Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout6.1 StopSignsBloomington CITY CLERK File # AGENDA STATEMENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: April 21, 1998 SUBJECT: Stop Signs on Bloomington Way at Beckett Way and at the Southernmost (Upper) Fenwick Way Intersection Report Prepared by: Lee S. Thompson, Public Works Director EXItlBITS ATTACHED: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) Resolution 1998 Stop Sign Studies from TJKM April 7, 1998, Agenda Statement Without Attachments Notice Mailed to Residents Location Map RECOMMENDATION: ,~1) 2) 4) s) Open Public Hearing Hear Staff'Presentation and Public Comment Question Staff and the Public Close Public Hearing and Deliberate Adopt Resolution Approving Installation of Stop Signs on Bloomington Way at Beckett Way and at Upper Fenwick Way Intersection FINANCIAL STATEMENT: Cost of signs and associated striping is estimated at $600 per intersection, for a total of $1,200. DESCRIPTION: At the April 7, 1998, meeting, the City Council conducted a public hearing regarding traffic issues on BloomingiCn Way. A copy of the April 7th agenda statement is attached as Exhibit 3. Staff' s original recommendation was installation of striping on Bloomington Way between the upper Fenwick Way intersection and Beckett Way. As noted in TJKM's most recent stop sign study, Exhibit 2, and in the agenda statement, Exhibit 3, the two intersections studied did not meet the warrants for all-way stop signs. Ar2er receiving the Staff.presentation and public comment, the City Council approved the installation of the recommended striping. The City Council also requested that Staff prepare a resolution for approval of stop signs on Bloomington Way at the Beckett Way intersection and at the southernmost (upper) Fenwick Way intersection. The resolution is attached as Exhibit 1. Because of the change in recommendation on this item, Staffhas sent an additional notice to the residents on Bloomington Way (Exhibit 4). Staff recommends that the City Council conduct a public heating, deliberate, and adopt the resolution. g:\agenmisc\bioom2 COPIES TO: TJKM, Mrs. Nolan ITEM NO. RESOLUTION NO. - 98 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN APPROVING INSTALLATION OF STOP SIGNS ON BLOOMINGTON WAY AT INTERSECTION OF BECKETT WAY AND AT SOUTHERNMOST (IYPPER) INTERSECTION OF FENWICK WAY The City Council of the City of Dublin hereby resolves as follows: Section 1: Pursuant to City of Dublin Municipal Code Section 6.04.070, and in the interest of public safety, stop signs shall be erected at the following locations: Bloomington Way at intersection of Beckett Way Bloomington Way at southernmost (upper) intersection of Fenwick Way Section 2. Said stop signs shall be added to Section 6.16.010 of the City of Dublin Traffic Code. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 21st day of April, 1998. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Mayor City Clerk g:kagenmisckresoblm2 _~- .~ .~ =_--~q Mat 6 '98 ~0:07 P. 09 TranspOrtation O~n~ult~nts March 6, 1998 Project No.: 157-001 Task 51 To: Mr. Mehran Sepehiri From: Gordon Lure ~ Subjectz Ali-Way $'iTPP .4analysis for Bloonfington Way ~fs memo ls to prescnt ~c rcsulm of T~M's an~}~is related fo ~e request for all-way ~P sign con~ol along Bloon~gton Way in ~e CiW of Dubl~. ~terscc~ons of Bloo~n W~y ~d Fen~ck Way, ~d Bl~ng~n Way ~d Bcckc~ Way ~e ~al~-ze~ to de~]e ~' ~ere Is a need for ~l-x~y STOP consol at ci~er of ~ese mtersec~ons. It shoed be norad ~at ~ere ~e actuMly po~ where Bloo~on Way intersec~ x~5~ Fen~Ck Way. This study ~ed ~e Bloo~on Way/Fen~fck Way intersection ~at is in~ediately to ~e west (or up,l) of Bloo~gton Way/Bloo~gton Cou~ ~e M~u.