City Traffic Commission - Regular Meeting

Five to order. And with that, we'll start off with the Pledge of Allegiance. Commissioner Hamilton, please

put your right hand over your heart and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance. Ready to begin.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of The United States Of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Great.

With that, we will move on to item 1.2, which is the roll call. Francisco? We'll begin with the roll call. Vice Chair Ritchie? Here. Commissioner Barbato? Present. Commissioner Hamilton? Here. Commissioner Georges? Commissioner Chavarria? Here. Commissioner Redding? Present. And Chair Felice?

I'm here as well. We have a quorum present with Commissioner Georges absent. Great. Thank you. With that, we move on to item two point zero, which is public comments, which is an opportunity for members of the public to address the Traffic Commission on matters not listed on the agenda, which are within the subject matter of the jurisdiction of the commission, provided that no action may be taken on off agenda items unless authorized by public law. Public comments are limited to three minutes per speaker. Do we have any speakers? Perfect. Let me switch screens because I forgot. All right.

Up first, we have Carrie Snyder. And after Carrie, we have Joshua Cosmos.

Okay. Thank you. I'm Kerry Snyder. I'd like to address two items regarding the newly passed paid parking at the plaza and the surrounding area. Engineering department hasn't been forthcoming returning calls or contact and after repeated attempts. So first is the parking lot at Lot 9, the senior center. As I understand it, that lot is now a paid parking lot. All volunteers have to center have to pay in order to give their free time in volunteering at the center. In addition, all caretakers assisting seniors attending events, all seniors on limited budgets attending any events will now have to pay fees. And this is to accommodate the city's need in raising revenues.

Now, was under the impression the major part of the restructuring of the parking was to assess business owners who wanted to turn over vehicular parking in order to assist bringing in better and new business to them. And this revenue stream would be added to it, of course. It appears in this instance, Lot 9 does not do it, but it does dissuade seniors from attending events, volunteers, and caretakers from donating their time, basically trying to lower attendance at a well meaning community facility. It's possible, I don't know, was this lot included as a paid lot so in the next round of funding, community development department could use an excuse to close it, citing lack of use, decreased attendance, and that would be a direct result of adding on parking fees. The second item is motorcycle parking at the plaza, which I discussed with Larry Tay back in April and was supposed to be contacted during the period of time.

As you know, previously, motorcycle parking has been in areas that regular vehicles cannot park. It reduces congestion of not using up the regular vehicle spaces. Will parking motorcycles in these areas still be available? Will they be exempt from paying the fees rather than paying as a full vehicle in these areas? By not doing so, what you're doing is having motorcycles saying, we'll park in regular vehicles areas.

We won't double stack them, but we'll take up the spaces. And then you're decreasing the amount of through fare for traffic. And you're increasing the number of vehicles taking up spaces as well. Now, motorcyclists usually travel in small groups with no special accommodation. They may very well take up the larger vehicle parking spots, and this doesn't help the local businesses.

Again, multiple attempts to try to find this out from the traffic division at the city has been to no avail. Maybe the commission can answer that or make it public. Because it is not public from what I've seen on any information except all parking designated parking stalls will be charged. But it doesn't address specifically for the motorcycles. Thank you.

Great. Thank you. And after Joshua, I have Eric Aldman.

Good evening, commissioners. My name is Joshua Cosmos. I'm here today to raise some concerns also about the parking ordinance adopted this last February. My goal is clarity and collaboration and to share considerations that I believe deserve attention as the ordinance moves towards implementation. Over the last few years, Old Town has seen a consistently high turnover of businesses with new establishments moving beyond the circle now because of surpassed saturation.

And this pattern reflects broader impacts of zoning decisions made by the council, which I understand is outside of your decision making. But it's pushing for a denser commercial activity, which the efforts I understand come from the need to have and to strengthen revenue after difficult financial years for the city, still has created a business environment where long term stability feels increasingly strained. And at the same time, families and workers across the nation are dealing with rising cost of living, stagnant wages, and heightened economic pressure, which our community isn't immune to. So that's why I'm hoping to better understand as to why the added cost of paid parking fits into this moment. Once the ordinance takes effect, employees may have to commit a meaningful portion of their earnings simply to park for work, which may deter long term employment for small businesses, which are what make the circle what it is.

Patrons may face added costs just to visit, which may deter them, further straining the economic environment of the circle. And it's already a saturated market, to reiterate. Nearby residents may experience overflow parking in their neighborhood as visitors seek free alternatives, which is very self evident as to why that's inconvenient. And so I find myself wondering, how were these potential outcomes evaluated during the formulation of this policy? And what safeguards are planned to ensure that these impacts do not place additional burdens to the people who live and work here?

To me, these aren't simply logistical questions, but inclusively moral ones. Downtown and Orange as a whole depends heavily on the workers, small businesses, and residents who make the city vibrant. Any policy that affects them should balance revenue with dignity, stability, and a quality of life. So I raise these points truly respectfully and in sincere good faith. I'm confident that the possible consequences I've outlined today are ones this commission will consider thoughtfully, and I trust that my concerns and the concerns of others will not be overlooked as this ordinance moves toward implementation.

Thank you. Thank you.

Hello. My name is Eric, and I live at the corner of Batavia And Chapman in the Seville apartment complex with North Parker Street being the closest local street to my specific apartment. And I've been a

resident of Orange for the

last six years. I came today to try to secure a meeting with someone in the traffic commission. And I want to voice some thoughts and questions and explore my options regarding the newly installed permit parking on North Parker Street, was item 8.1 approved at the tenfourteentwenty five City Council meeting, resolution number 11636. As a resident of that area, I feel the installation of the permit parking has had a relatively adverse effect on my life and the life of my roommate and any visitors we host, which I do not believe was the intention of the commission or the permit parking installation at all as the stated purpose of the permit parking was to improve the lives of the residents in the area. Just since last week, I felt the effects of this new permit parking as my roommate and I have had trouble finding parking close to our apartment And my brother who has a physical handicap needed to park much further down South Parker Street in order to visit.

