Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout15 RESTRICT TRAFFIC 11-15-99AGENDAI'- NO. 15 11-15-99 in t e r-C o m DATE: NOVEMBER 15, 1999 TO: WILLIAM A. HUSTON, CITY MANAGER FROM: PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT/ENGINEERINGDIVISION CONSIDERATION OF PETITION TO RESTRICT VEHICULAR THROUGH- $UBdECT: TRAFFIC USAGE OF PUBLIC ALLEY NORTH OF FIRST STREET BETWEEN "B" AND "C" STREETS SUMMARY A review of the traffic conditions in the alley and results of a public meeting with area residents and business owners find that it is in the best interest of the public to continue to allow vehicular usage of the subject public alley. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council maintain existing vehicular access in the subject alley to promote efficient neighborhood traffic circulation and provide for emergency access. FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact to the City related to the preparation of this report. BACKGROUND Since 1992. nearby residents have expressed concerns that the presence of vehicular traffic within the alley is causing a dangerous situation for pedestrians using the alley and creating a nuisance for residents living adjacent to the alley. The alley is located north of First Street between "B" and "C" Streets as shown on the attached exhibit. The subject fifteen-foot wide alley was created by Tract Map No. 338 in October 1922. At that time the alley sen'ed as vehicular and pedestrian access to the rear of residential properties that backed-up to the alley, and also provided alternative emergency access between "B" and "C" Streets. In January 1955. the residential property along First Street was rezoned for commercial/retail uses. In 1962, a public sewer was installed in the alley approximately two and one-half feet north of the centerline of the alley and remains in service today. In October and November 1992. the Public Works Department met with a resident at 125 North "B'? Street regarding various alley issues including: Noise generated by the adjacent commercial/retail property, excessive vehicular speeding, trash overflowing or left outside of the trash bin near the alley, lack of visibility when driving in the alley, damage to trees and shrubs by the City's waste hauler, and the waste hauler using "B" Street as a haul route between First Street and h-vine Boulevard. In 1993. the traffic issues relating to the aforementioned complaint were addressed by the Engineering Division and the current signs and pavement markings were installed. Consideration of Petition to Restrict Vehicular Through-Traffic Usage of Public Alley North of First Street between "B" and "C" Streets November 15, 1999 Page 2 In October 1998, the City received a petition (Attachment "A") requesting the closure of the public alley located north of First Street, between "B" and "C" Streets to motorized through-traffic. The petition was signed by forty- two residents representing twenty-four households, primarily located on "B" Street, north of First Street. In response to receiving the petition, the Public Works Department conducted a public meeting on August 17, 1999, at the Tustin Senior Center. Invitations for the meeting were sent to all residents on both "B" and "C" Streets north of First Street, the resident on Lockwood Park Place who signed the original petition, and the business proprietors on First Street, who could be affected by closure of the alley. The meeting was attended by eight persons representing residents of"B" Street and the business proprietors on First Street. The intent of the public meeting was to allow residents and business proprietors the opportunity to discuss the issues related to the alley closure in an effort to arrive at a mutual solution. However, it became apparent at the meeting that consensus could not be reached due to the opposing views of the "B" Street residents and the business proprietors. At the meeting the City representatives were presented a petition (Attachment "B") of thirty-one signatures including residents on "C" Street and the business proprietors on First Street requesting that the subject alley remain open to vehicular traffic. The meeting concluded without reaching agreement. The partial closure of the alley to vehicular traffic was reviewed by the City Attorney's office, which indicated there is no legal restrictions to prevent the City from closing the alley to vehicular through traffic. A copy of the City Attorney's Memo of May 24, 1999 is attached (Attachment "C"). DISCUSSION A. Traffic Conditions: City records were researched back to 1992 for information regarding traffic conditions within the alley. Since 1992, there have been no accidents and there have been no citations issued related to the alley. The current vehicular traffic utilizing the alley is twenty vehicles per day. B. Alternatives: The following alternatives have been investigated to address the requests in the aforementioned petitions: Alternative 1. Installation of Bollards in the Middle of the Alley. This would close the alley to all vehicular access and would create private drives over a publicly maintained asphalt access for two residents, at 125 "B" and 124 "C" Streets. Emergency access through the alley would be eliminated. However, pedestrian and bicycle access would be retained. Currently, "C" Street is a dead-end street and the alley serves as emergency access if First Street becomes