~ on Un~o~ ~a~ ConSol Dep~s ~D) indicates ~at STOP slg~ should not be used as speed-conn-ol de,Sees. ~OP signs ~e used to assi~g ~ght-of-way at ~tersec¢ons, e~c~g s~eV at lo~ons where ~c vot~es and/Or s~%V req~emenm in~ca~ a need for increased consol. ~e City of Dublin's wa~ reco.a~e ~fffact ~d ~e ~erefore based on ~c volumes, accident ~xTerience, ~d x~sib~re~c~ons. ~e wm~ ~e based on rese~ch and dam compiled from n~erous locations ~d constitute ~ efi%cfive measure of nhe need for a ~OP sign (~d shoed be tempered by engmeehng judgement). Unworried STOP sig~ ~cr~se moto~st delay [and inconvemence) and m~v reset in habitual .~l-Way STOP Back.ground for Bloomlngton Way artd Fenwick Way The r2nree-iegged inmrsection currently operates w~th STOP sign control on the Fenwick Way approach and no control on the Bloomington ~ray approaches. The intersection is located in a residential area. Bloomin~on Way is 35 feet wide and Fenwick Way is 36 feet ufide. The need for ail- way STOP si_ma c~nm-ol at the intersec¢on ~x.-as evaluated based on the Ci~ of Dublin's warrants for ail-way STOP sign insta!larion, as summm"ized in Tables I-.~ I-B, and I-C. TSK~'.' TRAk'SPORTATiON :x(r. ~ehr~] Sc9ci~'-i Traffic volumes Tra~c Accidents sight Distance Residential Area {Wa.-ra~t 4) ElementarY School Cro~siag ~-r~zt 5) Fax :510-463-3690 Page 2 Mar 6 '93 !0:08 P. 03 March 6. 1998 Not Satisfied: TJKM conducted 24-hour machine traffic volume counts at the intersection; the eight highest traffic- volume hours are summarized in Table II. Compared to thc wan-ants (Table I-A), thc average of thc highest eight hours falls short to satisfy the required volume {71 existing versus the 180 required]. Hence, thc traffic volume wan'ant is not satisfied for this intersection. Not Satisfied: TJKM investigated City of Dublin accident records for the period between January 1, 1994 and December 31, 1997. During th/s period, there were no reported accidents at the intersection. Five accidents ~ithin a single year are required for lkis location; therefore, tlzis ~rrani is not met. Not Satisfied: Thc sight distance along Bloomington Way was measured for both directions. The intersection sight distance for both directions along Bloon~gton Way were measured to be greater zhan 150 feet using the methodologY desm-ibed in Cain-aris' Hkjhwap M~ To meet this warrant the sight distance must be less than 150 feet for at least one of the directions on the major street Thus, this warrant is not satisfied. Satisfied: Ex~sting conditions at the intersection saiJs .fy the City's residential area warrants [see Table I-B). /'nerefore, %he volfnne and accident criteria used for City Warrants No. 1 and 1~,~ ~were taken fi-om the residential {'Res-~) of Table I-A and are indicalcd in bold .type. Not Satisfied: As Table I-C indicates, neither Part I nor Pm[ II of Warr~-mt 5 {Elementary School Crossin~ is met. No school is ]ocaled ¢~4%hin the ¢~cinity of the intersection. .Mr. Mchran Ssp¢hcd page 3 March 6, 1998 Recommendations The intersection of Bloomin~on Way and FenwtckWay fads to satisfy all-way STOP sign warrants. Hence, the mstallation of all-way STOP is not recommended at this intersection. Ali-way STOP signs are installed to assign the right-of-way at intersections with heaxder traffic volumes or more accidents than what e:dst at Bloomington Way and Fenwick Way. Instnll~ng unwarranted STOP signs may be counterproduct/ve since motorists tend to roll through flaem. Between February 10 and 11, 1998, counters were installed on Bloomington Way I.o measure the speed of veb_icles approaching Fenwick Way from both directions. The 85¢'percentde speed was 30 mph in the eastbound {downtd/1) direction and 28 mph m the westbound (uphgLl) d/rection. The 85~ percentile speed is that speed at or below whlch 85 percent of the recorded vehicles are travelling. The 85 TM percentile speeds recorded on Bloomington Way are reasonable for a residential street. Studies have sho~m that STOP signs used for speed control do not reduce speeds, except in the immediate vlcinity of the signs. Motorists tend to speed to make up for the lost time caused by the STOP signs. Mr. Mehran Sepeb_~i M=.r 6 '98 !0:09 ?.05 F~^' P~_ge 4 March 6. 