Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSafety Commission mins 1990/05/10 . . . MINUTES OF THE SAFETY COMMISSION MEETING CITY OF CHUrA VISTA, CAliFORNIA Thursday, May 10, 1990 7:07 p.m. Council Chambers Public Services Building ROLL CALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Chainnan Decker, Commissioners Arnold, Koester, Militscher, Thomas, Waller MEMBERS ABSENT: Vice Chair Braden, excused STAFF PRESENT: Hal Rosenberg, City Traffic Engineer; Frank Rivera, Assistant Civil Engineer OTHERS PRESENT: Patrol Division Officer Barry Bennett, Ray Morris, Zoubir Ouadah. Also, see attached attendance list. 1. APPROVAL OF MINlITES MOTION Approve minutes of the April 12, 1990 Safety Commission meeting. MSUC [Koester/Thomas] 3-0, Decker, Militscher and Waller abstained due to absence from last meeting, to approve the Minutes of April 12, 1990. Chainnan Decker welcomed Harvey Magana, a student, who was at the Safety Commission meeting in order to compile a report on local government in action. 2. CONTINUED MATTERS (2a) ReQuest for sneed control on Canyon Drive and Country Vistas Lane Frank Rivera, Assistant Civil Engineer, presented staffs report. This is the request for speed control on Canyon Drive and Country Vistas Lane. At the April 12 Safety Commission meeting it was voted 4-0 for staff to come back with other alternatives to address the vehicular speed on Canyon Drive; md Country Vistas Lane. Staff has completed some additional evaluations and studies of the area and has corne back with some recommendations. [Using a viewgraph, he indicated that the area is between Country Vistas Lane from Corral Canyon to the west and Canyon Drive from Otay Lakes to Country Vistas Lane. Both these streets are 40 foot wide residential collectors with an average daily traffic count of approximately 1,800 vehicles per day. Staff also did an engineering traffic survey in which the minimum design speed is approximately 30 mph, the area is strictly residential in nature, the accident rate is also half the statewide average and on the data that staff has 1 , 1'190 .,~I()1 I' - I . collected for these speed surveys, they show that at various locations on Canyon Drive and on Country Vistas Lane we have a median speed generally in the 30 mph range (to the high 30s mph). Staff also conducted curve studies which showed typical readings showing comfort levels as vehicles negotiate the curves in the area at various speeds. Staff is recommending that because of the curves and nature of the area and the volume of traffic in this area, the recommendation to establish a 30 mph speed limit, in keeping with the design of the roadway and to also post curve warning signs in the area of 25 mph. In looking at these curves, most of these curves at 30 mph exceeded our limits, but at 25 mph were well within the range. Therefore, staff is recommending to keep these at 25 mph. Staff is also recommending that an all-way stop be installed at the intersection of Canyon Drive and Country Vistas Lane due to the fact that there is a high volume of turning movements in this area and these two streets serve the entire area of the Bonita Long Canyon subdivision. PUBUC COMMENTS . Rich Triplett, 561 Canyon Drive, Bonita, 92002. I received a copy of the report that Mr. Rivera just summarized and quite frankly I'm not satisfied with the 30 mph speed limit. He says they have done a study and the road has been designed for 30 mph and that if something less than 30 mph were posted it would be considered a speed trap. In my mind I would rather have a speed trap than a death trap. He stresses in the second paragraph that it should be noted that most vehicles are traveling within 10 mph of the presumed 25 mph speed limit and his supporting data shows that the median speed at Locations Band C is 35 mph and being a median speed, that would mean that 50 percent of the vehicles are exceeding 35 mph. I want to stress that it is not a trivial matter and I think that a lot of people are here to discuss this issue. But, when the survey was done no one came to my house, no one asked how many children we have, no one asked what kind of concerns that we have. The survey just rated off peak hours. I just don't think that 30 mph in a residential area is appropriate. I was told that if it was not posted you cannot track the cars by radar--I don't know whether that is true or not, but what would happen if something like we posted the advisory signs at 25 mph, but not actual speed limit signs, would they still then be allowed to use radar? I don't know the answer to that and I don't know if any of you do either. Chairman Decker interjected that the advisory signs on the curbs are just advisory. . Mr. Triplett continued, stating sure, but if they posted 25 mph speed limit signs I was told they wouldn't be allowed to use radar to enforce that 25 mph speed limit, which didn't make sense to me but I was told that since this survey would reflect the road is designed for 30 mph, that that would be considered a speed trap. When the roads are strictly residential, if anyone wants to use high speed thoroughfares that is what "H" Street and Corral Canyon have been provided for. 2 . . . SAFETY COMMISSION MINUTES May 10,1990 Chairman Decker interrupted, stating that [he would not cut into the speaker's remaining time] it was covered fairly clearly at the last meeting that the problem with posting the speed limit at 25 mph when the prima facia speed is 25 mph is that that maintains that speed exactly at that. When you post a speed it has to be supported by a survey. A survey is not a small thing--you do not go out there and count just a few cars--you put a device down in the street, take the survey for a couple of days at a 24-hour time interval. Once that survey is established, and that seems to be reasonable and fair, then the speed law mandates that we establish a speed that is 85 percentile of what seems to be reasonable and fair by the drivers. The rules in this state are relatively simple: they assume that prudent people drive at prudent speeds. I consider all of you prudent people. So when you go out there and drive then you would drive at a prudent speed of what would be considered prudent in that area. Now, since this is a housing area the state law is quite explicit. It is 25 mph. You do not have to post it. However, if the street is designed for a little bit higher than 25, municipalities have the option of posting it a little bit higher than 25 mph and we have them all over this City. "H" Street is in a housing area, but it is still posted at 35 mph and 40 mph and 50 mph at some places, but that is not necessarily a housing area. So, the point is that when you do that you have to be able to support it by some radar survey that says that you made a prudent speed by establishing some speed other than 25 mph, established by the people that drive. Mr. Triplett asked if the accidents warrant the speed. Had they come out there on a day when the traffic was 50 mph. Chairman Decker stated that staff had done more than one day. Mr. Triplett responded that it looks like they did two days. Chairman Decker noted that they had done two plus some time before. Mr. Triplett continued his comments, stating that the Ball Bank indicator study has indicated that the 30 mph at least in one direction in three out of the four places could be hazardous. The curves are close together and comprise a large portion of the two streets and it concerns me. I would like to see added, Children At Play signs or some other alternatives other than a 30 mph. I just don't think that is acceptable for a strictly residential street that serves the community and if anyone wants to use bypass I speed streets, they can use "H" Street and Corral Canyon. 3 . SAFETY COMMISSION MINUTES May 10, 1990 . Kathy Aland, 569 Canyon Drive, Bonita, 92002 I appreciate the fact that you have resurveyed the street and have come up with some alternatives to our problem. I do agree with the center lines, I feel that this would be a good way to deter people passing at high speeds and cutting off people trying to turn in and out of their driveways. I do agree with the stop sign at the end of Canyon Drive and Country Vistas Lane. I do agree also with the installed curve warning signs which I think would be most effective at about the [Point number 3, as shown on viewgraph] where the greatest speeds are. What I do not agree with is the 30 mph speed limit. I have three children that do not play in the streets, that are even afraid to walk on the sidewalk. Within the last two weeks we have had two accidents, one being over the weekend, Saturday evening when we were out of town. A car traveling down, hitting the maximum speed point at Point 3 [as shown on the viewgraph] was on the right hand lane going down the hill, ended up in a driveway across the street, taking out the side of a car. If it had not taken out the side of the car parked across the street it would have ended up in my neighbor's home. Someone coming down [Point B, on the viewgraph] the street a year ago, did go through my neighbor's home. Then again last week, coming up the hill at Point B, a car coming up the hill went all the way over onto the grass where the children should be and not the carsnthe speed was too fast and they had no control. I would like to see at Point 3, Curve signs and Children at Play signs. I think the more that people are aware that there is something going on, the more signs they see the more aware they are of the problem and maybe will slow down. I would also like to see a dip in the road at Point 3 to slow the traffic before it reaches the maximum point speed at Point B. I think one dip in the road with a sign that says Dip will certainly prevent those people from speeding. I have seen two cases with cars and police cars going down that road where those people feel that they can get away, they get to the bottom of Country Vistas Lane, they can hang a right and they are home free when they hit Corral Canyon, because Corral Canyon is wide and it opens to the back roads. I would like a dip there, they hit the dip and they'll lose their axles and they'll slow themselves down and we won't to have to worry about our children. I thank you for listening and I would appreciate it if you could come up with a little more to help us with our problem. Chairman Decker addressed the idea of the dip. The dip becomes a hazard to driving and if we, the City, engineers something like that, they are liable for anybody that gets in any kind of an accident there. If it is engineered because of natural drainage, that's one thing. When you engineer something like that in you are in for a lot of trouble. It is certainly an idea and we like to listen to ideas. Thank you. . 