Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTSC Packet 01-14-2010CITY OF SARATOGA TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION AGENDA DATE: January 14, 2010 TIME: 6:30 PM - 9:30 PM LOCATION: Administrative Conference Room 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA 95070 Call to Order Roll Call: Biester, Bustamante, Coulter, Guichard, Kane, Kirk, and Vita Report on Posting of the Agenda: Pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on January 8, 2010. Accept Agenda Items: No additional items may be added pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2. Election of new Chair and Vice Chair Oral & Written Communication Any member of the public may address the Commission about any matter not on the agenda for this meeting for up to three minutes. Commissioners may not comment on the matter but may choose to place the topic on a future agenda. Approval of Draft Minutes Draft Traffic Safety Commission Minutes for November 12, 2009 Sheriff's Report to the Commission Old Business 1. Traffic Matrix #239 - Ray Cosyn Issue: Concerns with intersection at Herriman & Saratoga Avenue Action: TSC will make recommendation 2. Traffic Matrix #233 - Mike Ziegel Issue: Review of crosswalk implementation on Kirkbrook at Kirkmont and Carol Lane Action: TSC will make a recommendation New Business 3. Traffic Matrix #242 - Barbara Stock Issue: Speeding on Sobey Road Action: TSC will make recommendation 4. Traffic Matrix #244 - Don Schmedik Issue: Concerns with speed limits on Quito Road Action: TSC will make recommendation 5. Traffic Matrix #245 - Larry & Lisa Pott Issue: Speeding on Mendelsohn Action: TSC will make recommendation Announcements by Commissioners and Staff Adjournment to Next Regular Meeting Thursday, March 11, 2010 In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you are a disabled person and you need a disability - related modification or accommodation to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 408.868.1269 or ctderk@saratoga.ca.us Requests must be made as early as possible and at least one full business day before the start of the meeting. In accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act, copies of material provided to the Traffic Safety Commission by City staff in connection with this agenda are available at the office of the Public Works Department at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, California 95070. Any materials distributed by staff after the posting of the agenda are made available for public review at the Public Works office at the time they are distributed to the Traffic Safety Commission. Certificate of Posting of Agenda: I, Kristin Borel, Public Works Analyst for the City of Saratoga, declare that the foregoing agenda for the meeting of the Traffic Safety Commission of the City of Saratoga was posted on January 8, 2010 at the office of the City of Saratoga, 13777 Fruitvale Ave., Saratoga, CA 95070 and was available for public review at that location. The agenda is also available on the City's website at www.saratoga.ca.us. CITY OF SARATOGA TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION Draft Action Minutes DATE: November 12, 2009 TIME: 6:30 PM - 9:30 PM LOCATION: Administrative Conference Room 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA 95070 Call to Order at 6:30 p.m. Roll Call: Biester, Bustamante, Coulter, Guichard, Kane, Kirk, and Vita Absent: Biester Staff: Traffic Planner Church and Analyst Borel Report on Posting of the Agenda: Pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on November 5, 2009. Borel reports Accept Agenda Items: No additional items may be added pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2. No changes Oral & Written Communication Any member of the public may address the Commission about any matter not on the agenda for this meeting for up to three minutes. Commissioners may not comment on the matter but may choose to place the topic on a future agenda. No speakers Approval of Draft Minutes Draft Traffic Safety Commission Minutes for September 10, 2009. APPROVED 6-0 Sheriff's Report to the Commission (6:35 p.m.) Lt. Shervington reports New Business 1. Traffic Matrix #239 - Ray Cosyn (6:40 p.m.) Issue: Concerns with intersection at Herriman & Saratoga Avenue Action: TSC will make recommendation MOTION: Request that the Traffic Engineer review comments and present options at the next meeting. APPROVED 6-0 MOTION: Request that the Traffic Engineer bring volume and speed data for Saratoga Avenue near Herriman Avenue. APPROVED 6-0 2. Traffic Matrix #240 - Shanthi Jayadev (7:15 p.m.) Issue: Safety issues on Dagmar Action: TSC will make recommendation MOTION: Recommend extending the shoulder stripe on Dagmar as a guide to the cars entering from Saratoga Avenue. APPROVED 6-0 MOTION: Investigate the development of a 90° turn from northbound Saratoga onto Dagmar. APPROVED 6-0 MOTION: Recommend that that the Public Work Department work with the residents to address other concerns. APPROVED 6-0 3. Traffic Matrix #241 - Dan Marshall (8:10 p.m.) Issue: Safety issues on Old Wood Road Action: TSC will make recommendation MOTION: Recommend that the vegetation around the No Parking signs be cleared back. APPROVED 6-0 MOTION: Recommend that the parking be restricted (Monday -Friday 8:00 am - 4:00 pm) on the east side of Old Wood Road starting the current end of the No Parking area and traveling south to the end of Dan Marshall's property (14270 Old Wood Road). APPROVED 5-0-1 Bustamante abstained. 4. Election of new Chair and Vice Chair (6.40 p.m.) Bustamante elected Chair and Kirk Vice Chair 5. Discussion of Homeowners Association process (8:50 p.m.) Commission will address safety issue first and if necessary representation second Announcements by Commissioners and Staff o Update on Cox Avenue speed bump - installation November 19th o Update on Herriman Avenue - summary of City Council meeting o Update on Oak Street Task Force - summary of Public meeting o Calendar for 2010 - change TSC meeting date on November 12, 2010 (Veteran's Day) to November 4, 2010 Adjournment to the next Regular Meeting at 9:15 p.m. Thursday, January 14, 2010 In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you are a disabled person and you need a disability - related modification or accommodation to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 408.868.1269 or etclerk@saratoga.ca.us Requests must be made as early as possible and at least one full business day before the start of the meeting. In accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act, copies of material provided to the Traffic Safety Commission by City staff in connection with this agenda are available at the office of the Public Works Department at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, California 95070. Any materials distributed by staff after the posting of the agenda are made available for public review at the Public Works office at the time they are distributed to the Traffic Safety Commission. Certificate of Posting of Agenda: I, Kristin Borel, Public Works Analyst for the City of Saratoga, declare that the foregoing agenda for the meeting of the Traffic Safety Commission of the City of Saratoga was posted on November 5, 2009 at the office of the City of Saratoga, 13777 Fruitvale Ave., Saratoga, CA 95070 and was available for public review at that location. The agenda is also available on the City's website at www.saratoga.ca.us. Public Works Department MEMO TO: Traffic Safety Commission FROM: Kristin Borel DATE: January 14, 2009 RE: Traffic Matrix #233 