1998 Table I-A " Ail-Way Stop sign Warrant Analysis For Bloomiaxgton Way/Fenwick Way Me~urement - Re{:lulred i IMeasured - . . _ I non- IRes. I Y est res. intersecLion,)2eragecl over high ] eight-hour p~riod, (vph) -- 4 -way 350 210 Met? 71 No 30% No Minor Street (vehicle plus pedestrian) proportion of S-hour entezing volume No Warrant I Met? (both pm'ts need to be satisfied) Correqtable accidents in 12-monLh non- Res. res , period No 5 3 0 _ Visibflify [in feet) ~n bom [ [ WB >15o' ~ Table I-B Warrant 4 - Residential Area _ Yes ---~- ~-~ts resident, iai, with existing 25 mph speed limitS? ;gu ~*~ ~ .... Yes Neither street an adopted r2m-ough sLreet? Yes Ne!t2ner street exceeds 40 feet of roadway widr_h? ' Yes ,~o e>~isdng STOP sion/si~n~ within 600 feet? = = Yes fne intersection? SWee~-~ e~_.eno at least 600 feet. ?_way from ~rooos~-3 All-Way STOP is comoatible x~Sth area's circulation needs? Yes___~___ Residential .area Wa-rant Met? (all slx criteria must b~_e satisfiffd) Tg!(M TRANSPO~TAT!ON Fax:510-=oa-~O Mar 6 '98 !0:09 P. 06 2~. Mehr~m Sepehr~ Page 5 March G, 1998 Table I-C Warrant 5 - Elementary School Crossing Pm-t Is crossing thc major street part of an ofl-2clai approved elementary No r school plan? Ail Residential Area Warrants met? Is there less than 280 feet of sight distance on the major street? Yes _ Part I Satisfied? [all three criteria must be satisfied) No Part Are there more than 20 students crossing the major street when at No II least 300 vehicles are tn direct conflict with pedestrians? Is there/ess than adequate sight distance on the major street for S5'~ No percmatile speed or speed limlt, whichever is hlghe~ No e~sting STOP sign/signal ~itbin 600 feet of the intersection? Yes Is the ,MI-Way STOP is compatible ~-ith area's circulation needs? Yes Part H satisfied? [all four m-iteria must be satisfied) No Warrant 5 satisfied? (either Part I or Part II must be satisfied) No Table II Hi 'best Hourly Vol. mes at Bloomin~oton Way/Fenwick Way 7:00 A.M. 13 19 32 64 8:00 A_M. 17 33 15 68 9:00 A_M. 14 15 19 51 2:00 P.M. 9 39 22 70 3:00 P,~, 17 55 29 101 4:00 P.M. 13 38 18 69 5:00 P.M. t2 53 16 6:00 P.M. 14 34 15 63 Total for/~ hours 109 289 169 567 Ave. age per hour ! 4 36 21 71 Traffic comnts were '=~x.ken Wednesday, F~bi'~:sz7 11, 1995. Mr. Mchran Sepchri All-Way STOP Analysis B ckgrou d ......... Fax : 510-463-3690 l'~ar 6 '98 !O:!O P. 07 Page 6 March 6. 1998 for Bloomkn~ton Way a_nd Beckett Way The three-legged intersection currently operates 'with STOP si~n control on the Beckett Way'approach and no control on the Bloomington Way approaches. The intersection is located in a residential area. Bloomin=~ton Way is 35 feet wide and Bcckett Way is 36 feet wide. The need for all-way STOP sign control at thc intersection was cvalualed based on thc City of Dublin's warrants for all-~y STOP sign insiallation, as sttm~d in Tables I-~ I-B, and I-C. Traftic Volumes (win-rant l) Traffic .