HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem T,\ AGENDA REPORT
DATE:
August 13, 2001
TO:
Honorable Mayor and City Council
THRU:
John B. Bahorski, City Manager
FROM:
Doug Danes, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer
SUBJECT:
CITIZEN REQUEST FOR CHANGES TO THE PLANS
ON SEAL BEACH BOULEVARD IMPROVEMENTS
FROM SEAL BEACH BOULEVARD AND ELECTRIC
AVENUE
SUMMARY OF REQUEST:
The proposed City Council action would discuss and take appropriate action on whether
to make various changes to the plans.
BACKGROUND:
On July 31, 2001, the Engineering Division received a request to re- install the handicap
access ramp in front 231 Seal Beach Boulevard and install a marked crosswalk as part of
the Seal Beach Boulevard Improvement project. This was then followed up by further
requests for changing the design of the street and bike -lane configuration.
As background, the entire Seal Beach Regional Trail project was to complete the last two
missing links of the coastal bikeway between the Santa Ana Regional Trail and the San
Gabriel River Regional Trail. These last two links will create a continuous, unobstructed
coastal bikeway between the Huntington/Newport Beach area and the Seal Beach/Long
Beach area. An approximate timeline of this section of the project is provided in
Attachment 3. It was supported and promulgated by the City, Caltrans, OCTA, US Naval
Weapons Station, Senate Republic Leader, Ross Johnson, and County Supervisor, Jim
Silva.
Mr. Miller has sent several letters regarding this phase of the project. To briefly
summarize Staff's discussions and understanding of Mr. Miller claims, there are four
major issues:
1. Bicyclists will not use the provided regional trail facilities
Seal Beach Regional Trail is a 12 -foot wide Class 1 Bike trail that was designed
to handle both pedestrian and bicycle traffic and meets all federal standards.
Agenda nem
1. The road width is too narrow to accommodate parking and traffic.
The street as designed has an 80 -foot wide right of way, a 44 -foot wide street
width, and a 22 -foot wide distance from centerline to face of curb. This design is
in within current accepted engineering standards for street design for a local
collector (See Attachment 4, Orange County, Typical Street Sections and
Attachment 5, Seal Beach Boulevard, Project Cross Section)
3. A separate street handicap access ramp is necessary adjacent to his business.
There was an existing handicap access ramp that was placed in front of Mr.
Miller's shop. Our understanding from Mr. Miller is that it serves the handicap
bicyclists that visit his shop.
It is not advisable to place an access ramp mid -block on a public street
specifically for one type of business. Normally, the predominant mode of travel
for the handicapped would be on the sidewalk. Since this has been claimed as a
special situation, Staff met with Mr. Miller and offered to place a bike driveway
approach instead. It is not recommended to place an access ramp that leads
directly into the street, i.e. a blind person may use it and believe that it placing
him in a crosswalk or a safe place to cross.
4. A painted mid -block crosswalk is necessary at the access ramp.
The next issue is that you can place an access ramp in front of the business as
long as a painted mid -block crosswalk is placed at that location. Marked
crosswalks do not Provide safety in and of themselves but rather direct
Pedestrians where the safest route to cross. There have been numerous studies
concerning why marked cross walks can be more dangerous than un- marked cross
walks. Mid -block crosswalks can be considered even more dangerous. See
Attachment 1, Institute of Transportation Engineers, "When is a crosswalk
safe ? ", and Attachment 2, Seal Beach Engineering, Frequently Asked Questions,
"Crosswalks."
Further, marked cross walks can be viewed as an invitation to pedestrians to cross
at a location and to assume that motorists would be able to see them and stop for
them. Some courts have found that by creating a crosswalk, the public entity has
imposed a duty on that entity to exercise reasonable care as to pedestrians using
that crosswalk, thereby exposing the city to potential liability.
Engineering Staff believes that the road and trail were designed properly and will
function accordingly (See Attachment 4, Orange County, Typical Street Sections).
It is recommended, that the project be constructed as designed.
Agenda Item
Alternatively, a large part of what Mr. Miller is requesting, access ramps, parking
restrictions, painted crosswalks, could be implemented after the project is built. At the
request of Council, the Engineering Division could monitor the actual conditions and
report back on the actual volume of bicycle ridership on street versus trail and pedestrian
volumes/crossing patterns. For instance, many cities have adopted pedestrian volume
warrants for the installation of painted crosswalks and this was suggested in a previous
engineering report (See Attachment 7). The analysis could dictate that the most
appropriate place for another marked crosswalk might be at the Liberty Gate where Navy
personnel exit to visit the area. These numbers would clear up the confasion/conjecture
and provide facts to which base a more informed decision.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None at this time. There could be additional costs to perform pedestrian and traffic
studies.
It is recommended that the City Council
1. Direct staff to have the project constructed in accordance with the plans and
specifications as recommended by the City Engineer.
Alternative Recommendation:
2. Direct S to monitor the facility once constructed and if wan-anted bring back
an nee s muorLwt ractual data.
Douglas A. Dancs, P.E., Director of Publi'U'Works /City Engineer
NOTED AND APPROVED:
Jo7Borski, City Manager
Agenda Item
ATTACHMENT 1
Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE)
"When is a Crosswalk unsafe ?"
Agenda Item _
CROSSWALKS
WHEN IS A CROSSWALK UNSAFE?
Apparently, whenever it is painted on the street!
A number of years back, the City of San Diego published some startling results of a very extensive
study of the relative safety of marked and unmarked crosswalks. San Diego looked at 400
intersections for five years (without signals or four -way stops) that had a marked crosswalk on one
side and an unmarked crosswalk on the other. About two and one half times as many pedestrians used
the marled crosswalk, but about six times as many accidents were reported in the marked crosswalks!
Long Beach studied pedestrian safety for three years (1972 through 1974) and found eight times as
many reported pedestrian accidents at intersections with marked crosswalks than at those without.
One explanation of this apparent contradiction of common sense is the false security pedestrians feel
at the marked crosswalk. Two painted lines do not provide protection against an oncoming vehicle
and the real burden of safety has to be on the pedestrian to be alert and cautious while crossing any
street. A pedestrian can stop in less than three feet, while a vehicle traveling at 25 MPH will require
60 feet and at 35 MPH approximately 100 feet.
The California Vehicle Code says that a crosswalk exists at all intersections unless pedestrian crossing
is probibited by signs. Some of these crosswalks are marked with painted lines, but most of them are
not. Pedestrian crosswalk marking is a method of encouraging pedestrians to use a particular
crossing. Such marked crossings may not be as safe as an unmarked crossing at the same location.
Therefore, crosswalks should be marked only where necessary for the guidance and control of
pedestrians, to direct them to the safest of several Potential routes.
Mid -block crosswalks or crosswalks between
intersections are to be avoided because they are
unexpected by the motorist. Pedestrians should be
encouraged to cross only at intersections so that
they are crossing at a location when drivers will
have the expectation of pedestrians and other
vehicles being around.
36
ATTACHMENT
Seal Beach Engineering Division
FAQ's Sidewalks
Agenda Item _
Seal Beach Engineering Division
FAQ's Sidewalks
What are the of trial guidelines?
The Engineering Divisions follows State policies and the California Vehicle Code. The
Code requires us to follow the national guidelines outlined in the State Traffic Manual.
Traffic control devices include signal lights, traffic signs, and paint markings. The State
Traffic Manual covers all aspects of the placement, construction and maintenance of
every form of approved traffic control. The guidelines prescribe five basic requirements
for all devices. They must:
• Fulfill a need.
• Command attention.
• Convey a clear, simple meaning
• Command respect of road users.
• Give adequate time for proper response.
The State Traffic Manual emphasizes "uniformity" of traffic control devices. A uniform
device conforms to the regulations for dimensions, color, wording and graphics. The
standard device should convey the same meaning at all times. Consistent use of traffic
control devices protects the clarity of their messages. As stated in the State Traffic
Manual, uniformity must also mean treating similar situations in the same way.
What is a crosswalk?
Crosswalks are either "marked" or "unmarked ". The California Vehicle Code defines a
"crosswalk" as the portion of a roadway at an intersection, which is an extension of the
curb and property lines of the intersecting street or is any other portion of a roadway
which is marked as a pedestrian crossing location by painted lines. A marked crosswalk
is any crosswalk which is delineated by white or yellow painted markings placed on the
pavement. All other crosswalk locations are therefore "unmarked ".
How are crosswalks used?
At any crosswalk (marked or unmarked) drivers must yield the right -of -way to
pedestrians. Crosswalks are marked mainly to encourage pedestrians to use a particular
crossing. Studies conducted on the relative safety of crosswalks support minimal
installation of marked crosswalks.
The City of San Diego studied 400 intersections at which there were both marked and
unmarked crosswalks. The results were surprising. Although 2 1/2 times as many people
used the marked crosswalks, 6 times m many accidents occurred in the marked
crosswalks. A pedestrian safety study in Long Beach, reported 8 times as many accidents
in marked crosswalks compared to unmarked crosswalks. Similar studies in other cities
have confirmed these results.
Agenda Item _
What causes accidents at marked crosswalks?
Research suggests that marked crosswalks give pedestrians a false sense of security.
Pedestrians often step off the curb into the crosswalk, expecting drivers of vehicles
approaching the crosswalk to stop. However, drivers frequently fail to stop and cause an
accident. At all crosswalks, both marked and unmarked, it is the pedestrian's
responsibility to be cautious and alert before starting to cross the street.
At mid -block crosswalks on multi -lane roadways, another frequent factor in causing
accidents involves the driver of a vehicle in the lane nearest to the curb stopping for a
pedestrian that is waiting to cross or who is already in the crosswalk. The driver of a
second vehicle traveling in the lane next to the stopped vehicle tries to pass the stopped
vehicle and hits the pedestrian, even though it is illegal for drivers to pass a stopped
vehicle at a crosswalk. Pedestrians should be very cautious when walking in a crosswalk,
especially when their visibility is limited by vehicles already stopped at the crosswalk as
illustrated below:
When are crosswalks normally marked?
Crosswalks are marked at intersections where there is substantial conflict between
vehicle and pedestrian movements, where significant pedestrian concentrations occur,
where pedestrians could not otherwise recognize the proper place to cross, and where
traffic movements are controlled. Examples of such locations are:
• Approved school crossings.
• Signalized and four way stop intersections.
These examples follow the philosophy of marking crosswalks as a form of
encouragement. In the first case, we are encouraging school children to use a crossing
which is normally being monitored. In the second case, we are encouraging all
pedestrians to avoid a prohibited crossing.
What about mid -block crosswalks?
It is the City's policy not to paint crosswalks at mid -block locations where traffic is not
controlled by stop signs or traffic signals. Painted crosswalks should only be used where
necessary to direct pedestrians along the safest route.
According to the City of Long Beach's Crosswalk and Pedestrian Safety Study, the
County of Orange removed all mid -block crosswalks in its unincorporated areas..
