes
July 27, 2015
Page 13of14
47
FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS:
(This section of the agenda is designated for individual Committee Members to
request that an item be placed on a future TSC meeting agenda)
A. Palos Verdes Drive South Traffic Study Update
B. School Crossing Guard Requests for Three Locations
C. Forrestal Traffic Calming (AYSO)
D. Traffic Control Impact (25th Street@ Anchovy)
Senior Engineer Countryman stated that all of the future agenda items are in the works
and that it will be determined which items will be presented first, depending on the
timing of the preparations needed.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Committee Member Guerin stated that there was a typo in the June 22, 2015 meeting
minutes on page seven, last paragraph: the word "understating" should be changed to
the word "understanding."
ACTION TAKEN:
Committee Member Kramer moved to approve the minutes of June 22, 2015 as
amended, seconded by Vice Chair Vlaco.
Motion approved:
Ayes 5, Nays 0
Committee Discussion and Staff Questions
Committee Member Kramer commented on the temporary traffic control on Hawthorne
Blvd. near Rolling Hills Rd. in the City of Torrance needed for the construction going on
there and asked how this type of construction and traffic impact is handled in the City of
Rancho Palos Verdes. Deputy Director Jules explained that since Hawthorne Blvd. is an
arterial roadway, the applicant would have to submit a traffic control plan for review and
approval, and pay a fee for an encroachment permit, but that she could not speak for
how this is handled in other cities.
Committee Member Guerin asked about the status of restricting left-turns coming out of
the Point Vicente Interpretive Center and Senior Engineer Countryman responded that
that is being included as part of the Palos Verdes Drive South corridor improvements
that will be taken to City Council for consideration.
ADJOURNMENT: Meeting adjourned at 9:52 p.m. to the next meeting of the Traffic
Safety Committee on August 24, 2015.
Traffic Safety Committee Draft Minutes
July 27, 2015
Page 14of14
48
ATTACHMENT C
49
Melissa Countryman
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
FYI
KitFox,AICP
Citt) of Rancho Palos Verdes
(310) ~J44-5226
Id tf@'(pVCLl.f\OV
Kit Fox
Wednesday, September 30, 2015 4:36 PM
Melissa Countryman; Nicole Jules
FW: Question -Coolheights & Floweridge
WE ARE IN PROCESS OF SWITCHING TO A NEW WEB AND EMAIL DOMAIN. IF YOU HAVE ME IN YOUR CONTACTS,
PLEASE SWITCH MY EMAIL FROM l<ITF@RPV.COM TO l<ITF@RPVCA.GOV.
From: Steve Katz [mailto:stevekatz74@yahoo.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 3:30 PM
To: Brian Campbell <brian.campbell@rpvca.gov.com>; CC <CC@rpvca.gov>; Joel Rojas <JoelR@rpvca.gov>
Subject: Fw: Question
This is a dangerous intersection. People are blissfully
unaware & uncaring about vehicles proceeding toward
Ganado uphill from Seaglen, Seaclaire, & Hightide. I had a
near miss last week, & the car didn't even slow down. A
"Yield" sign will have no effect. In fact there are STOP
signs on Ganado in both directions @ Floweridge which are
disregard-
ed constantly -they know there is no enforce-
ment. At least, if there is an accident, running a STOP sign
will assist in filing an insurance claim. There is a STOP sign
@ Hightide, which for the most part is observed, & the
intersec-
tions are similar.
Colonel Stephen E. Katz
USAF -retired.
50
@ Seaglen Drive since 1972.
On Wednesday, September 30, 2015 12:51 PM, Melissa Countryman <MelissaC@rpvca.gov> wrote:
Good afternoon Colonel Katz:
Thank you for contacting the City for an update on this item and I am sorry to hear of your recent close call at this
intersection. At its meeting held at the end of July, the Traffic Safety Committee recommended that a Yield sign be
placed at this intersection instead of a Stop sign, and so this item has been placed 011 the tentative agenda for the City
Council review at their upcoming meeting on October 20111 • Please let me know if you have any additional questions or
concerns.
Thank you,
Melissa Countryman
Senior Engineer
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Public Works Department
30940 Hawthorne Boulevard
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
310.544.5256
1n£.!1Jis<1 <;.@rnYg.\L.ill!.Y
w~w.r~0gov
WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF SWITCHING TO A NEW WEB AND EMAIL DOMAIN. IF YOU HAVE ME
IN YOUR CONTACTS, PLEASE SWITCH MY EMAIL FROM MELISSAC<@RPV.COM TO
M l~LISSACfa)RPVCA.GOV
From: Nicole Jules
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 8:34 AM
To: Steve Katz
Cc: Melissa Countryman
Subject: RE: Question
Greetings Colonel Katz,
Thank you for your email.
Melissa Countryman, Senior Engineer in our department, is handling the stop sign request in your neighborhood. I have
copied her on my response to you and she can give you an update on the status of the request.
Have a good day.
Nicole
Department of Public Works
310-544-5275
2
51
From: Steve Katz [mailto:stcvckatz74(iilyal100.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 8:02 PM
To: Nicole Jules <Nic9lc.[@rpvca.gov>
Subject: Question
Good day. Perhaps you can forward this to the right person to respond. I
recall that placing a STOP SIGN@ the intersection of Cool Heights &
Floweridge was under consideration. I almost got clobbered the other day
by someone who neither slowed down or looked
for traffic heading up toward Ganado. Is that still under consideration? It's
needed.