The TSC approved a crosswalk on the south side of Kirkbrook Drive at Kirkmont in March 2009. When the City hired contractor was out to paint the crosswalk, some of the neighbors contacted the City to question the installation. The City put the job on hold and asked Fehr & Peers go out and conduct a count of students at each of the crossings on Kirkbrook. We are asking the TSC to reevaluate their decision with new data and input from the residents on Kirkbrook who are opposed to the new crosswalk and from one neighbor who wants the crosswalk at Carol Lane removed. Carol Lane (....... fi(0) 0 (0) k- a�� k7 (3) Kirkmont Drive Kirkdale Drive * 38 Manilla Drive irkbrook Drive Knollwood Drive LEGEND: *t X (Y) = AM (PM) Pedestrian Volumes 111111111 = Crosswalk N Not to Scale fp FEHR & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS December 2009 1025-446 Kirkbrook Crosswalks Blue Hills Elementary School Peak -Hour Pedestrian Counts on Kirkbrook Drive (October 2009) Figure 1 23 September 2009 12226 Kirkbrook Drive Saratoga, CA 95070-3204 Mr. John Cherbone Director, Public Works City of Saratoga, CA 95070 Dear Mr. Cherbone: I am writing to you concerning the installment of a new cross walk at the intersection of Kirkmont and Kirkbrook Drive. The city crew arrived to paint the cross walk yesterday. I asked what authorized this and they could not tell me, except they had a work order for the effort. I called Mr. Torres office and left a message. Later in the day I did get a call from his office and was given the details regarding the cross walk approvals. Due to my questions and concerns the effort was delayed until Monday, September 28, 2009. This was due to Ms Kristin Borel who approved this cross walk returns from her vacation. It is my understanding that this cross walk was approved in March 2009 by the City Safety Committee. Neither I nor any other resident on Kirkbrook Drive received any notice of this action. I am not against this cross walk if it is for the safety of our children going to and from Blue Hills School. I am concerned that the location of the cross walk will be on the intersection toward Knollwood. This location was apparently selected without an on-site review. If the cross walk is there it would put the children directly into the trees and ground cover in front of my home. If the cross walk is installed on the intersection toward Carol Lane it would be an open access to both sides of the intersection. I have enclosed pictures of intersection for your review. I would appreciate you modifying the work order to have the cross walk painted on that side of Kirkbrook Drive. Another concern for safety of our children is the sidewalks in front of Blue Hills School. If the City is so concerned for the safety of our children walking to and from school then why has no action been taken to repair them? It has been in dangerous conditions for at least 10 or more months. Your consideration to re -locate the cross walk is appreciated. Sincerely, ErneGst0Br(av i 408-257-4311 October 5, 2009 Ann and Robert Kiehl 12168 Kirkbrook Drive Saratoga, Ca. 95070 Ms. Kristen Borel City of Saratoga Subject: pedestrian crosswalks on Kirkbrook Drive The purpose of this letter is to document conversations and our concerns of the crosswalk issues on Kirkbrook Drive. On September 22, 2009 a crew was on Kirkbrook with instructions to add a crosswalk at Kirkmont and restripe the crosswalk at Carol Lane. Mr. Brookfield who lives on Kirkbrook at Kirkmont was able to get the project postponed. I explained to the crew that the crosswalk at Carol Lane was to be removed not repainted. There was no notification to any residences. Nine or ten years ago (date approximate), we attended a City Council meeting to review a proposed crosswalk on Kirkbrook Drive at Carol Lane. Two residents on Carol Lane who had Blue Hills school children were present to support the crosswalk. I was there to protest the crosswalk for the following reasons: Pedestrians would not use the crosswalk they would jaywalk anyway. Crossing a street in a crosswalk does not provide additional safety. Cars will not stop for pedestrians, even though it is the law. The crosswalk takes up parking in front of our house. We cannot park a full length vehicle in front. We cannot park in front of the mailbox, because the post office will not deliver. The crosswalk does not terminate into a sidewalk on Carol Lane. There are no sidewalks on Carol Lane. The crosswalk is in an unlikely place so it is unexpected to drivers. At the meeting we lost the battle. However, the city manager stated that the Sheriff would not ticket us for parking in the crosswalk and when the children no longer attended Blue Hills school the crosswalk would be removed, which has not happened yet. Since the crosswalk subject is on the table again, we still object for the previously stated reasons. In addition, there was an incident a couple of days ago in the North Bay where two pedestrians were seriously injured in a crosswalk. The reason the car did not stop was that the crosswalk was not in an expected location, i.e. not at a traffic light or stop sign. If crosswalks are desired on Kirkbrook, why is there none at Kirkbrook and Marilla which has a stop sign and limit marks. The existing/proposed crosswalks on Kirkbrook do not provide wheelchair access across the curb or limit lines. Crosswalks do not funnel people to the sidewalks. Check it out when people are going to Blue Hills School, Knollwood is full of people. I am enclosing pictures of my wife crossing at the crosswalk at Kirkbrook and Carol Lane. As you can see the vehicles did not stop for her. About 1 out of 10 vehicles actually stop for pedestrians. Sincerely,� Ami and Robert Kiehl Public Works Department MEMO TO: Traffic Safety Commission FROM: Kristin Borel DATE: January 14, 2009 RE: Traffic Matrix #233 I have found some background history on the Kirkbrook crosswalks that I think would helpful when assessing the review. The Public Safety Commission approved the crosswalk on Kirkbrook Drive at Carol Lane in 1998 and the decision was appealed to the City Council in 1999. I have attached the information in chronological order. BLUE HILLS SCHOOL Randy Karel, Principal CUPERTINO UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT April 28, 1998 Mr. Erman Dorsey Sr. Engineering Technician City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvaie Ave. Saratoga, CA 95070 Dear Mr. Dorsey, 12300 DeSanka Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 (408) 257-9282 (408) 368-0611 Fax Per our phone conversation last week, there is parent concern over a route to school that has become unsafe. According to the parent, approximately 20 children from Carol Lane and the surrounding area (including Natoma and Covina Courts and Merida Drive) walk this route to Blue Hills School every day as part of a safe route to school. Therefore, on their behalf, I am requesting that a school crosswalk and signs be placed at the south side of Carol Lane at the intersection with Kirkbrook Drive. Thank you for your support and attention to this matter. Randy Karel Principal cc: Mr. Larry I. Perlin Ernest A. Brookfield 12226 Kirkbrook Drive Saratoga, CA 95070 21 May 1998 Mr.Larry I. Perlin City Manager, Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Dear Mr. Perlin LL/ _1 CITY x1112. _- . UiVICE I am writing you on a matter which concerns me on an action that was taken by the city without public notice or notification. On 19 May a work team from Saratroga was starting to drill a hole on the sidewalk in front of my home. When my wife