4 . SAFETY COMMISSION MINUTES May 10,1990 . Mark Blakey, 1605 Country Vistas Lane, Bonita, 92002. I work for the County as a litigation investigator so I am familiar with some of the problems here. I am in favor of the 30 mph. If you do not have something that is enforceable, people are going to disregard it. If you try to enforce something that people are not going to abide by then it's a problem for them too. I don't think that five miles per hours one way or the other is going to be a problem with the prudent person and I think all of us here tonight probably are of the opinion that we are really concerned about the people that travel down there at 40, 45, 50 mph. I saw a car one day go down there and he must have been doing at least 60 mph. I think the problem is not so much in the lower section when you get close to the intersection of Country Vistas Lane and Canyon Drive because the two curves, the one at Point 1 and one at Point 2 have sufficient curve radius as well as the lack of super elevation to slow the traffic down. I would be opposed to the stop signs from the standpoint that I think the traffic is already slowing for that intersection. The problem is that the people coming down, until they get to about that point, the traffic is too high. I do not think that the 30 mph would cause a problem with children, I think that it is the people going above that and that is really the problem. Its not the 25 versus the 30 mph. I have children and what concerns me is not the people who are doing 30 mph, or even the people who are sometimes doing 35 mph, because they have sufficient sight distance, they have sufficient stopping room and normally are attentive enough to see what is going on and stop or be able to stop. It is those people that are really being well above the speed limit. I have thought about this for some time and I don't know exactly what the solution is, the dip is a problem, the County gets sued over problems like that. The dip is a good suggestion but it presents a problem. I think maybe we need to look at other possible solutions that maybe are not in the CalTrans Manual or whatever manual that the City is using as some other alternative of slowing down the speed. One thing that I thought might be a potential solution and I have never seen it done, although it may have been done somewhere, would be possibly some kind of real very, very low type of speed bump or several multiple small speed bumps like maybe 1 inch high and 3 or 4 inches wide so that when people go across them they do not lose control, it does not cause a problem for normal traffic, but it might be enough to slow down that fast driver who is really the one causing the problems. I don't know if that is a potential solution but I think there are some things we may have to look outside the normal things in the traffic manuals as a solution as I don't see the speed signs or some of these other things as being a solution. Lastly, I think the stop signs, to me, is kind of an over regulation because the traffic is slowing at that point anyway and it's really over regulating the intersection. . Commissioner Thomas asked Mr. Rosenberg if there has ever been any statistics on these speed bumps in residential areas or any different types of speed bumps. 5 . SAFETY COMMISSION MINUTES May 10, 1990 . Mr. Rosenberg responded, stating that there have been some studies performed in cities throughout the State of California. The gentlemen is referring to what we call speed humps and these are mounds of asphalt about 2 or 3 inches high and actually are about 12 feet wide and create a undulation, if you will, on the movement of the car--a gentle bump and has proven to slow cars down on residential streets. The California Traffic Control Device Committee evaluated this device and based on a lot of dissertation and testing have determined that it was not applicable in most cases and decided at the State level to recommend that this device not be included as a traffic control device. However, some cities within the State are employing the speed humps. A report has been issued by the State committee and they have made recommendations that if they are to be used, on what kind of roadways they should apply. One of the conditions they have made for the use of the speed hump was that they should not be used on high volume streets or on streets that have grades in excess of 4 to 5 percent. The problem is that those kinds of streets, particularly on grades similar to what we are talking about here may tend to cause cars to go out of control. There is really not enough statistical information to prove one way or the other whether that in fact is valid. Also, I want to point out that in order for these speed humps to be effective they have to be placed about 200 feet apart to give you that up and down motion as you travel the roadway. They also cause some slight jarring and the Fire Department and bicycle users and others find them to be somewhat offensive and may constitute a safety problem for those users. So they do have an application, but we would suggest that they be used very carefully and only in certain situations where they fit the case. Commissioner Thomas stated that he doubted that the people coming down that hill at 25 or 30 mph would slow down, so if they put a speed hump between Points 3 and 4 [as shown on the viewgraph] --what would happen if the car hit it at 25 mph. Mr. Rosenberg responded that nothing would happen at 25 mph, but if a car were going at 45 mph it could possibly cause a problem. My fear and my objections to the speed humps is the problem may arise if someone who is unaware of the speed humps loses control, flips over, runs into the sidewalk into someone's front yard and, God forbid, runs somebody over. The same thing would hold true with the dip-type situation. Commission Thomas inquired if they were ever used as a temporary measure for gather data, or once you lay them they are permanent. . Mr. Rosenberg stated that once laid they are generally permanent. The City of La Mesa installed some speed humps in a residential neighborhood and there were many complaints from the residents because of the noise impact caused by those speed humps. The cars go over and they give thumping sound, and in the middle of the night it causes quite a problem for people trying to sleep. As a matter of fact 6 . . . SAFETY COMMISSION MINUTES May 10, 1990 I can tell you that when I worked for the City of San Diego we had a similar problem on Ardath Road and I put down strips of asphalt to give a rumbling effect to wake up people as they were driving down a hill towards Torrey Pines because we were having a lot of problems with speeding and motorists were having problems coming to a stop at the bottom, coming off the freeway of 1-5. That rumble strip only lasted a couple of days, the residents complained, they thought someone was using a jackhammer in the neighborhood because of the thumping every time a car ran over the hump. That is a consideration too. Mr. Blakey spoke from his seat at this point. What he said was not picked up on tape. [In future it is recommended that people return to the lectern and speak into the microphone.] Mr. Rosenberg noted that he thought Mr. Blakey was referring to rumble type strips, the type I was just referring to--just little beads of asphalt that would cause a rumbling effect on the motorist and enlighten them to realize they there is something unusual about the roadway. I prefer not to use those devices for the reasons I just mentioned. Summer Aland, age 12, 569 Canyon Drive, Bonita, 92002. Representing: Children at Play. I am here today because I am mostly concerned about when I walk home from my bus stop which is approximately at Curve 1 [on the viewgraph] and I live at Point B. Several cars have been known to come out of the street across the lane and on to the sidewalk, across the front lawns. This has happened two times in the last week. I appeal for the safety of myself and my friends to put at least two or three Children at Play signs. About the speed bumps, I do think that is a good idea and also maybe if you would put up a sign, speed hump or whatever, then the drivers would not be going 45 mph and lose control over their cars. I thank you for your cooperation. Chairman Decker noted that we are all drivers and one of the problems with drivers, --though I am not lecturing you all--but once in awhile I think we all speed a little bit. Our modern cars are so quite and ride so well and behave so well that we tend to not watch the speed. It doesn't make them any safer and it doesn't make us any better drivers--but we tend to be very relaxed on that and that happens with a large number of the cars that are out there. Then there are always the people who are not like us and just ignore the speed limit completely and feel that the road is built for them. These are the kind of people we are looking for and I don't know how we answer those, except give them tickets as often as we can. 7 . SAFETY COMMISSION MINUTES May 10, 1990 . Christopher Kiefer, 1589 Country Vistas Lane, Bonita, 92002. I want to thank the police for coming out a little more often lately. I think they have given out a few tickets and I hope it is going to payoff. I am against the 30 mph speed limit. I am concerned that the people who are driving at 25 mph now will see the 30 mph speed limit sign and speed up to 30, possibly 35 mph. People who are driving 30 mph now will speed up to 35 or 40. I don't think it is going to slow the traffic down, I don't see it working. Summer [Aland, previous speaker] mentioned that item number 1 there--the bus stop. There is 100 to 140 children, I think, who are let off at that bus stop in the afternoon and picked up in the morning. People come down Country Vistas Lane, put on their brakes very hard to make that comer. I am just afraid that one time some children will be let out of their bus and somebody is not going to make the comer. Regarding the striping, I am a little concerned with striping. To me, I see stripes and I think this is a thoroughfare. One thing I think we ought to discourage is giving people the opinion that this street is a thoroughfare. People can take Corral Canyon to "H" Street over to Otay Lakes Road, that is a thoroughfare; Country Vistas Lane and Canyon Drive I don't believe should be treated as thoroughfares. Another point I find interesting is, and we seem to have a hard time enforcing it, is a 25 mph posted speed limit. When I go on Corral Canyon, and as soon as the dots there [referring to the viewgraph] that signify the difference between Chula Vista and San Diego County, right at that point there is a 25 mph speed sign. I think I have seen that enforced. I have seen cars pulled over. I don't know if the ticket sticks, but I have seen cars pulled over. I just ask that we do something to try to get the cars down to a reasonable speed. Thank you. Chairman Decker responded that there have been folks who come up in front of our Commission before asking for a redress on that area and the police give a ticket that is very seldom at less than 35 or 38 mph. . Wayne Jackson, 573 Canyon Drive, Bonita, 92002. One of the accidents that was mentioned earlier, the one that happened Saturday night, I think might have been avoided with a possible stop sign at the top of the hill which is where 3 and 4 meet there [referring to the viewgraph] --the comer of Via Hacienda. The car that came down the hill was gaining speed before he ever got to that comer. All night long we listen to cars hitting those curves and wheels squealing. I think that with a stop sign at the top of the hill, those people would stop and then continue along down the street. That night I saw the car right after the accident happened as he spun out of control into the neighbor's yard. The reason being was that the squealing woke me up first, and then the car parts flying across the road and him hitting the other car. When I got to the window I saw him slide up into the driveway. I believe that the stop sign would eliminate the people starting to speed at the top of the hill. Most of the people who are speeding down the hill are going downhill, not uphill. There are some speeders coming up the hill. 8 . SAFETY COMMISSION MINUTES May 10,1990 But going downhill you can lose control of your car a lot easier. The other thing I wanted to point out was that there is another street out in that area, I think it is also on the Agenda too, to have a stop sign removed, which is Gotham. I remember when that street did not have any stop signs on it. It had one at the end and at the beginning and it goes from Otay Lakes Road to Rutgers Road. A lot of people used it as a thoroughfare until the stop signs were put in. And, it is posted at 25 mph. I don't know whether the study showed that it was safe to go 25 or 30 mph, but I do know that once the stop signs were in, I myself stopped using the road as a thoroughfare and started going around because I did not want to stop at all the stop signs. I think that a lot of our traffic problem is people that are cutting through from Otay Lakes Road over to Corral Canyon and they think they can go at any speed they want down that hill and back up again. It eliminates them having to go back to "H" Street and down that road up to Corral Canyon. I appreciate