Numerous other agencies have not allowed and/or removed mid block crosswalks from
their jurisdictions.
... The only exception m this policyison Main Sv where mid -block crosswalks have bxn in existence for some time in the
downtown business district. Due m their existing hinory and driver and pedestrian knowledge of uw existence, W.rn ive markings
and high pedestnan volume, these have remained.
Agenda Item
ATTACHMENT 3
Correspondence from Watt Miller
July 23, 2001 Request for Stop Order, Coastal Commission
July 24, 2001 Request for Executive Order
July 24, 2001 Request for Stop Order, Coastal Commission
July 27, 2001 Request for Stop Order, Caltrans
July 31, 2001, Objections to Proposed Traffic Flow Seal Beach Boulevard, City Manager
July 31, 2001 Request for Change Order to Add crosswalk and handicap ramps, Project
Designer
August 1, 2001, Request for Change Order to Revise plans, Project Designer
August 1, 2001, Request for Change Orders to Revise plans, Project Designer
August 3, 2001, Request for Change Orders to Revise plans #2
Agenda Item_
July 23, 2001
Peter Douglas
Executive Director
CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION
45 Fremont Street, Suite 2000
San Francisco, California 94105
Re: REQUEST FOR STOP ORDER ON PERMIT GRANTED FOR STREET IMPROVEMENT
Seal Beach Boulevard South of Coast Highway, City of Seal Beach
Dear Mr. Douglas:
It appears that the South Coast Area Office has granted a de minimus
permit to the City of Seal Beach, which has no certified local coastal
plan, to reduce the 56' width of the boulevard entry to the shoreline
to that of a residential street. No plans were made public until four
weeks after construction started on the street. These plans were
developed without public notice. I am a property owner on this street
and have a pending hearing set for August on my application to build a
visitor - serving bicycle shop.
The City of Seal Beach City Council, staff, and beachfront property
owners have used the restrictive policy of the Coastal Commission to
block visitor- serving development of this section of Seal Beach
Boulevard, which serves as the "Gateway" to the boardwalk and pier for
inland visitors to Old Town Seal Beach. The City has used "Catch 22"
to advance their program to close off the beach to the visiting public.
Coastal Commission requires on -site parking for visitor- serving
development, but will accept off -site if provided by the City. The
City will accept in lieu on -site parking but refuses to provide off -
site parking on the Pacific Electric right -of -way that is within 300
feet of our development.
After ten years of no development, the City plans to rezone this
boulevard R -1, permanently eliminating any possibility of public access
to the southside beach and boardwalk. Their first step is to make our
boulevard a residential street. Their second step is to change the
name of the boulevard to Ocean Avenue. The third step is to change the
zoning to R -1 and make the 55 low income apartments and 9 businesses
non - conforming, which means the structures cannot be improved and must
eventually be torn down, which also means property values drop
dramatically when all this happens.
Look what happened to the Hellman Ranch development under the Coastal
Commission policy. It was approved as a golf course development. Then
the Sierra Club intervened in court and the development was reduced to
70 single family residences. But what happened to the wetlands?
Nothing. There is no restoration, no irrigation, no grading, only
weeds and oil wells still pumping.
Please stop this insane permit to choke off public access to the
shoreline by changing a visitor-serving gateway to a residential
street. I have enclosed a copy of a press release for your
information, along with previous correspondence to your staff.
July 29, 2001
Commanding Officer
NAVAL WEAPONS STATION
700 Seal Beach Boulevard
Seal Beach, California 90790
Re: REQUEST FOR EXECUTIVE ORDER
Dear Captain:
I am writing this letter because I believe you have immediate sole
authority to order the barbed wire fence on Seal Beach Boulevard south
of Coast Highway, moved back approximately 90' to the existing entry
gate. I further believe you have the opportunity to contribute to the
betterment of community relations with the City of Seal Beach by doing
so. Let me explain.
At this moment the City has torn out this section of Seal Beach
Boulevard and is in the process of narrowing the street to accommodate
a bi- directional bike path which leads to nowhere. This plan was drawn
by the Department of Public Works of the City without public notice.
Why were you not noticed? Why were the property owners on the
boulevard not noticed? No one seems to have the answer. I have
enclosed a copy of my letter to the California Coastal Commission to
stop construction before an opportunity to restore this boulevard is
lost and precious resources squandered.
The Navy constructed this barbed wire fence fifty -seven years ago when
I was age 19 to protect our national interests. It has stood as a
sentry separating the community from Anaheim Bay ever since. No need
to tell you the world has changed. The Berlin Wall has fallen, Germany
and Japan are no longer our enemies, weaponry has changed to where it
is safer yet more lethal, and on. In order words, the mission of your
station has changed, but the fence remains. You have been spending and
wasting countless dollars maintaining the landscape behind the fence
for the last ten years to no avail. Drive out and take a look.
My request is that you direct the barbed wire fence be moved back to
the depth of the shore leave guard house in tact and give the City of
Seal Beach an easement to continue their "Greenbelt^ from the corner of
Electric all the way down to Coast Highway. That would allow the
proposed bicycle path to be moved off the street and connected with the
existing boardwalk, thereby providing a pathway for cyclists, runners,
roller bladers to follow a direct route to the Seal Beach Pier from
Coast Highway without interruption. The boulevard would remain wide
and available for visitor- serving diagonal parking on inland side.
The City is spending over one million dollars to squeeze a 12' wide
bike path into a 56' street which apparently satisfies political but
not practical purposes. If the street is just restored to its original
dimensions, there would be a savings. The cost of extending the
"Greenbelt" and connecting the bike path to the boardwalk could be
funded from the realized savings. Further amenities such as picnic
tables and "fitness stops" along the way might be funded from the
budget you now have to provide landscape maintenance which will stop.
In the past, people have argued that the "radius of the blast zone"
from the munitions loading dock prohibits moving the fence back. The
shore leave guard house is outside that radius. Present day munitions
do not require the same radius as did munitions in the 1940's. Look at
what the Navy has done in San Diego. Look at what Camp Pendleton has
done between San Clemente and Oceanside to accommodate their mission
with the civilian community. They have worked with local planners to
design bike paths throughout the base; they have provided access trails
and roads to permit surfers to use government beaches. In the event of
a national emergency the fence can be moved back under the authority of
your easement. Am I asking too much of you to order the relocation of
the barbed wire fence and creation of the easement to benefit our
community? We have stood at rest for 57 years. It's time to come to
attention.
Please, come on board. The families of the station have enjoyed the
school system and the amenities of our community without the burden of
property taxes. You even have your own private beach on land that was
once part of the bayside community of Seal Beach, and you have
restrooms out there. The community and the visiting public should have
the opportunity to enjoy equal amenities to our side of the fence,
don't you think? I now the interest is there. This area is opened for
bus parking supporting special events of the City. Please take the
initiative and write a letter today to the City letting them know your
position. Your staff and City staff can take it from there.
I am distributing a copy of this letter in the hopes that common ground
will be found between the agencies, community and governing authorities
to take advantage of this unique opportunity rather than continue the
oppression for another fifty years and the lifetimes of our children.
Thank you for taking the time out of your schedule. To all who read
this letter, I would be available to further my views at your
convenience. My son and I are probably the only ones who own our
property and have worked on a daily basis for the past twenty -eight
years looking across at the barbed wire fence and the dirt parkway some
60 feet away. None of the people who designed and /or approved the
"street improvement" now under construction can make that statement.
The Director of Public Works just resigned and took a job in Newport
Beach.
Sincerely,
`_
Walt Miller
231 Seal Beach Boulevard
Seal Beach, CA 90740
Tel. 562 - 598 -8455 FAX 562 -430 -0912 e -mail waltfm @earthlink.net
Enclosure - Letter
cc: P er Douglas, Executive Director, California Coastal Commission
ity Manager, City of Seal Beach
Public Works Director, City of Seal Beach
July 24, 2001
Peter Douglas
Executive Director
CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION
45 Fremont Street, Suite 2000
San Francisco, California 94105
Re: REQUEST FOR STOP ORDER ON PERMIT GRANTED FOR STREET IMPROVEMENT
Seal Beach Boulevard South of Coast Highway, City of Seal Beach
Amendment
Dear Director Douglas:
This letter is to offer additional arguments to the letter sent by
certified mail to you yesterday. I trust that both of my letters will
be routed to the proper individual in your agency to handle such
matters. I do not expect you personally to get involved in our local
problems.
The City of Seal Beach staff did not work with the Naval Weapons
Station (NWS) in the development of this street improvement, in spite
of the obvious effort over the last six years by the Navy to landscape
their property adjoining Seal Beach Boulevard. Camp Pendleton has set
the standard of cooperation between civilian and military by working
with local planners to allow bicycle paths and beach access for surfing
on government property. There is no doubt in my mind, if approached,
that the Navy would move its barbed wire fence back 90 feet to their
shore leave entry gate and allow the City to continue its "Greenbelt"
from Electric all the way to Coast Highway. Such "Greenbelt" extension
could allow the bike path to continue to Coast Highway without a
reduction in the width of the existing boulevard. Such a program
would:
1. "Open" the "Gateway" to inland beach -going visitors.
2. Make a statement to the vitality of "Old Town" Seal Beach.
3. Develop the boulevard as visitor - serving.
4. Accommodate diagonal parking as visitor - serving inland side.
5. Accommodate parallel parking for residents bay side.
6. Relieve the Navy of landscape maintenance.
7. Generate goodwill between the community and the Navy.
One has to wonder what the motivation of City staff is to bury their
heads in the sand and ignore this opportunity.
Sincerely,
Walter F. Miller
231 Seal Beach Boulevard
Seal Beach, CA 90740 -6596
Tel. 562 -598 -8455 FAX 562- 430 -0912 Temp Tel. 970 -453 -5664
cc: ✓City Manager, City of Seal Beach
July 26, 2001
Peter Douglas
Executive Director
CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION
45 Fremont Street, Suite 2000
San Francisco, California 94105
Re: RETEST FOR STOP ORDER ON PERMIT GRANTED FOR STREET IMPROVEMENT
Seal Beach Boulevard South of Coast Highway, City of Seal Beach
Dear Mr. Douglas:
I regret directing another letter to your attention, but additional
facts have presented themselves in this matter.
If a permit was issued by the South Area office of the Coastal
Commission to the City of Seal Beach for the subject improvement which
called for a reduction of boulevard size, it should not have been
issued without a permit first being obtained from CalTrans. The
reasoning being the designated roadway carries a category that
represents the boulevard entry to Seal Beach from a four lane divided
highway to a 56' wide boulevard.
Secondly, the plans call for a reduction of commercial sidewalk
existing in a commercial zone, to that of residential. The plans call
for the sidewalk to be reduced to a 5' width and the parkway to be
increased to 51, allowing for the planting of trees. I believe such
plans violate the viability of commerce in a area of the City that is
presently zoned Limited Commercial (L -C). I further believe such plans
were drawn and implemented solely to support the position of the City
Council to rezone this area to R -1, Single Family Residential, when
presently the area houses no single family, but 55 low income apartment
units and 9 businesses.