My address is North Batavia Street. However, North Parker Street serves as the de facto street that I would consider myself to live on as I live around 200 feet from North Parker Street and 400 feet from North Batavia Street. Batavia Street is classified as a minor arterial street by Caltrans, therefore, it's meant for through travel, and North Parker Street is a local street, Therefore, it's meant for access to residents, business, and abutting property. I also noticed that our apartment is zoned the exact same way as the residences on Parker Street on North Parker Street. Unfortunately, for myself and the residents of Seville Apartments, I live in the easternmost apartment and close proximity to North Parker Street, we're now limited in where ourselves and our visitors can park.

And there are no parking signs on the section of North Batavia Street on which our apartment lies and the parking section does not start on North Batavia until past the border of our apartment. As I try to get to a solution and understand permit parking better, I'm trying to get a meeting with the traffic commission. And I'm specifically wondering if I would be able to secure permit parking as I have two bedrooms in the residential area. Also, I've noticed that since the installation of permit parking around two weeks ago, when my roommate and I have been out on North Parker Street, park seems to be very vacant. And in my review of the municipal code, I noticed that a parking occupancy study must be conducted to determine parking occupancy levels before any permit parking can be installed.

I was unable to find this parking occupancy study or documentation surrounding that study, but I would be interested to have access and review that study with someone from the traffic commission in order to understand the situation better, as I'm at work most of the day and I don't fully understand the impact of the parking. Also because the shop the opening of the coffee shop Cedar House was the impetus for this request for permit parking, and it is only open six days a week from 07:30AM to 3PM if the commission would consider eliminating permit parking on the West Side Of North Parker Street or enforcing permit parking during certain hours of the day or certain days of the week rather than twenty four hours a day. I have these topics and a few others. I'm just looking to discuss with the traffic commission going forward. Great.

Thank you, Mr. Auer. All right. Are there any other

cards? Nope.

Seeing none. We'll move on to item three, which is the consent calendar. All matters under the consent calendar are considered to be routine by the city traffic commission and will be enacted in one motion. There will be no separate discussion discussion of the items unless members of the commission or staff or public request that the items be removed from the consent calendar for a separate action. Anybody want to pull any of the consent? Any speakers on any of those items? We're already motioning it. That's good. All right. Go ahead and call for the vote.

All right. With that, the motion passes unanimously. Excuse me. I'll now move on to item 4.1, which is the insulation of 40 feet of red curve on the west side of Wanda Road, both north and south of Quincy Avenue. Is there a staff report on this one?

Good evening, chairman and members of the traffic commission. Item 4.1 is for the request of red curb on the northwest and southwest corners of the Wanda Road and Quincy Avenue intersection. Staff received this request for the city to consider the installation of red curb on the northwest and southwest corners of the Wanda Road and Quincy Avenue intersection in order to enhance visibility. Wonder Road is a four lane roadway at its intersection with Quincy Avenue. The land use along this stretch of Wonder Road is generally comprised of single family residences.

Wonder Road from Lincoln Street to Monroe Avenue is a 40 mile per hour street. Parking is permitted on the west side of the street. The site sketch illustrates the proposed installation of 40 feet of red curb to the north of Quincy Avenue and 40 feet of red curb south of Quincy Avenue. Approval of this request will result in the loss of approximately two parking spaces to the North of Quincy Avenue and two parking spaces South of Quincy Avenue for a total of four parking spaces, but would enhance access to Quincy Avenue. The proposed curb markings are similar to those installed near other intersections along this corridor.

Staff recommends the traffic commission approve the request for red curb on the northwest and southwest corners of the Wanda Road and Quincy Avenue intersection. This concludes my report, and I'm available to answer any questions at this time.

Great. Thank you. Are there any questions for staff at the moment? Seeing none, I'll go ahead and open the public portion of this. Are there any speakers on their items? And yes, there is. I see Clyde Granger.

Good evening, all. We want to speak in favor of the of the action here. We think that this is a necessary thing. We normally have some pretty close calls there trying to get out of our little cul de sac. There's no other way in or out of where we live. It's just that corner there, so it makes it real difficult to see. In addition to that, we'd like to also see there's it shows four lanes where he's looking at it, but that four lanes is only about 100 feet long. Further north from us, it's a single lane. And if we had a single lane there, it'd allow us to get out a little farther to be able to see around the cars. That would help.

And then the other thing that would be very helpful is if we had a left turn lane because if there's room for four lanes, there would be room for a single lane and a left turn lane so we could turn left into our neighborhood if we were going north. That would be real helpful. And then as he mentioned, the speed limit is 40. We would recommend that it be 35. Sole the people down and give us a better chance to get out of the neighborhood before we get hit. We kind of get the one fingered salute and all that kind of stuff that we're all familiar with. So we'd like to not have that happen and not have those close calls. Thanks for your help, we appreciate what you're doing. Great.

Thank you.

Any other speakers on this item? Seeing none, I'll go ahead and close the public portion and bring them back to the commission. Any additional questions or anyone willing to motion? You guys are fast tonight. All right. With that, I'll

go ahead and call for the vote. All

right. With that, the motion passes unanimously. With that, we'll move on to item 4.2, which is a request to install speed cushions on Maple Avenue between Main Street and Batavia Street.

Good evening, Chairman and members of the Traffic Commission. Item 4.2 is for the request to install speed cushions on Maple Avenue between Main Street and Batavia Street. Maple Avenue between Main Street and Batavia Street is a two lane street comprised of single family residential dwellings with parking supported on both sides. In the 2024, the city installed Edgeline Striping Maple as a traffic calming feature. But despite the effort, city still continues to receive concerns over the vehicle speeds.

The city conducted an initial traffic study to gather the speed and volumes on Maple Avenue. The study showed that Maple Avenue has an eighty fifth percentile of 31 miles an hour and a six ninety two vehicle volume. Due to the ongoing concerns and the speed shown, staff believes it would be appropriate to consider a speed cushion pilot program. Speed cushions are prefabricated cushions that can be bolted down and are divided into segments with gaps to allow emergency vehicles to straddle the cushions. A petition was circulated to the residents on the affected blocks to identify the level of neighborhood support.