the stop sign being considered. . Jim Hoke, 564 Canyon Drive, Bonita, 92002. Thank you for the opportunity to speak once again, I spoke last time. I don't think the problems are as complicated as it is made out to be by a lot of different people. I agree with Mr. Jackson that there should be a stop sign at Via Hacienda, because going down the hill there I believe the stop sign would stop a great majority of the people that would not have the chance to gain as much speed as they do without having to stop at that point. They start going down from Otay Lakes Road and it is just like riding a skateboard, the further you go the faster you get. One of my major concerns is that I don't want to see the elimination of Chula Vista police being able to come down their and catch speeders with radar. There have been several of the motor units that have been coming down, parking in our driveway and I talk to these guys, and one morning last week one of them wrote 10 tickets in less than two hours. None of them were for less than 40 mph. If we hit these people in the pocketbook by sticking them with tickets, over and over again. As long as we can keep the police out there to write these tickets, I believe that is going to be a major deterrent. There are two specific groups that are really guilty, it's the going to work crowd in the morning and the coming home crowd in the afternoon. A lot of the afternoon ones are high school kids. Basically, I think a couple of stop signs--one down at the bottom of the hill at County Vistas Lane and Via Hacienda. Actually I would like to see some more put in because I think inconvenience to the driver is a great deterrent in itself. But really, I think we should hit them where it hurtsnin the pocketbook. Let's write some tickets, let's make them go to court. Even if there are rich people who can afford to pay the tickets, they are going to lose their license if they get enough tickets. I think that is probably the best deterrent we are going to have. If posting the speed limit is going to keep them away [the police], by the way I disagree to raising it to 30 mph, I don't want it posted. I have mixed emotions about having a center stripe put down. It's one good point that maybe the people who pass you, I like that idea . 9 . SAFETY COMMISSION MINUTES May 10,1990 because I have almost been hit several times just turning into my driveway with my turn signal on. I turn left and they try to pass me on the left as I'm turning into my driveway. But at the same time I agree with the gentleman who was saying that it is a little neighborhood, that it is not a major thoroughfare. That line might make it seem to many people that it is a major thoroughfare versus a residential area. So, let's hit them in the pocket, let's not post the speed limit if that is going to keep the police away. Thank you. . Greg Fay, 448 Sandy Creek Drive, Bonita, 92002. I live just about where the Circle 5 [referring to the viewgraph] is, we are right on the comer. My major concern is from the area of 6 down to 5 [again, referring to the viewgraph] because the trucks and cars just speed down that area. But I am also concerned about the children that congregate at 1 [referring to the viewgraph]. I think that there is a real likelihood that someday we are going to have a car coming either from G to D taking out a bunch of kids, or a car coming from 5 to D, passing in that area and taking out a bunch of kids. This is going to happen. When we came here for the last meeting, we had a car coming northbound on Country Vistas Lane that [in Circle 2, referring to the viewgraph], we were coming the opposite the direction, coming southbound, he bounced across the road and almost hit us. Tonight when I was coming here we were again coming up Country Vistas Lane, going southbound [between F and B], a boy about 9 or 10 years old had a ball come rolling out into the street. He ran outnI was doing exactly 25 mphnhe didn't even see me coming. I stopped just before I hit him. I did not see him until he came out from between the cars. We have had accidents [in Circle 5] right in front of our house. There have been accidents down near the intersection of Country Vistas Lane and Canyon Drive. I understand there was an accident on Country Vistas Lane about 6:00 p.m. There is a lot of stuff going on out there. I think that the solution is to put stop signs on every comer. I said it before, I'll be glad to buy a stop sign or two if the City cannot afford to buy them. There are other people here that said that they would buy them. I am a police officer, by the way; the advantage of the stop signs is they are 100 percent enforceable. You don't have to worry about radar. You put a 30 mph speed limit out there, you and I both know that they are going to write people 40 and over [referring to the speed limit] at an absolute minimum because you always give them 10 mph to make it enforceable in court. People are speeding through there as it is. The 30 mph is set upon speeds that were done by people who are breaking the law in the first place. If they were doing 25 mph like they were supposed to, that's what the average speed would be. If you put the stop signs in, they have to stop or slow down and the few of them that don't do it there will get a ticket that there is no defense against. The officer just says there is a stop sign here, the guy went through it, I wrote him a ticket. That's the end of the trial. It will definitely slow people down. If you don't do it, you are going to have some people killed out there. Then you'll probably go ahead and put the stop signs up. I have a real strong interest in this . 10 . . . SAFETY COMMISSION MINUTES May 10,1990 because my daughter was seriously injured in an accident in a residential neighborhood where the County of San Diego in a Board like this refused to put up stop signs until the accident occurred. When we sued them then they put up the stop signs. The stop signs are still there and there have not been any other major accidents in that intersection. But, it took my daughter being crippled for life to get the stop sign. I don't want to see that happen to my other kids, here or anybody else's kids. I think you folks are being penny wise and dollar foolish by refusing to put stop signs in. Thank you for your time. Alex Lievanos, 1565 Country Vistas Lane, Bonita, 92002. Good evening. I live right at the juncture of Canyon Drive and Country Vistas Lane where the D is [referring to the viewgraph], just a little bit to the west. I live right at that comer. After a rather vigorous meeting last month, some of you folks were not here, but I was very pleased to see the response that happened very, very promptly by the staff of this Commission and the police officers of this City. It seems that they were energized, both of them and took very, very prompt action. From a citizen of this City I commend them both. I urge this Commission to accept the recommendation of the staff as regards, especially, the all-way stop at the intersection of Canyon Drive and Country Vistas Lane. Living right at that intersection I am privy to the noises--the squealing and screeching tires--that occur there at all hours of the day and night because of excessive speed. Attempting to manipulate human behavior by posting signs and drawing lines on streets is almost a futile task. This is what this Commission is faced with. We are not, as human beings, possessed of that wisdom as to how to manipulate human behavior to cause the effect that really this Commission is seeking. Insofar as the stop signs are concerned, I encourage this Commission to go ahead and recommend that and accept the recommendation of your staff. In addition to that, however, I am wondering if the addition of a Stop Ahead sign might be advantageous or effective at some worthwhile distance approaching the stop sign, to alert the drivers that there is a stop sign approaching. I differ with the person here who indicated that posting of stop signs would be over biting this thing. I beg to differ, I live right there and hear the noises and I think I have a little more valid perspective on that. In summation, I am really impressed by this Commission and its staff that they responded so promptly and I commend you both. Thank you very much. Commissioner Koester asked the Chair if they wished to have the Police Officer speak on this issue. 11 . SAFETY COMMISSION MINUTES May 10, 1990 . Patrol Division Officer Barry Bennett addressed the issue. All the motor officers and our sergeant meet on a regular basis meet with the traffic engineers and are advised of these problems. We do what we can. I personally have worked, I don't know how many hours in the last five weeks, on Country Vistas Lane and Canyon Drive. I definitely see there is a problem. However, if I can clarify as I am not sure if everyone understands about the speed survey and by posting it at 25 mph, the police will go away. The way it works is, when we go to court--if I write a citation for someone exceeding a posted speed limit, I can't just go to court and tell the judge or the jury that this person was going 40 mph in a 25 mph zone. I have to prove that the speed was unsafe at the time and I also have to show by a copy of the speed survey--I have to have it in my hand or the judge will completely dismiss it. They ask for it before the trial starts and if I don't have it, they will throw the case out. I have to show by that survey that the speed limit that is put on the street is backed by justification: the road design, the width of the roadway, and the like. The problem is--and we had it on one other street out in the EastLake area on Rutgers Avenue where we had a similar problem--it was a thoroughfare, we had a lot of speed and the street was posted at a speed lower than the speed survey legally would justify. When that happens all the police officers, mainly the traffic officers, we stopped working it because we would be violating a section in the [California] Vehicle Code. Whether you wish to leave it as it is now--unposted at 25 mph, I am allowed to work radar there. Personally, I do not think it will make much difference from my enforcement point of view if you leave it unposted at 25 mph or if you post it at 30 mph. At 3:00 in the morning and there is no one on the road, for example, when I write my citations I have to allow a little speed over the limit as I have to go to court and convince the judge that it was unsafe. If it's 4:00 in the afternoon and there are children all over or its raining or anything that would make an unsafe condition, I can write for less than the posted speed limit because I can justify that it is, in fact, an unsafe speed. I agree with the gentleman who asked for police concern out there. I agree also that when you start writing tickets these people are going to feel it: in their pocketbook and their insurance rates are going to go up. One thing I do want to point out though, in the 40 or 50 citations that I have written in that area, probably 80 percent are area residents. By their addresses on their driver's license I am seeing that the people that live in the area are the ones that are speeding. I have talked to a lot of you folks when I have been out on Canyon Drive and I know one concern was the construction workers at Circle 6 [referring to the viewgraph] at the top of the hill. I have gone up there twice and talked to the foremen and a number of the drivers and told them what is going on and I've made an effort to educate them about driving the roads through this area. But, most of the individuals I have been stopping are residents in the area. As far as having more police services in your area, I wish we could; but, there are only five motor officers and we cover from 6:00 in the morning until 7:30 in the evening, Monday through Saturday. We work four day work weeks and we cover the area from National City south to the Otay River bottom and from the . 