It is now also noted that the proposed bicycle path runs the length of
two city blocks and requires the inbound cyclist to cross opposing
traffic both on entry and exit from the path, as well as crossing
traffic entering the Naval Weapons Station shore leave guard house.
Sincerely,
n r
Walter F. Miller
231 Seal Beach Boulevard
Seal Beach, CA 90740 -6596
Tel. 562 - 598 -8455 FAX 562- 430 -0912 Temp. Tel. 970 -453 -5664
cc: ✓City Manager, City of Seal Beach
Janna Shackeroff, Coastal Program Analyst
Y �
July 27, 2001
CALTRANS
Permit Section
3331 Michelson Drive, Suite 100
Irvine, Califoria 92612 -8894
949- 724 -2000
Re: REQUEST FOR STOP WORK ORDER STREET IMPROVEMENTS
Seal Beach Boulevard South of Coast Highway, Seal Beach
Director of Operations:
At the moment the boulevard has been torn out between Coast Highway and
Electric Avenue under a public works contract awarded by the City of
Seal Beach. Concrete curbing is now being formed and poured that
reduces the roadway from the previous width of 56' to a residential
width of 44'. The City Council has made its intensions clear that it
plans to change the commercial zoning of this section of the street
from commercial to single family residential.
This roadway is being permanently modified from being the "Gateway to
Seal Beach" to being an exclusive single family residential street by a
"ruse" perpetrated by the City staff and the City Council. On the
plans the boulevard remains 56' wide and contains bike lanes, the "same
as before ". However, the bike lanes are no longer part of the
boulevard, but combined in a two block long bi- directional bike path
that is raised to curb height and 3' outside the northbound curb. This
configuration results in the roadway being reduced to 44' consisting of
two 12' traffic lanes and two 10' parallel parking lanes. The bike
path will be rarely used, if at all, by cyclists coming off Coast
Highway because they must dismount to cross opposing traffic both on
entering and exiting the two block long bike path. The practicality of
riding into opposing traffic along with opening car doors along the
bike path also makes the choice impractical for the inbound cyclist.
It is anticipated cyclists coming from both directions will continue to
ride the restricted 44' roadway and shared with response ambulances and
fire engines, OTC busses, parallel parked cars, and the additional
private vehicle congestion created by a roadway reduced by 208 and
containing no bike lanes. My son runs the bike shop on Seal Beach
Boulevard. I believe the City is building a "nightmare ", an "accident
waiting to happen ", lethal delays for emergency response vehicles, in
order for the City Council to achieve their vision of an exclusive
seaside community. Let me relate what I believe to be the
justification for the direction taken by the City Council.
Fifty -seven years ago, in 1944, under the vail of a national emergency,
World War II, the U.S. Navy built the Weapons Station in Seal Beach,
and installed a barbed wire fence along Seal Beach Boulevard (then
called Bay Boulevard) to secure Anaheim Bay and enclose the government
facility. The world has changed (see enclosed correspondence to the
Naval Weapons Station) but the fence remains. The fence sapped the
vitality from this "Gateway" to the bay and ocean shorelines of the
City of Seal Beach, leaving the boulevard to become an abandoned and
forgotten area for the next half century.
July 31, 2001
John B. Bahorski BAND DELIVER
City Manager 7/31/01 10:30am
CITY OF SEAL BEACH
City Hall - 211 Eighth Street
Seal Beach, California 90740
562 -431 -2727 Ext. 300
Re: Memorandum of understanding
Objections to Proposed Traffic flow Seal Beach Boulevard
When Greg and I met with you this morning, we discussed the subject.
At the conclusion of your meeting, based on your calendar, we set up
a meeting with Gary, project manager, for loam Thursday on site. We
advised you we were going out to walk the job with Gary this morning
to get background. We just came back from that meeting.
Gary told us that the plan is to reroute traffic this evening. All
signage is already made to do so. It appears you were not aware of
this plan when we had our meeting.
After our meeting this morning, Gary is going to discuss our concerns
with you before he shuts down inbound traffic. We walked up to the
intersection of Coast Highway and Seal Beach Boulevard to consider
the possibilities of switching inbound traffic to the newly paved
section while the remainder of the street is torn up. Here's what we
found:
1. Old Town does not have paramedics. They are dispatched from
Leisure World station. They have used Seal Beach Boulevard as
their entrance of choice to pier area emergencies for the last
twenty years. If they are now diverted to 12`" Street or Main
Street, both now congested with detour traffic, they are going
to lose three to five minutes that they would not lose on the
direct route Seal Beach Boulevard to Ocean Avenue to the pier
area. Gary was not aware of this fact, but I think you are.
2. Most delivery vehicles, such as UPS, come from the 405 Freeway
down Seal Beach Boulevard to Coast Highway. If there is no
inbound lane open, they will not be able to service any business
on Seal Beach Boulevard south of Coast Highway because they
cannot negotiate the "T" in the alley behind these businesses.
Briggeman Disposal must back up the entire length of the alley
to exit on Landing, and they have a backup horn. Construction,
including sidewalks, will extend for two more months,
effectively closing businesses that depends on customer access
and delivery. Gary was not aware of these facts.
3. The "funnel" opening on to Coast Highway
collect inbound traffic that is entering
"S" is made for traffic going straight.
traffic off of Coast Highway flow smooth
without hazard. Gary suggested that the
be temporary marked to allow the vehicle
left. That would allow two inbound lanes
enter Seal Beach without hazard.
is ideally suited to
Seal Beach. A smooth
Right and left turn
Ly into the "funnel"
inside left turn lane
to go straight or turn
to funnel into one and
4. Outbound vehicles leaving Seal Beach from the pier area have
choices based on signage. They can exit any of the residential
streets or Main Street to Coast Highway or Bolsa and feed back
into Seal Beach Boulevard inland. They do not have the choices
inbound because . they are not familiar with our street grids, and
will either congest Bolsa, which feeds to Main Street, which is
already congested, or to 12 th Street following signage, which is
a residential width street and will be further congested with
both inbound and outbound visitor traffic. This increased
congestion will take us back to #1 above. Emergency vehicles
will be delayed both inbound and outbound.
This memo is just presenting logic which may not have been considered
in your initial planning. Gary said he had talked to all business
owners, but did not realize that I was a business owner on the
premises, and missed me in his survey even though Greg was out of
country at the time. I see no need for our meeting Thursday if your
decision is being made today.
Gary was open to the logic presented, but was concerned that all his
signage was already done and he had planned to change inbound to
outbound this evening. We understand it will be inconvenient to
delay this change or make up new signage, but I think the rights of
the public should be paramount in making any decision, being it
emergency or economic.
Thank you,
V✓
Walt and Greg Miller
231 Seal Beach Boulevard
Seal Beach
562 -598 -8455 562 -594 -6130
cc: Gary, project manager
August 1, 2001
William G. Zimmerman VIA FACSIMILE
Resident Civil Engineer 562 -599 -8599
W.G. ZIMMERMAN ENGINEERING, INC.
1500 East Coast Highway Original by First Class Mail
Seal Beach, California 90790
562 -599 -8589
Re: Request for Change Orders to REVISE plans
231 Seal Beach Boulevard
Project No. 9991 -99757
Dear Mr. Zimmerman:
Thank you for allowing us to enter into discussions you were holding
with the principals on this project in front of our property
yesterday afternoon. Needless to say, a lot was learned.
First, I agree with you, the 12' wide "Paved Trail" shown on Sheets 9
and 5 of the construction drawings is not for bicycle traffic. The
bicycle lanes will become invisible because there will be no
striping. Will cyclists feel safe for the 1,9001f of new roadway?
Will they realize, without stripes or signage, that the 5' lane they
just came off of above Coast Highway has shrunk to 9' and be extra
careful of traffic? Will they just ride in the car lane and hope
that no one runs them down from the rear? These are real concerns of
real cyclists. Will it be safe for racing wheel chairs to come down
the street without marked 5' bike lanes and stop at Sandpiper Bicycle
Repair?
From my experience, the statement made by Doug, the City Engineer,
that by narrowing the street traffic will be slowed, may not be
entirely on the mark. There will be congestion, of course, but that
will add to speed for locals when there is no congestion. It was
amply demonstrated the other day when a vehicle stopped to wait for
another to pull out from the curb so he could pull in and pick up his
child at the Growing Tree day care center. Some fifteen cars and an
OCTD bus qued up for the wait. I would not like to have been on a
bicycle in that traffic, nor be waiting for a customer to park.
Traffic speed is dependent on the length of unobstructed view. A
straight roadway, 1,900 feet in length, with no distractions from
Coast Highway to the curve where the boulevard terminates at Ocean
Avenue will result in the same high speeds we have endured here for
years, even though it is a posted 35mph zone. The uncertainty of
obstructions to travel, such a 3 -way boulevard stop at Landing
(suggested years ago), popouts with pedestrian crosswalks for
handicap and similar to the pavers used on Main Street, and diagonal
parking (not possible with 99' width roadway), all result in slowing
vehicle traffic. Don't you think 1,400 feet is a long way to go
without a crosswalk ?. I know you questioned why the proposed
crosswalk should be in front of our property. The sole reason is it
is the center of the block, just like Main Street. That is why the
fire hydrant is where it is; it is in the center of the block.
I must tell you that under the present configuration, cars are not
going to be able to park and unload bicycles. Cyclists are not going
to want to ride in car lanes to get to /from the bike shop. The hopes
to expand the bike business seem to be out. The hope to continue to
do business as we have done in the past is dim. Do you think you
might consider keeping two striped 5' bike lanes on the street and
eliminating the east side parking lane? After all, residents only
live on the west side of the street and should not be parking their
cars on the street during the day. Sandpiper could live with that if
our business frontage was painted with 20 minute green and we had the
handicap crosswalk. Could you give us a little help here? Seems
unfair that a visitor- serving business is being choked after twenty
years of service to the community.
I met with OCTA today and found that they and the Federal Department
of Transportation (DOT) only suggest that cities provide bicycle
paths to recreational areas. I was also advised that the City did
get permission from OCTA to reclassify the boulevard to a residential
street some time ago. He is looking for documentation to send me.
OCTA has no authority to ask for connecting Class II bike paths, nor
can they prevent cities from removing bike paths that have served the
community for years. I was shocked. They recommended I speak with
the Long Beach Office of the California Coastal Commission based on
the fact that removal might be an act to deny coastal access. I
understand that no coastal permit application was received for your
plans. Did you know that the City of Seal Beach does not have a
certified Local Coastal Plan (LCP) on file. The Coastal Commission,
under the authority of the Coastal Act, retains jurisdiction over
this boulevard "gateway" to the shoreline. Yesterday the City
Engineer and City Manager made an offer to install a driveway
entrance to my building site, smooth at the bottom, to accommodate
handicap entrance. If the City does have the authority to make curb
cuts on this boulevard to accommodate a property owner without first
obtaining a Coastal permit, then we would want to discuss that offer.