The petition results indicated that a majority of the residents on Maple Avenue are in support of speed cushions. There would be three speed cushions along Maple Avenue. The first location would be between Jewel Place and Leicester Drive. The second would be between Leicester Drive and Lime Street, and the third would be between Lime Street and Titcher Street as shown on the map above. The cost to furnish and install the speed cushions is estimated to be between $15,000 and $20,000 but it can be funded with the approved fiscal year 'twenty six budget.

To encourage slower speeds, staff recommends that the City Traffic Commission consider the installation of speed cushions on Maple Avenue between Main Street and Batavia Street and forward the resulting recommendations to City Council. This concludes my report and I am available to answer any questions at this time.

Great. Thank you. Any questions for staff at the moment? Staff,

thank you. Thank you for the presentation. So how often are we putting speed cushions in on a permanent basis, do you feel?

This is actually a pilot program, and this would be the first of its kind in the city.

And why three cushions instead of one or two?

Normally, we install a speed hump, which is one continuous. But with these speed cushions, it would allow emergency vehicles to straddle so they would not delay their emergency response time.

So the three is what staggered?

Okay.

And does public safety have any concerns?

I'm sorry?

No,

Nothing? Okay. And did we have any comments of opposition to have a speed cushion in front of somebody's house?

Commissioner do believe there may have been one resident who expressed concern about the speed cushions being located in front of their homes. Unfortunately, with all the constraints, all the driveways, all the utilities in the area and the need to have a certain number of speed, a certain spacing, we were very constrained. And so if we were to install speed cushions on the street, that's those are the the placement that we show on the staff report really are the only viable locations.

And and is it something where is it an opportunity to and I recognize it's a pilot program, but there's going to be the data going to be brought forward to the City Council. But with this pilot program, is it necessary to have the three locations?

Would be more beneficial. Speed vertical deflection devices, whether speed cushions or speed humps generally should be placed around between two hundred and four hundred feet apart approximately. And given the length of the segment between Batavia and Maine, if we go down to two, I think we would exceed a spacing that would normally be effective for reducing for encouraging slower speeds.

Okay. And how long is that pilot program? That's my question.

That hasn't been determined.

It's What would

you like to see?

Think there will be some data collection before and after. Usually it takes several months for patterns and behavior to kind of settle down. So we can certainly revisit this if it's an intent of the commission and ultimately the city council in several months' time.

Larry, on that, could the commission establish a time for data to be brought back if we were to pass this? I

believe it could be part of your recommendation to the

city council. Perfect. Thank you.

Commissioner Hamlin, go ahead.

Yeah, I had one question. I noticed in the study that it said that the eighty fifth percentile was 31 miles per hour is what the study had said. And it said that that's typically lower than what is normally recommended. At what speed does it get to where it would become we recommend this?

Based on the thresholds in our residential neighborhood, our NTMP, 35 miles per hour is typically the threshold.

I have

a question.

Go ahead, Commissioner Chavarria.

You're requesting cushions. What's the cost impact for doing conventional speed bumps? The reason I ask that question is because with these cushions, we're going to be implementing hardware and bolts into the street. They can be moved. If there's seismic movement in the street, they're likely to pop up. Is there a great cost impact for that?

Commissioner Chavarria, in my experience, the speed the asphalt speed humps are typically more expensive to construct. And as far as a pilot program, they'd be more difficult to remove. And in this particular case, Maple's Maple Avenue's proximity to a fire station. We we we ran this past our Orange Fire Department. And so I think critical to their response times is the groove. So the the conventional humps would would be less favorable from their perspective.

Right. But they're permanent. This is this is gonna have to have maintenance. That's why I'm asking the point. At least if we're permanent, then it's a done deal. We should always have them in the neighborhoods for safety. But that was my first Okay. So what is the difference in price? Do we know? Or is it

It's been a while since we've actually done an asphalt hump a number of years ago. Think they were $5,000 per location that but that was several years back with cost escalations. I'm going to give an estimate between 10,000 and $15,000 per hump as opposed to $15,000 for the Yes. Entire

understood. That's all. Thank you. Okay.

Thank you. Question. Commissioner Reddy, go ahead.

Yeah, have a two part question. One, is there an example in the city now? I'm over in West Presidential and I know that there's some sort of hump apparatus on Hoover Avenue. Is this the same thing?

So I believe there are just a few sets of speed humps. The asphalt ones that go all the way across and a couple of them, you're right, are in the Presidential Streets. But in terms of prefabricated speed cushions, as Maria mentioned, these would be the first of their kind.

Okay. And the second question is, what was the community response? I think it was 55% in the positive?

That is correct.

Okay. That's all.

All right. If there's nothing else, I'd like to open the public portion of this. Excuse me. Right. Douglas Redding will be up first. You put a comment card

in?

No, I had raised my hand and asked

a question. Oh, gotcha. Well, that's cool. Perfect. Thank you.

All

right. First, we'll have Pat Rosa, and then after Pat, we'll have Melanie Zerina.

Good evening. I've lived on Maple Avenue in that area for nearly forty one years now, and it has only been getting worse. In fact, tonight, about an hour ago, I got dropped off after volunteering just across street from my house. Somebody who just felt they had a right to go whatever speed they wanted had to slam on their brakes to prevent hitting me. So I don't know how much a life is worth versus whatever cost these may be.

Very much in favor of this. In fact, the one thing I was going to mention before I had this little incident tonight, there have been times I've got to back out of my driveway, somebody starts off Main Street, and by the time I get out of my driveway, they're honking the horn at me because they're trying to avoid Chapman in Maine or Chapman in Batavia and use our street as their bypass and between 03:30 and 06:00 at night, it is somewhat crazy out there. One thing that I would say, it's unfortunate that location three according to the map is West Of Citrus Street. I think people on Citrus Street would like it just East Of Citrus Street because I walk a lot. That's one of the things that I do.

And, that corner right there, people coming across Citrus Street to turn right on Maple to get up to Batavia, they have few cares. So if it was right there, a speed bump, if it could be right there, that would deter and I'm sure people on Citrus Street would be happy with this. So I'd just like to say I'm very much in favor of it and I hope that it can provide safety for many of us along Maple Avenue. Thank you.

Good evening, City Traffic Commission members, city staff. My name is Molina Carranza. I'm a resident in District 1 on affected Maple Street. One of the proposed installations, Location 2, will be right in front of my driveway. The city's engineering and public works department did conduct a study.

