HomeMy WebLinkAboutRPT 6 17TH ST TRAFFIC 09-06-88TO:
WILLIAM HUSTON, CITY MANAGER
FROM:
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT/ENGINEERING DIVISION
.
.
SUBJECT: SEVENTEENTH STREET TRAFFIC CONCERNS, RTE. 55 FREEWAY
TO YORBA STREET (NORTH)
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive and file.
BACKGROUND:
At a previous City Council meeting, Mrs. Helen Edgar raised a concern
regarding the traffic conditions along Seventeenth Street between the
Route 55 Freeway and Yorba Street (North), particularly the left
movements into Mimi's Restaurant from eastbound Seventeenth Street.
A copy of the City's Consultant Traffic Engineer's report is attached
for the Council's reference.
DISCUSSION:
As indicated in the report, Staff is proceeding with the following three
recommendations to enhance driver recognition of the restrictive
controls within the areas of concern:
le
At the driveway entrance/exit to and from Mimi's Restaurant, it
is proposed to upgrade certain signing and replace the 8" diameter
traffic signal lenses with 12" diameter lenses.
·
Continue the evaluation of the northbound Rte. 55 on-ramp with
respect to its geometrics and the ramp metering. The evaluation
should be completed about mid-September 1988. These findings will
be forwarded at that time.
·
Placement of "Do Not Block Intersection" signs and corresponding
pavement legends for westbound Seventeenth Street traffic at the
Mimi's Restaurant driveway.
These proposed modifications in item nos. 1 and 3 above can be
accomplished within the normal operating budget of the Public Works
Department with no supplemental budgeting of funds being required.
Bob Ledendecker
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
BL:mv
Mr. Bob Ledendecker
August 24, 1988
Page Two
In spite of the above, it is important to note that with the
exception of the freeway on-ramp and the new metering ~ys-
rem, the subject location along 17th Street provides good
service to existing traffic. Moreover, it should be recog-
nized that there are over 41.000 vehicles per day in the
vicinity of the subject location. Therefore, from a com-
parison of those high volumes to only 4 accidents in 1987
and 7 accidents in 1988 (to August), it is our conclusion
that significant changes to existing conditions should not
be implemented. While we can do little to control the be-
havior of a driver and his decision to disregard a red sig-
nal indication (mentioned in your memo), the decision not to
make further improvements includes any changes that would
attempt to control illegal left turns into Mimi's driveway.
To verify our conclusion, we reviewed all signs, striping,
pavement markings and signals between the freeway and Pros-
pect. Although a few signs are recommended to enhance driver
recognition of restrictive controls (those recommendations
provided below), we find no significant deficiencies in the
areas' existing operational control. Please note that this
includes the signal which controls eastbound left turns into
Mimi's from 17th Street. While we did consider moving a sig-
nal to the median island (the signal mounted on the east
side of the Mimi's driveway which governs eastbound, left
turns), this would create a non-standard situation causing
more problems than it would solve (if any).
Recommendations
Our recommendations for the area are three-fold. The first
concerns signing and signal "indication" improvements at the
-Mimi's driveway (the size of the signal's lenses), the
second involves a more thorough review of the ramp problem,
and the third includes the addition of "Do Not Block Inter-
section" signs and pavement legends.
At the Mimi's driveway, the controls which restrict outbound
left turns will be enhanced with signing that is easier to
recognize by the drivers (i.e. large international "Right
Turn Only" signs). To better define the control of eastbound
left turns into Mimi's driveway, the 8" red signal indica-
tion located on the east side of the driveway will be
increased to 12 inches.
Mr. Robert Ledendecker
August 24, 1988
Page Three
The problem at the northbound 55 ramp has not yet been fully
defined. Although we already know that its affects are some-
times detrimental 'to 17th Street traffic, we still need to
work with Caltrans to develop a more permanent solution. We
intend to determine the exact queue lengths during both the
morning and the afternoon peak hours. With this information
in hand, Caltrans can be presented with a definitive' des-
cription of the affect that their system has had on 17th
Street. They can also be presented with a request to miti-
gate the situation. We will have the evaluation completed
within two weeks. If significant and re-occurring problems
are indeed discovered, we will keep you informed as to our
discussions with Caltrans.
Please note that one interim improvement that will be imple-
mented now involves the placement of westbound "Do Not Block
Intersection" signs along with pavement legends reading the
same as the signs (placed along 17th Street at the Mimits
driveway intersection). Since most drivers are aware of the
new law restricting intersection blockages, we expect that
the above combination will be successful in keeping the in-
tersection open for left turns.
ADDITIONAL PARKING ALONG FIRST STREET
Your memorandum indicated the a City Council member
requested staff to review the feasibility of providing more
on-street parking on the south side of First Street west of
Centennial Way. This would be done through the selective
removal of existing red zones.
Please note that from our review of the area, there are no
red zones along this stretch of roadway that could be
removed and used for curb parking. Aside from a very short
red zone on the southwest corner of First and Centennial
(barely 10 feet), a short red zone on either side of the
post office driveway (recommended to remain), and a fairly
long red zone in front of 200 First Street (the southeast
corner of First and Prospect), all other curb areas are
fully available for curb parking. Our conclusion is that no
additional curb parking can be provided along this stretch
of First Street. Could there be a possibility that the wrong
location was described by the Council member?