~ccidents [Warrant Z) . sight Distance [win-tarot 3) Area Not Satisfied: TJKM conducted 24-hour machine traffic volume counts at the intersection; the eight highest traffic volume hours are summarized in Table II. Compared to the warrants (Table I-A), the average of the highest eight hours falls short to satisfy the required volume (87 existing versus the 1 S0 required). Hence, the traffic volu_me warrant is not satisfied for this intersection. Not Satisfied: TJ'Eq~ investigated City of Dublin accident records for the period between January 1, 1994 and December 31, 1997. During thls period, there were no reported accidents at the intersection. Five accidents u~thin a single year are required for this location: therefore, this warrant is not met. Not S~i;fied: The sight distance along Bloo.mington-W~Y was measured for both 'direction~ The int. ersec~on sight distance for both directions along Bloomin~on Way were measured ~o be greater than 150 feet using the methodology described in Ca]wans' H~ku~ay Desk3n Manual To meet this warrant, the sight distance must be less than 150 feet for at least one of the directions on the major street. Thus. this ~-arrant is not ~tisfied. satisfied: Existing conditions at the intersection satisfy the C~ry's residential area warrants [see Table I-lB). Therefore, the volume and accident c~teria used for City Warrants No. 1 and No. 2 were taken from the residential URes.') column of Table I-A a_nd are indicated in bold fy-pc. Ti, Off TR,qNSPO~TATiON Fax : 510-463-5690 l",a,~ 6 '98 i0:11 P. 08 .,Mr. Mehr~ Sepehri Page 7 March 6, 1998 School Crossing (Warrant 5) Not Satisfied: As Table I-C indicates, neither Part I nor Pant II of Warrant 5 (Elementary School Crossing) is met. No school is located within the vicinliy of thc intersection. Recommendations The intersection of Bloomington Way axed Becketl Way fails to safisfiy all-~-ay STOP sign win'rants. Hence, the installa~on of all-way STOP ts not recommended at tbJs intersection. Alt-way STOP signs are installed to assign right-of-way at tntersec~ons with heavier traffic volumes or more accidents than what e.:dst at Btoomin~on Way and Beckett Way. Inst~l~ng unwan-anted STOP signs may be counterproductive since motorists tend to roll through them. Between February 4 a_nd 5, 1998, counters were lnsialled on Bloomington Way io measure the speed of vehicles approaching Fenwiek Way from both directions. The 85=' percentile speed was 29 mph in the northbound [downhSJD direction and 32 mph Lq the southbound (uphill) direction. The 85~ percentile spe_~d is that speed at or below which 85 percent of the recorded vehicles are travelling. Studies have shown that STOP signs used for speed control do not ~ducc speeds, except in thc Lmmediatc ~4eintty of thc signs.- 5Motorists tend {o speed to make up for the Iost,'__~ne caused by ilne STOP signs. .... -~ -,-q ,M~r 6 '98 i0'11 ? 09 Fax: ~_, 0-~-o~ 0 ' TSKM Tp. ARSPORTAT!ON .¥,r. ~ehr~n ScpchM M~rch 6, 1998 Table I-A ' - All-Way Stop Sign Warrant Amalysis For Bloomington Way/Beckett Way , . ~ Mel~ttred Met? Warrant Measurement _______ l~ intersection, averaged ox er highest eight-hour period. (vph) 4-way [ 350 210 3-way 300 180 Minor Street {vehlcle plus I 33% pedestrian) proportion of 8-hozw cnte~ng volume Wm-rm~t 1 Met? ('oor2~ parts need to be satisfied) 87 No 41% Yes Correctable accident-a tn 12-month pe~od Bon- Res. ~s 5 3 0 No <150 EB >150' No 3 Visibility (in feet) m both WB > 150' directions on Major Street-2L ' - ~..~_~: _------~- ..... '_.: .- - .- ._ .. :'~---: . .- .. .--_--. - . Table I-B Win-rant 4 - Resident-iai _&rea Bod~ streets residential, with e~sting 25 mph speed 1LuSts? Yes Neither sU-eet an adopted ;2~rough street? Neither street axceeds 40 i~t of roadway ~idth? Yes .No e~.stLng STOP sign/sial_mai wiUhin 609 feet? Yes S~eers ex~end at. least 600 feet away/-om the intersection? Yes Fqroposed All-Way STOP is compatible *'ith area's circulation needs? Yes ~ Residential .A.rea Warrant Met? (all six c~teria must be satisfied) Tf!(M TpcaN'SPO.