12 . SAFETY COMMISSION MINUTES May 10, 1990 ocean as far east as the City goes. We also take accident reports and have lists of assignments that we have to complete. Before daylight savings time took effect, we changed our hours so we are covering more time. We were working from 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., but we were missing the morning crowd and the afternoon crowd. There are now three motorcycle officers on at 6:00 in the morning and there are two of us are on until 7:30 at night. This went into effect this week, so you will see us, hopefully, a little more during the rush hours. I can tell you now, that if you post signs that post 25 mph, legally I will be breaking the law by sitting there and work speed enforcement with the radar gun. It is prohibited in the [California] Vehicle Code under what is defined as a speed trap. It is not the type of street that I can pace people on. I don't believe staff has a survey that will back this speed limit. It may be able to be enforced, but I don't think we can legally work radar. [At this point, Officer Bennett received a sustained round of applause.] . Officer Bennett responded to a question regarding advisory (warning) and regulatory signs from the audience [the speaker's voice was not picked up on the microphone]. Advisory signs are the ones that are yellow, such as curve warning signs. Those are not mandatory nor enforceable. It is only the white signs with the black lettering that are enforceable that we have to have a survey to back. . Chairman Decker commented to those present, noting that what is happening here is not exclusive to your neighborhood, it happens all over town. It happens in my neighborhood. I live just across "H" Street down by Southwestern College. I have walked out in your area, I am familiar with the area. I know what you are talking of and I know where you come from, what you are talking about. I have often wondered about establishing a neighborhood committee. Have you all thought about that. What I mean by establishing a neighborhood committee, Officer Bennett said and I thoroughly believe this because I notice in my neighborhood that most of the people who speed in my neighborhood are from the neighborhood. I recognize the cars, you see them all the time. Find out who that is and go to their house as a committee and say hev. how about slowinsr down. If you could slow down 50 percent of that 80 percent [that is speeding] that would be 40 percent of the vehicles. Another thing is, what do we do when we don't like the way things go? We protest! Get your committee out there in the evenings, mornings and afternoon with signs that say Slow Down! There is only so much the government can do for you and a lot of this you have to do for yourselves. There are so many places we can that we can put these officers. One of the things you've got to try to do as citizens of this City is to demand more motorcycle officers. Motor officers are hired to do one thing and one thing only and that is to write tickets. They know that when they become a motor officer--they are concerned with traffic. What you have to do is get hold of your Councilman and ask for more motor officers, because the more motor officers we have the more tickets we write the more tickets 13 . . . SAFETY COMMISSION MINUTES May 10, 1990 we write the slower go. I want to point out one thing for somebody about stop signs. We know that when you put up a stop sign, most cars are back up to speed within about 200 feet. So you would have to put up stop signs practically everywhere in the City to keep people slowing down if they don't want to slow down. The only way you can train them to slow down is to cost them money, that is where it hits everyonenin their pocket. Mr. Rosenberg commented that with the 30 mph speed limit sign we can post the warning signs at the curves at 25 mph. If the speed limit remained at 25 then we would not put the warning signs up because the speed limit is already at 25 mph. I think there is an added benefit of the advisory signs at the curves because it does provide notice of something unusual at those particular locations. Chairman Decker noted that on the freeways there is a series of bumps, small disks, they put down occasionally to warn you of something. Is there something made like that that is a little bit smallernabout half the size of the ones you find on the freewayuthan could be put on streets. Mr. Rosenberg said no, there are not any designed for that purpose. We can manufacture the effect that you try to obtain with the little dots that are in the roadway. As I pointed out before the rumbling effect is only momentary and does cause noise, so there is a downside to the devices. Also they do present an obstacle in the roadway and bicyclists or motorcyclists who go over them have a tendency to lose control. Commissioner Thomas asked if there were any problems with Children at Play signs. Mr. Rosenberg responded that there is if the sign implies that it is okay for children to play in the street. We don't want to encourage children to think that it is safe to be in the street. There are some signs that are put on private property and private developments that we have no control over. But, generally speaking, we think those are not helpful at all. MOTION That Commission accept staffs recommendation. [Thomas/Koester] COMMISSION DISCUSSION Commissioner Arnold had an inquiry regarding Item 4 of the recommendationuadd a centerline stripe. Commissioner Arnold suggested that we modify that to add the word double centerline stripe. 14 . . . SAFETY COMMISSION MINUTES May 10,1990 Chairman Decker advised that there was a motion on the floor and that this would have to be entered as a separate motion after the motion on the floor was handled. MSUC [Thomas/Koester] 3-0, Decker, Militscher and Waller abstained due to absence from last meeting, to approve the Minutes of April 12, 1990. MOTION That Commission accept staff's recommendation. MSUC [Thomas/Koester] 6-0, approved. Commissioner Militscher inquired if the striping was double striping or double striping. Mr. Rosenberg responded that staff would put in a broken line so it would be permissible to pass to the left, except at the curveshthere the centerline would be double yellow. Commissioner Arnold stated he does not vote for the dashed one because of the gradient of the area. No passing should be permitted or allowed. Mr. Rosenberg stated that staff had no objection to a double yellow centerline stripe. The problem with the double yellow line stripe is that it does encourage violation. Staff has no problem with a double yellow line the entire length of the roadway if that is the desire of the Commission. Commissioner Arnold made the motion that the Commission accept the recommendations of the Safety Commission and add the word double under Item 4 of staff's recommendation--add a double centerline stripe. MOTION That the Commission change the recommendation of staff, Item 4, to a double centerline stripe. [Arnold/Koester] COMMISSION DISCUSSION Commissioner Arnold pointed out the value of the double centerline, particularly in a winding area, especially in a neighborhood area. I do a lot of driving in the San Bernadino Mountains from San Bernadino up to Running Springs and Big Bear. Out of that area there is only two areas where you can do any passing and there is only maybe another two areas where they use dashed lines, all the rest of the way it is double lines. If you get behind somebody that is slow you've got to stay in there behind them or you are going to cause an accident. I use that example for my justification of the double line. 15 . . . SAFETY COMMISSION MINUTES May 10,1990 MOTION That the Commission change the recommendation of staffs Item 4 to a double centerline striDe. MSC [Arnold/Koester] 5-1, (Waller), approved. Chairman Decker called a recess at 8:25 p.m. Chairman Decker alerted the public that there was a sign up sheet and that if they wished to be notified when any of the issues being discussed at this session would come before the City Council they needed to sign the sheet. Chairman Decker called the Commission back into session at 8:40 p.m. 3. NEW BUSINESS (3a) ReQuest for an all-wav stoD at "0" Street and Woodlawn Avenue Frank Rivera presented staffs report. This was a request that we received for an all- way stop at Woodlawn Avenue and "0" Street. This item has come before the Safety Commission previously and at that time the intersection was uncontrolled and the Safety Commission at that time decided to install yield signs on "0" Street to control east- and west-bound traffic. Staff did do an all-way stop study at this location to determine the merits for the request for an all-way stop. This intersection did not meet the City's requirement. I would like to point out that the volumes on these streets are 717 on "0" Street and 967 vehicles per day on Woodlawn Avenue. We have had one accident, which was a right-angle accident which occurred over one year ago--one vehicles did not yield the right-of-way for the other motorist. Staff is recommending that a two-way stop be installed, but with stop signs we are being recommended that it be posted on the minor street, or the street with the lower volume, which would be "0" Street. Therefore, in effect, we would be replacing the yield signs with the stop signs. I would also like to point out that the vehicles which park in the vicinity of the intersection can be reducing the sight distance. There are some campers parked in the area and motor homes which park close to the intersection. Staff is only recommending that these two stop signs be added and that if the Safety Commission desires it, we could also install a parking restriction within the vicinity of the intersection. PUBliC COMMENTS Bert Vanderheyden, 101 Woodlawn Avenue, Chula Vista, 92010. I have lived at the comer of Woodlawn Avenue and "0" Street since 1945, so you know I have seen many changes. It has only been in the more recent years that we are running into a problem. Now as you know this street is only two blocks long 16 . SAFETY COMMISSION MINUTES May 10, 1990 . where we are having the problem. This is not a thoroughfare for anybody to go anywhere. This has become residential area. We have all trailer parks on the left hand side, many people in there, especially the ones from "0 Street up to Chula Vista Street, they are mostly elderly people. On the other end they have many, many apartments and down through Woodlawn Avenue there is getting to be more and more apartments. It is our own people, as you brought up once before, that is causing the problem. We have asked for the police to come out and check it and you see the cars at 3:00, 3:30 in the afternoon and 10:00, 10:30 in the morning. Everybody is going to work, nobody is driving on the street. Probably 9 out of 10 of the cars drive legitimately. It is not a case of everybody speeding, it is not case a case of high speed. It is a case of--from about 4:30 to 6:30 in the evening--they work on their cars and then later it used as a drag strip. They zoom. The bikers get out there and I'm telling you it is not 35/40, when they come through there it is good. If you will check back about three years we had a bad accident in there where the Life Flight helicopter had to come and take the people away. After you put the yield signs in on "0" Street, it has become way worse. Now they are not going to speed on "0" Street. You've got a dip in there and if they go over it at 25 mph you'll see the wheels off the car and that car off the ground. As soon as you put up a stop sign there, that made it legitimate for these people to use this as a drag strip. If you are out there at the right time of day, it won't only be one or two or three--but it only takes one car to kill somebody. I am telling you it gets to be dangerous to even try to walk across the intersection. To me it was worse after they put the yield signs. Seeing as this street does not go any place, it only goes up one to two blocks to residents, down here another block to the school, they can't go fast around that so they have to be slowed down at the school. To me, the legitimate thing to do would be to put a stop sign at "0" Street and Woodlawn Avenue. Now, I know what is going to happen when you put a stop sign in: you get all of the car noise, everybody is trying to get underway as fast as they can, you have more smoke in the intersection it would turn blue from the smog. So I know we have two problems there. But everyone in there is concerned about the possibility of a child being hurt, it is a dangerous situation. COMMISSION DISCUSSION Commissioner Militscher asked is this on the suggested route to school, this intersection--do the children have to pass that. . Mr. Rivera responded that all the intersections in the area, depending where the children live, are on the suggested route to school. If a child lives north of the intersection in this area [referring to the viewgraph] there would be crossing in this direction [again, showing the Commission on the viewgraph] to get to the school which is located here. Generally, the pattern is for the students to walk this way to the Feaster Element School. 