And like was mentioned, it does fall below the city's neighborhood traffic management program. I just feel like at a time when the city is operating with constrained financial resources, spending $20,000 or potentially $100,000 if we do single humps, without clear data driven needs diverts funds from higher priority infrastructure upgrades that are needed, such as downtown street paving, pothole repairs, and city sidewalk upgrades, not to mention the need to set aside funds to build up essential reserve levels. These investments would provide meaningful benefits and improve mobility for thousands of Orange residents, not just a small number on a single block. For these reasons, I respectfully urge the committee to vote no on the installation of speed cushions at this location. The data does not support the necessity, and the city's limited funds should be allocated to projects with broader community impact.

Thank you

for your time and consideration.

Alright.

My name is Lindsey Zotnick. I'm a resident of the street, and as mentioned, many of us are here today. I've lived on the street for seven years, and during this time, we've seen increased speeding and near miss incidences and encounters that have caused us to call into the police department of the city of Orange. Not only am I a mother and a mother of two small children, I'm here on behalf of all of the little families in my area. We have held community meetings.

We have held conversations with the local chair. We have talked to the city traffic engineer. We have talked to the police department. We have talked to numerous family members. We've seen two families with small children move from the neighborhood in just the last year alone.

And I think while it is an inconvenience at this point, it doesn't matter if I read but while it is an inconvenience to some because it is going to cause noise, it is going to cause a problem for a very small population. I think to the point mentioned earlier, like, the life of these small children is not worth a noise, right? And it's something that we need to consider, and I understand it is there's a cost to everything, right? But when you've seen near miss incidences I have numerous cameras on the front of my house I can go back through that Rolodex and look at so many incidences where people have almost been either hit with their cars in their cars or while walking. I've seen strollers be pushed out of the way.

And when you look at all of those components, we're not just standing here trying to say, like, let's spend more money. We've also thought together, like, fine, we'll raise funds to do it if we need to, but there is something that needs to be done. And I understand that, yes, there are going to be some nos to this, But I would urge you guys, if you need more data, we'll help you provide more data. We have all installed numerous cameras to try and help with this and try to understand things. As the wife not only of a police officer, which is an added component to this, he has asked me to not be very vocal on the street for my own safety, but to just keep recording incidences, keep calling the police department, keep asking for them to show up.

And so I would urge you guys to think about your small family, your children, whatever that may look like. Our children can't play in our front yards. We've now resulted to putting in fences in the majority of the front yards in this neighborhood. If you haven't seen it, come drive through it. Come see what it looks like. We're all putting up these fences to protect our children. And so this comes to you guys as a ask of a mother of small children and on behalf of the other families of small children in our neighborhood. Thanks.

Hello. Thank you for your time. My name is Amy McFadden and I've lived on the corner of Maple And Jewel for twenty seven years. I've raised two children there. They've played in this neighborhood and I've enjoyed watching them grow and obviously the neighborhood has grown exponentially as well.

I would like to strongly express my opposition on this installment of these speed humps on Maple. While I fully support the efforts to improve safety and I encourage responsible driving, I believe the speed humps are not the appropriate or effective solution for this area. Speed humps cause sudden braking, especially when drivers are unfamiliar with this area. Failure to see that in time could also this will interrupt reactions and increase the likelihood of rear collisions. It will force cars to maneuver in unexpected and unpredicted ways, which could put pedestrians, especially children and seniors, at risk.

I understand they're saying that these speed humps are made for response vehicles or emergency response vehicles, so I'll omit that if you're saying that that works, but that also does limit their speed time if it's not applicable for them to drive through or able for them to drive through without dramatically slowing down. It could slow them down from getting to urgent situations. Vehicles slowing down and speeding around these humps also creates creates very unnecessary noise and braking, engines revving, and cargoes rattling. Homes that are located nearby, these can be interrupted and affected their sleep. It also affects the neighborhood.

Seeing that this was a majority rules and 90% positive participation is what we were looking for, 55% in favor, 17 opposed, and 28 unresponded, if 28% added to that 55%, you still only have 88%. And again, I've lived in this neighborhood for twenty seven years in that exact house, and the speeding, yes, is a problem. You're not going to find the way to really stop people from breaking the law other than I don't think these speed bumps are going to help that. I think the only real solution is to make it an exit only on Maple between Maple and getting on to, which is obviously more expensive. So I don't think that's going to be a factor.

But I just don't think these speed humps are really going to make the difference that that you guys think it's going to make. I think it's going to make it worse because these speeders are unlawful people. They're just going to do it even worse, which is going to make their cars unpredictably careen into other cars. We've seen cars get hit on the side because of the white lines that are there now. We're just continuing to try to Band Aid things that this isn't the solution. The solution is exit only. So thank you for your time and consideration. I appreciate it.

Great. Thank you. Next is Gigi and then after Gigi, it's Bill Norman.

Hello. Thank you for giving me some time. I live on Jewel Place, which is one of the Theater Streets to Maple. And if you remember the graphic that you saw, this area that we're talking about is not a very long area and we get a lot of cross traffic coming from Main Street and Chapman. They use it as a thoroughfare to circumvent that signal at Main And Chapman.

And just to give you an idea of our neighborhood, we've got 16 children that live along Maple and those five feeder Streets. We also have dozens of dogs and cats. We have an older population as well as the young children. And we have a lot of concerns with people safely crossing the street. As had been mentioned before, the cars come zooming around the corners and then they hit the gas before they're even going through those intersections to be able to get past in order to get through to before the signal lets loose.

And as a result of that, they come around the corners not realizing people might be crossing the street with their dogs or with the children and they are just right through. One little other thing I'd like to mention before I say goodbye. Out of those that 55%, I think that kind of gives us a little bit of a skewed view. 19 were in favor 19 people, homes were in favor. Six were opposed.

Nine didn't respond. So if you look at the people who took the time to respond, that is a much higher percentage than the original 55 because that 55 takes into account those that didn't respond. And of those that didn't respond, we've got a large majority of houses on Maple Street that are renters. Maybe the renters didn't even see that petition. And that's all I'd like to say. Thank you.

Great. Thank you. Excuse me, Bill. And then after Bill, we'll have Anthony Case. Bill Norman?