These street improvements are going to do nothing for the flood zone.
For the last 57 years the lower part of this boulevard has been
classified as a flood zone. Prior to 1944, the fall of the boulevard
was to adjoining Anaheim Bay and there was no flood zone. A quick
look at the older structures in this area will verify that fact.
When the Navy confiscated the bay front in 1944 under the provisions
of a national emergency, the placed a jetty on the shoreline and
brought in import borrow to cover the sand shoreline and seal the
jetty from tidal flow , thereby giving a 3' berm base for a two lane
roadway out to the jetty. That construction raised the surface level
above that of the community thereby directing flood runoff into the
residences and businesses along the boulevard. The world has
changed!! The Navy needs to work with this community.
It seems that you might communicate with the Navy as I have tried to
do by prior letter, and ask that they build a retaining wall on their
easement with catch basins to allow the new roadway to drain to the
sea, not to a pumping plant. That would eliminate the flood zone and
accommodate future development of Seal Beach Boulevard without the
requirement of raising floor levels 2' above sidewalk level for
residential and commercial entrance. That would also eliminate the
need for local residents on Ocean Avenue and Seal Beach Boulevard to
sandbag their homes during severe storms. As a gesture of community
goodwill, I would assume the Navy would be willing to discuss this
with your engineer. Could you give it a try?
Let me give you my background. I spent the first 12 years of my
career working with contractors and negotiating change orders with
the State of California, various counties in California, tract
developers, and near the end, with OICC, Department of the Navy, in
Saigon during the Vietnam war. I now am working as part of a team
with the City of San Clemente to slow down traffic in their historic
district. We are proposing using mid -block paved crosswalks and
popouts to bring traffic below the posted speed limits. I have owned
commercial frontage on E1 Camino Real at the intersection of Granada
for the last twelve years. This is the very spot where Doug
mentioned the accident happened.
I look forward to further discussions with all who might be involved
in bringing this project to a deserving conclusion, which will
enhance visitor serving access to our shoreline.
Sincerely,
Walt and Greg Miller, Owners for last 20 years
229 and 231 Seal Beach Boulevard
Seal Beach, CA 90740
562 -598 -8455 562 -594 -6139 FAX 562- 430 -0912
Enclosures - Implementing Bicycle Improvements at Local Level
- Sheets 4and 5 of plans to distribution only
cc: California Coastal Commission, Karl Schwing, Program analyst
IKTA - -Kurt Brotcke, Principal transportation analyst
✓John Brocoluk, City Manager, City of Seal Beach
Commanding Office, Naval Weapons Station, Seal Beach
July 31, 2001
William G. Zimmerman VIA FACSIMILE
Resident Civil Engineer 562 -594 -8549
W.G. ZIMMERMAN ENGINEERING, INC.
1500 East Coast Highway Original by First Class Mail
Seal Beach, California 90740
562 -594 -8589
Re: Request for Change Order to ADD crosswalk and handicap ramps
231 Seal Beach Boulevard
Project No. 4991 -49757
I was told by Gary, the project manager, that the handicap ramp in
front of the bike shop, would not be replaced for the following
reasons:
1. It was illegal in the first place, but the City allowed it.
2. There is no crosswalk and no handicap ramp on the other side of
the street.
3. A blind person would be confused by the scored handicap ramp and
wheel himself into oncoming traffic.
The arguments for the construction of handicap ramps on both curbs
connected by a crosswalk to replace the existing "non- conforming"
handicap ramp are as follows:
1. As you know, those with no ability to use their legs for power,
use specially designed wheel chairs and some use hand powered
tricycles. This community, small as it is, competes against
each other. They come to Greg for not only service, but
innovation to make their chairs and tricycles go faster. No one
in the Southern California area offers such a service. For
twenty years, Sandpiper Bicycle Repair has served this select
handicap community.
2. These people wheel on public streets for training and racing.
They ride where bicycles ride. Prior to narrowing our street,
they wheeled down the bike lane, up the ramp and into the shop.
After construction is complete, they will wheel on the new bike
way across the street. Without a crosswalk and handicap ramps
they will have no safe crossing to enter and exit the shop.
3. When the street was full width, with a five foot bike lane
separating a parallel parked vehicle, the handicap could bring
their chair or tricycle to the shop in their vehicle. Because
of the narrowing of the street, the handicap can no longer exit
their vehicles, deploy their chairs, and enter the shop.
Returning to their vehicle is no longer possible for the same
reasons.
The Growing Tree preschool would also benefit from a crosswalk
that could be used by parents to drop off and pick up their
children, when they must park on the Navy side. The narrowed
street, along with higher traffic congestion, will allow little
error for exiting and entering vehicles from the driver's side.
The same might apply to any handicap visitor living or visiting
any resident living along the street improvement.
>, without a mid -block crosswalk, cyclists cannot get to the bike
shop other than walking their bicycle down the residential
sidewalk from Coast Highway or from Electric. It is illegal to
ride a bicycle on the sidewalk as you know. In fact, no one,
runners, roller bladers, strolling pedestrians, cyclists, can
cross the street safely between Coast highway and Electric
Avenue from the new bikeway without a crosswalk(s) connecting
the two sides of the street.
As long as there is expected activity on the new bikeway and the bike
paths eliminated on the boulevard, a change order needs to be issued
by your office to include the requested multi -use handicap crossing.
At this stage, the cost is minimal. Later it will be prohibitive.
It is unfortunate that there was no public notice prior to drawing
the plans. No doubt you will agree with this request if you make a
visit to the jobsite and verify the above facts for yourself. My son
and I would be pleased to meet with you at your convenience as well
as any of city staff or the contractor.
Walt and Greg Miller
Owners, Sandpiper Bicycle Repair
231 Seal Beach Boulevard
Tel. 562 -598 -8455 562 - 594 -6130 FAX 562 -430 -0912
cc: city Manager, City of Seal Beach
Gary, Project Manager
August 1, 2001
William G. Zimmerman
Resident Civil Engineer
W.G. ZIMMERMAN ENGINEERING, INC.
1500 East Coast Highway
Seal Beach, California 90740
562 -594 -8589
/f,T ND
VIA FA ILE a'1
56 99 -8599 /
Ori ina� First Class Mail
Mail
Re: Request for Change Orders to REVISE plans
231 Seal Beach Boulevard
Project No. 4991 -49757
Dear Mr. Zimmerman:
Thank you for allowing us to enter into discussions you were holding
with the principals on this project in front of our property
yesterday afternoon. Needless to say, a lot was learned.
First, I agree with you, the 12' wide "Paved Trail" shown on Sheets 4
and 5 of the construction drawings is not for bicycle traffic. The
bicycle lanes will become invisible because there will be no
striping. Will cyclists feel safe for the 1,4001f of new roadway?
Will they realize, without stripes or signage, that the 5' lane they
just came off of above Coast Highway has shrunk to 4' and be extra
careful of traffic? Will they just ride in the car lane and hope
that no one runs them down from the rear? These are real concerns of
real cyclists. Will it be safe for racing wheel chairs to come down
the street without marked 5' bike lanes and stop at Sandpiper Bicycle
Repair?
From my experience, the statement made by Doug, the City Engineer,
that by narrowing the street traffic will be slowed, may not be
entirely on the mark. There will be congestion, of course, but that
will add to speed for locals when there is no congestion. It was
amply demonstrated the other day when a vehicle stopped to wait for
another to pull out from the curb so he could pull in and pick up his
child at the Growing Tree day care center. Some fifteen cars and an
OCTD bus qued up for the wait. I would not like to have been on a
bicycle in that traffic, nor be waiting for a customer to park.
Traffic speed is dependent on the length of unobstructed view. A
straight roadway, 1,400 feet in length, with no distractions from
Coast Highway to the curve where the boulevard terminates at Ocean
Avenue will result in the same high speeds we have endured here for
years, even though it is a posted 35mph zone. The uncertainty of
obstructions to travel, such a 3 -way boulevard stop at Landing
(suggested years ago), popouts with pedestrian crosswalks for
handicap and similar to the pavers used on Main Street, and diagonal
parking (not possible with 44' width roadway), all result in slowing
vehicle traffic. Don't you think 1,400 feet is a long way to go
without a crosswalk? I know you questioned why the proposed
crosswalk should be in front of our property. The sole reason is it
is the center of the block, just like Main Street. That is why the
fire hydrant is where it is; it is in the center of the block.
I must tell ,you that under the present configuration, cars are not
going to be able to park and unload bicycles. Cyclists are not going
to want to ride in car lanes to get to /from the bike shop. The hopes
to expand the bike business seem to be out. The hope to continue to
do business as we have done in the past is dim. Do you think you
might consider keeping two striped 5' bike lanes on the street and
eliminating the east side parking lane? After all, residents only
live on the west side of the street and should not be parking their
cars on the street during the day. Sandpiper could live with that if
our business frontage was painted with 20 minute green and we had the
handicap crosswalk. Could you give us a little help here? Seems
unfair that a visitor- serving business is being choked after twenty
years of service to the community.
I met with OCTA today and found that they and the Federal Department
of Transportation (DOT) only suggest that cities provide bicycle
paths to recreational areas. I was also advised that the City did
get permission from OCTA to reclassify the boulevard to a residential
street some time ago. He is looking for documentation to send me.
OCTA has no authority to ask for connecting Class II bike paths, nor
can they prevent cities from removing bike paths that have served the
community for years. I was shocked. They recommended Ispeak with
the Long Beach Office of the California Coastal Commission based on
the fact that removal...might be an act to deny coastal access. I
understand that no coastal permit application was received for your
plans. Did you know that the City of Seal Beach does not have a
certified Local Coastal Plan (LCP) on file. The Coastal Commission,
under the authority of the Coastal Act, retains jurisdiction over
this boulevard "gateway" to the shoreline. Yesterday the City
Engineer and City Manager made an offer to install a driveway
entrance to my building site, smooth at the bottom, to accommodate
handicap entrance. If the City does have the authority to make curb
cuts on this boulevard to accommodate a property owner without first
obtaining a Coastal permit, then we would want to discuss that offer.
These street improvements are going to do nothing for the flood zone.
For the last 57 years the lower part of this boulevard has been
classified as a flood zone. Prior to 1944, the fall of the boulevard
was to adjoining Anaheim Bay and there was no flood zone. A quick
look at the older structures in this area will verify that fact.
When the Navy confiscated the bay front in 1944 under the provisions
of a national emergency, the placed a jetty on the shoreline and
brought in import borrow to cover the sand shoreline and seal the
jetty from tidal flow , thereby giving a 3' berm base for a two lane
roadway out to the jetty. That construction raised the surface level
above that of the community thereby directing flood runoff into the
residences and businesses along the boulevard. The world has
changed!! The Navy needs to work with this community.