blocked. There have been occasions in the past when through streets have been closed for long periods of time to local traffic due to emergencies. Consideration of Petition to Restrict Vehicular Through-Traffic Usage of Public Alley North of First Street between "B" and "C" Streets November 15, 1999 Page 3 Ce The City's waste hauler would be required to back out of the alley thereby creating a potential safety hazard due to restricted sight distance It is the intent of the adjacent property owners that the City would continue to maintain the alley pavement, striping, and signing. Alternative 2. Abandoning the Alley. The alley could be abandoned and the land would be returned to the adjacent property owners (one-halfto the commercial/retailproperty owners and the other one-half to the two residential property owners at 125 "B" and 124 "C" Streets). An easement would need to be recorded for the existing sewer on the residential properties since it is currently installed on the northern one-half of the alley. The easement would include building restrictions on the property within the area of the easement to guarantee access to the sewer. This would eliminate any public access and emergency access through the alley. Environmental documentationmay be needed to address the emergency access issues associated with closure. Trash service for the commercial businesses adjacent to the alley would need to be relocated to the business parking lot. Alternative 3. Retain Alley As Is. This would retain the existing access conditions in the subject alley. Current traffic signs and pavement markings would remain the same. It is anticipated that traffic conditions would also remain the same. Analysis: The following issues appear to be the major points of controversy among the various parties: 1. The residents on "B" Street, and particularly the resident adjacent to the alley are requesting closure of the alley due to concerns of traffic safety, noise from the traffic, and the waste haulers process of trash pickup within the alley. 2. The residents on "C" Street are requesting the alley to be left open for emergency access and general access to and from "C" Street to "B" Street. 3. The business proprietors are requesting the alley to remain open due to concerns that closure would shift alley traffic to their driveway and parking lot as an alternative to alley access. Closure would also alter the waster haulers procedure of trash pickup possibly forcing trash trucks to back out of the alley creating a safety issue. Consideration of Petition to Restrict Vehicular Through-Traffic Usage of Public Alley North of First Street between "B" and "C" Streets November 15, 1999 Page 4 CONCLUSION The alley issue has been ongoing since 1992. Since that time there have been several conversations with both the business proprietors on First Street and a resident on "B" Street adjacent to the alley regarding .vehicular access through the subject alley. Based upon the recent submittal of petitions and a public workshop, it is apparent that a mutual solution cannot be reached. Staff has re-reviewed the historical and current conditions at the alley location and has determined that the existing traffic signing and pavement markings are appropriate for current traffic usage of the alley. It is therefore recommended that the City Council retain the existing access conditions at this time due to findings that vehicular access is necessary for emergency response through the alley and there is not a traffic accident problem at this location. Tim~ ~ Director of Public Works/City Engineer Douglas~. ,~nderson Senior Project Manager-Transportation TDS:DA:Council:Alley North of First St.doc. Attachments %~ ~ 14741 ~OSELEAF AV. ' ' 177 l 173 [ 160 165 I 158 __ 163 t 150 151 I 148 140 :45 I 138 143 I 130 1~5 i 174C0 175 I 178 173 [ 170 165 [ 168 163 ! 160 155 I 158 Ill 149 I 150 135 [ 136 129 130 · WLLA VI EN TO · APTS. 345 MILLER DR. ~ ,,ql,,qJ,,ql~l~l~l~ ~ ~j~ ~ ~ ~ i SYCAtdORE j MAONOUA ~ ~ PLAZA P~ZA 17671 17731 BOULEVARD 17667.' t 173 I 170 155 J 158 153 j 150 L ORANGEWOOD L.N. Ill. 120. LOCKWOOD PARK PL. STREET -'/ I 1 ( SUBJECT ALLEY Re: PETITIO? ) THE CITY OF TUSk ATTACHMENT CALIFORNIA PUBLIC ALLEY RUNNING ONE-WAY FROM "C" TO "B" STREETS, NORTH OF FIRST STREET BE IT KNOWN that we, the undersigned residents of Tustin, in the interest of the public health, safety, and welfare. herein declare our concerns regarding the above-referenced public alley: ' · 1. The alley is habitually used by motorists well in excess of the posted 15 mile per hour speed 1/mit. 2. The alley is frequently used by motorists traveling in the w~-ong direction and also at excessive speeds. 3. Motorists habitually exit the alley, at either end, without stopping; without watching for pedestr/ans or other non-motorists; and otherwise use the alley without exercising any manner of due caution or regard for other users. - The number of very voung children residina and r~laving in the immediate viciniw of the alley has increased siardficantlv in recent times. The number of children crossing and using the allev going to and from school is so2i_onificant. THESE CI-I~DREN ARE CONSTANTLY EXPOSED TO EXCEPTIONAL A.NrD UNDO 5. Generally, the number of non-motorists of ali ages using and crossing the alley is significant. 6. Because the alley is habitually used as an unnecessary shortcut, the volume of vehicular traffic in and the manner of use of the alley are beyond that originally intended. 