17 . . . SAFETY COMMISSION MINUTES May 10, 1990 Commissioner Militscher asked if he were correct in assuming there were no crossing guards at the intersection under discussion. Mr. Rivera stated that no, the only crossing guards are at Jefferson Avenue. He further stated that he did not know if there is a crosswalk on Woodlawn Avenue, where the could possibly be another crossing guard. MOTION Commissioner Koester made the motion that we accept staffs recommendation. [Koester/Militscher] COMMISSION DISCUSSION Commissioner Arnold asked relative to the sight distancehhe has had problems with these types of vehicles parked at intersections. I would like some reaction from staff as to how far back that intersection should those large vehicles be restricted from parking. Mr. Rivera showed slides of the area. The primary problem at this location is that when a vehicle is eastbound and they have to look south, they have to come up to the intersection, very slow, and look both ways before they can cross. When vehicles such as this [the van shown parked at the comer, in the slide] do park close to the intersection it does present a problem. Staff could put about 30 feet of red curbing on the approaches to each intersection. But when vehicles are parking in the vicinity of the intersection it does [such as the vehicle in the slide] it normally does not present a problem sight distance wise. It is when these type of vehicles are parking over on these comers [pointing to the slide] on Woodlawn Avenue that make it difficult for "D" Street traffic to look for oncoming vehicles. Commissioner Militscher asked if that would present a parking hardship for the residents in the area. Mr. Rivera stated that on the west side it is a mobile home park, it should not be a problem for them as they having parking spaces. This house here [pointing to the slide] their parking could be on the other side of the street; this house here [pointing to the slide] may have a problem where we would have to restrict parking--over here by the fire hydrant and continuing down somewhat, across the street restricting would not be a problem. Possibly some restriction here where the car is [pointing to the slide] might present a problem as you see there is also a vehicle here in the driveway, so I imagine that they do have a need for off-street parking. 18 . . . SAFETY COMMISSION MINUTES May 10, 1990 MOTION Accept staff's recommendation. MSUC, [Koester/Militscher] 6-0, approved. (3b) Request for an alI-wav sto1' at East Oxford Street and Melrose Avenue Mr. Rivera gave staff's report. This is the request for an all-way stop at the intersection of Melrose Avenue and East Oxford Street. Staff received a request from a citizen to investigate the need for an all-way stop at this intersection. Staff has noted that the traffic in this area is pretty much evenly distributed between East Oxford Street and Melrose Avenue. The volumes are 2,080 vehicles on Melrose Avenue and 1,890 on East Oxford Street. The accident history for this intersection shows that since 1987 that we have six reported accidents and we have had only had one in the last year. A radar study was done at this intersection for East Oxford Street and showed that the 85 percentile was 33 mph. The City's all-way stop policy completed at this intersection showed that this intersection did not meet the warrants to justify an all-way stop at this intersection and therefore staff is recommending that no all-way stop be installed at this location. That completed my report . Mr. Rosenberg made the observation that the volumes of traffic on both streets are almost equal and in terms of the effect that an all-way stop would have for delay would be minimized because the volumes are equal and generally speaking, these kinds of streets lend themselves best to all-way stops. However, the criteria that we use in terms of points does not qualify the intersection. But in terms of a local neighborhood type all-way stop it would not cause anything unusual in a delay problem. Commissioner Militscher asked if there were any stop signs up at present. Mr. Rivera noted that Melrose Avenue, north- and south-bound directions do have the stop signs. Mr. Rosenberg interjected that both streets have centerline stripes on them, so they are through streets, intersecting with each other, but no stops for Oxford Street. Mr. Rivera showed a slide of the view looking eastbound, East Oxford Street does not have any stop control. The stop signs are on Melrose Avenue. Commissioner Waller asked about the five accidents that were referred to as broadsides. He asked if he was correct in assuming that people are running that stop sign. Officer Barry Bennett stated that he personally probably took the most recent accident report about six weeks ago and he believes that the biggest problem is for 19 . . . SAFETI COMMISSION MINUTES May 10, 1990 the through street on East Oxford Street are violation of right-of-ways during a left turn. Someone will be going straight east or west and someone else will be making a left turn and they will turn in front of them--that is what the accident was that I responded to. That was the most recent. Commissioner Arnold asked that relative to page 3 of the all-way stop summary he noted that staff had some recommendations in addition to the not installing an all- way stop, specifically parking sight distance. What was intended when this was added on page 3 of the all-stop summary. Mr. Rivera responded that staff was saying that the sight distance could be improved if vehicles such as the one on the previous slide [which showed a parked van] parking too close to the intersection. This would also help provide more visibility for the vehicles. Commissioner Arnold asked what was the deal on the north leg move limit line 5 feet. Mr. Rivera stated that we would be moving the limit line closer to the intersection to provide more sight distance because of the block wall. MOTION Accept staffs recommendation. MSUC, [Militscher-Thomas/Koester] 6-0, approved. Chairman Decker inquired if staff needed a motion to go ahead and move the limit line. Staff indicated a motion was not necessary. Chairman Decker noted that there was not much visibility at that comer. FOLLOW-UP ACTION ITEM BY STAFF Chainnan Decker requested that Mr. Rosenberg check and see if that block wall was put up under permit. llil ReQuest for removal of stop sisms on Gotham Street at Vassar Avenue Mr. Rivera gave staffs report. This is the request from Mr. Douglas Tatreau who owns the property at 1698 Gotham Street, requesting the removal of the temporary all-way stop at Vassar Avenue and Gotham Street. Staff has received a written request Mr. Tatreau last November that the stop sign be removed and the red curb in front of his property also be removed. Staff evaluated this intersection for an all- way stop study and found that the intersection of Gotham Street and Vassar Avenue did not justify any points. The volumes on these streets, Gotham Street initially 20 . SAFETY COMMISSION MINUTES May 10, 1990 when the all-way stops were installed had volumes of approximately 4,000 vehicles per day. At that time Rutgers Avenue did not extend north between Gotham Street to East "H" Street. At that time the only way east/west through the area for the residents living east of Rutgers Avenue was to go through Gotham Street. The volumes on Vassar Avenue are 111 vehicles per day. We had, during the four busiest, 34 vehicles. Staff, therefore, had also conducted a vehicle speed survey since the stop signs were installed to decrease the speed of the motorists on Gotham Street. The radar speeds, which was done on April 19 showed that the mid-block speeds between Vassar Avenue and Cornell Avenue had an 85 percentile of 39 mph. The radar speed which was done in 1985 showed that the 85 percentile was 4 miles per hour lower. Therefore, the all-way stops have not reduced the speeds mid-block although they have reduced the speeds in the vicinity of the stop signs. Staff also evaluated the accident history for this intersection and found that we have had no reported accidents at this intersection. Staff also feels that since the motorists are now using Rutgers Avenue and bypassing Gotham Street, and as the volumes are about two-thirds lower, the recommendation is that the stops signs for Gotham Street be removed and the stop signs on Vassar Avenue remain. . PUBLIC COMMENTS . Tom Davis, 1657 Gotham Street, Chula Vista, 92013. I am speaking in opposition to this particular study. I [see/have] a couple of problems that may be bureaucratic in nature, but when these stop signs were approved they were temporary. My recollection is that on two occasions they were made permanent. When I spent some number of hours this week with the City Clerk looking for those two approvals for permanent stop signs, I could only find one in the records which was 4/12/88 in which three sets of stop signs were made permanent. I don't know exactly what that means, except it was my understanding that when the City Council acted on that particular matter that they were going to stay. That Gotham Street being what it is and with the traffic volumes understandably less than they were when Rutgers Avenue was put through, that the stop signs were still an appropriate device to have in there. I now discover that action by the City Council, whether there were two or one, seems to have no effect on this. That the gentlemen who wrote the letter to the City Council initiates another entire study of the matter. That being the case, and if that is correct, then you can expect to act on every stop sign and stop light in the City. I [generic use of I] will require something that will require a new study to be done. I don't understand, first of bureaucratically, when a set of stop signs are approved for the reason of controlling traffic--we admit that freely--that when somebody wants one removed that it can be removed after all of the argument and emotion that was expressed the first time those signs were approved. Secondly, I do not think a 39 mph 85 percentile speed is appropriate. It is a reflection of not enforcing the speed limits, as far as I am concerned, because the attention has been drawn away 21 . SAFETY COMMISSION MINUTES May 10, 1990 from that area. When there was a lot of attention on Gotham Street, the speed limits were lower because it was being enforced. Now there isn't such enforcement, they are off on these other areas that you have already heard about at length this evening. I believe that to accept a 39 mph 85 percentile speed on a residential street is absurd. The stop sign being removed would only encourage that to be higher. When the study was done at first, when the stop signs were being considered, the high speed was over 50 mph. I feel that without stop signs on that street that is exactly what you can expect again. I don't think we ought to be subjected to those kind of speeds on a residential street