Good afternoon. I'm Bill Norman. I live on the corner of Maple And Jewel. I've lived there since 1963. I've seen a lot of traffic changes during that time, and it's a lot worse now.

And I'm a supporter of the speed bumps because I think it'll really help. The biggest problem is traffic coming off of Main Street and going to Batavia. They use that as a bypass, and they really get on really get on it when they go down the street. I'm concerned about I have grandchildren that live across the street, and they cross the street once in a while to come to house. And I hope this goes through.

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Norman. Any other speakers wanting to speak on this item? Seeing none, I'll go ahead and close the public portion and bring it back to the commission.

And Chairman Felice, and talking to everyone else up here, a really quick perspective on this because I heard the questions and they're good questions. So a little bit of background. I used to work parking enforcement and

go out the traffic accidents for the city of Costa Mesa. Costa Mesa has a lot

of these different types of speed bumps. I like this style for a couple of reasons. One, they're cheaper when they wear. They wear individually, not just a single hump because if one part of the hump goes, you pretty much got to do the whole thing or you got to demo it. We've installed something like this similar on a private project.

And then their method of attachment, they're easier to remove than the typical ones. And we'll talk through it. But being a pilot program, like I said, they could be removed. So four to six months, see how it goes, take them out. And what's kind of nice about these, seeing how they work, is a lot of places where we might put a four way in lieu of doing speed bumps, I think this is a better flow.

From personal experience, I used to live at the 500 Block Of West Maple, and I would cut through the same street. Now, at the time, I drove a cherry red PT Cruiser, so that was not capable of speeding. So I have a good conscience about that. But I've also walked this neighborhood to doing drop material some odd years ago. It's a legitimate concern, and I've seen it. So with that being said, when we make our decision, I think all those reasons we probably should do this and just have it come back in four to six months, whatever is reasonable for data collection. But that's about it.

Go ahead, Commissioner.

Chair, just a few comments. So when I originally looked at this item, I really was not supportive of the item. I have some experience with speed cushions. They go in, they're impactful, and they get taken out. And then the community cycles through this because there's no agreement on it.

I'm very empathetic about the families and the kids that are in that on that street, on Maple, in the community. I think they are going to be impactful to some of the residents. Probably six of the homes are going to hear it mostly. You're going to have those the vehicles, the trucks, or the deliveries, the Amazon, they're just going to bounce and everybody's going to hear it. But I do think it's necessary to run this as a pilot programme.

It is necessary to collect the data and see what is going to be the actual effects to the community. It's worth it for the community to run through it for maybe a short pilot program, maybe two to three months, and then if there's enough data there to go take it to the city council and see if the city council is supportive to continue it. This if there's not support, these cushions can come out. And I'm empathetic for both sides, but I think it's I'm going to look at staff's recommendation. I'm going to support this item as a pilot program.

Go ahead, Commissioner Eddy.

Through the Chair, just a question. So it's a pilot program. Obviously, we're going to collect data. Maybe for the room or just for my personal understanding, what is the mechanism for collecting data? And is the residents part of that mechanism? Do we get to hear feedback from them at the end of the pilots? And what is our mechanism for collecting data?

Commissioner Redding, so there can be qualitative and also quantitative methodologies. Typically, when we're talking about before and after studies related to effectiveness and reducing reducing speeds, there would be the road tubes that we could lay on the ground before and after the implementation just to see number one volumes and number two, the speed profile of of the street. And maybe less common, but also possible, are surveys back to the community. After the pilot program has run its course, we can send out another if it pleases the commission and the council, send out another round of petitions asking the people to the residents of the neighborhood to weigh in on on their opinions after, you know, they've lived with it for a certain amount of time.

I have a question for the commission. Maybe I missed this, but what are we implementing as far as the pilot program lengthwise? Because I would suggest that we leave it for a time period that would be impactful to the neighborhoods, like a two year program. Even though that might seem kind of short or long, I just I don't want to put them in and then take them out because it didn't work for the neighborhood because we're going to give false hope and then take it away.

Additional comment?

Yeah, an additional comment to that. I don't know, two years is a long time. I'd like to see a full season, like do the whole thing. That way we have an idea. It's really important because this is the first one.

And whatever the neighbors tell us sets the precedent for considering this as a product throughout the entire city. So I think have a feeling, just based on the comments that people are going to call whether it's going good or bad, and we really rely on that. Going back, I'll start the motion process, and then we can mess with it as we go along. I move to approve item 4.2, request to install peak speed cushions on Maple Avenue between Main Street and Batavia Street and would like if it could be brought back to us or counsel after a one year period and see how it goes through for further discussion or I don't want mess this We'll up too

have to get a second in order to

carry that motion. Can I have a substitute motion? Okay. So just continuing with that kind of thought or idea, I feel like the one year is kind of a long time, especially if it's going to be impactful to the community. So I would entertain just more like a six month period. And then I think that's plenty of time for everybody to collect the data.

Do want to modify your motion?

Yeah, I'll modify my motion to approve. 4.2 request to install speed cushions on Maple Avenue between Main Street and Batavia Street and for it to come back to us in a six month time before the traffic commission and or counsel to go over it.

Mr. Chairman and Vice Chairman, may I offer a couple of comments. Number one, what's being asked of the commission is to make a recommendation to the council. So I think if you'd like to build in a time for the before and after study that gets potentially baked into a recommendation that the city council approve the speed humps. But it sounded a little bit to me that you were going to recommend a time, have us do the before and after study, and then go back to the council. Very

rarely do we get to even mess with these. Like, you have to excuse me. So, all right. So let's do that same motion but, baked in the recommendation for a six month, pilot period.

And you're recommending that council approve the speed cushion pilot program with a six month duration. Exactly the

way you

said it. You're welcome.

All right, glad we clarified that there. We have a motion, somebody want to second it? So you'll fix it? Great, with that I'll go ahead and call for the vote. With that, the motion passes unanimously.