It seems that you might communicate with the Navy as I have tried to
do by prior 'letter, and ask that they build a retaining wall on their
easement with catch basins to allow the new roadway to drain to the
sea, not to a pumping .plant. That would eliminate the flood zone and
accommudate future development of Seal Beach Boulevard without the
requirement of raising floor levels 2' above sidewalk level for
residential and commercial entrance. That would also eliminate the
need for local residents on Ocean Avenue and Seal Beach Boulevard to
sandbag their homes during severe storms. As a gesture of community
goodwill, I would assume the Navy would be willing to discuss this
with your engineer. Could you give it a try?
Let me give you my background. I spent the first 12 years of my
career working with contractors and negotiating change orders with
the State of California, various counties in California, tract
developers, and near the end, with OICC, Department of the Navy, in
Saigon during the Vietnam war. I now am working as part of a team
with the City of San Clemente to slow down traffic in their historic
district. We are proposing using mid - block, paved crosswalks and
popouts to bring traffic below the posted speed limits. I have owned
commercial frontage on E1 Camino Real at the intersection of Granada
for the last twelve years. This is the very spot where Doug
mentioned the accident happened.
I look forward to further discussions with all who might be involved
in bringing this project to a deserving conclusion, which will
enhance visitor serving access to our shoreline.
Sincerely,
Walt and Greg Miller, Owners for last 20 years
229 and 231 Seal Beach Boulevard
Seal Beach, CA 90740
562 -598 -8455 562 -594 -6139 FAX 562 -430 -0912
Enclosures - Implementing Bicycle Improvements at Local Level
- Sheets 4 and 5 of plans to distribution only
cc: California Coastal Commission, Karl Schwing, Program analyst
OCTA - Kurt Brotcke, Principal transportation analyst
John Brocoluk, City Manager, City of Seal Beach
Commanding Office, Naval Weapons Station, Seal Beach
_- y,Rcuuaja
mm
1 lel —� °' c 1 � I•
I v
� oe rr• +I
♦ '
IT O
m
P i
e i
1 ,
•
i
r i
i
i
'b, of LA T000poodoo aewont B'rycle Ran ded, auMU&
IV. BIKEWAY DESIGN STANDARDS
Design Standards - Class I and Class II
Al Class I (bike path) and Class It (bike lane) facilities shall be designed to the
mandatory standards set forth in Chapter 1000 of the CALTRANS Highway Design
Manual. In addition to these state- mandated minimum standards, the following
standards shall also apply to these respective facilities:
CLASS I (BIKE PATH)
Striping and Signing
a yellow centerline stripe shall be used to separate opposing
directions of travel
bike route signs with destination signing shall be placed at all points
where a bike path intersects another bikeway route.
street signs identifying major or secondary highways and collector
streets shall be placed where a bike path intersects and /or provides
access to such streets
Intersections with Highways (not oMdll separated)
• bike path intersections with major or secondary highways at mid -
block shall be signalized to the maximum extent feasible.
• ramps shall be installed in curbs at all mid -block bike path
intersections.
bike crossing signs shall be placed in advance of the crossing at all
public street intersections to alert motorists.
Liahtino
existing lighting conditions and illumination levels should be
evaluated, and where warranted and feasible, upgraded to meet
standards currently adopted by the City.
CLASS II (BIKE LANE)
Lane Location
bike lanes on one -way streets shall be placed on the right hand side
of the street
Stiffing and Signing
a bike lanes shall include a bicycle symbol marking in addition to
the word message "bike lane.'
bike route signs with destination signing shall be placed at all points
where a bike lane intersects another bikeway.
Liahtina
existing lighting conditions and illumination levels should be
evaluated, and where appropriate, upgraded to meet standards
currently adopted by the City.
Recommended Design Standards - Commuter Bikeway
Commuter Bikeways are intended to provide some of the benefits of a Class II facility
(during peak travel periods) while limiting parking prohibitions to the morning and
evening peak hour, in order to encourage the use of key roadways as commuter
facilities for bicyclists.
Peak hour parking prohibition
posted morning and evening peak hour (e.g. 7 -9 A.M. /4-7 P.M.)
parking prohibition on designated Commuter Bikeways should be
'Tow Away -No Stopping.'
Width
minimum curb lane width should be fourteen (14) feet
Idlwww. laity. mr /PLN? raps O=enV ikcBlaNb- desiFn%20standsds bin
IW17= 406 PM
N,I of
, of LA Tnnaponvim Elemem nicycle Plan O ign =r&,an
Stdoina and Sliming
• a bicycle symbol pavement marking (See Appendix E) should be
placed on the far side of each intersection within four (4) feet of the
curb. The symbol should also indicate the morning and evening peak
hours in addition to the word message bikeway'. No bike lane
striping should be marked. The symbol pavement marking should be
repeated once each approximately fifty feet along the bikeway.
• bike route signs with destination signing should be placed at all
points where the Commuter Bikeway intersects another bikeway.
Llahtina
existing lighting conditions and illumination levels should be
evaluated, and where appropriate, upgraded to meet standards
currently adopted by the City.
Design Standards - Class 111
Class III (shared) facilities are established by placing bike route signs along
roadways. Standards for Class III routes relate directly to bikeway route selection
criteria, which are discussed in Section V of this Plan.
�&TOR a_.
ZAP
I •A A
MOM 4:16 M
rJywww.larity.oePJPLN ?rnna eemeniNike- plaNb- Eenirp % ^AlunJarJS.hlm Nit d ?
iry of LA. Tanapamion (]nnun. Birycle Plan, Critt'n
V. BIKEWAY ROUTE SELECTION CRITERIA
Route selection criteria are derived from four principal considerations:
support of bicycling as a mode of travel;
orientation toward significant travel destinations;
connectivity of the Citywide Bikeway system;
safety and convenience to bicyclists.
Prior to feasibility considerations relating to implementation, the following route
selection criteria should be applied:
Class I I Class 11 (commuter /utilitarian)
routes should provide the most direct linkage of the two ends of the trips;
routes should provide connections to areas with:
GPF- identified Regional Centers,
GPF- identified Major Economic Activity Centers (.e. DSP area, LAX
Port of Los Angeles),
rail and /or bus transit centers,
Park N Ride lots;
the route system grid should be the most fine grained as is practical so that
accessing the system is relatively quick and convenient;
a Class If facility is typically preferable to a Class I for commuter /utilitarian
purposes.
Class I/Class II (recreational)
routes should be scenic;
mutes should connect regional open spaces and other recreational activity
centers;
a Class I facility is typically preferable to a Class 11 for recreational purposes
Class III (local)
routes should connect residential areas with:
• Citywide Bikeway System routes,
• local high schools, junior high schools. middle schools and other
educational institutions serving youths,
GPF- identified Neighborhood Centers,
local parks and recreation centers;
routes should not be designated on streets carrying traffic volumes of over
10,000 vehicles daily or with curb lane volumes of over 150 vehiclewbour,
Minimum curb lane width (including parking) should be eighteen (18) feet,
routes should provide for through and direct travel to destinations.
Top t �_
Il/ www. hcitXOet/ PLIUrraesElcmeeUbit <- planNsnaria.him
IWOM 6:36 PM
N,1 a
IW17M 07 PM
[ey ar LA Gemnl Plan Tnnzlnnalinn Element acydc Ran M-1 9
VII. MONITORING AND EVALUATION
This Bicycle Plan should be reviewed periodically and revised within ten (10) years of
adoption. To facilitate review and monitoring it is imperative for the City to:
develop the Five Year Bicycle Program into a genuine programming tool, with
annual review reports presented to the City Planning Commission,
Transportation and Traffic Commission, and the BAC.
Responsibility: City Planning, DOT /Bicycle Coordinator. BPIC
continue to conduct traffic counts including bicycle counts, with intersections
along designated Bicycle Plan Citywide Bikeways reported separately for
comparison purposes -
Responsibility: DOT
require that traffic studies conducted as part of DEIR's or other environmental
clearances which include manual traffic counts also include bicycle traffic
counts if intersections to be studied are located on designated Bicycle Plan
Citywide Bikeways.
Responsibility: City Planning Dept, DOT
undertake annual bicycle parking counts at public bicycle parking facilities
(public racks, meter - mounted, bicycle commuter centers), as these facilities
are constructed, an a project by project basi
Responsibility: DOT, Dept of Recreation and Parks, Library Department,
others depending upon location
incorporate bicycle accident reports into bicycle trafficiparking count reports
as part of Bicycle Plan monitoring; provide a map indicating accident report
locations as a means of pinpointing safety enhancement needs.
Responsibility:
LAPD, DOT
'Aim
a
As
Y
V V
�, --
Pa 191
httPJ /www.Ixily.w);/PLN ?mnx�Elemen W tke- Pis ^ /bmonimr.wm
rrI MAJOR URBAN STREETS
JlrE ��i ��
SPECIF1CAPONS
Short-term: Short-term projects include critically important connections,
may restriping projects, projects that can be treated as incidentai aspects of
current transportation projects, or projects that can take advantage of new
pavement overlays.
Long -term: Long -teen projects include more complex restriping projects,
projects that are likely to engender greater public concern (e.g., loss of on-
street parking), and projects that will be completed as incidental pans of
major transportation improvements.
Bicycle lanes
Bicycle lanes should conform m the AASHTO Guide for the Development of
Bicycle Facilities (19gg— pending) or local standards, if applicable. The
following are basic points that should be followed. Circumstances may
require deviating from these requirements in some special cases: however,
such cases should be carefully considered and mitigating measures applied.
L YAWL- Bicycle lanes should be at ]east 15 an (5 ft) wide, from the lane
stripe to the curb face (see Ml below). In addition, there should be at least
1.2 m (4 ft) between the bicycle lane stripe and the joint between the
pavement and the gutter pan. When next to parking, bicycle lanes should
be at least IS an (5 ft) wide (see 82). When no curb and gutter section is
present, a 1.2 -m (4-ft) bicycle lane will suffice and it should mat a
smoothly graded shoulder at least 0.6 an (2 ft) wide.
2. One -way: On two -way streets, one -way bicycle lanes must be provided
on each side, to the right of the right -most through lane. Under no condi-
tions should two -way bicycle lanes be provided on one side of the street.
3. Side of road: On one -way streets, a ono -way bicycle lane should gener-
ally be provided on the right side of the road. Special circumstances may
dictate striping a particular bicycle lane on the left side. Such circum-
tmplemendngBicycle Improvements atlhe Local Level
.a• m;,.� 6' or 8' solid white 4'
stripe
1
Figure 1.2
- - —
'mi
Motor vehicle lanes 5' min.
Bicycle lanes provided
under different types of
V. (1) Parking prohibited lane
conditions
stami; L bbackhIsMiReam Ana
P6
5krdar rro
Parking stalls or 4• stripe'
6' or e" solid white ite stripe \
I Y r
e +ha 5. min. Motor vehicle lanes. 5 min. s' -to'
Paoang
Bills
Bike Parking
lam lane
sirow triM Went ki r. 9is
ho�paaive tane.0 nm4^ e— ulem�eb
(2) Striped parking
2. One -way: On two -way streets, one -way bicycle lanes must be provided
on each side, to the right of the right -most through lane. Under no condi-
tions should two -way bicycle lanes be provided on one side of the street.