no matter how the twisted logic goes that we should remove the stop sign and then remove any reason for slowing up on the street at all. So I would say that I would be opposed to the removal of that stop sign. The red curb is there because it is a bus stop, not because it is a stop sign. I think that point ought to be made clearly, that the red curb is there not because of the stop sign, but because of the bus stop. The bus couldn't stop there so the bus company got together with the City and had a red curb. It will stay red curb, whether there is a stop sign or not. Thank you. . John Stewart, 1716 Gotham Street, Chula Vista, 92013. I have lived at this address for 22 years. I am also a police officer with the City of Chula Vista and have been so for the past 15 years. I have seen traffic on Gotham Street before and after the installation of the stop sign. I have personally have written hundreds and hundreds of tickets on Gotham Street before the stop sign for speeds exceeding well over 50 mph. With the installation of the stop sign there has been a drastic change. Your survey of the 85 percentile of 39 mph in my opinion is unacceptable and probably should require some selective enforcement. I feel that the stop signs being in place at this time, they are an effective control regardless of the amount of traffic on the street. I feel, in my own opinion as a professional in the law enforcement field, that it would be foolhardy to remove them. There has been a lot of talk on stop signs already, they are effective, they are working and I ask you to leave them in place. Thank you. Richard Villarreal, 1720 Gotham Street, Chula Vista, 92013. I am a father of two kids which go to school at Tiffany's School and cross that street on a daily basis. I think that by taking the stop signs out will have more of an increase of speeders. We already have violators of speed out there on that street. By removing those stops it is just going to increase. Those special people that violate the speed law, they are going even faster, they know they have to come to a stop and I feel that if that is true that the red curb is out there for the bus stop reason. Why jeopardize the safety of the kids around in the neighborhood on top of that. . 22 . SAFETY COMMISSION MINUTES May 10, 1990 . Brenda Boyd, 1704 Gotham Street, Chula Vista, 92013. Our house is located at the end of Gotham Street, directly in front of the three-way stop so you can image I am able to view the traffic daily at all times of the day. I was here before the stop signs were installed and there is no doubt about it, they make it a lot safer to live on Gotham Street, to cross the streets, or to drive. Our community supports these stop signs. I have a petition with over 100 neighbors' signatures opposing the removal of the stop signs. We are concerned with the safety of the school children that go to Tiffany Elementary School. We have a letter from the Principal of Tiffany stating his support for these stop signs for exactly this reason. Before the stop signs were installed, there was no limit on what speed a motorist could excel to. And it was not unusual to see speeds in excess of 55 mph. If you take the stop signs out people will be traveling extremely fast. Our children cross there, I don't know if it is the approved route, but it is where they go. We will just be increasing the likelihood that somebody is going to get hit and killed and it is probably going to be a small child. As I understand it, these stop signs were made permanent after East Rutgers opened to East "H" Street and nothing has changed since then. We still need the stop signs. The reason we are here is because of the red curbing in front of 1698 Gotham Street. The owner has indicated to me that he has no objection with the stop signs in and of themselves, he just wants the red curb removed. So I hope you can remove the red curb without affecting the stop signs. Thanks. . Doug Tatreau, 1355 Valencia Loop, Chula Vista, 92011. I am the owner of 1698 Gotham Street and my 88 year old father is the resident in the house. I am also the latest villain on bring this question up on stop signs and red curbs on Gotham Street. For the benefit more of the people sitting behind me than you as the Council I would like to read the last sentence of my very first letter that I wrote back in September to the City of Chula Vista. "I hereby request that the City not paint the curb red in front of 1698 Gotham Street." Please note, I did not request that the stop sign be removed at that time. The only reason that I requested the stop sign be removed is because of a letter that I received from the City Engineer saying that that was the only way that they could remove the red curb was to remove the stop sign. And as a previous speaker has pointed out, the reason for the red curb was because of the bus stop. Now, the situation is somewhat confusing to me. In other words I talked to the people in the bus stop and they indicated they would consider not having to require the red curb there. I then talked to the people in the City Engineering department and they said that even if the bus stop were removed, and I repeat, even if the bus stop were removed, that the red curb would have to remain there if the stop sign remained there. But the reason that the red curb was put there was not because of the stop sign but because of the bus stop. So I reached kind of a point of confusion here. Then my request was, well how about we just get rid of the red curb and I am allowed to park a vehicle therehwhich isn't very often since it is an elderly man of 88 years 23 . SAFETY COMMISSION MINUTES May 10, 1990 . old. Then the City pointed out that there is ordinance that says, no you cannot park any vehicles within 30 feet prior to a stop sign. I got very confused at that point because all other stop signs in College Estates do not have a red curb painted in front of them and they do have cars parked in front of the stop signs--with one exception--the stop sign in front of the fire station, it has a red curb and I have an idea that red curb was there long before the stop sign. To go a step further, the stop sign diagonally across the street, there is no red curb. People park there in front of that stop sign all the time. In other words, in violation of the code. Other stop signs up and down Gotham Street do not have the red curb in front of them and people park there. To take the risk of really insulting someone, and I don't want to, but if you walk out these doors through the City Administration Building, and go out on to Davidson Street, right in front of the Health Services Building you will find a stop sign and two reserved designated parking spots within that 30 foot strip that would be in violation of the this code. Or, walk across the street to where there is a more public situation and not the City property and you will find that on Davidson Street and Fourth Avenue there is a stop sign, there is no red curb and prior to this meeting at 6:30 there was a car park there. So, I realize that there is this City code, but I also realize that this City code is obviously is not enforced very much, even when the City on their own property has two designated parking spots within 30 feet of a stop sign. So I go back to my original request, I am confused on the enforcement. It appears that the City has this law but it is not enforced very much throughout the City. I see lots of stop signs without red curbs and cars parked within that 30 foot margin, all over. I see I am running out of time here, therefore, my request is primarily to remove the red curb more than anything else and that is the way my original request was written. Commission Militscher asked if it were impossible to remove the red curb. . Mr. Rosenberg stated that staff is bound by the Code and that's what gives me the heartburn. The Municipal Code Section 66 states you cannot park within 30 feet of the approach to any flashing signals, stop sign or traffic control similarly located at the side of the roadway. This Code, by the way, I think, was written in 1966. It is an unusual section of the Code. As you know I worked at the City of San Diego for 28 years and in the City of San Diego there is no such regulation that denies parking near intersections or next to stop signs. If there is a problem with vehicles blocking the visibility of the stop sign, we dealt with it on a case by case basis. I think there are two issues here: 1) is whether or not the stop signs are justified--we did evaluate that and determined that they did not qualify and we feel that, and continue to feel, they are not required nor needed any longer; and 2) the issue of the red curb and parking, I would suggest that the Commission consider directing staff to study the feasibility of modifying the Code to delete that provision to allow for these exceptions and determine the problem on a case by case basis. There is a provision in the Vehicle Code, enabling legislation if you will, that allows 24 . . . SAFETY COMMISSION MINUTES May 10, 1990 a local agency to adopt an ordinance or resolution to prohibit the parking of vehicles in excess of 6 feet in height, including any load on the vehicle, from parking within comers for a distance of around 100 feet. We could modify the Code to cover that situation and rectify the problem. If the Commission determines that the stop signs shall remain I would suggest then that we study the feasibility of changing the Code that would allow us then to remove the red curbing. I am in a little bit of a fix because I have been put on notice by the bus stop that they need they did that. If they were to relocate the bus stop, I guess I would have to take that risk and remove it. If in fact someone did get hurt crossing the street because a car was parked there and the motorist couldn't see the pedestrian or the child crossing the street, they can turn to the City and say you created a dangerous condition. I don't want to be in that position, having been on notice to put the red curb in initially. Now if there were a complaint about any other location we would probably put red curb in at other locations where they constitute a problem. I recognize that there are situations where cars are being parked next to stop signs within that 30 foot tolerance. I am not aware of those situations representing a dangerous condition. Chairman Decker asked if the reason for the red curb right now at this location at present is because there is a bus stop there. Mr. Rosenberg responded yes to the question and to enforce, or emphasize, the provision of the Municipal Code. Chairman Decker stated that the City does not paint curbs on all stop signs as a regular policy in this City, do we. Mr. Rosenberg stated that was correct. Chairman Decker reiterated that it [the red curb] is there primarily because it is a bus stop and regardless, it is still a no parking zone regardless of whether there is a bus stop there or not. Mr. Rosenberg stated that if the bus stop were removed it still would be a violation to park there, but recognizing that people do park adjacent to stop signs, I am in a dilemma here on removing the red curb. Chairman Decker noted that this was truly a Catch 22! Mr. Rosenberg agreed. 