Great. At the moment, all the rest of you are here for. All right, we'll move on to item 4.3, which is a discussion of potential traffic modification and safety enhancements to the Orange Plaza.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Sheriff Lees, members of the Commission, this last item is a follow-up to a discussion that began at at a city council meeting in September. I'm just gonna start off by providing a little bit of context, how we got here, what we what we plan to achieve during tonight's meeting, and what might come next. So back in the summer, city council directed staff to evaluate certain concepts with the intent of reducing the frequency of plaza incursions.

Findings and recommendations were presented for consideration at that September 23 meeting at which time staff was asked to do three things. Number one, install raised pavement markers at various locations in the plaza, which was done. Number two, analyze accident trajectories in a little bit more detail. Number three, bring an item back to the city traffic commission and ultimately the city council. We've completed the first two items, even brought in a peer review consultant to provide a fresh look through a planning and engineering lens, and we've refined the recommendations that were presented to council just a little bit.

The plan is to present these updates to the commission tonight, receive public input, and potentially bring this back to city council sometime early next year. And just to clarify, the commission isn't required to take any action tonight. The staff's recommendation is to receive and file. Next slide, please. So with the help of the Orange Police Department, staff actually summarized and plotted trajectories of all the reported incursions between 2018 and October 2025.

And some of the key takeaways, incursions have declined from peak of 12 in 2022 to an average of 1.5 in each of the last two years. So some of the countermeasures that we've implemented have been effective. 43 incursions took place between January 2018 and October 2025, 70% of which involved driving under the influence. Another was a result of a police chase that, as lieutenant Plogg always reminds me, did not involve OPD. Seven and eight accidents involve vehicles traveling on Chapman Avenue.

All but one accident occurred during darkness. And the spray pattern, as you can see on this exhibit from the plotter trajectory suggests an incursion from any given approach tend to generally occur between the curb lines of the approaching roadway. Next slide, please. So based on the previous recommendations, accident analysis and peer review, there are four viable options that could be presented to the city council for consideration. Each has pros and cons and I kind of want to just go over them really quickly.

The first is the bollard enhancement concept that really extends the existing crash rated bollards that are in the pedestrian walkways right now and kinda fills in the gaps and extends them outward a little bit to create more of a barrier. When we took this to city council in September, recommendation was doing all four approaches just based on these trajectories that we saw before. It would be a viable option just to limit the treatment to the Chapman Avenue approaches given the disproportionate ratio of incidents that occur on Chapman. The cost of doing so would be in the ballpark of about $300,000 Next slide please. We had also talked about splitter islands.

These are kind of raised pork chop islands that provide some channelization opportunities for landscape, an entry feature and a pedestrian refuge. They're very common features in a lot of rotary, circular roadways. The cost of doing so is approximately $300,000 for all four entries. And it's still a viable recommendation. Next slide, please.

One of the things that we kind of added was just modifying lighting in the park. Some drivers have commented that the lighting pattern may give the appearance that the street actually continues straight through. Those post hops, they're about 36 feet apart. And if you're drunk or tired, maybe it looks like through street to you. Talking to our community services folks, there seems to be an opportunity to put these on a timer.

And during those critical hours of the evening, maybe modify these lighting patterns and shut some of these lights off in order to reduce that perception. Next slide, please. And the fourth item is the installation of raised crosswalks. This option was considered by staff, but not previously presented to the city council due to potential impacts to emergency response vehicles and drainage impacts that may need further evaluation. But it has come up in prior discussions and the peer review did identify this as an option to consider as raised crosswalks can encourage slower speeds at the entry and approaches to the rotary or the circular roadway.

I'm sorry. They would work best in conjunction with the splitter islands, but could also work without. And if installed on the Chapman Avenue approaches and not just the entries, they can provide traffic calming and pedestrian comfort as some of those uncontrolled crossings as an added benefit to reducing vehicular speeds as we approach the plaza. But the cost of this option can't be fully determined until a feasibility study is done and those drainage impacts identified and further discussions take place with our fire department. Any or all four of these options we feel are viable recommendation to the city council.

They can be implemented individually or, in combination where staff feels that they would be most effective. I know there's many things to consider here. A lot of folks we've heard from have very different ideas. These were the ones that we felt were best from a planning and engineering perspective. That concludes my presentation. Be happy to answer any questions.

Great. Thank you. Any questions for Steph right now? Do you guys want to you have a question for Saf now? Yes. Go ahead. I'm sure.

Just curious on the splitter lane idea. Was there any discussion of having some sort of vegetation, like ice plant or whatnot at maybe a certain height so that it would catch the vehicles and keep them from

going

airborne and obviously slow down or stop vehicles? I looked through study and I just didn't notice if there was any type of vegetation or something that would be included.

Sure. Landscaping features are quite common in these splitter islands. Conceptually, there have been discussions, I believe, with maybe some of the stakeholder groups, historic preservationists, and it seems from what I remember that there is some openness to landscaping and from an engineering perspective, certainly having a vertical element makes them more prominent from a distance. So I would expect landscaping features to be a part of the ultimate design.

Thank you. Any other questions? I do have

a follow-up question. So Larry, what's the this is a received and final. Are you looking for comments from us?

Comments, public comments, commissioner input. And if Chairman would like to make a recommendation, I believe he is at liberty to do so.

And this goes back to the City Council?

It will go to the City Council, yes.

Okay.

Commissioner Barbato.

It just seems like we're 100% focused on treating the symptom and not looking at the disease. Bollards, I get, protect the plaza, protect pedestrians. But are we looking outwards to slow and calm traffic coming into the whole plaza area?

So a couple of things. This item really focuses on the plaza and the approaches themselves. Number two, the raised crosswalks do provide that opportunity for traffic calming on those approaches. So if they were to be installed not just at the entry to the circle, but at some of those uncontrolled approaches, ultimately, could be several in series as before you even get to the circular roadway.

It seems like we have a natural traffic calming with the railroad tracks on the west side of the plaza. And that's 360 meters to the entrance to the traffic circle. And clearly, the the the scattered patterns are one entrance into this plaza, which at Grand Street to the entrance of the traffic circle is a 140 meters, which at 50 miles an hour is five point six seconds till you hit the the circle. You know, drunk driver is not gonna know how to do that. Seems to me the raised calming measures should not be at the the traffic circle. It should be further out towards Grand Street.

Yes, sir. And in the Fair and Peer's report and also in the staff report, that was one of the options that we extend, those, roadway features not just at the entry but further upstream.