asked what were they doing she was told that they were going to install a sign to identify that a cross walk was ahead. She told the crew that we had no knowledge of this and asked them to stop. The crew lead called his supervisor and found out the "cross walk project" was put on hold and they stopped. Upon future investigation I determine that a resident living on Carol Lane had requested a cross walk at the intersection of Carol Lane and Kirkbrook Drive. Her request was her concern for the safety of her three children crossing from Carol Lane to the sidewalk on Kirkbrook Drive on their way to Blue Hills School. I have been a resident of Saratroga for over 25 years and my child and many of her friends have crossed from and to Carol Lane and Kirkmont Drive without the benefit of a cross walk at any of these intersections. The action by the city to expend limited funds for a cross walk based on one request was a surprise to me. The sidewalk on Kirkbrook Drive is for the safety of children walking to school. There are no sidewalks on any other street in our area, including Carol Lane which would require her children walking in the street to get to Kirkbrook Drive. School cross walks are at DeSanka and Kirkdale ( the end of Kirkbrook ). If this parent is concerned for the safety of her children then she should walk with them down her street to the sidewalk on Kirkbrook Drive as other parents have done for years in our area. The traffic on Kirkbrook Drive has increased due to the many additional children attending Blue Hills school. Many of these children are from the Seven Springs development and their parents drive them to and from school. I suggest that rather than place a cross walk on Kirkbrook Drive, that a speed limit sign be placed at the start and end of Kirkbrook Drive which reflects that the speed limit is 25 miles per hour, and 15 miles per hour when children are present, similar to other school areas. Also, request the Sheriff's office to patrol the street in the AM and PM hours to enforce the speed limit. These suggestions would achieve the same or better results for our children's safety (and adults) in our area and would be less costly than to establish a new cross walk. Your consideration of this request is appreciated by me and other neighbors in the area. Sincerely, Ernest A. Brookfield cc: Saratoga Public Safety Conunission Saratoga, June 2, 1998, Dear Ms. Loft, Enclosed, please find a petition to place a crosswalk and signs at Carol Lane and Kirkbrook Drive, Saratoga, signed by 61 residents of Carol Lane, Covina and Natoma Courts, Merida, Marilla and Kirkbrook Drives. We strongly believe that our children need a safe way to cross Kirkbrook Drive from Carol Lane in order to use the only existing sidewalk on Kirkbrook Drive so they can continue their walk to Blue Hills school safely. We are aware of the protest of a neighbor and his concern about losing a parking space to the crosswalk. However, we feel that the lives of our children are more important and that a possible loss of a children's life far outweighs the loss of one parking spot on a public street for one resident. The argument that there are no more cars now than 30 years ago and that there has never been a problem before may be partially true : 30 years ago parents did not need to worry to let their children walk to school all by themselves, nobody drove a car to school everybody walked. Unfortunately those times have changed. People from outside our area are in a hurry to drop off their children at school before driving on to work. We believe that SLOW signs and a crosswalk will remind them to stop for pedestrians. We hope you can agree with us, Respectfully yours, Trees .r ens. 20304 Carol Lane Saratoga, CA 95070 343-0128 Blue Hills school parent. encl. : 4 pages petition for crosswalk at Carol Lane and Kirkbrook Drive. 0 PETITION FOR CROSSWALK AT CAROL LANE AND KIRKBROOK DRIVE. YES, we would like to provide a safe route to school for the children of our neighborhood and therefoitrequest the placement of a crosswalk and signs at the intersection of Carol Lane with Kirkbrook Drive. NAME • 'DRESS SIGNATURE 4042./1 ifsaAnt. 41s11 2O3i► CARoL- vN. jn? TS o --LA1 1 141 %7-2c --- .qc, Co.iA., Woo Caw _ lith -_ _LtylAtIE alitat3 I ,CL 01‘0 lireRTS37: --- LU ,hod 67,z2-1r-Cordiqe/gg _!.0 rt - n 09_9---®moi---L.Dot. i-cetui4 tt_uNTEZ e 1- LA -A/c- )16.,-0 arro_i Az_ miaon__ abs /GI/6-5 l 46th.e. gni-- L 0 5-r&A) 04--fee.g_ILL) L_n_1121 Ll2L z__4422e Ez LLQ �C' PETITION FOR CROSSWALK AT CAROL LANE AND KIRKBROOK DRIVE. YES, we would like to provide a safe route to school for the children of our neighborhood and thereforerequest the placement of a crosswalk and signs at the intersection of Carol Lane with Kirkbrook Drive. ADDRE o2n[ L / C4-6 __" Cl xar_k _ISE_ 0-4-g pi---�� _. - Utt�_ SJ7111ee Poq-- 20 2 ] ci Cgrc nwi,. OF. VG,rckteri 2.0 10 5 C44.:c c�.�f r4.2.61- -roe* hcoL vE .ahl_ zzij.S1 2D .. 55- -tarot L LN CSC ..wr-rra'•tr". wr-r--•• T-.---rPTr-. .r. . .T^.r--Tr•T. • r .r1F^rTTr----Tr rr, ^r-rrtnrrr,'-r•Tr•r.r^rT- • PETITION FOR CROSSWALK AT CAROL LANE AND KIRKDROOK DRIVE. YES, we would like to provide a safe route to school for the children of our neighborhood and therefoitrequest thaplacement Oa crosswalk and signs at the intersection of Carol Lane with Kirkbrook Drive. �5 (rv>rbN fc X-- .e&u.Ls[ RE blirrAinAG: I A 12•) 04 (&a4rowa a- p-Int2Z4.104 (-)46-1-2 NiffreAMA- Cr e_ -- 9. xe"^ ViA t2111 tfc*cn cit PETITION FOR CROSSWALK AT CAROL LANE AND KIRKBROOK DRIVE. YES, we would like to provide a safe route to school for the children of our neighborhood and thereforrrequest the placement of a crosswalk and signs at the intersection of Carol Lane with Kirkbrook Drive. NAME ADDRESS SIGNATURE ---�- - --fi -19014% �_rz.e� to- aAb-l_eaZiez`1_3 c7 d - �" 1� Piy 2.33? Heho(& Pr-. mar J'e %3,e o w u /2_1 / / c_end A- cr- Yk/EL_ aw,tf !t1/j (,d/ 6 3`�;ML �E- CoAti ✓*- \ark ' Cochro, C-1- AVeat- A -U C,tv ea-7- S/9gfi7-0� 19 . /j 3 Jo7iirnb2 - m�I(1Tv'`b1C --- Loy trai M Vatttsitc, Rut 11 3;Voye ( Pau.( Voq Jo &/1' IM i (ler ger ! Sall Cif✓evf MA-�y C/9 1.4042--1-2E CelE � st"er T_., _ _ _ _ . MBA N/E-M/4 l/'L c rdiaec y v OAL Sn ft -t 0035Plv'iLLQ&V5r� 3 fk�n c _2_0.3_77 h 0„,: � A:* . r��a��. S«,, fad_, sae .3'33 Mtt< 3 ClP Stu fo „zzier0 4 JCl-QQE ct ..SL i.7 _4 Szaibrtra Fre (ems /+/(4 , Fed%Ljg724_eCt. Set Dc, 1`15,1Mt lacer LO • ( - sS r C YM of USC 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE • SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 • (408) 868-1200 FAX MEMORANDUM COUNCIL MEMBERS: Stan Bogosian Paul E Jacobs Gillian Moran Jim Shaw Donald L. Wolfe TO: Captain Wilson, Sheriff's Office, Westside Station FROM: Jennie Loft, Administrative Analyst/Staff to the Public Safety Commission RE: Request for Patrol and Survey DATE: June 17, 1998 At the June 11 Public Safety Commission meeting, regarding the proposed Carol Lane and Kirkbrook Dr. crosswalk near Blue Hills School item, the Commission recommended further study of other traffic implementation (possibly including a crosswalk). The Commission requested Sheriff patrol and a survey at Carol Lane and Kirkbrook Dr. now and also again in September for data comparison; the item will be reviewed again at the September PSC meeting. Please advise. If you have any questions, please call me at my temporary line (408) 868-1258. Thanks for your assistance. cc: Larry I. Perlin, City Manager Erman Dorsey, Senior Engineer Technician Public Safety Commission Printed an recycled paper. June 17, 1998 USET' ©0 0 U023 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE • SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 • (408) 868-1200 COUNCIL MEMBERS: Stan 8ogosian Paul E. Jacobs Gillian Moran Jim Shaw Donald L. Wolfe Dear Residents at Carol Lane and Kirkbrook Dr.: At the June 11 Public Safety Commission meeting, the Commission recommended City staff to review alternative traffic solutions to the proposed crosswalk (but not excluding the possibility of one during the review) at Carol Lane and Kirkbrook Dr. The plan for alternative traffic solutions at the above site includes 1) placing the radar trailer in June and again in September for data comparison for traffic volume and speed, 2) placement of Sheriffs patrol and survey request in June and again in September for data comparison, and 3) form a study group which consists of Public Safety Commissioners and the City's Senior Engineering Technician to review site and give recommendations. The Commission has requested that this item be reviewed at the September 10 Public Safety Commission meeting and that residents be invited to further discuss the issue. Further, the Commission requested that recommendations from the September meeting be implemented immediately. If you have any questions, please call me at (408) 868-1200. I hope to see you at the Public Safety Commission meeting in September. Sincerely, Jennie Hwang Loft Administrative Analyst/Support to the Public Safety Commission cc: Larry I. Perlin, City Manager Captain Wilson, Sheriff's Department, Westside Station Erman Dorsey, City Senior Engineering Technician Public Safety Commission Printed on recycled paper. County of Santa Clara Office of the Sheriff 55 West Younger Avenue San Jose, California 95110-1721 (408) 299-2101 Charles P. Gillingham Sheriff MEMORANDUM TO: Lt. Coria / FROM: Deputy K. Tarabetz #1588 t ICe SUBJECT: Traffic Survey for Kirkbrook @ Carol DATE: 10/6/98 As you requested we conducted a traffic survey in the area of Kirkbrook and Carol. Dep Stephens monitored August 4th through the 7th, prior to the opening of school. He chose the early morning hours between 0740 and 0810 hours. No citations were issued during this time frame and the vehicle count was low. DATE: 4 5 6 7 MPH: 20-25 3 4 1 5 26-30 13 15 7 11 31-35 5 4 8 6 36-40 1 0 0 1 41-45 0 0 0 0 22 23 16 23 Dep. Stephens then conducted the salve survey during the same time frame once school was in session. The dates were September 8 through the 11 between the hours of 0740 and 0810 hours. One citation was issued. The survey found that the traffic was doubled during this time frame with little increase in the higher speeds. DATE: 8 9 10 11 MPH: 20-25 23 20 16 19 26-30 19 22 25 23 31-35 0 0 1 1 36-40 0 0 1 1 41-45 1 0 0 0 44 42 43 44 I conducted random checks of the area over several days. I issued 7 citations on September 3rd. The increase of traffic in the afternoon seems to support the need for a marked cross walk, but in addition, there should be speed limit signs posted, as well as, school zone signs. There was bicycle and pedestrian traffic from the school which increases the risk to children from speeding motorists. There is a concern from one neighbor that a stop sign and cross walk would limit his ability to park in front of his residence. Board of Supervisors: Donald F. Gage, Blanca Alvarado, Pete McHugh, James T. Beall, Jr., S. Joseph Simitian County Executive: Richard Wittenberg TIME: 1540- 1430- 1700- 1530- 1640 1530 1730 1640 DAIE: 8/28 9/3 9/3 9/9 MPH: 20-25 11 8 6 3 26-30 30 56 23 24 31-35 31 55 29 25 36-40 5 8 5 4 41-45 0 2 0 0 22 23 16 23 **Note these numbers do not reflect the vehicles that passed while I was issuing a citation. RECOMMENDATION: The afternoon traffic is much heavier than the morning hour traffic. The traffic conditions reflect vehicles that pass on their way to the school then return via the same route. The pedestrian and bicycle traffic coupled with the average speeds by vehicles indicate a need for an increase in signage for the area and the addition of a yellow crosswalk at minimum. A stop sign would assist with slowing the speeds of the vehicles using Kirkbrook. To: Mayor Don Wolfe 13777 Fruitvale Ave. Saratoga, Ca. 95070 From: Robert and Ann Kiehl 12168 Kirkbrook Dr. Saratoga, Ca. 95070 October 10, 1998 Cc: Larry Perlin Subject: Marked crosswalk at Carol Lane and Kirkbrook Dr. Dear Mayor Wolfe, At the Safety Council meeting on October 8, 1998 the council decided to install the subject crosswalk in disagreement with all six of the Kirkbrook Dr. residents present at the meeting. The request for the crosswalk came from one Blue Hills school parent, who contacted the principal, Randy Karel. Ms. Karel was given the impression that many parents requested it. Wrong. (Attaclunent )A) Ms. Karel did not attend the meeting because she felt it was a neighborhood dispute, implying she was not going to be involved. The only data presented at the meeting was a traffic survey prepared by the Santa Clara County Sheriff. The survey revealed that most all people traveling on Kirkbrook exceed the 25 -mile per hour speed limit. There was no data on how many children actually crossed the street. Everyone at the meeting agreed that the traffic speed on Kirkbrook is excessive and should be reduced, children present or not. The council rejected a stop sign because they say it creates noise and air pollution and most drivers do not come to a complete stop anyway. The council also rejected speed limit signs since most drivers exceed the posted limit. The council seems to think that a marked crosswalk is a speed reducer. What will make the drivers that ignore the stop signs and speed limits, stop at a marked crosswalk? Logic like this makes no sense. It was obvious that the council had no intention of selecting a solution that was agreeable to all residents. They just wanted to close the matter. Since the crosswalk is in front of my house, I am the most concemed. Before the proposed crosswalk is installed, I would like the following: 1. Data that supports the fact that a pedestrian is safer in a marked crosswalk and that a marked crosswalk will cause a speed reduction on Kirkbrook Dr, 2. The ability for me to retain all the parking in front of my House. 3. A statement from the city that the marked crosswalk will not effect the value of my home. Therefore, if the city does install the marked crosswalk and we lose available parking in front of the house, we expect compensation from the city for this loss. (I'm sure there is a legal teen for this, if necessary, I will retain a lawyer.) Please consider this letter as an appeal, which we were told, we could do at the meeting. Further, until this matter is settled no marked crosswalk should be installed. Thank you for your attention in this matter. Sincerely, Ann and Robert Kiehl gof 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE • SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 • (408) 868-120(1 November 2, 1998 Robert and Aim Kiehl 12168 Kirkbrook Drive Saratoga, CA 95070 Dear Robert and Ann: COUNCIL VIE\II3ERti: Stan Bogasia; Pau' E. Jacoos Gdnan Moran Shan. Dcnalc L bholtr This letter is in response to your October 10'h letter to Mayor Wolfe and City Manager Perlin regarding the proposed crosswalk at Carol Lane and Kirkbrook Drive. In your letter you requested the following. 1. Data that supports the fact that a pedestrian is safer in a marked crosswalk and that a marked crosswalk will cause a speed reduction on Kirkbrook Drive. 2. The ability for you to retain all the parking in front of your house. 