Traffic Committee - Regular Meeting

It is 02:00. Let's call the meeting to order for the traffic committee. I know we had 01/13/2026. Roll call. Let's see. Where we at here? PD? Here. Fire? Here. Planning?

Here. Public works? Here.

And I'm representing engineering. Please remember to unmute your microphones when you are speaking today.

Members of the audience who wish to address the traffic committee are asked to submit a request to speak form located on the podium at the back of the council chamber and submit it to the clerk, ideally before your item is called. Speakers will be allowed three minutes. If you intend on using technology for your presentation, please leave a copy for the record.

Members of the public who wish to speak on any matter not listed on the agenda may speak during this portion of the meeting and will be allotted three minutes. Please identify yourself and your city of residence. The committee will not take action on any item that is brought to their attention at this meeting if it requires action. It will be referred to staff and or listed on the next traffic committee agenda. Or do we have any request to speak forums?

We do

not. Would anyone like to make a motion to approve the consent calendar?

So move. Second.

Second.

Those in favor, say aye.

Aye.

Those opposed? Aye. Passes.

Okay. Agenda item E, reports. At this time, it is appropriate for any committee member to give an informational report of any work completed, training, or any other item to share with other members. Please be brief, and no action may be taken on these items.

Any reports from committee members?

I don't have any reports.

From the PD, I just want to make an official announcement that Sergeant Pfister is the new traffic sergeant. He's here with us today. Sergeant McKinnon is going to be retiring soon, which I've said before. So we had to replace him with Sergeant Pfister, which so we can get him trained up.

You. Clair?

Nothing to report.

Thank you. Planning?

Yes, we are in the well, really at the beginning stages of our general plan update. We will be having an open house from two to six on January 28 here at City Hall. So please come down and take a look at our assets and conditions. And opportunity it's for you to give your opinion about where the city should go. It's a blueprint for the city's growth in everything, including public safety, infrastructure, as well as land use. So we hope to see you and hear from you.

As far as engineering, we will be moving these meetings to an online request form process. Stay tuned for more directions on that.

Agenda item F1, request 20 six-one, requesting red curbing on both sides of the end of Rancho Camino Drive at Granada Court. Public Works submitted this request regarding the city sewer lift station at the end of Rancho Camino Drive being blocked by parked vehicles. Residents in the area, including large tow trucks, are parking in front of the gate, which blocks access to the facility. Public works is requesting to have the curbs painted on both sides of the street red in front of the city's sewer lift station.

Do we have anybody here to speak on this matter today? Come on up, please. All right, right up, so we can get you recorded.

I'm AJ D'Stacio, the Public Works Supervisor for the Super and Storm Department. In regard to that, just to add on a little bit, we have contacted all the residents around that area in the past and asked them to please refrain from parking there, explaining we do have the need to get large equipment in that area. And it's a single gate that has that road blocked off. We do have no parking signs everywhere, but it has not made a difference in any of that. So we have made several attempts to ask the community to quit parking there.

But that being said, we've been out there in the middle of the night and we're unable to access our facilities just because of just individuals parking everywhere. That's all I had.

So you're looking at painting a red curb in that area as well as the signage?

Correct, yeah. Because as it is now, if we call code enforcement during the day, they're like, well, it's an unmarked curb. They can technically park there. So there's really not a whole lot that can be done about it.

Okay. Thank you. Bring it back to the committee for discussion.

Anyone? I went out there and looked at it. I agree the way that it's designed out there. There's a parking issue. But I think the issue is more or less where the gate is placed. It's placed off to the side directly behind the sidewalk, which naturally, I mean, somebody's probably going to park there because it's an open road. Like I said, it's not marked. No parking. I'm just wondering if there's any way we could maybe just move the gate over instead of painting the curves. I have a photograph of it too, if that makes a difference.

If we want to I don't know if we want to display it so everybody can see it.

Can we get it up on the overhead or with his phone? While we're waiting for that, fire any comments on that?

I would be interested in knowing what the concern would be for not painting the curve. And looking at this, I'm very supportive of public works and needing to have operations run smoothly. But I'd be curious to know, based on the comments from PD, is there a reason why painting the curb would be an issue?

GREGORY D. How about fire? GREGORY

I was hoping to see this gate. I didn't get a chance to make it out there. I did look at Google the Street View data was old. And this infrastructure wasn't in there yet. Has that been explored, that option of moving the gate? Has that been explored? Possibly. Sorry. You're going to have to go back up to the mic.

My apologies.

As far as moving the gate, we are going in there with one of our bigger pieces of equipment, would be our vac truck. And the way the station is laid out, we're driving through a mud field to try to line up and go straight into our station. So we do need to swing wide just to get no matter where we move the gate, we're still going to have to utilize more room than really just within what's in front of the gate. That being said as well, there's a lot of time if we have a crane truck and other things, we have several vehicles that we need to either stage outside of the gate, potentially on either side with multiple crews coming out and things of that nature. So we may need more room than just what is in front of the gate.

How many spaces do you think this will restrict once we paint it? Two, three?