25 . . . SAFETY COMMISSION MINUTES May 10, 1990 Commissioner Militscher asked if it were possible to establish a code to remove that red paint. Mr. Rosenberg told the Commission that they could pass a motion to recommend that the red paint be removed. MOTION That the Commission move to not accept staff's recommendation--and to leave the stop sign and remove the paint on the red curb. [Militscher/Thomas] COMMISSION DISCUSSION Commissioner Arnold desired to know what effect this would have on the bus company. Mr. Rivera informed the Commission that he spoke to the representative from the transit company and they said that when the request was made they were having a problem with vehicles parking there. I understand that now, since the vehicles that do park there are there less frequently that they do not experience the problem that had when they initially made the request for the red curbing. They said that most times they should not experience a problem at that location. Commission Waller noted that there was a gentlemen earlier from another area discuss that he was one of the people who used to go through Gotham Street before the stop sign was installed and he stopped going through there after the stop signs were put up and I can image that quite a few other people no longer use Gotham, but that if we take the stop sign down they will start using Gotham Street again. Commissioner Decker commented that while he was never in favor of the stop signs to begin with, only because of a technical issue, I am generally against changing things when they have been established and this is a well established intersection, the stop signs are there, the speed is still excessive--I walk that street often and I still see people going at excessive speedsnso I can't believe, personally, that removing the stop signs is going to decrease the speeds on that street. Given that, I am in favor of retaining the stop signs, too. MOTION That the Commission move to not accept staff's recommendation nand to leave the stop sign and remove the paint on the red curb. MSUC, [Militscher/Thomas] 6-0, approved. 26 . . . SAFETY COMMISSION MINUTES May 10, 1990 (3d) Request for a pedestrian barrier on Otav Lakes Road alon!!: Bonita VISta Junior and Senior Hi!!:h Schools Mr. Rivera gave staffs report. I would like to mention the background of this request. Staff received a letter from the President of the Bonita Business and Professional Association and the Principal of Bonita Vista High School that something be done about the jay-walking students crossing the area of Otay Lakes Road in the vicinity of the Junior High School and the shopping center. Staff had met with the Principal of Bonita Vista High School and the Director of Planning for the Sweetwater Union High School District to discuss some of the alternatives available to eliminate the jay-walking in the area. Otay Lakes Road is a divided four-lane roadway, with a median, set between Canyon Drive and north, where it is separated by a double yellow centerline stripe. The recent roadway improvements, the development of the shopping center, and the schools and residents in the area do encourage the pedestrians to cross to go to these developments. Staff did look at the idea of installing a chain link fence on the median and that idea was not recommended since the design of the medians would not lend themselves easily to the addition of a chain link fence. Staff has also reviewed the accident history for the area and it shows that there were no reported pedestrian accidents in crossing mid-block. It should be noted that the roadway width changed considerably within the last year. Staff and the school district came to a consensus to add No Pedestrian Crossing signs which would be placed in the medians, opposite the shopping center driveways, which are not signalized. These are the locations where the pedestrians tend to congregate. They cross the street in the mornings towards the driveway where the Carl's Jr. is located, in the afternoon they are crossing the north driveway of the shopping center where the video and ice cream stores are located. Staff, therefore, is recommending that Pedestrians Use Crosswalks signs be installed to discourage the jay-walking. The Chula Vista police have issued some citations for the jay-walkers in the area. Staff feels this is a first measure, along with police enforcement that we will help alleviate this problem. Commissioner Koester inquired as to whether there were an adequate number of crosswalks. Mr. Rivera noted that there were three crosswalks in the area: one at East "H" Street and Otay Lakes Road, one at the mid-block location, and Canyon Drive and Ridgeback. All of which are signalized. [Slides, showing the areas of the crosswalks, were shown to the Commission.] 27 . . . SAFETY COMMISSION MINUTES May 10, 1990 Mr. Rosenberg interjected that we do not want the children crossing mid-block, of course, and the only way to discourage them is either to put a barrier up which is not feasible or to issue citations--it is a violation, and this is in the jay-walking code section, crossing between two signalized intersections. Commissioner Thomas asked if the schools have made any public announcement to their students that this is a violation, that they could be given a citation. Mr. Rivera responded stating that he had spoken with the Principal. The Principal was going to be sending notices out to the students and also there were some perimeter gates along the high school, which when left open the students use to walk down the grass and they proceed across the street mid-block over the median and over to the driveway. The school was talking about closing off the gate, and thereby causing the students to be coming out up towards the library which is closer to the signalized intersection. PUBUC COMMENTS Manuel Uera, 658 Landis, Chula Vista, 92010. I am the Principal of Bonita Vista High School. This has been quite an experience hearing all the crowd. I probably did not need to stay because I agree with the City's decision. My only concern is, and it was mentioned somewhere in the report, is that at a later time if this solution does not work, then something else needs to be looked at. But for the present, we have notified the students that they are not to cross, that it is a misdemeanor and that they will be cited. I noticed this morning as I was driving in, a police officer was citing a student. Perhaps if we do that for a little while, knowing the police are very busy, it tends to have an effect on them. There are also adults doing the same thing [jay-walking] and some of them are employees of the school and some of them are not. We are informing our own people not to do that. The signs will instruct everyone--be they students or adults. It is quite a ways between the two lights and people think twice and then they make a dash for it, so they need that warning that they could be cited. We will be closing the gates in the front which will redirect the students to the areas where the two traffic signal lights are. I really didn't have much to do with the area further to the north for the junior high school; that is another problem, but one that may also have to be addressed. The junior high school kids tend to go every which way and, I think, it's an even worse problem than the high school. I wanted to wait to thank you, to thank the City for its rapid response to our request and what seems to be a pretty good temporary solution. Thank you. 28 . . . SAFElY COMMISSION MINUTES May 10,1990 COMMISSION DISCUSSION Commissioner Arnold inquired as to the spacing of these signs. He noted that it was quite a distance between traffic signals and wished to know also how many signs were there going to be. Mr. Rivera responded that staff was looking at placing the signs opposite of each driveway entrances since that is where the students are crossing. Along the west curb line where the shopping center is located on Otay Lakes Road. If the students are crossing, they have to walk towards the driveway anyway. They are tending to walk the shortest route to their destination which is the driveway entrances. Therefore, we wanted to put the signs opposite the driveways on the median. Chairman Decker stated that he noticed that opposite the junior high school that there is illegal crossingnright at the end of the fence where there is a short walkway that comes down to the edge of the curb, to the southwest from the school. He urged Commission/staff to put a sign across the street at that location, if in fact it is an illegal crossing. Mr. Rosenberg informed the Commission that it was legal to cross at that location. Chairman Decker inquired if it were possible to make it illegal to cross there as it certainly is a very dangerous spot. Mr. Rosenberg stated is all that we can hope is that we get the word out to the junior high school and have monitors out there directing the children to not do that. As far as enforcement he did not know what we could do. Officer Barry Bennett said that the way the law reads for jay-walking is crossinsr between adiacent controlled intersections. either bv a sisrnal or a police officer. So this does not apply in that situation. There are sections that do apply, in that when you are not crossing at an intersection a pedestrian does not have the right-of-way and must yield to all oncoming hazardous traffic. So if a police officer were out there and one of these kids darted across the street or tried to run, and if a car had to put on brakes or swerve or make some kinds of evasive action or it was close enough that it could have been a hazard, that is, in fact, a violation and can be cited. MOTION That the Commission accept staffs recommendation. MSUC, [Koester/Thomas] 6-0, approved. 29 . . . SAFETY COMMISSION MINUTES May 10, 1990 (3e) ReQuest for an all-way stOD at Yale Street and Vassar Avenue Mr. Rivera gave staff's report. We received a request from Mr. Gibson to investigate the need for an aU-way stop at Yale Street and Vassar Avenue. Mr. Gibson mentions that the proximity of the elementary school and the stop signs on Gotham Street have diverted traffic over to Yale Street and therefore he was requesting that an all-way stop study be conducted by staff. Staff did do an aU-way stop study and did traffic counts in this area. Volumes on Yale Street are approximately 375 vehicles per day and 395 on Vassar Avenue. Staffs aU-way stop study showed that it received 11 points, primarily because the volumes were so close to each other that an aU-way stop would not reaUy delay one direction over the other. One point that should be noted is that at most times the vehicle volumes are very low and therefore there are gaps in traffic. There is also pedestrians in the area, but the pedestrian counts do not show to be more than 20 to 30 pedestrians crossing in the morning and in the evening on their way to the elementary school. We have had one accident which was a right-angle accident, this occurred in January 1989, where one vehicle failed to yield to the other vehicles. This accident occurred at 2:00 p.m. Staff is recommending that an aU-way stop not be instaUed at this intersection. Commissioner Arnold stated that he is assuming that in the fourth paragraph under Discussion [in staffs report] that the second sentence Both intersections of Xavier and ComeU Streets are T-intersections with Vassar Avenue. This should be Yale Street and not Vassar Avenue. What is the relevance of that particular statement to the problem here. Mr. Rosenberg told the Commission to disregard. PUBUC COMMENTS RandaU Webber, 1692 Yale Street, Chula Vista. I live on the southwest comer of Yale Street and Vassar Avenue. I am here to support staff's recommendation to not instaU stop signs. The minimal traffic that we have observed over the last 15 years, I do not believe supports the need for stop signs at Yale Street and Vassar Avenue. I would like to thank staff also for their quick action to look into this situation. Robert Tugenberg, 1702 Yale Street, Chula Vista. I have been living at this address for 17 years. The accident reported here of January 3, 1989--my wife had happened to be knocked down and had a couple of stitches put in her head. Nonetheless, I am also supporting the staff's recommendation because there is literaUy no traffic on either Vassar Avenue or Yale 30 . . . SAFETY COMMISSION MINUTES May 10, 1990 Street. Since the opening of Rutgers Street it has become even less. Oh, by the way, I have lived there, as I say, 17 years and in the 17 years I have counted three accidents so I see no justification for a four-way stop there. Thank you. MOTION That the Commission accept staff's recommendation. MSUC, [Waller/Thomas] 6-0, approved. Qfl Reauest for parkinS!: permits on 300 block of Roosevelt Street Commissioner Arnold informed the Commission that