3. Side of road: On one -way streets, a ono -way bicycle lane should gener-
ally be provided on the right side of the road. Special circumstances may
dictate striping a particular bicycle lane on the left side. Such circum-
tmplemendngBicycle Improvements atlhe Local Level
August 3, 2001
William G. Zimmerman VIA FACSIMILE
Resident Civil Engineer 562 -594 -8549
W.G. ZIMMERMAN ENGINEERING, INC.
1500 East Coast Highway Original hand delivered
Seal Beach, California 90740
Re: Request for Change Orders to REVISE plans #2
231 Seal Beach Boulevard
Project No. 4991 -49757
Dear Mr. Zimmerman:
The long and short of this matter is a 44' wide residential roadway
cannot safely accommodate the existing commercial traffic on this
boulevard if parking is provided on both sides of the street. The
plans provide two unmarked 8' wide parking lanes and two 13.5' wide
traffic lanes with a 1' wide double divider line at the crown. In
other words, the plans provide for a 21.5' clear roadway inbound and
the same outbound. There is no provision for non- motorized vehicle
traffic. A multi -use paved pathway without connections is provided.
The configuration of the approximately 1,400 lineal feet of Seal
Beach Boulevard, now torn out, had provided two 13.5' traffic lanes
divided by a 1' double yellow line; two 5' bike lanes delineated by a
5" white stripe; two unmarked 8' parallel parking lanes; total 56.0'
inside curb to inside curb. The posted speed limit was 35 mph
(average speed 45 mph) and the only cross walks (neither built to
accommodate handicap) were at Coast Highway and at Electric Avenue.
Two oversize vehicles were using (and will continue to use) this
section of the boulevard on a daily basis as a matter of necessity.
They are the OCRT busses, of which there are two pickup and drop.off
stops on the boulevard, and more on the route to Main Street. The
other being the United Parcel Service delivery truck, which services
business and residents on this boulevard, must stop and load and
unload at curbside. Paramedic ambulances and fire engines also use
this boulevard as the most direct route for their needs on response
with lights and sirens on, or on return, with lights and sirens off.
This section of Seal Beach Boulevard is the only entrance /exit
to /from Electric Avenue, Ocean Avenue and the pier that Old Town has
left for these vehicles. All streets but Main Street are residential
width streets, bounded by residential parking on both sides. Main
Street is too congested to support any through traffic.
Yesterday we measured the width, including mirrors, of the UPS truck.
It is 10' wide. The OCRT bus is 9' wide. I assume ambulances and
fire engines are between 9' and 10' wide. A pickup with dual drive
wheels is between 8' and 9' wide, including mirrors. The legal
distance a vehicle can park from a curb face in a parking lane is 18"
inches. The inbound width of the unmarked roadway from curb face to
the inside of the double line is 21.51. My standard size two door
sedan, with the driver's door open, is approximately 9' wide. -
Here are real scenarios:
1. If the UPS truck is just passing on the roadway, allowing for a
minimum of 1' driver clearance on each side of his vehicle from
the center line, thereby leaving 9.5' from the curb face for
unmarked parking, there is potential for a lethal accident. I
parked my two door standard size sedan (not a "dooley ") 18" from
the curb face (maximum legal distance) and opened the driver
side door. The car is 6' wide and the open driver side door adds
34" to the width. Do the math. The edge of my open door is
approximately 10.5' from the curb face. My door is torn off by
the passing UPS truck as I exit. Again, you can appreciate that
there is no remaining room to even consider a bicycle passing by
without facing injury or death.
2. As acycling shop servicing handicapped riders for 20 years, we
see them driving up and parking in front of the shop. They then
exit the driver's side and unload their chairs. They have
pride. The risk is even greater for the handicapped as you see.
3. If the UPS truck is legally parked making a delivery, the
outside mirror is 10.5' from the curb face, leaving a remaining
roadway width of 11'. If the 9' wide OCTD bus goes by the
parked UPS truck, the bus has 1' of driving room on each side to
avoid a collision unless the bus driver crosses into opposing
traffic by crossing the double lines. The bus is not an
emergency vehicle and is not equipped with a siren. If the UPS
driver exits his vehicle by stepping out of the driver's side at
the time the bus passes, there is going to be a lethal accident.
4. It is also obvious that if a cyclist were passing the UPS truck
on the unmarked street when the bus went by, he's seriously
injured. I am sure that is why you have provided_ parking at the
bus stops so there would be no conflict with oversize traffic.
Our suggestions, found in our previous letter to you, is that the
plans be revised to eliminate parking on the east side of the
boulevard, and add two 5' marked bike lanes and one 8' west side
parking lane. That allows for two 13' wide traffic lanes with bike
lane buffers. The safety of the public, be it pedestrian, cyclist,
or vehicle driver, is then back to the standards that have worked for
at least 28 years. Ido not see that there is another choice since
the curbs are now poured and the roadway graded to a 44' wide
roadway. We have a video, which we made, to illustrate our
observations, and will be pleased to furnish you a copy at no charge.
Past traffic counts will verify this boulevard to be a "gateway ".
Hopefully you can continue to work with the community as well as the
City to do what is best. We will make ourselves available when you
are to work with you to complete this project.
Sincerely,
UIM�
Walt and Greg Miller, Owners for last 20 years
229 and 231 Seal Beach Boulevard
Seal Beach, CA 90790
562 -598 -8955 562 -599 -6139 FAX 562- 930 -0912
cc: Mayor William Doane, City of Seal Beach
Karl SChwing, Program analyst, California Coastal Commission
OCTA - Kurt Brotcke, Principal transportation analyst
John Bahorski, City Manager, City of Seal Beach
CpPt. Paul Bruno, Naval Weapons Station, Seal Beach
✓Doug Dancs, City Engineer, City of Seal Beach
Brian Brown, District 1 Planning Commissioner
Gary, Project Engineer
August 6, 2001
William G. Zimmerman VIA FACSIMILE
Resident Civil Engineer 562 -594 -8549
W.G. ZIMMERMAN ENGINEERING, INC.
1500 East Coast Highway
Seal Beach, California 90740
Re: Request for Change Orders to REVISE plans #3
231 Seal Beach Boulevard
Project No. 4991 -49757
Dear Mr. Zimmerman:
The Orange County Transit Authority considers the section of Seal
Beach Boulevard between Coast Highway and Electric Avenue to be a
major route. The long term plan is to widen it to four lanes. When
street improvements are made, it is their policy to provide bus
turnouts for existing stops, creating what they term "Smart Streets ".
Seal Beach Boulevard north of Coast Highway is now a designated
"Smart Street ". Your plans seem to fly in the face of OCTA. The
roadway has been reduced from 56' to 44' and no bus turnout has been
provided at the south end, thereby creating a dangerous situation by
reducing the outbound roadway to 9.5' following the curve. Under
California Vehicle Code Section 21202 a)3), copy enclosed, this
section of the roadway will be classified a "substandard width lane"
requiring cyclist and other non - motorized vehicles, such as wheel
chairs and hand cycles to ride the center of the roadway.
I am sending a copy of this letter to the City Engineer and City
Manager requesting that this item be added to the August 13, 2001
agenda of the City Council.
The present configuration of the outbound bus stop provides a 12'
wide concrete pad for the bus. The boulevard is now 44' feet from
curb to curb. The double divider line uses 1' of the roadway center,
leaving a usable width of 431. The 43' is further divided into two
21.5' traffic /parking lanes. The 121 concrete pad for the bus stop
leaves only 9.5' remaining for passing traffic because the parked bus
is 10' wide plus the 18" allowed from the curb face. The 9.5'
remaining roadway creates a dangerous situation, causing some
outbound traffic, wider vehicles such as UPS delivery trucks (10'
wide including mirrors), to cross the double line into opposing
traffic when passing the bus stopped to pick up passengers. And to
make matters worse, this bus stop is located immediately after the
curve from Electric Avenue. This is precisely the paramount reason
OCTA is upgrading its routes to "Smart Streets" as road improvements
are made.
The solution is clear and I will ask that the City have the plans
revised to comply. The "paved path" needs to be routed behind the
pumping station and connected with the "boardwalk" entrance found at
the termination of Electric Avenue. Since the City of Seal Beach
provides a City lifeguard and truck to monitor the Navy beach on
weekends, I am sure the Navy would allow an easement for the "paved
path ". There will then be room to construct a turnout for the bus in
the exact location where the bus stop was previously located on the
boulevard. That revision will then eliminate the dangerous situation
created by the present plans, and avoid future liability to the City.
Sincerely,
S��_��
Walt and Greg Miller, Owners for last 20 years
229 and 231 Seal Beach Boulevard
Seal Beach, CA 90740
562 -598 -8455 562 -594 -6139 FAX 562 -430 -0912
cc: Mayor William Doane, City of Seal Beach
Karl Schwing, Program analyst, California Coastal Commission
OCTA - Glenn Campbell, Senior transportation analyst
FAX 714 -560 -5794
John Bahorski, City Manager, City of Seal Beach
C�aPt. Paul Bruno, Naval Weapons Station, Seal Beach
V6oug Dancs, City Engineer, City of Seal Beach
Brian Brown, District 1 Planning Commissioner
Gary, Project Engineer
mE =D 00 mm VUL
mm 0 T N m C
4 y O C 0 L_ m m m W U W C O Wm W O v
m L STl m O C C C U m a m e0 'i0 T V a W N C L m i, m
O p a O W W O c$ W m L U
C N O U> O O N
F 20 wx mE c pEE�mm m3 0 Ei° 3m mLm
4 Vm «>,z
� cmmm row m romwma�3 c°'«p y ^w ,CL cm�'°
0 0 >. m O w 09 O Q A
O p w C C > >i A m -p L C ro m U m a O a w N m s N - am
0 N W > w E to 3 .- D c a T y m O m T O m p m m
O am =« am -0:9 - 9Emv °mmT aEa o� gym$ q �'� n mdn
SWaN'.O CWO oa cv dN NL"'�W =0.2 lY W�m Wa Wmwm
Ol - W T p N y J- W N C O O T C N m a C W-M0
cmmac cm cQ mr'cmi'�-.ca°m> WEa q a 0 S
601 TE Emo '� o `m� com g.w c0 m ao cm O =D E W ZO OCi `y 0+L c
Oe Qo_ o`m m's a N �a sow- 0 s S m`_m J me a0 -o
J' cm �'e 'm o a°- my my m Tm cw y pm$ O o cm.,; Pi
vi
YO to zc �cmc m��omm o.i ®y O coma O
OS $..c jg�L° 3E 3- rs = >L �u.�> Tg$� 6 m�mW m °_o act°'
W 6 4 y :U 6® N t7 ¢ 4� N m= O U m W O z N Z C Z
Oo rom:o O1« d:c0a= z.D$° Z m$ a0wQ
no
O OC = R
mCTm�O Wt,t„Nj ooa
iam=0o 2= mmm
T U V m N L ° �a C O M M
wom
y $AN .WCd O C N C ; U m we
Ca
mom- E@ mm mro m 3 - O 0
�o°N 310 ox. mr .:Sa = MM pc po of Sa
c C w D m L 3 N T U N C -0.0 "D NN O 0
a m .m m TOW a E
a L C ` °
m m E j y 3p -p m N D
N
%11 oim X� 33`0 0o ct_0L« ON
1� E5 1 a c m 0 EaN � , Fc O N a` aci s c
el -.0.2 ago m0- 3Eomc m0 0 z, «o-uf0
=a{O�pp Mac 0> a-. W .'m-'c ot3� 0i ci 00 "3mcD.