3. A statement from the City that the marked crosswalk will not affect the value of your home. In response to your first request relative to pedestrian safety and speed reduction, you must understand that crosswalks are not speed control devices. Rather, when properly located and marked, crosswalks alert motorists that pedestrians cross the street at these marked locations. This is especially true for school crosswalks, and the applicable traffic warrants are based on this premise. When the City Traffic Engineer investigated this issue, these warrants were used to determine that the proposed location was the best location at which to install the marked crosswalk. The Santa Clara County Sheriff's report recommended, at a minimum, the installation of the crosswalk as well. Your second request, that you should be able to retain all parking in front of your house, is an understandable concern, but is something which cannot be guaranteed should the crosswalk be installed. Inevitably, such an installation might indeed interfere with the ability to park directly in front of your home. In these circumstances, the City must balance the individual desires of property owners with the broader public safety needs of the Community. Thirdly, the City is in no position to render an opinion about how the value of your home might be affected by the installation of this crosswalk. Instead you may wish to consult Printed en recycled paper. an independent appraiser about this. Please remember that the initial request for a crosswalk was made because of a potentially dangerous situation which exists for school children walking to and from Blue Hills Elementary school. I suppose the elimination of this danger could increase the value of your property. Lastly, you asked that the City consider your letter to be an appeal to the City Council of the decision made by the Public Safety Commission on October 8h. While you are entitled to appeal the Commission's decision to the City Council, such appeals must conform to the procedures contained in Municipal Code Section 2-05.030 (attached): • All appellants must fill out an Appeal Application (attached). • All appellants must pay the applicable fee (see attached excerpt from the City's Fee Schedule), in this instance (an appeal to the City Council without a public hearing), the fee would be $100.00. Per the Municipal Code section referenced above, you have 15 days from receipt of this letter to file your appeal form and fee if you still wish to file an appeal of the decision. Once received by the City Clerk, your appeal will be scheduled for the next available City Council agenda for their review. If you have any questions or need clarification of any information provided, please do not hesitate to contact me at (408) 868-1221. Pete onda Administrative Analyst Office of the City Manager cc: Larry I. Perlin, City Manager Erman Dorsey, Assistant Engineer Public Safety Commission Date Received: g/2-00/0 Hearing Date: /Z/(t, / ff fribo, oa Fee: Receipt No.: 4/441C)7 // APPEAL APPLICATION Name of Appellant: Wod er7" f/2n h TeX /2/6.8 /l 'rkircok Dr- Scare 7 & Telephone: 9`6, 2S3 9,598 Address: Name of Applicant (if different from Appellant: Project File Number and Address: Decision Being Appealed: Crosswe,,`/C, ou Cc ro//a,nc 4n J kt r4rod k Dr- /u L)1 S4 to & Con,"3 iss, art o / /279 /eolcie 40+h ?eke c0 wk c ticcd Milt- ber 2f /279 Grounds for Appeal (letter may be attached): / CA' c{y C44 -16N.- a CO.0Sii-74" 1 ,'/ !ewes / ' or �C/ :S c,ib4. ,✓ien /—c/ l/ joc,i-1 /Jo/ Ca+7siClr✓C� c_aa ////z/r8 *Appellant's Signature Check. $ C28y 1/00 *Please do not sign until application is presented at City offices. If you wish specific people to be notified of this appeal, please list them on a separate sheet. THIS APPLICATION MUST BE SUBMITTED BY 5:00 P.M. WITHIN FIFTEEN (15) CALENDAR DAYS OF THE DATE OF THE DECISION. Mn of L-• • C. 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE • SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 • (408) 868-1200 November 20, 1998 Mr. And Mrs. Robert Kiehl 12168 Kirkbrook Dr. Saratoga CA 95070 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Kiehl: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Stan Sogostan Paul E. Jacobs Gillian Moran Jim Shaw Donald L. Wolle We have received your application for an appeal of the approval of a crosswalk at Carol Lane and Kirkbrook Drive. We have also received your check in the amount of $100.00 for the appeal. This matter has been set for the City Council meeting of December 16, 1998. It will be considered as an item of New Business. Enclosed is a copy of the Council's Public Participation Policy, which explains the procedure for speaking on items of New Business. The official deadline for submitting any additional materials on your appeal is Thursday, December 10. If you wish to submit written documents after 5:00 p.m. on that date, please provide ten copies of each document. If you should find it necessary to request a continuance, you may do so once without charge with the written consent of the applicant. Any subsequent requests for continuance must be accompanied by a fee of $340. Please let me know if you have any questions. Sincerely, Grace E. Cory City Clerk cc: Larry Perlin /Pete Gonda Printed on recycled paper. To: Mayor Jim Shaw, Larry Perlin, Hugh Hexamer 13777 Fruitvale Ave. Saratoga, Ca. 95070 From: Robert and Ann Kiehl 12168 Kirkbrook Dr. Saratoga, Ca. 95070 Cc: Pete Gonda Subject: Marked crosswalk at Carol Lane and Kirkbrook Dr. Dear Jim Shaw, December 30, 1998 For some reason the City of Saratoga is hard over to install the crosswalk in front of my house. You stated many tines during the appeal on December 16 that this appeal was very unusual. Maybe it was because it was a result of only one new parent in the neighborhood and the complete disregard for long time Saratoga residents.. As for additional unusual, did you notice that there were no speakers from the floor? The reason was that no Kirkbrook Drive residents were notified of the hearing. It was apparent to me that the subject had been reviewed by the council prior to the appeal, and a decision had already previously been made because while I was talking no one was listening. One of the council members even announced how he was going to vote before the vote. I do not think this is proper parliamentary procedure, it is just a lead in for the other members to know how to vote. In order to make this terrible situation less painful for my family and possibly avoid litigation, I would like to accept some offers that were made at the appeal by council/commission members. Hugh Hexamer, You said that the crosswalk could be reconfigured to provide two parking places in front of my house. Please provide a sketch so that we can discuss this option. Larry Perlin, You said that the Sheriff would not ticket my vehicles for parking in the crosswalk and that you would have the Sheriff produce a letter stating such. Please obtain that letter. Sincerely, Bob & Ann Kiehl, Disappointed Saratoga Residents RESOLUTION NO. 99- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA DENYING THE APPEAL FROM THE DECISION OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION APPROVING A CROSSWALK INSTALLATION AT THE INTERSECTION OF CAROL LANE AND KIRICBROOIC DRIVE WHEREAS, Robert and Ann Kiehl ("Appellants") have appealed the action of the Public Safety Commission approving of a crosswalk installation at the intersection of Carol Lane and ICirkbrook Drive; and WHEREAS, on October 8, 1998, the Public Safety Commission of the City of Saratoga held a duly noticed public meeting at which the matter of installation of a crosswalk at the intersection of Carol Lane and ICirkbrook Drive, for Blue Hills school students, was considered; and at which time all interested parties were given a full opportunity to be heard and present evidence and following the conclusion thereof, the Public Safety Commission recommended the installation of the crosswalk as presented; WHEREAS, on December 16, 1998, the City Council conducted a de novo public meeting on the appeal, at which time any person interested in the matter was given a full opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed and considered the staff report, minutes of proceedings conducted by the Public Safety Commission relating to the application, and the written and oral evidence presented to the City Council in support of and in opposition to the appeal. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA, as follows: Section 1. By a unanimous vote of the City Council the appeal from the Public Safety Commission is hereby denied, and the decision of the Public Safety Commission is affirmed, to wit: That there is a compelling case for the installation of the crosswalk as proposed, including appropriate signage. Section 2. After careful consideration of the staff report and all of the exhibits attached thereto, and the written and oral evidence presented to the City Council in support of and in opposition to the appeal, it is hereby determined by the City Council that the crosswalk as proposed shall be installed at the proposed location with appropriate signage. i Res. 99-03 :ss Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Saratoga held on the fith day of January , 1999, by the following vote: AYES: Councilmembers Baker, Streit, Mehaffey, Vice Mayor Bogosian, Mayor Shaw None NOES: ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None ATTEST: )J J gr! 6. C<24 1 V ty Clerk MSR:apn December 28, 1998 J:\WPD\ s,4NRSW\273\RES99UQEHL.DEN 2 ,�� ®,rii r1 Mayor l✓ C zn ©g 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE • SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 • (408) 868-1200 Incorporated October 22, 1956 January 20, 1999 Robert and Ann Kiehl 12168 Kirkbrook Drive Saratoga, CA 95070 Subject: Crosswalk Installation at Carol Lane and Kirkbrook Drive Dear Mr. and Mrs. Kiehl: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Evan Baker Stan Bogosian John Mehaffey Jim Shaw Nick Streit This letter is in response to your letter sent to Mayor Shaw dated December 30, 1998. In your letter you referred to comments made by former Public Safety Commission Chair Hexamer and City Manager Perlin at the City Council meeting of December 16, 1998. I would like to clarify those statements and also notify you of the scheduled date for the crosswalk installation. In response to Mr. Hexamer's comments, he stated that it was proposed to you at the Public Safety Commission meeting of October 8 that a crosswalk of minimum -width be installed as opposed to the standard ten foot crosswalk. Mr. Hexamer commented that this installation would give you additional parking area in front of your house and that you would probably be able to park two vehicles in front of your house. This is something however, that the City cannot guarantee, as the number of parking spaces will vary relative to the size of automobiles attempting to park there. I have been informed by the City's Assistant Engineer, Erman Dorsey, that the minimum width for crosswalks is six feet, with an additional one foot per marking (for a total of eight feet). This is the size of the crosswalk that will be installed at this location. Installing the minimum -width crosswalk will ensure that maximum footage space will be available to you to in front of your home. In response to comments made by the City Manager, Mr. Perlin recollects that he was attempting to address your concern about being ticketed, stating that it would be extremely unlikely the Sheriff would ticket your vehicle while unloading your boat. The assumption here is that the vehicle would not be parked in the crosswalk for any extended period of time when you are performing this activity. If you are truly concerned about being ticketed when you are unloading your boat, you may first contact the Santa Clara County Sheriff's Office - Westside Substation at (408) 867-9715 to inform them when you are unloading your boat so they will not ticket you at that time. Printed on recycled paper_ Attached hereto is a copy of City Council Resolution No. 99-03, which denies your appeal regarding the crosswalk installation at Carol Lane and Kirkbrook Drive. This decision is final. The scheduled time -frame for installation is during the first week of February, 1999, weather permitting. The City would appreciate your cooperation in not having a vehicle parked in front of the location of the crosswalk at that time. As a further reminder, the City will place "No Parking" signs prior to installation to alert residents not to park in this location when the crosswalk will be installed. If I can be of further assistance in this matter, please call me at (408) 868-1221. Sincerely, �� Peter Gonda" Administrative Analyst cc: City Council Public Safety Commission City Manager Acting Public Works Director Assistant Engineer To: Peter Gonda 13777 Fruitvale Ave. Saratoga, Ca. 95070 From: Robert and Ann Kiehl 12168 Kirkbrook Dr. Saratoga, Ca. 95070 January 25, 1998 Cc: Mayor Jim Shaw, Larry Perlin, Hugh Hexamer Subject: Marked crosswalk at Carol Lane and Kirkbrook Dr. Dear Peter Gonda, I think certified mail is a little unnecessary. The mail service in Saratoga is very good. You said that parking would be relative to the size of the vehicles. Here are the lengths of my vehicles not including the boat which is 25 feet long: 1 20 feet 1 18 feet 2 16 feet 1 15 feet I still expect Mr. Hexamer to keep his word to provide parking for two vehicles. You said the crosswalk would be narrowed but there was no mention about relocation. If the crosswalk is located 12 feet north of its' previous location the problem would be alleviated. As for Mr. Perlin not being able to recollect what he said, I understand. He does so much talking that he could not possibly remember everything he said. He did clearly say that he would assure that the Sherriff would not ticket my vehicles for parking in the crosswalk and that he would have the Sheriff produce a letter stating such. If there is any question you can review the video tape of the meeting. I still expect Mr. Perlin to produce the letter. I am making the assumption that statements made by council/commission members at city council meetings are accurate and truthful. Therefore, I expect Mr. Hexamer and Mr. Perlin to make good on their promises. I would like to obtain a copy of the video tape of the appeal. What is the process for this? What happened to the speed limit signs? I see no evidence of them yet. Sincerely, Bob & Ann Kiehl, Disappointed Saratoga Residents To: Mayor Jim Shaw, Larry Perlin, Hugh Hexamer 13777 Fruitvale Ave. Saratoga, Ca. 95070 From: Robert and Ann Kiehl 12168 Kirkbrook Dr. Saratoga, Ca. 95070 Cc: Pete Gonda Subject: Marked crosswalk at Carol Lane and Kirkbrook Dr. Dear Jim Shaw, December 30, 1998 For some reason the City of Saratoga is hard over to install the crosswalk in front of my house. You stated many tines during the appeal on December 16 that this appeal was very unusual_ Maybe it was because it was a result of only one new parent in the neighborhood and the complete disregard for long time Saratoga residents.. As for additional unusual, did you notice that there were no speakers from