~T~T!DN Fax:.b!O-aoS-.~o90 I,¢~r 6 '98 i0:~? P !0 V- Mahran Se?elm'i Page 9 March 6, 1998 Table I-C Warrant 5 - Elementary School Crossing part Is crossing the major street part of an official approved elementary No I school plan? All Residential Area Wanmmts met? Yes Is there less than 2S0 feet of sight distance on the major street? Yes Part I Satisfied7 (all three criteria must be satisfied) No Part Are there more than 20 students crossing the major street when at No H least 300 vehicles are in direct conflict u~ith pedestrians? Is there less than adequate si,ght distance on the major street for 85" No percentile speed or speed Ii.mit, whichever is higher?. No existing STOP sign/signal within 600 feet of the intersection? Yes Is the Alt-Way STOP is compatible with area's circulation needs? Yes -Part rr satisfied? (all four criteria must be satisfied) No Warrant 5 satisfied? (elf_her Part I or Part It must be satisfied) No Table H HourI~ Vol. me$ at Bloomington Way/Beekett Way - Hr}u~ BegLr'ri';n'~,- -' BI~o~i~:~Ofi way BeeKe~ Way' To~" h~ ~ SB S:00 A.M. 55 13 36 104 9:00 A.M. 50 13 18 81 2:00 P.M. 32 12 27 71 3:00 P.M. 29 23 55 107 4:00 p.M. 25 37 29 91 5:00 P.M. 22 20 47 89 6:00 P.M. 23 21 3~ 82 7:00 P.M. 28 !0 35 73 To~ far 8 hom~ 2~ 149 225 698 Avenge par ho~ 33 19 36 87 ,- Tr~ ~ff~c coun~_~ were taken Thu.rsday. ?eb:'um~Y 5, 199S. /£ cITY CLERK AGENDA STATEMENT CITY coUNCI~ MEETING.DATE:i APril 7' 1998.. - SIYBJECT: Public Hearing: Bloomington Way Traffic studies Report Prepared by: Lee S. Thompson, Public Works Director EXltlB~S ATTACHED: 1) 2) 5) 6) 7) Letter from Mrs. 'Catherine Nolan dated 5/29/97 Petition and phone messages regarding prOp°sed edge line and centerline striping of Bloomington Way south (uphill) of Beckett Way. Copy of notice sent to residents Stop sign studies conducted by TJKM in 1995 (Bloomington Way/Fenwick Way and Bloomington Way/Beckett Way intersections) Stop sign studies conducted by TJKM in 1998 Location Map of Bloomington Way Addresses Map of Proposed Striping Improvement '; R_ECOMMENDATION: 1) 2) 4) s) Open public hearing Receive Staff presentation and public comment Question Staff and the punic --Close public hearing and deliberate .~-~nsmll minimal striping on Bloomington Way betwee~. Fenwicl~Way and Beckett Way as shown.on MaP Exhibit 6- and continue to monitor traffic in this area. ygN.-MNCLA, L STATENEENT: Cost of the recommended striping is estimated at $650.00. DESCRI~'TION: In May of 1997, Mrs. Catherine Nolan of 11721 Bloomington Way submiued a letter (Exhibit 1) to the Public Works Department requesting that stop signs be installed on Bloomington Way at the intersections of(upper) Fenwick Way and Beckett Way. The reasons cited for 'due request included speed control and sight distance issues. Stop sign studies had been performed by ' engm~,'-m= consultant, at both intersections in 1995. Neither intersection met TJTCML,. the Ci~'s tra.~c - ,,~ ' c, flue wa~-Tants for all-way stop intersections at that time. The reported accident history on this street is minimal, with five reported accidents in the past seven 5'ears. Two of the accidents could be considered speed-related, as they involved drivers losing control and COPIES TO: striking parked cars. Two of the other three accidents also involved parked cars, resulting from the driver's attention being diverted, in one case by sunlight and in the other case by an insect. The fifth accident involved a dog which was hit when it ran into the street. The warrant for stop sign studies requires five speed-related accidents wJth/n a one-year period. The installation of unwarranted stop signs can produce several negative impacts. Because the incidence of cross traffic is low, drivers