When the tow truck's parked there, that takes up the whole thing. There's a broken down car sitting on the other side. So that pretty much, I mean, I don't know. Maybe they've moved it since but yeah. Here we go. Nope, it's still

there. So,

in looking at that photo, our station's off to the right hand side of it. But like I said, there are times we need to put several different pieces of equipment there. And that field is not necessarily our field. So we have just kind of a little easement right there behind that gate where we have to make the turn.

So they're parking inside that little That

little turnout right there. Cutout.

Juan, would you like to elaborate on that?

JUAN J. Yes. As A. J. Stated, we have the need. Our equipment is large. It's just not one piece of equipment. And I think what happens to, again, in the dead end, some maybe residents in the area bring their large equipment, leave it there, leave it there for long periods of time, and then limit it in our access. Know, obviously, so I do support AJ with the request and want to have the red curve in the area. Juan,

do you think a couple posts and a chain across JONES: that entrance would be a better restriction rather than the red curve? Or do you think that's enough?

Well, to tell you the truth, I think the red curve will be good. And now we'll be concerned, I'm going say, blocking off the access to the back of the area. I will have concerns with someone running it over or something, a vehicle accident. I'll be, again, in support of pinning the red curve.

My only concern with that is that the red curve is a suggestion, right? They shouldn't park there. It's not really restrictive unless this guy drives by and finds them parked there. So I mean, I can support that. Myself, I'd probably rather have like a chain draped across that front. And so there's definitely nobody there.

I think that we will start with the red curve. And if we see that if the neighbors are still parking there, we can explore different options.

So the red curve would give PD the right to be able to tow. Is that really what the red curb would help with? Give the

Yes. Because at this point, we have and there's nothing. I mean, we put a no parking sign in front of the gate that people still park in there. And we have no enforcement to sign them because they're blocking if there are no parking in there.

I move that we approve this request.

Second. Okay, we got first and a second. All those in favor, aye. Aye. Those opposed? All right, approves. Juan, who's going to do the work order for that? You want us to do that for you, or you got that taken care of?

Agenda item F2, request 20 six-two, requesting a four way stop signs at 20th Street and S Street. Citizen states that there have been multiple accidents at this intersection and witness one the day of the submission. Citizen shares concerns about blocked views of the intersection during drop off and pickups at Fremont Elementary School. Currently, this intersection has stop signs going east and west on S Street. Citizen is requesting to install stop signs on 20th Street to make this intersection a four way stop to keep children safe.

Is anybody here today to speak from the public? I see nobody, so bring it back to the committee. Comments from the committee?

I have kind of a question. So I see that this is on one side of the school. I did notice that 22nd And S also has a four way stop. I looked at the warrants. Maybe our officer can speak to that.

But

if the warrants don't specifically call out the need, would there be some sort of support anyway because it would be related to school support and frontage? Because I could where this there could be some concern based on the fact that students could be walking through and probably quite a few close calls. But those, of course, aren't recorded.

I would definitely support putting a stop sign there. Obviously, there's a school zone. And there's already a crosswalk there. So kids are naturally going to cross the road right there. In the last year, we have had three accidents at that intersection. So I would definitely support it.

Fire, any comments by your team?

No, I agree. I was just curious about the document that was provided. Does three accidents in the twelve month period meet warrants for this situation? I didn't get a chance to fully digest this document yet. Or does that fall under the multi stop?

That will fall into the multi stop.

What's our total incidence on that?

Oh, my apologies. It was two in

the last year. Two in a year. And over the last five years, we've got four?

It looks like we've had five in the last sorry, I'm trying to count here and run back dates. Yeah, it looks like we've had five, six in the last year. Okay.

I don't I mean, I don't think so. I mean, see two I'm sorry. In the last year. One I'm sorry.

I was looking at the two year period. Yeah. Not five years. Sorry. You're correct.

I mean, in the past, you know, we have not, for the most part that I can remember, installed stops if it doesn't meet the warrants. I think there is liability issues for not doing it for the city. And so I I don't support if he doesn't meet the warrants. I do understand he's next to the school. We're in the process of meeting with the school for some enhancements, looking at some of their concerns that they worked with Sergeant McKinnon over the last year.

This area was not identified, this intersection. They had some concerns at this school, but this was not one of them. So with that, I will not support the before we stop here.

So on the report of incidents here, we have is this still in the word? Yes. So the one, two, three. There's seven potential incidents, but only four are described in what type. What would the other three

The other three could just be name exchanges only so that when the officers respond, they determine there's no injuries or no serious injuries. And then they just do an information exchange.

Okay. But typically, look at five incidents in five years, right, the area for our warrants so we can support that. We've got two injuries, potentially four situations, but three unknowns. So not technically triggering the criteria for the warrant unless we have some type of outstanding circumstance that maybe PD have witnessed in the field that you can elaborate on.

I would say that if this was a regular intersection, I'd agree and that the 20 has a four way stop. And because this is on the other side of that ingress, egress for the parking lot, I personally feel like it would be a circumstance where we could, as long as PD so the law allows us to be able to do that because of the school, I think that we should consider it.