the people who submitted this request were here earlier, one of them is a doctor involved in bring this to our attention. He had a medical requirement to leave and so nobody will be here to represent them. Mr. Rivera gave staff's report. We received a request for the doctors to be able to obtain permit parking on Roosevelt Street. Initially, when the City Council established the permit parking on Roosevelt Street was to help out the residents because they live in an area where there are medical buildings and commercial businesses that do make parking a premium there. People from the medical offices across the street would fill up the entire street and residents could find no place to park. The street is 30 feet wide and this necessitated the removal of on-street parking on the north side and establishing a two-hour parking limit on the other side from 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Staff is recommending that the red curb in front of the doctors' offices be removed to allow for one more parking space to allow for a vehicle to park closer to the medical offices. They do have a parking lot but it only holds eight vehicles. Staff is therefore just recommending that the red curb be removed. We are not in a position to overrule the City Council and provide them with a parking permit since the City Council has established a policy for residents only to receive a parking permit. Therefore, we intend to forward this time to the City Council and maybe they could provide the doctors with a parking permit. But we feel that by adding an additional parking space closer to the medical office building that we are moving in the right direction. Commissioner Koester asked if the new space would also be a 2-hour parking space. Mr. Rivera stated yes it would. Commissioner Waller wished to know how many doctors were in the medical building. Commissioner Arnold informed the Commission that there were two doctors and six technicians in the medical building. 31 . . . SAFETY COMMISSION MINUTES May 10,1990 Commissioner Waller noted that would take up eight parking spots. Commissioner Arnold stated he had gone down and looked at the area and the people who use these doctors are elderly individuals and that another problem in the area is that the people have to go across the street to the hospital and that some of the people do not have the mobility to cross a busy street such as Fourth Avenue. Commissioner Arnold said he would go along with the creation of two parking spaces where the red curb is presently located. Chairman Decker wished to know why the red curb was painted so far down the street, did it come about with Council's direction. Mr. Rivera addressed that question. We have a red curb that is 53 feet long and over on the other side of the street it is 49 feet. The red curb was installed here because vehicles were parking on both sides of the street and only one vehicle could drive down the center of Roosevelt Street. If a vehicle was on Fourth Avenue and wanted to turn onto Roosevelt Street they would have to wait mid-turn in order to let a vehicle leaving Roosevelt Street maneuver out. Later it was determined that if parking was to be removed on one side it would allow for parking and two directions of travel on Roosevelt Street and that is why the red curb was put in--to clear the intersection area so that it would reduce the backup and congestion on Fourth Avenue. Mr. Rosenberg interjected that the [lengthy] red curb is redundant and not needed any longer. It was an oversight on staffs part not to have removed the red curb when the parking was removed. My understanding is that the doctors are seeking permits for employees to park on the street, not their patients, so that they can leave some room on their parking lot for patients. As you know, the residential permit parking was established primarily for the hardship that was incurred by the residents because of employee parking on the street. It is not staffs recommendation to go to the City Council unless the Commission so determines that wish to ask that the Council reconsider the use of the issuance of permits. If the Safety Commission does approve our report, we would forward an information report to the City Council only to the effect that we are going to establish an additional parking place by removing the red curb. If the doctors wish to pursue a request for special consideration, we expect them to take the initiative, we would not do that on their behalf. Commissioner Waller inquired if staffs intent was to add one more parking space, which would also be a 2-hour parking space. Mr. Rivera responded that the new parking space would still fall under the 2-hour parking restriction. 32 . . . SAFE1Y COMMISSION MINUTES May 10, 1990 Commissioner Waller asked why staff could not allow those two parking spaces be allotted to the doctor. It is his building and essentially he is the resident. Why not allow put a sign up. Mr. Rosenberg reiterated his understanding that staffs recommendation is to leave it open parking and not designate a 2-hour parking limit for the space. MOTION Remove the parking restriction on the south side of Roosevelt Street, remove 18 feet of red curb and establish the zone for open parking with no time limit restriction in that area. MSUC, [Militscher/Koester] 6-0, approved. 4. TRIAL TRAFFIC REGUIATIONS None scheduled. s. STAFF REPORTS Commissioner Koester inquired what is the fuel efficient traffic signal management program. Mr. Rosenberg informed the Commission that staff is installing a computerized traffic signal throughout the City. As you know we are upgrading approximately 100 some odd signalized intersections. The Federal Highway Administration, through the State of California, has a program which provides a grant that allows cities that have sophisticated traffic control systems to perform studies to determine the best timing for the signals for the purpose of fuel energy conservation, so hence, the acronym FETSIMnfuel efficiency transportation system management program, is designed to do just that. We have a contract for about $100,000 worth of effort. A consultant is going to make traffic counts at all these intersections and, using simulation computer models, determine the best timing for the signals as a system and then run actual field measurements of the performance of the signals as they operate, without the change and with the change, and show us how much more efficient we can get the roadway system to operate. Chairman Decker asked how often this would have to be revised based upon the change in the traffic loads. Mr. Rosenberg stated that the contract would hopefully will teach us how to do that on our own. Staff should be able to perform modifications as traffic patterns change and make adjustments. As soon as the computer is up and running, the Commission can corne over and see a demonstration and view the performance of 33 . . . SAFETY COMMISSION MINUTES May 10, 1990 the signal system-owe can program the system and show you an areawide system, and then we can focus in on a small area and then finally, on one intersection so you can view the changing of the signals. 6. COMMUNICATIONS fA} Public Remarks None. ill Commission Comments Commissioner Arnold stated that he was curious as to the progress on the development of the Broadway medians. Mr. Rosenberg introduced Zoubir Ouadah, an Associate Civil Engineer, in the Engineering Department, who will be transferring to the Traffic Section as an Associate Traffic Engineer and turned the question over to Mr. Ouadah for response. Mr. Ouadah informed the Commission that he is currently in charge of the special assessment district(s) and the development impact fee programs in the City of Chula Vista. I believe the Broadway project has been divided into three segments and the segment between "I" Street and south to Oxford Street is out to the consultant for design. I think it was two months ago we went to Council with a report to approve the median. FOLLOW-UP ACTION ITEM BY STAFF Mr. Rosenberg informed the Commission that he will provide a progress report at the June meeting. Commissioner Arnold brought up the signals south of "L" Street--going north and southuthere seems to be some problems. Mr. Rosenberg stated that there may be a malfunction. Staff will check. Commissioner Thomas made a brief report on the Shell Station at Bonita Glen Drive and "E" Street. A week ago last Wednesday, Mr. Rivera and I met with two representatives from Shell Oil Company at the gas station and we discussed the deterioration of the street and talked about problems and probable solutions. Shell Oil is to get back to me later this week with some type of recommendations. I think it is a very good idea to get them out here to meet with City officials, to look at the situation, to get somebody high up. His name was Brooks Herrings, he is an engineer from the Retail Facilities from Irvine. We felt his recommendations may be to paving concrete half the road, about 175 feet on the east side. I asked him 34 . . . SAFETY COMMISSION MINUTES May 10, 1990 to think about this before he made their recommendation. He felt strongly that Shell should not be responsible for the west side of the street. That if Shell paved it concrete on the east side, the City should leave the west asphalt, which would possibly present an elevation problem, thereby forcing the City to pay half to concrete the other side. I said that without Shell's problem the City would not be forced to make any kind of budgetary decision. Mr. Rivera stated that the problem would occur where seam of the concrete meets the asphalt. It would never be even and that would be where the water would collect, thus deteriorating the asphalt part of the roadway. We will have to keep the water off the road, and that is why we recommend that it would either have to be all concrete or no more water on the street to leave it at asphalt. Commissioner Thomas continued, stating that after the meeting on Wednesday that it might be a good idea to make a recommendation that the Mayor write Shell a letter. Commissioner Thomas read the letter sent by Mayor Cox to Mr. Herring. [Copy attached to these minutes.] I think we have to give Shell an opportunity to present a proposal, then I think we could bring that proposal to the Safety Commission, what does the Safety Commission think and then make the recommendation to the City Council. There was dialogue between Commission members about how to proceed. Chairman Decker asked that when this recommendation officially comes in, is it going to be presented to the Safety Commission. Is it your understanding that someone is going to come from Shell and make a presentation to the Commission. Commissioner Thomas stated that his concept was that Mr. Herring would submit a written proposal via him to the Safety Commission that would be acted upon and recommendation made to the City Council. Chairman Decker suggested that the Commission ask Mr. Herring to come and present his recommendation to the Commission. FOLLOW.UP ACTION ITEM BY STAFF Mr. Rosenberg stated that staff could make this an Agenda item for the June 1990 meeting. Staff will write a representative of Shell Oil Company informing them that this will be before the Safety Commission for discussion and possible action and that the Safety Commission has a preliminary recommendation to make. We can so advise the Shell Oil Company that that is what the Commission will be considering at the next meeting and perhaps they would like to have a representative come and speak to the item. 35 . . . SAFETY COMMISSION MINUTES May 10, 1990 7. WRrITEN CORRESPONDENCE None. 8. RECESS TO REGULAR MONTHLY WORKSHOP SESSION None. 9. ADJOURNMENT TO REGULAR SAFETY COMMISSION MEETING OF THURSDAY, JUNE 14, 1990 MOTION That we adjourn this meeting. MSUC, [Koester/Waller] 6-0, approved. The meeting was adjourned at 10:07 p.m. At the June meeting members will nominate and elect a new Chair and Vice Chair. ~~.~ Berlin D. Bosworth, Recording Secretary [SC3\A:MAY-90.MIN] 36