will omen come to "roiling stops" or may not obey the stop sign at all. In addition, unwarranted stop signs contribute to traffic deIays, noise, and air pollution. Stop signs are not an effective means of speed control, as drivers tend to speed up between stop signs. Staffnotified Mrs. Nolan that stop signs would not be recommended but offered to locate the Police Sendces radar trailer in front of her house and conduct a speed survey. Mrs. Nolan indicated at the time that she felt the speed survey should be done in the fall, as the traffic was worse when school was in session. The initial speed survey conducted in September indicated that the 85th percentile speed above Mrs. Nolan's house was 30 mph. Mrs. Nolan felt that the survey should have been conducted directly in front of her house. The survey was re-done as requested, with the result that the 85th percentile speed was 27 mph downhill and 30 mph uphill. These speeds are typical ora residential neighborhood. The 85th percentile speed is defined as the speed at or below which 85% of drivers are traveling. This figure is used as a benchmark by traffic en~neers, as it is felt that most drivers will drive at a speed that is safe for the roadway. The 85th percentile speed is a major criterion, along with roadway characteristics, that is used in determi/~g the speed limit for a street. M~-s. Nolan was 'advised of the speed survey results. The City's Traffic Safety Committee discussed this issue on several occasions and felt that the perceived speeding problem might be helped by the use ora suSping device that had been used on a few o_ther City streets. The striping consists ora centerline and edge tines which reduce the travel lane width-to mn or eleven feet. This ~ves the illusion ora narrower ' roadway and typically causes a motorist to drive more slowly. An additional benefit of the edge line striping is that it proxddes a buffer between the travel lane and driveway approaches, mak. ing it easier for residents to exit their driveways. This device has been used on West Vomac Road with positive comments from neighbors. Mrs. Nolan indicated that she would be receptive to the striping. Vv~hen ~e striping work order was scheduled and the preliminary "ca-tracking" painted on the street, several residents called the Public Works Department and asked that the work be stopped. In response, Staffmailed a letter to residents on the portion of Bloomin~on Way that was proposed to be striped, the potion that is south (uphill) of Beckett Way. Staff'received a petition with 42 signatures, plus six telephone calls, from residents who were not in favor of the striping. Three calls were received in favor of the sniping. _M~-s. Notan was advised of the situation and requested that Stafflook at installing stop signs on Bloomin~on Way at the "upper" Fenwick intersection. In addition, the petition received from the other residents asks for stop signs on Bloomin~on Way at Beckett. TJKM has performed new studies; thek report, Exhibit 5, indicates that the warrants still have not been met. It does appear, however, that Mrs. Nolan's house and driveway are located so that she may have a problem seeing oncoming tr~ffic when tLySng to back out. This situation is partly due to her landscapin~ which could be modified, and partly due to a curve in the road. It may be possible to provide minimal su-iping as shown on the diagram, Exhibit 7, to d;.scourage cars from "cutting the comer" con-ting downhill and thereby improve visibility. Since the response to general striping improvements has been overwhelmingly negative, Staff has sent a notice to the Bloomington Way residents advising them of the stop sign study results and the suggested Council