7. The alley, as cur(ently used, imposes excessive and undo hazard and inconvenience, and other burdens upon the residents of the properties abutting the alley ' THEREFORE, we, the undersigned, believe that_because of the habitual reck/ess and unlawful manner of usc, continued usage of the subject alley as an unnecessary shortcut presents a significant and constant threat to the public health,, safety,, and weffare, articularlv in re,ard to the children residing in the immediate nei~borhood. ACCORDI2qGLY, we hereby petition the Ciff of Tustin to close said alley to motorized thro ~ugh-traffic by installing a partial barrier,, and to that end, respectfully request that the City of Tustin conduct a public hearing. ' Respectfully subrn/tted this~ th day of c¥_.m,~ ~,, 1998 with/--/'2 attached signatures. NAME ADDKES_ S 12q IU, C ~'-,-. /5-o ,,¢/ ,f · IXJO~"r~ Page 1 of.~ PETITION TO THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA Re; PUBLIC ALLEY RUNNING ONE-WAY FROM "C" TO "B" STREETS, NORTH OF FIRST STREET NAME 8. ~~c~~. ~ ~/,/ 5" "', . 26. ,'~, 1~ ADDRESS /,q-:-. ¢- )/by ,/2 "' , /Mz/ ,~. . 3'2. C lq, Is,g 4/ ~ 57'5 Page 2 of ~ PETITION 7 THE CITY OF TUSTF 2ALIFORNIA PUBLIC ALLEY RUNN~G ONE-WAY FROM "C" TO "B" STREETS, NORTH OF FIRST STREET 28. 29. 30. ADD._____~S S 41. 42. 43. /?0 ! 44. 45. 46. 47. Page 3 of .~ ATTACHMENT Petition to the City of Tustin UUi AU¢ 161999 L... I t J TUSTIN PUBLIC WORKS D~:,,. · Re: Regarding the partial closure of an alley to vehicular traffic (P.W. File No 1093) We, the undersigned residents, corporate citizens and merchants of Tustin, in the interest of public health, safety, and welfare hereby declare our concerns regarding the above reference partial closure of the alley between B and C Street. 1. The alley is a necessary safe route for people who live on C Street to get around without risking their lives to cross the busy First Street. 2. Closure of the alley will increase through traffic in the parking lot that abutting the alley and will create the hazardous condition for people who are using the parking lot. 3. The direction of the one-way alley is unfunctional for people who live on C Street. If the one,way direction can be changed to go from B to C Street, that will make it more practical and safer for people who use it. 4. School children encounter great danger while crossing First Street without the signal light assistance. Therefore, we, undersigned, believe that because of the i~practical one-way direction of the alley and without the signal light assistance on the'intersection of First Street, £ and C Street present, s a grave threat to the public health safety and welfare. Accordingly, we hereby petition the city of Tustin to keep the alley open for vehicular traffic and change the direction of the one-way alley to go from B to C Street. Also the city should install the two traffic signal lights on intersection of First Street andB Street, and on First Street and C Street, to mitigate the problem and protect our children. Respectfully submitted this[ (2klay of August, 1999 with~oI attached signatures. NAME Petition to the City of Tustin Re:' Regarding the partial closure of an alley to vehicular traffic (P.W. File No 1093) NAME ADDRESS ! ,, Page 2 of Petition to the City of Tustin Re: Regarding the partial closure of an alley to vehicular traffic (P.W. File No 1093) 25. ~~ · 26. ~~~~'~~ ~'~ 32. 33. ADDRESS 34. 35. 36. 37. ' 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. Paoe-3 of LAW OFFICES OF WOODRUFF~ SPRADLIN &" A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIO RT MEMORANDUM ATTACHMENT C DIRECT DIAL: (714) 564-2607 DIRECT FAX: (714) 565-2507 E-MAIL: LEJ@WSS-LAW.COM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works, City Engineer City of Tustin City Attorney May 24, 1999 Partial Closure of Alley to Vehicular Traffic This is to memorialize our conversation and to belatedly respond to your memo dated November 2, 1998. In our opinion there is no legal problem with the City closing the alley to vehicular through traffic by means of a partial barrier, such as bollards. This is similar to cul-de-sacing a street in mid-block which is frequently done. Since you are not selectively closing the street to non-residents and you are not vacating the street, there are no special procedures required by law to undertake this process. However, we recommend that all of 'the affected persons, i.e. those who live or own property or businesses along the alley and those persons who have signed the petition, be given notice of the details of your proposal and an opportunity to be heard. You can do this at the Council meeting where the Council will consider authorizing this action, or you could provide a noticed opportunity be heard prior to the Council meeting, at a hearing conducted by yourself. The idea' is to make sure that the City has everybody's thoughts on this, and if there are any objections, to understand the nature of those objections. From a legal standpoint the City Council should be concerned if owners, residents, or businesses believe their rights of access will be substantially harmed. Please let me know if you have any questions. LOIS E. JEFFRE~ //// i5 CC: Dana R. Kasdan, Engineering Services Manager Doug Anderson, Senior Project Manager Jerry Otteson, Associate Civil Engineer Bob Stachelski, Consultant- Willdan 105281\1