the floor? The reason was that no Kirkbrook Drive residents were notified of the hearing. It was apparent to me that the subject had been reviewed by the council prior to the appeal, and a decision had already previously been made because while I was talking no one was listening. One of the council members even announced how he was going to vote before the vote. I do not think this is proper parliamentary procedure, it is just a lead in for the other members to know how to vote. In order to make this terrible situation less painful for my family and possibly avoid litigation, I would like to accept some offers that were made at the appeal by council/commission members. Hugh Hexamer, You said that the crosswalk could be reconfigured to provide two parking places in front of my house. Please provide a sketch so that we can discuss this option. Larry Perlin, You said that the Sheriff would not ticket my vehicles for parking in the crosswalk and that you would have the Sheriff produce a letter stating such. Please obtain that letter. Sincerel Bob & Ann Kiehl, Disappointed Saratoga Residents 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE • SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 • (408) 868-1200 Incorporated October 22, 1956 February 16, 1999 Robert and Ann Kiehl 12168 Kirkbrook Drive Saratoga, CA 95070 Subject: Marked Crosswalk at Carol Lane and Kirkbrook Drive Dear Robert and Ann: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Evan Baker Stan Bogosian John Mehaffey Jim Shaw Nick Streit I would like to take this opportunity to respond to questions and statements contained in your letter dated January 25, 1999 regarding the crosswalk which has now been installed at the above referenced location. I reviewed the videotape from the December 16, 1998 City Council meeting and offer the following: Parking Spaces Former Public Safety Commission Chair Hexamer commented that with the minimum size crosswalk, there should be room for two standard -size vehicles to park in front of your home. This is not the same as promising you two parking spaces, nor was it specified on what side of the crosswalk the spaces would be available. As discussed earlier, the City, nor any of its assigns, is under any obligation to provide you with private parking on a public street. In addition, part of the role of the Public Safety Commission is to recommend and/or review traffic safety devices. The Commission may forward recommendations to staff and/or the City Council for final action or approval. Neither the Public Safety Commission, nor any of its Commissioners, has the authority to make a unilateral decision or promise that something can and will be done. Letter From Sheriff City Manager Perlin said that he thought the Sheriff would produce something in writing stating that you would not be ticketed for parking in the crosswalk. The inference during this discussion was that you would not be ticketed while unloading your boat. From what I saw on the tape, at no time did Mr. Perlin state he would actually obtain a letter. Printed on recycled paper. You simply asked him if he would like to take on the assignment of obtaining the letter. In any event, the City can take no official position on what the Sheriff's Office (a County authority) can or cannot produce. You may call a traffic enforcement Deputy at the Sheriff's Office at (408) 867-9719 to inquire about the letter you seek. In your letter of January 251s, you also inquired about getting a copy of the videotape from the December 166 City Council meeting. Copies may be obtained by contacting KSAR - Saratoga Community Access TV at (408) 741-2108. You may also view the videotape at City Hall by making an appointment with either myself (408) 868-1221, or the City Clerk (408) 868-1269, if I am unavailable. Lastly, you inquired about the "Speed Limit" signs. The City's Assistant Engineer has informed me that these signs will be installed within the next two weeks. I hope this letter answers your questions and concerns. If I can be of any further assistance in this matter, do not hesitate to contact me. Administrative Analyst cc: City Manager Public Safety Commission Kristin Borel From: Barbara Stock [barstck@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, November 02, 2009 6:09 PM To: Kristin Borel Subject: Re: Traffic Safety Commission Traffic Matrix #242 DEAR SIR: EVEN THOUGH I HAVE LIVED ON SOBEY ROAD FOR SOME 45 YEARS, I HAVE ALWAYS BEEN CONCERNED ABOUT LEAVING MY ROAD THAT I SHARE WITH TWO OTHER FAMILIES WE SIT AT THE END OF A HILL WITH A BLIND CURVE, AN ACCIDENT WAITING TO HAPPEN. THE CARS SPEED DOWN SOBEY ROAD LIKE IT'S A RACE TRACK, AND I DO THINK A SPEED BUMB OR SOME OTHER DEVISE WOULD MAKE A WORLD OF DIFFERENCE. HOPING YOU WILL TAKE CARE OF THIS MATTER. BARBARA STOCK i52Lt. Sobel Rot --- On Mon, 11/2/09, Kristin Borel <kborel@saratoga.ca.us> wrote: > From: Kristin Borel <kborel@saratoga.ca.us> > Subject: Traffic Safety Commission > To: barstck@yahoo.com > Date: Monday, November 2, 2009, 2:49 PM > Hi Mrs. Barstock, > It was a pleasure speaking with you > today. > Here is a link to our Commission > page. Please look at the > information about the "Traffic Safety Commission Process" i Kristin Borel From: Don S. [dis933@hotmail.com] Sent: Saturday, November 21, 2009 4:19 PM To: Kristin Borel Subject: Quito Rd. speed limit. For Traffic Safety Commission Hi Kristin Here is the summary I suggest be provided to the Traffic Safety Commission regarding the findings of the Traffic study by the firm of Fehr and Peers on Quito Road. Based on the study the speed limit of at least the very wide section of Quito between Bicknell and Woodbank should be reposted to 30-35 MPH. I want to make the following points: 1. The section of Quito between Bicknell and Woodbank, posted at 25 MPH, is nothing more than a speed trap with no readeaming speed rationale. This is a speed ticket cash cow for the SC Sheriffs used on a daily/weekly basis. 2. This section should be at the same speed limit as the previous section between Hwy 9 and Bicknell, i.e. 30 MPH or even better 35 MPH. 3. The study is severely flawed and inconsistent in their findings, sectionalizing of roadways, summarizing and suggesting of actions and speed limits. See below and review the findings on other roads with similar characteristics which are suggested at 35-40 MPH in study. 4. I am including 2 of my photos of this section of roadway. I will bring the rest to the hearing and will send them to you in an other email. Thanks Don Schmidek SUMMARY SECTIONS OF THE STUDY REGARDING THE BICKNELL TO WOODBAK SECTION OF QUITO ROAD This is the summary conclusion from the Traffic Study — the speed limit should be RAISED 10 MPH! 11/23/2009 Traffic Matrix #244 Page 2 of 4 Overall, the observed 85°' percentile speeds have decreased slightly as compared 10 the data from the 2001 Speed Survey. Speeds have Increased on 15 of the 01 roadway segments, while speeds decreased on the remaining 48 segments. The observed 85" percentile speeds on the following 15 roadway segments indicated that the speed limit should he 10 mph higher than the posted limit without considering other factors: Quito Road from Southerly Cky Limit to Bicknell Road • Quito Road from Bicknell Road to Pollard Read 1. This is an interesting comment which does not appear to be based on any supporting information. Additionally, WB recommend that the City continue to monitor speeds on the following five roadway sednlents and Implement tragic calming measures as needed to at least maintain and possibly decrease the 85" percentile speeds; • Quito Road from Bicknell Road to Pollard Road 2. This section is inclusive of a wide 1/8 mile section with an other windy and narrow section thus creating confusion for the motorists Quito Road from Bicknell Road to Pollard Road The posted speed limit on this section of Quito Road is 25 mph. The 851" percentile speeds on this roadway section exceed the posted speed limit by 11.0 mph (northbound) and 11,2 mph (southbound). This Indicates a speed limit of 35 mph, Three mid -block speed -related accidents have been reported for this segment of Quito Road between 2003 and 2006. This segment of Quito Road Is very narrow and does not provide additional pedestrian and bicycle facilities therefore a posted speed limit of 25 mph is allowable under the CVC, even it the speed limit is more than five mph below the 85th percentile speed (CVC 223583). We also recommend that this roadway segment should be monitored for possible traffic calming measures to reduce the 85'" percentile speeds. 