CO U .N.`NOm Em'cmi O mm mN y O .°a.-6? c0 aS
�ro'o aEA 00- S <tl -mT >oy N roam Ezz z I �m�o.�
cym2 !?=m t0 m'° W'NL0N N 'a_�i .cE des .9? "nM0
O VN,O« wUn'C,. CLm W cZuc`m m_ -M.-- wymo Oc 8 .°- 'c°�8s
b2a oo �pc n >a 7' 0mro$ >; wNmcm� =O «3tM°
mows o.m
0- W 'n- ci�va® a mamo'm$.a 00 9r000Fn
m• C iiaSv m 7 m `� `gym" ='� o m
HUM V oa`o Mo w «'ovm °c Vp a�'o ^+m
Y
V O O j
m m Im 4
ATTACHMENT3
Project Timeline
Agenda Item
Seal Beach Boulevard
Project Summary Timeline
Event
Occurrence
Project Conception
1999
Letters of Support for Project CounTy
Supervisor and State Senator
March 1999 — August 1999
Application for funding for State Local
Grant Program
Council Meeting of October 11, 1999
Plans and specifications and authorization
to advertise approved by Ci Council
Council Meeting of March 21, 2001
Project Awarded to Low Bidder by City
Council
Council Meeting of May 14, 2001
Field Work Commenced by Contractor
Week of June 25, 2001
Agenda Item
ATTACHMENT 4
County of Orange
Typical Street Sections
Standard Plan 1107
Agenda Item
R/W r4. R/W
W
1 /2111 I I /2W
2• p I p 2
R
I/ PER I' 1.7% 1.7'L % • PER I'
i
ISee note 8 TYPICAL SECTION See note e
*Curbs shall be Type A2 -6. Special conditions may require other types.
LEGEND
W = Width of right of way in feet
R = Width of roadway in feet
P = Width of parkway in feet (incl. sidewalk)
AVG. DAILY
RESIDENTIAL
MINIMUM
TRAFFIC
CLASSIFICATION
TYPICAL ACCESS BY:
A O TA.%E
DESIGN
R
SIDEWALK
4000-10,00
Indust. Collector
N/A N/A
35
80
64
Both
riy.wo"
sides
<4,000
Indust. local -a
rivewo 1OOO °tn
tst0es
N/A
25
60
44
Both sides
4000 - 10,000
Commuter
Local streets
None
35 -45
56
40
Both sides
1200 -6000
Collector
Local streets
None
35
56
40
Both sides
500 -1200
Loc ol-b
Drl°Cw so ee s
e
One side
25
48
34
one side
500 -1200
Local
°v °1 sith
Both
25
56
40
Both sides
ry Si
Sid
<500
Local
Driveway both sides
Both SIM
25
52
361
Both sides
200 -500
LOCOI -b
Driveway one side
One side
1 25
1441301
One side
<200
Local -c
Driveway one side
One side
1 25
1401281
One side
NOTES:
I. Sidewglks, in addition to those indicated above, may be required to provide
continuous pedestrian routes.
2. Required pavement structural section to be determined by the Engineer.
3. Curb shall be type A2 -6 except for Industrial Collector streets.
4. See Std. Plan 120 -0 -OC for Type A2 -6 Curb.
5. See Std. Plan t205 for sidewalk details.
6. Basic criteria 12' travel lanes for volumes greater than 500 ADT.
10' travel lanes for volumes less than 500 ADT.
a. Roadway, R, shall be 50' and parkway, p, shall be reduced to 5' within 100'
of curb return of an intersection with a higher classification highway.
Curb & Gutter transition shall be constructed between 100' & 140 from
curb return.
b. 8' parkway on Driveway side.. 6' parkway without access.
Pavement crownline shall be centered between curbs.
c. 8' parkway on driveway side. 4' parkway without access.
Pavement crownline shall be centered between curbs.
7. Min. street flow line grade shall be 1.0%, reverse grade Vert. curves excepted.
8. Distance shown Is min. from R/W to hinge point when sidewalk is adjacent to R/V
and /or hinge point is for a down slope. When hinge point is for an up slope
when sidewalk is adjacent to curb, hinge point shall be located at R/W or a
min. of 2' behind sidewalk whichever is the greater distance from curb face.
ORANGE COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT AGENC
STD. PLAN
Approved I
CR.NdxvAD/ pror ar Pudb Wvks
epptea: Res. 7T -92 Revises: Res. 78-791; 91 -I492: s6 86-11411 8s
I; -13<I
1107
OTHER STREET IMPROVEMENT - TYPICAL SECTIONS
IWT_I nrd
ATTACHMENT 5
Seal Beach Boulevard Improvement
Project Cross Section
Agenda Item _
?/2
�
/m
@ d
\
cu
,
\
\/
°
\\\
§E
{ j
j
m
§
=uv
=7m
§
(\)
\{
u
&
\g§
z
\
<f
\�
%}
ATTACHMENT 6
Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE)
Bikeway Brochure
Agenda Item
i• " ►i�
WHEN ARE WE GOING TO GET SOME BIKEWAYS
IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD?
Bikeways have raised a lot of interest in the past few years. Some cities have built separate off -road
bike paths. Many more have painted bike lanes on streets. Others have installed green "Bike Route"
signs without the special lanes.
The cost of both building and maintaining bikeways can be a deterrent to many city bike programs.
Initial cost can range from a few dollars to paint a lane to a small fortune to build a separate path
including special bridges where needed.
Before plunging into a bikeway program, your city or county should look at the total problem of
bicycle operation and safety. Bike lanes and signs alone cannot solve the problem of bicycle accidents;
in some places they have increased the problem by giving riders a false sense of security.
An overall bicycle safety program should include: enforcement of traffic laws; bike safety training in
the schools at an early age; follow -up training every year in the schools; and involvement of the
parents of minor children who violate traffic laws or whihit dangerous riding habits. The
overwhelming cause of bicycle accidents is violation of the RULES OF THE ROAD.
If these recommendations seem to be oriented toward the younger set, there is good reason. Over 20
percent of cyclists involved in accidents were violating a traffic law; over 60 percent were age 17 or
under. It only makes good sense to emphasize the children in training programs, since they are the
principal users of bicycles.
The bike program for your community should include three principal
points:
1. Education in safe riding.
2. Enforcement of rules of the road
3. Development of well - engineered bike lanes and bike paths.
This will involve the active participation of:
1. The schools.
2. The police or sheriff.
3. The traffic engineers; and, of course, you, the
citizen.
37
ATTACHMENT 7
Seal Beach
Traffic Safety Evaluation
Enforcement and Engineering Analysis
Warrants for Pedestrian Crosswalks
Agenda Item _
Seal Beach
TRAFFIC SAFETY
EVALUATION
Enforcement
and
Engineering
Analysis
March 1996
University of California
Institute of Transportation Studies
and University Extension
WARRANTS
PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALKS
In order to qualify for a marked crosswalk, a location must (A) meet the following basic
warrants, and (B) rate 16 points or more under the following point system.
A. BASIC WARRANTS
Pedestrian Vohtme Warrant
Crosswalks will not be installed where the pedestrian volume is less than 10
pedestrians per hour during the peak pedestrian hour.
Approach Speed Warrant
Crosswalks will not be installed on roadways where the 85th percentile approach
speeds are in excess of 45 mph. The approach speeds shall be determined by approved
engineering speed study technique.
Vuibi6ty Warrant
Crosswalks will not be installed unless the motorist has an unrestricted view of all
pedestrians at the proposed crosswalk site, for a distance not less than 200 feet
approaching from each direction. Sites with grades, curves and other sight restrictive
features will require special attention.
Rlumination Warrant
Proposed crosswalk sites must have adequate crosswalk lighting in existence or
scheduled for installation prior to installation of the crosswalk. (See Section 12.16.)
10
B. WARRANT POINT SYSTEM
Pedestrian Volume Warrant
— Criterion—
The total number of pedestrians
crossing the street under study
during the peak pedestrian hour.
This includes pedestrians in
both crosswalks at an intersection
Crosswalks will not be installed
where the pedestrian volume (peak
pedestrian hour) is 10 or less.
— Point Assignment—
Pedestrian Total
Points
0 -10
0
11 -30
2
31 -60
4
61 -90
6
91.100
8
Over 100
10
Maximum 10
General Conditions Warrant
Average Number
Points
Points
• Will clarify and define pedestrian
2
routes across complex intersections
G-0.99
• Will channelize pedestrians into a
2
significantly shorter path
2 -2.99
• Will position pedestrians to be seen
2
better by motorists
4.4.99
• Will position pedestrian for exposure
2
to fewer vehicles
Maximum
Maximum
8
Gap Time Warrant
— Criterion—
The number of unimpeded vehicle
time gaps equal to or exceeding
the required pedestrian crossing
time in an average five- minute
period during the peak vehicle
hour.
11
— Point Assignment—
Average Number
Points
of Gaps per
5- Minute Period
G-0.99
10
1 -1.99
8
2 -2.99
6
3.3.99
4
4.4.99
2
5 or over
0
Maximum
10
Computations
• Pedestrian Crossing Time = Street width curb to curb
4.0 feet per second
• Average Number of Gaps per 5- minute Period =
Total usable Rap time in seconds
Pedestrian Crossing Time x 12
Provisions
• The above criterion is based on a one -hour field survey consisting of 12
five- minute samples.
• All roadways having a raised median or a painted median (4 -foot
minimum width) will be considered as two separate roadways, if the
pedestrian has a protected place to stand out of the path of traffic.
• See Appendix I for survey methods and warrant field form.
12
FIELD DATA TABLE
13
FIELD DATA TABLE
Laaticm
Da .
Date.
Weather,
Recorded b .