conduct a public hearing, deliberate, and ri in~ improvements. Staff recommends that the City ~ st p -L 'he minimal striPing as shown on Exhibit 7. - - approx ,. L . · CI~ Oi~ P. O. Bo× 2340, Dublin, California 94568 · City Offices, 103 CM: Plaza, Dublin California 94568 -April 10, 1998 Bloomington Way Traffic Control Dear Resident: Approximately two weeks ago, you received a public hearing notice regarding traffic control on Bloomington Way. The purpose of this le~er is to advise you of the results of the City Council meeting. The City Council approved the installation of the striping that was recommended by the City's engineering staff. This striping would affect only the area of Bloomin~on Way between the upper Fenwick Way intersection and the Beckett Way intersection. The City Council also felt that stop signs should be installed on Bloomington Way at both the upper Fen~x4ck Way intersection and the Beckett Way intersection. A second public hearing has been scheduled rezarding the stop signs. The hearing will be held at the regularly .scheduled meeting of April 21, 1998 at 7:60 p.m., in the Council Chambers of the Dublin Civic Center, 100 CMc Plaza, in Dublin. The City of Dublin encourages interested parties to attend public meetings and comment on issues being discussed, fi.you are unable to attend the meeting and would like to provide input, written comments m~nn~ in the public'.record. d~hv~, vd to the City Clerk's office up until the time of the will be included If you have any questions regarding this matter, please feel flee to call the Public Works Department at (925) 833-6630. Sincerely, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Mehran Sepehri Senior Civil Engineer Lee Thompson Soled Aminian C_rin ~ er Russell ~. Rich ~brose ~ ;-, ~[-~ ~ Administration (925) 83~SE50 - C~ Council (~25) E~SS~ - Finange (~25) 5~6~ ' Buildin~ In~pegtion (~25) 83~S20 /~ ~ 'e =nfomement ~25 S3~66 - Engineering (~25) 8~6~0 - ?ark~ & Commun~ Semiee~ {~25) g3~S~ i/-,; 457 1147S 1i4E2 ./ 115!~--'NN' EXISTING STOP SIGN 71551 PROPOSED STOP SI6 \ .~~i/~TING STOP SIGN PROPOSED STOP SIGNS April20,1998 Re: Bloomington Way Traffic Control Dear City Council: This is an opinion about the stop sign installation proposal for the intersection of Bloomington Wa)' and Beckett Way. We are the residence of 11744 Bloomington Way, which is located at the intersection of Beckett and Bloomington Way. As owners of a house in this neighborhood, we were not pleased to hear the characterization of Bloomington as a busy street. We feel that Bloomington Way is not as busy as the parallel street, W. Vomac; yet there is not a three way stop sign at the intersection of W. Vomac and Beckett. Obviously, we are womed about the noise that stop signs generate (i.e. stopping and accelerating), decreasing of property value, and the inconvenience that it will cause driving in and out of our driveway. We are not suggesting to trade public safety with noise or property value concerns; however, other methods of slowing traffic should be implemented first, such as striping. We should give striping a tO.", and if it doesn't work we can consider speed bumps at that time. Since we moved to the house eleven months ago, we have not seen or heard about any accident, nor any close calls for an accident. We strongly feel the local traffic that is passing through this street does not warrant a stop sign at this junction and should not be considered; however, striping should be installed to slow down traffic. We hope you will consider our opimon and we are sure other residents in the area feel the same way. If you have an), questions, please feel free to call us at (925) 833-6088. Thank you for your time. Fuad ~3~abit Date