4 Summary comments for the section of road in question ---- this does not describe the section between Bicknell and Woodbank which is 1/8 mile long, is about 50' wide, has bike lanes on both sides as well as a 14' parking lane. There are NO hidden driveways, it is not narrow or windy (it is windy on some days!). Roadway Na rd Road ben oflanes ! 2 Date: Navein7,300 Roadway width 22 feel Poslod Speed j 25 mph Tota€ Vehicles Dhserved Average Deity Traffic (veh u (WI to Not Readily Apparent: • Approximately 10 driveways are bidden benina landscaping_ • Narrowand wilding roadway Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities: No sidewalks Quito Road designated as Class 111 bicycle resale Curren tp ed 0 erihboun8 I So .964 807 0 501h Percentile _._.._..._ 22.2 mph ._._._i._ 32.3 mph 931h Percentila__,..,........_ 36 nigh .._ 30.2mph ,.,,..,.,,.. 10 mph Pace 27.3 37.3 mph t 27.3 - 37.3 mph Percept in, Peen Description of Surrounding Area: • Residential 14e€cteorhood 81.0 o 5. This shows how inconsistent in suggestions and findings the report is for similar stretches of roadways! 11/23/2009 Page 3 of 4 Quito Road from Pollard Road to Allendale Avenue On this section of Quito Road speed limits were observed at approximately 33.8 and 32.7 mph in the northbound and southbound directions, respectively. The posted speed limit Is 30 mph. Since, vehicles are traveling in excess of three mph of the posted speed limit, the critical speeds initially indicate that the speed limit should be posted at 35 mph. Three mid -block speed -related accidents have been reported for This segment of Quito Road for the throe -year period analyzed for this report. Marshall Lane Elementary School is located Just west of Qullo Road, and therefore Quito Road serves as an access route for vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians traveling to the school. Based on the combination of the accident history and the proximity to the school, It Is recommended that the speed Ilrnit be maintained at 30 mph. which is five mph below the speed limit indicated by the observed 850 percentile speeds. 6. Traffic Engineer's comments are not correct! Here is our response to Mr. Schmidek's inquiry about the 25 mph speed limits on Quito Road between Bicknell Road and Pollard Road. Speed limit sections are generally selected based on roadway segments that are easily distinguishable, such as by major intersections; in this case Bicknell Road and Pollard Road. The majority of this segment is characterized by narrow and winding roadway as indicated in the speed survey. Mr. Schmidek is correct to point out that the first 500 feet of the segment from Bicknell Road north towards Pollard Road is wider that the remaining % miles of the roadway segment. However, we recommend that that speed limit of 25 mph be maintained on the entire segment of Quito Road between Bicknell Road and Pollard Road, since the it advises drivers of the appropriate speed limit for the approaching narrow and winding section of Quito Road and gives drivers time to adjust their speeds from the indicated 30 mph north of Pollard Road and south of Bicknell Road. My response to comments: • Bicknell and Woodbank intersections are similar 3 way intersections thus segmentation is incorrect. • The 500 ft. is in reality 1100 ft. thus an other poor finding. • Drivers do not need 500 or 1100 ft. to slow down 5 or 10 MPH — from 30 to 25 MPH. • The wide section of roadway is not conducive to 25 MPH and begs for speeding tickets. • Safety in this section does not call for 25 MPH! I wonder if any accident happened in this section. • It would be more appropriate the maintain the same speed limit of 30/35 MPH from Hwy 9 to Woodbank. • There are several yellow signs which suggest a winding road and suggest a speed of 21 MPH. 7. PHOTOS OF THE WIDE SECTION OF QUITO BETWEEN BICKNELL AND WOODBANK 11/23/2009 Page 4 of 4 11/23/2009 Page 1 of 4 Kristin Borel From: Don S. [dis933@hotmail.com] Sent: Saturday, November 21, 2009 4:38 PM To: Kristin Borel Subject: Quito Rd. pictures Attachments: 1 Quito Hwy 9 (Small).jpg; 2 Quito Hwy 9 (Small).jpg; 4 Quito & Austin wy (Small).jpg; 5 Quito Twin Creeks (Small).jpg; 6 Quito Maude (Small).jpg; 8 Quito past Bicknell (Small).jpg; 9 Quito past Bicknell (Small).jpg; 10 Quito from Radar (Small).jpg; 11 Quito past Radar (Small).jpg; 2 Quito Hwy 9 (Small).jpg Hi Here are most of the photos I have taken. These are in Small format, but I have full size pics as well. Thanks Don Schmidek 11/23/2009 Page 2 of 4 11/23/2009 Page 3 of 4 11/23/2009 Page 4 of 4 11/23/2009 Traffic Matrix #245 Kristin Borel From: Larry Pott[larryp@premiersecuritysolutions.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 9:56 AM To: Kristin Borel; lveta Harvancik Cc: 'Lisa Pott' Subject: Mendelsohn Lane Speed & Crosswalk from Mendelsohn to Three Oaks Hello Kristin and lveta, Just wanted to drop you a quick line to get you my contact information as well as summarize our conversations. Regarding the Mendelsohn Lane speed, it appears that because there is a long stretch from HWY 9 to homes and/or side streets people use the last 1/4 mile or so as a ramp -up either coming or going from HWY 9 on the South section of Mendelsohn. As we do not come or go from the North side of Mendelsohn I do not know if it has the same problem. As I often drive Three Oaks to get to Redwood and Saratoga Pre-school it appears that the speed bumps have very positively affected the lack of speed there. It would be a great benefit to all in the Glen Una area to have a crosswalk from Mendelsohn linking to Three Oaks. It is a very visible and wide section of the HWY, it is an obvious direct link and if people want to go over to Farwell they still can, once across. There is no immediate or easy foot/bike access linking, (RMS, Saratoga Pre -School, Civic Center, West Valley College, Post Office, City Hall). The comment was made to go and see how many cross without, my comment is only a very few brave souls would attempt the crossing without a cross walk. If one was there then you would see how often it would get used and in this climate where we are trying to foster green activity it seems like a very needed addition to the City. We have lived in Saratoga for 5 years but only recently moved to Mendelsohn. As we have four kids all under 12 it is very important to us that these issues are addressed. Please respond with confirmation on receipt of this as well as any suggestions or comments moving forward. Respectfully, Larry and Lisa Pott & Family 20040 Mendelsohn Lane, Hm 408 741-5499, Larry Cell 415 385-7688 11/19/2009