Have there been three or more crashes in the last twelve month period? What are the dates on there?

Looks

like two. Two.

So it's not triggering the state protocol for signs. I mean, agree with we all want to be safe. We can't use the standard that the other intersection has it, so this one should have one, unfortunately. But if we put a sign in here that's unwarranted, it actually puts the city at risk. If there's any accidents, then the city is liable for any incidents that happened in that situation.

So I'm not seeing it trigger the minimum warrants unless anybody else sees something different than I do.

Yeah, as far as warrants go, it doesn't meet the warrants. But again, I would support it if we could

do it.

There are other applications that our public works did share today. Did you want to elaborate on that a little bit, Juan? I mean, maybe some yielding signs or something or

Oh, for this intersection? Yeah. No, I don't think we could use yields at this intersection if we have to stop on the other side. No. I think that, again, going back to our current conversations with the school district assessing or going over concerns over several schools.

There were some concerns that they share on this school. This intersection wasn't one of them. And that was from the school. And again, with the other side of not meeting the warrants, I will not support it. And I'm sure there could be ways that could be enhanced, the intersection, for the safe crossing of the students or the residents in general. However, at this time, that wasn't the request.

Are there any vision restrictions that any of the committee here has seen out there? Are there any type of blockage at the corners or vision triangles?

I'm not aware of anything. And over the last several years, there was some older trees by the school. And they have been removed now. So actually, the visibility has increased. Maybe that's a

good reason why the injuries haven't been occurring since a few years back, since four years back. Could we contribute to that?

Is that something that the city since the city has been having conversations with the school district, being that we do have a request, is that something we can go to them and ask them about their if they have concerns with the intersection instead of them having come to us and said, oh, we have concerns with this, which you're saying they didn't. Is that something we can then go to them and say, hey, we've had this request? Is this something you have seen is a problem?

I personally, even with school support, if it does not meet the warrants, I think if the city was to act without meeting the state warrants, I think the city will be exposing themselves to possible litigation if there was any accidents in the future there. In the past, that's not the process, right? I think following the warrants, that's a way to be consistent across different intersections and meeting state guidelines. But I mean, I can bring it up. Mean, it's something that city engineer and myself and Lieutenant Calvin, we've been discussing it with the school.

We can bring it up our next meeting. That's not a problem at all.

I just didn't know if there was any exceptions because it's contiguous to a school.

Not for that

That you know of? Okay. There's not.

But we do have continuous meetings with the school districts. So I'll be glad to note this at the next one to make sure they didn't overlook something. But they have given us their top list of safety issues throughout their school district. This one was not on there. Do I have a motion from the committee?

I'll make a motion to deny the request as presented.

Do I have a second? Second. All those in favor, aye.

Aye.

Aye. Those opposed? Okay. Motion approved.

Agenda item F3, request 20 six-three, requesting a four way stop at the intersection of 12th Street and Canal Street. Citizen states that there have been multiple accidents at this intersection. This intersection currently has stop signs on 12th Street going the east and west directions. Citizen is requesting stop signs be installed on Canal Street on the north and south side of the intersections to create a four way stop.

Thank you. Laura, is anyone here to represent this request? I see no one, so let's bring it back to the committee. Discussion by the committee, please. We'll start with planning this time.

Let her

start out the discussion.

It seems like there's a lot of accidents over the last several years.

It does. This may be the most accidents I've seen in one of our reports in quite a long time.

Quite possibly. I'll defer to you, to

Thank you. You Fire any comments?

To me, it looks like we meet the warrants on this one. There's a pretty significant amount of incidents. So I would support it. But I would like to hear from PE and public works to see if there's any other conflicts or issues that could arise as far as circulation or anything like that?

Thank you, chief. Public works, any comments?

I mean, we do have a lot of accidents. We possibly could merit a multi multi way stop warrant. I think besides that, I think there could be maybe another measure to help with the visibility at the intersection there. Do think that vehicles parking too close to the intersection, I'm going to assume that it probably contributed to the number of accidents there.

PD. Yeah, would agree with what Juan said. I just drove through there, and not a lot of cars parked on the side of the road, but there are a lot of homes in the area, a lot of apartments. Just from my experience and even working out at the station that's a block away, when the cars people get off work and the cars start stacking up on the side of the road, it is hard to see trying to get through those intersections down there.

Thank you. Yeah, as Pliny mentioned, quite a few accidents here are recorded. Even the ones that aren't even listed as type, that's a lot of volume. So it looks like we definitely have a contender here for the warrant. I believe it wouldn't be warrants. And with that, I'd like to entertain a motion from somebody on the panel.

I so move that we approve this request.

Do I have a second? Second. Got a first and a second. All those in favor, aye.

Aye. Those opposed?

Approved. Thank you, Laura. Okay. This will be our time for adjournment. Do I have a motion by a commissioner for adjournment today?

And a second. I'll make the motion. Second.

GREGORY All in favor?

GREGORY

Aye. Adjourned. Thank you, everybody.