Really, really quick to go off of Commissioner Barbato's comment. That's exactly what I was thinking. I know we're here for the plaza, which is fine. We'll do what we got to do. But just keeping that thought for staff. I really like these, especially the bottom render of the raised crosswalks getting that on the two hundred three hundred block each direction. Anyway, I just wanted to preach that we should hold on to this as we go along. We'll fix the downtown plaza circle first and then move our way outwards. But anyway, just wanted to say that there's movement behind that.

One more, yeah, then we'll open up the public portion.

I know this is receiving file. I just wanted to get one last bit in there. Hasn't been said. And I did say this last night, but when we're talking about this issue, we're really talking about protecting the fountain and it's been leading the conversation. And I just want to say on the record that the fountain is property and what we should and I would hope to influence the conversation to think about life over property, which is all 43 incursions have happened when the Park Plaza was opened.

And by the grace of God and luck, there has not been anybody that was injured. And so instead of focusing on how do we protect the fountain and put a hard immovable object there, let's let's figure out how we can protect an impaired driver. It looks like 43 incursions and 30 of them were a DUI or DWI. That's an impaired driver that's probably not going to pay attention to anything unless it grabs them and forces them to do something. So I would just like for us to consider that or on the record for the council to consider life over property, and I hope that leads their decision. Thank you.

Great. With that, we'll go ahead and open the public portion. First, we have Reggie Mundikis. And after Reggie, we have George Cortez.

Good evening. I'm Reggie Mundikis, and thank you for the opportunity to address you tonight. So I support more bollards, the raised median, the splitter islands, lighting modifications to make it more obvious that the road doesn't go through, and the raised crosswalks. I realize that these may cause some problems with some of the events at the plaza, but there can be discussions with the city about how to modify those events to allow them to happen and there are ways of preventing these from becoming trapezoid during events. I also support adding landscaping features to draw attention to the splitter islands and anything else that needs focus.

I think we should start with the plaza and then work our way outward with more traffic calming features. There may be raised crosswalks or narrowing of the street with medians or things like that further back. I think that the problem, especially on the railroad track side, starts further out. And we're seeing it on Chapman, I believe, because it goes between two freeways. So you have someone who has been having a little too much of a good time perhaps and they just think that he can just zip along.

We've also had several medical incidents which can happen to anyone, cause a crash into the plaza. While the emphasis has been on the horrible things happening to the fountain, this is a public park which has a

lot

of people in it, both during the day and the evening. So we've been very fortunate that none of those people have been hit by a car. But there's nothing just because they're entering the park doesn't mean someone's not going to get killed or seriously hurt going forward. So I support what's been brought forward and we can make it work. We have to make it work because these accidents started as soon as the plaza was installed. So it's just the way it is, and thank you for your time on this.

Hello, everybody. Thank you for this opportunity. I just wanna talk really quickly about just how unique the the plaza is. It's it you know, the the city of Orange, you know, exists between these four freeways, and the it's just a sanctuary where there's there's not a lot of that crazy buzz that we get when we start to go outward. And so protecting it at all costs, I think, is just a great idea, and I just appreciate this conversation. I don't think it's gonna take, you know, one or two things. I do think it's going to be a combination of things that really gets it done. You know, pie in the sky, Mr. Tay talked about the PM hours. Was one exception.

All these were were taking place, you know, in the PM hours with except one time. Pie in the sky, you know, I would love to see this closed down, you know, just I I know that's a ridiculous concept, but it would be a very awesome gift to the community to see it closed down and have it be a park at night where people can roam around and spend money on the businesses, right, safely. But, you know, if that's not an option and we kind of want to continue business as usual without spending too much money, which I completely understand. I do think what Mr. Barbato was saying about, you know, going outward a little bit.

I think the uniqueness of the roundabout that the circle is a victim of its own uniqueness in that sense. That people sometimes have not seen a roundabout that large by the time they're getting in. And it's kind of for those incidences, I think some of them were the guy who was chased by the cops, you know, not from here. I think it could be some of these instances I wonder what the data is, how many of these people have ever seen it before, had been there for the first time. So if you can introduce a roundabout, say like coming in from Orange Cycle that four way stop that's a heated stop four way stop.

People are always fighting there. But if you can introduce a small roundabout there to get people ready to think about the fact that things are changing now in the road and do the same thing on the other intersection with the spray chart that was really active, you know, I think in front of where Bosscat is. Introduce a smaller roundabout there to tell people this is going to be different. And then they see the circle, the big plaza, as like the big roundabout, and they're ready to think about a different type of road. And for that reason, addition to, I think, the splitter lane and the raised crosswalks, I think those are great. It's just, I think, going to take a combination of things to actually see some change going forward. But thank you.

Hi. Thank you for seeing me. I have been in front of you once before. I am a long term resident of the flats in the circle. I am a long term resident of Orange, probably over twenty, thirty years now.

I also work in the circle at the Pokwa Studio, the martial arts studio. And I walk back and forth through the circle almost every day for, like, over eleven years now, and before that, maybe a couple days a week. I think all the ideas you're proposing traffic are excellent ideas, but I do agree with Commissioner and I apologize if I and Commissioner Redding that we do need to move it further out. If you're walking across the street from the martial arts school to Earth Cafe, people are gunning it from Olive to the cross walk there. They're just gunning it, and they're looking to their right, never looking to the left.

So they're missing all those people. And they just come really fast, and then they have to put their brakes on. So I haven't seen it so much on the other side of the circle, on Chapman and the other side of Glacelle, where the gardening shop is sorry, across the street from Wells Fargo or even on the other part of LaSalle going through the circle. But that one side is like crazy. People just rush from there coming through, and it's most likely because that's the side I'm always on.

But I do like the ideas in the previous comments of those what did you call them? Bolsters? The street for were you going to Wanda? No, not Wanda. That's the other one.

We're going to put the temporary yeah, those things. We should have something like that a couple streets out from the circle so that it slows traffic down excuse me, slows traffic down before you even get into the circle. And the other gentleman that was up here before me, he it's like and the other ones, they all mentioned that we need to get them in a mindset of they need to slow down before they get into the circle. Once they get to all of it's too late because that's a really short thing. And we have a lot more people with all the new restaurants and everything in there that they're not looking around.