Thanks & regards,
Steve I(atz
3553 Seaglen Drive
3
52
Melissa Countryman
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
pacific < pacificgrounds@hotmail.com>
Wednesday, July 29, 2015 12:43 PM
Melissa Countryman
RE: Stop sign opposition Floweridge & Coolheights
Thanks for forwarding my comment. It's really a no brainer-people can figure out to yield or stop, etc. Again-
there has been zero accidents there. The people have been making it work for at least 15 years that I have
lived there. It's not rocket science. My little bit of view is precious and very important for our property value. A
ugly stop sign right in line with our view would be very un-appealing.
Now, there IS one thing that you people can actually do to make things safer and likely save someones life.
Let's focus on this:
The switch backs going down P.V Dr East from Ganado on down are ABSOLUTELY OUT OF CONTROL!!!!!!!! The
street racers OWN that stretch of road in the middle of the night. I am often up late at night, and it sounds like
a race track back there. I ride that road on by bicycle every day, and daily-there is new skid marks, and pieces
of car plastic, etc from cars getting out of control. These guys are wrecking the guardrails and curbing and
laying ugly burn out marks all over the road surface. THIS IS A MAJOR MAJOR PROBLEM!!! One night we were
coming home late from a function, and some idiot racing down Dr East was WAY over the centerline at high
speed. A little sooner and we would have been hit head on. THIS HAS TO STOP!!!!! Some innocent person is
going to get killed back there-its just a matter of time. These guys haul A** back there!! And to boot-this
activity also brings riff-raff people around the area-and the potential for crime. Along the turn outs going
down Dr East-especially the one at the top-I always see evidence of drug use. I have seen many sharps, pill
bottles, liquor containers, etc. Why has the City turned a blind eye to this? I have talked to the Sheriffs, and
they dont have the manpower to properly police that area. And besides, the street racers post look outs at the
top and bottom of Dr East -so if the cops do come by-the racers are tipped off. The Sheriffs have to start
thinking "outside the box" in how they police this area. My business is in law enforcement (equipment
supplier)-and I could easily devise a plan to catch these guys in the act. its so simple that it hurts. If you would
like me to plan a way to tag these guys, let me know. There's many ways to defeat this problem. Pressure has
to come from the City council. This is a crisis.
So, instead of placing a useless sign at my home that will negatively affect our view, lets tackle a REAL problem
that WILL save someones life.
Again, let me know if you would like my assistance.
Sincerely,
Tim Valot
310-534-4070
From: MelissaC@rpvca.gov
To: pacificgrounds@hotmail.com; Traffic@rpvca.gov
Subject: RE: Stop sign opposition Floweridge & Coolheights
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2015 18:59:48 +0000
1
53
Dear Mr. Valot:
Thank you for providing your comments. The Traffic Safety Committee recommended the installation of a Yield sign at
this intersection at its meeting last Monday night. Your comments will be included when this item is presented to City
Council for consideration. Please feel free to contact me if you have any additional questions or concerns.
Thank you,
Melissa Countryman
Senior Engineer
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Public Works Department
30940 Hawthorne Boulevard
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
310.544.5256
J:l.l~tll:;;SCJ_<:;__@JJ).1{(£,.9911
WWVl,IJ]2YJ;_i:).,9QY
WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF SWITCHING TO A NEW WEB AND EMAIL DOMAIN. IF YOU HAVE ME IN YOUR CONTACTS,
PLEASE SWITCH MY EMAIL FROM IVlELISSAC@RPV.COM TO MELISSAC@RPVCA.GOV
From: pacific [mailto:pacificgrounds@hotmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 10:35 AM
To: Traffic
Subject: Stop sign opposition Floweridge & Coolheights
From: pacificgrounds@hotmail.com
To: raffic@rpvca.gov
Subject: Stop sign opposition Floweridge & Coolheights
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2015 10:32:56 -0700
Hello, I am sorry for being late, I was out of country. This email is in firm opposition to the idea of placing a
stop sign on front of my house at 31211 Floweridge Dr. R.P.V. See attached photo taken from my living room
sofa. The proposed stop sign would be placed directly in line with what precious little view that we have. (see
attached pie from our living room) We cant have any more view obstructed as it will affect our property value.
We have lived there for 15 years and have never seen a traffic accident at this intersection. A stop sign is NOT
required here by any stretch of the imagination. Furthermore, placing a stop sign here will actually INCREASE
both noise and pollution for us. Cars travelling UP Floweridge will have to accelerate after stopping a the sigh-
thus increasing both pollution and noise. There are many contractors (like myself) who live in this area and
they drive diesel powered pickup trucks. These trucks are very noisy, especially on acceleration, AND
addiionally, they create much more diesel soot and pollution as they accelerate-especially considering they
will still have cold engines. And the same applies to the down hill traffic, just a bit less. And lastly, to boot, the
stop sign would be placed right in the parkway of my house that I have planted with pristine putting green
grass. All in all, this is a REALLY BAD idea. If it's not broke, DON'T FIX IT!
2
54
Sincerely,
Tim Valot
31211 Floweridge Dr.
R.P.V, Ca. 90275
310-534-4070
3
55