They're always looking at their cell phone when they're walking across the street. They don't stop for traffic. I grew up with stop, look, and listen. People don't know that anymore. So anyway, I just wanted to put my 2¢ in and let you know that I think it should be moved out. But I do like the race sidewalks as well. Thank you for your time.

Great. Thank you. All right. Seeing no other public comments on this, I'll go ahead and bring it back to the commission. Yeah. We'll get you in.

This is my first time.

No worries. No worries.

Hello. My name is Ryan Buxton. And while I've only been in Orange about three months, there is something that I have noticed beyond how great the city is and how welcoming everyone has been. I live on the intersection of Olive And Maple, and much as miss Martinez was just saying, that is a dangerous intersection where it's a two way stop and people are flying through there on Maple constantly. And I am woken up in the middle of the night and throughout all hours of the day by horns blaring and I could see the intersection from my kitchen table and constantly constantly constantly people trying to get across that intersection or make a turn and somebody comes flying up or down Maple, cuts them off, it creates a situation.

And I myself have found close calls where I'm too worried about who the oncoming traffic that is impossible to see around the parked cars that are coming maybe a 100 yards throughout the length of that street, very short street at high speeds and I'm too worried about them to turn and consider the pedestrians that might be crossing. And it creates a dangerous intersection not just for drivers and pedestrians but for anybody involved. I think maybe having less parking on that street could be an option or I think having a four way stop would be the best way to fix that. And it would also slow traffic coming into the orange circle and give people more of a lead time to slow down and really think about where that they're entering a pedestrian zone. Additionally, there's no pedestrian crosswalks going across Maple, along Olive, and I think implementing that would give people a visual cue that they're entering a pedestrian zone.

Thank

you. Great.

Thank you. Anyone else? Now we'll go ahead and close the public portion and bring it back to the commission. Think yeah.

I'll go ahead

and make public some comments.

We'll have you first then.

Okay. Sorry.

I was

going to

make a comment, but Okay. Go ahead. First. It's fine. Alright. You know, this is a receiving file item for us to move up to the city council. We could certainly add some recommendations in for, you know, someone who wants to make a motion to this. I think it would be important that as part of the motion, we potentially could provide some recommendations based on comments that I've received quite a few over the over the weekend at the tree lighting, then also there's a common theme tonight in looking at some additional enhancements. But I think it's important that we would could move this motion forward in an effort to begin to really take the real core of this issue and then the other items that the additional enhancements outside of that area could be brought back at a different time. So I think it's really important for that.

I think, you know, that something obviously has to be done and needs to be done. And I think the trajectory map really is a good telltale sign of where the areas are coming through. I think staff are putting that together in that element as well.

Commissioner Bruce? Thank you, Chair. Again, this recent received a file. This is just my comments to it. So referencing the fears and peers and fears memo, I do like the race splitter islands kind of landscape item.

I I do think that we need to do something for the plaza, but it needs to be in an aesthetic way. So I I mean, I'm supportive of the race splitter islands. The yellow ballers out there right now, I'm not a big fan of those at all, just from an aesthetic standpoint. So I do think there's other alternatives to kind of alleviate and do some more traffic calming for that area. The supplemental ballers, that's for the actual plaza itself. Is that the recommendation?

That's that's correct. That that was that was behind the pedestrian walk in the in the park.

Okay. So I I definitely support those. The rest of what the recommendations are from the consultants, I'm I'm not a big fan. I'm I'm personally not a fan of the race crosswalks. That's just my own personal preference. But I I think there's other things that we can do, which is the the landscape median, that race splitter islands, kind of more from an aesthetic standpoint. And I think that's probably a good start for the council to consider and then work their way out for more traffic calming. So that's it.

Any other comments?

I'll make a quick comment. Just looking at the statistics, statistics, obviously, obviously the the majority majority of of the the incidents were DUI. But, like, coming from the West, there is forty two percent of people that were not DUI. And so, you know, when you look at statistics like that, it says that there maybe is something obviously flowing that's wrong, and a lot of this does happen at night. And so, you know, and this is just me here pondering is is there something that we can do now that's very limited in budget like the lights that maybe might lead somebody to make an error? While we're discussing the rest of the items being done, maybe the lights should be altered temporarily. And that's just my only thought, my comment. Also, I'll put it back to the council for that thought.

I have some comments as well. I'm in the agreement with this as well. I feel like we need to I'm probably not going to make any friends by saying add the bollards. I know OTPA is probably going to crucify me for that. But for safety reasons, I like the bollards and the raised curbs. I don't necessarily think that the splitters are a great idea. I think it's gonna add to infrastructure. I think it's gonna add problems for traffic delays for the next six, seven months, maybe more. And there's actually not well, perhaps there's a cost difference. But lighting, I believe, behind the bollards would be and additionally at the crosswalks. I feel like that will make a bigger impact to safety. That's all I have.

Great.

Anyone want to make the motion? Additional comments?

Jump in with one more comment. I mean, you just look at a satellite image of Plaza, and it's very different cars heading westbound on Chapman. If you take that railroad track and flip it over, that would be a chafer. You've got just no visual indication to anybody at nighttime coming that this hazard's gonna be in the middle of the road. It you've basically got four lanes that quickly go down to to two lanes, and then you've got a 140 meters to the traffic plaza.

There's got to be some sort of like the speed shown on Cambridge, showing car speeds, giving them indication of you're going too fast, just to give them a heads up. Obviously, the majority of these people are drunk drivers. Somehow you've got to get their attention to that something is coming up that you need to be aware of.

So that's all.

I'm going to go ahead and make a motion. As part of the motion, I would like to recommend that council consider reviewing other safety enhancements outside of this after the initial I forget the term that they're called. After the initial decision is made on what to do for the, I'll call it, fortification of the plaza area. One second. We have a first and a second.

Yep. I'll go ahead and call for the vote.

With that, the motion passes unanimously. All right. With that, will go ahead and adjourn the meeting, and the next regular city traffic commission meeting will be Wednesday, 02/11/2026 at 05:30PM in Council Chambers. Thanks,

everyone.