Time:
Time
FIELD DATA
Usable
Gap Time
(Second)
Time
Usable
Gap Time
(Second)
Time
Unable
Gap Time
( Seend)
Time
Usable
Gap Time
(Second)
Time
Usble
Gap Time
(Second)
Total
Peduttian Count
Total
13
CROSSWALK WARRANT EVALUATION
TABLE
14
s
z
E
E
N
U
Y W
� I o
I
t
g
i
D
°-
J
�
a
d
W
Id
E
y
Z
D
d
Ex
�co
E E
E
a
~
Ir
d
o
�% N
�
C
d
d
d
iJiJiJ
d
C
d
O
N
C
Y
E
N°
N
N U
y
L
L
ydj
U
L
�
a
° a
n
U
¢
O
7
Of
a
U
w
g
i
aUG -13 -01 03:33 em PeRK.HENCH
Au<NSt 13, 2001
DOwT 1lanrs yIA FACSIMILE
City Engineer 562 -431 -4097
CTTY OF SEAL BEACH
Re: Flood zone miLigaLion - REQUEST FOR CHANGE ORDER #5
Sea1 Beach
Boulevard reconstruction project
The construction
plans contain some strange conditions, unless water
:flows uphill till at
the nouth end of the boulevard:
1. The curb face
on ttie west side Cf the boulevard measures 6 ".
3. The curb face
on the Past side of Lite boulevard measures
3. The cast side
gutter is approx 3" above 'rOC on west side.
4. The east side
Catch basin inl.at it south end is approx 3" above
opposing west
side TOC.
5. The west side
catch basin inlet just below landing is above west
side sidewalk
in the flood ?one.
Could you explain
why the new roarlway directs runoff into the west
side properties
along the south end of the boulevard rather than to
the east side which
has no development and is on the bay side? If
the runoff were
reversed, the pumping plant could be. removed and
replaced with needed
visitor parkinq.
I am more than dinm; +yr:d that a west side catch basin mid -block was
noL called out on the approved plan:; to mitigate flooding of the
preschool and neighboring properL ies which must now continue
sandbagging during heavy raino. I am surprisea Sorotta Fielding and
Bruce Stark have riot. voiced (:.heir r.onrerns. I am amazed that Shawn
Boyd has not addressed These itaj.uas with you. He is on record that
Seal Ucaeh Boulevard is his 11 pLiority.
It seems that federal funds are betny used to make conditions in our
flood zone worse rather Lhan better., don't. you think?
Walt: and Greg Miller, Owners
231. Seal Beach Boulevard
Tei, b62- 598 -8455 562 - 594 -6130
dc; Mayor William. Doane
City Manager John Ba«orski
Councilman Shawn Boyd
;ydretta Fielding
Bruce Stark
FAX 562 -430 -0912
I'AN
FAX
FAX
HAND DELTVF.R
HAND DELIVER
FUG -13 -2001 15:50 5152 430 1636 97% P.01
02
,B4am A S"
Attorg at Law, Inactive
219 Seal Beach Blvd., Suite A
Seal Beach, CA 90740
562 -596 -2171
562- 594 -0397
FAX 430 -1636
July 31, 2001
John Bahorski
City Manager
City of Seal Beach
Dear Mr. Bahorski:
Enclosed is a copy of Mr. Waft Miller's letter to city officials and I concur with him
completely This is the worst debacle to hit the city since the pier went down.
The reason I have riot voiced my concerns is that I do not believe it would do any good.
Rather, I am writing Congress to see A they can't cut off the money being wasted on this
'project. When Vic Grgas was councilman he presented a plan which the city adopted for
the development of Seal Beach Blvd. Why it was totally disregarded by the city now is
one of those unanswered questions.
Seal Beach Blvd. was originally a- concrete street. It was patched over the years with
'asphalt. Considering the truck and bus traffic, concrete seems to be a necessity.
Certainly, Seal Beach Blvd. has more heavy traffic than 12th St., but we don't have the
mayor living on Seal Beach Blvd.
That the new design is guaranteed to dump water on the buildings on the west side of
the street comes as no surprise. We have three (3) wannabes in city hall pretending to
be engineers; not one having a State license. We still contract out. These three were to
replace Dennis Jue.
Mr. Miller avers councilman Boyd stated Seal Beach Blvd. was his #1 priority. He never
Said what he had a priority to do. One thing he proposed as a priority was to change the
name of the street to add prestige for one of his contributors. Boyd probably ddnt
even know of Vic Grgas' plan. Dom count on Boyd to do anything except promote his
-own agenda, which right now is getting reelected.
Mr. Miller didn't mention the patch work paving of the street. Nor did he bring to your
¢¢Attention the length of time this is taking - much longer than the one block on 12th St.
After 20 years in Seal Beach I expect the same old lame excuses for city hall's failures in
.preventing flooding on Seal Beach Blvd. The more things change, the more they remain
!te same.
��GfK• 'sll•.
gate M. Stark
PUG -13 -2001 1551 562 430 1636 96% P.02
08/13/01 MON 08:40 FAX 5624300912 TRICOM SYSTEMS a001
August 13, 2001
Doug Dancs VIA FACSIMILE
City Engineer 562 - 431 -401$7
CITY OF SEAL BEACH
Re: Flood zone mitigation - REQUEST FOR CHANGE ORDER #5
Seal Beach Boulevard reconstruction project
The construction plans contain some strange conditions, unless water
flows uohill at the south end of the boulevard:
1. The curb face on the west side of the boulevard measures 6 ".
2. The curb face on the east side of the boulevard measures 811.
3. The east side gutter is approx 3" above TOC on west side.
4.The east side catch basin inlet at south end is approx 3" above
opposing west side TOC.
5. The west side catch basin inlet just below landing is above west
side sidewalk in the flood zone.
Could you explain why the new roadway directs runoff into the west
side properties along the south end of the boulevard rather than to
the east side which has no development and is on the bay side? if
the runoff were reversed, the pumping plant could be removed and
replaced with needed visitor parking.
I am more than dismayed that a west side catch basin mid -block was
not called out on the approved plans to mitigate flooding of the
preschool and neighboring properties which must now continue
sandbagging during heavy rains. I am surprised Soretta Fielding and
Bruce Stark have not voiced their concerns. I am amazed that Shawn
Boyd has not addressed these issues with you. He is on record that
Seal Beach Boulevard is his #1 priority.
It seems that federal funds are being used to make conditions in our
f�loodd zone worse rather than better, don't you think?
�
Walt and Greg Miller, Owners
231 Seal Beach Boulevard
Tel. 562 -598 -8455 562 -594 -6130 FAX 562 -430 -0912
cc: Mayor William Doane FAX
City Manager John Bahorski FAX
Councilman Shawn Boyd FAX
Soretta Fielding HAND DELIVER
Bruce Stark HAND DELIVER
RUG -13 -2001 09:56 5624300912 97% P.01
08/11/01 SAT 17:42 FAX 5621700912
August 12, 2001
TRICOM SYSTEMS
Mayor Doane and City Council VIA FACSIMILE
Public comments 8/13/01 meeting 562- 431- 8*Tr7-
00(07
Seal Beach Boulevard plans - Ramps and crosswalks
la 001
Lee Whittenberg stood outside our shop last Thursday morning and
refused to order the replacement of the handicap ramp that was next
to the fire hydrant in front of our bike shop. He said the ramp that
we put in was not ADA approved, and therefore he would not replace
it. Mr. Whittenberg pointed to the non -ADA compliant driveway ramp
on the adjoining property that he added to the plans and said "The
handicap can use that if they want to go to the bike shop." The City
Engineer stood at his side and gave his silent consent. our grooved
ramp met the "no lip" requirements, but was several inches short on
width and depth. The City inspector did not call out the non-
compliance when the ramp was formed and poured by my contractor. Our
torn out handicap ramp had served Sandpiper's handicapped customers
for the last fourteen years, and did not use parking space because it
was within the fire hydrant red zone. Time is running out to put in
ADA compliant ramps on both sides of the boulevard and connect them
with crosswalks. Ramps placed next to fire hydrants do not consume
valuable curb parking.
We wonder why the plans were drawn to narrow the existing roadway
12'? We just measured the distance from the TOC to the Navy barb
wire fence. It is 24'. The east coca of the "paved trail" is 9'
from the fence. If the palm trees are relocated to the 3' buffer
zone between the curb and the "paved trail", the roadway could be
made 9' wider. This additional width will provide the "emergency
corridor" in the middle of the boulevard for ambulances that we now
lack because of the 12' width reduction in the width of the
boulevard. Was it just too expensive to move the palm trees? A
change order would now be a small price to pay with federal funds to
remove the otherwise dangerous condition spelled out in my August 11,
2001 letter to Mr. Zimmerman, resident civil engineer.
Sincerely,
L4
Walt and Greg Miller
231 Seal Beach Boulevard
Seal Beach, CA
Tel. 562 -598 -8455 562 -594 -6130
BDG -11 -2001 18:57 5624300912
FAX 562 -430 -0912
97%
P.01
08/12/01 SUN 10:32 FAX 5624300912 TRICOM SYSTEMS 0 001
August 12, 2001
Mayor Doane and City Council VIA FACSIMILE #2
Public comments 8/13/01 meeting 562- 431 -4067
Seal Beach Boulevard plans - PAVED TRAIL (Bike Path)
Dear Mavor Doane and Council Members:
Why was the boulevard width reduced 12' to put in a 12' "Paved Trail"
when there was 13' of right away available between the original curb
and the Navy fence ?? The 3' buffer required for the "Paved Trail"
could have been built by moving the original curb 2' to the west,
instead of the 12' shown on the plans. The palm trees could have
been removed and new palm trees put into the 3' buffer zone. Result:
Save 10' roadwav and add scale and beauty to the new boulevard.
One only needs to go measure the "River Trail" on the San Gabriel
River on the west end of town to "get the picture ". The
exit /entrance to the "River Trail" off Marina Drive, at the east end
of the bridge, is bordered on the east side by a chain link fence and
by large rock rip -rap on the west side. This "River Trail" (bike
path) is paved with asphalt and is 10' to 12' in width, just like our
new one. However, the "River Trail" has some 20 miles of safe
unobstructed travel, and is used by over 500 commuters and
recreational riders on a daily average. The "Paved Trail ", as shown
on the construction plans, is one - quarter of a mile long and has
created six dangerous conditions for bike riders in that one - quarter
mile run by mixing public traffic with trail users. The expected
daily use might be less than 20, mostly joggers, in its present
configuration because it goes nowhere, connects to nothing and has no
crosswalks for its full length. The "Paved Trail" location on the
plans has also created a multitude of dangerous conditions on the
roadway, which have been noticed to the City in prior communications.
It is really unfortunate that the City chose to redesign this
"Gateway" boulevard without first talking to the community, or at
least putting them on notice that the boulevard was to be redesigned.
All the dangerous situations that have been created on the plans
might have been avoided, or at the least mitigated. It is also
unfortunate that the City and its agents, during the construction
period when change orders could be issued, "stonewalls" its position.
Sincerely,
Walt and Greg Miller
231 Seal Beach Boulevard
Seal Beach, CA
Tel. 562 -598 -8455 562 -594 -6130 FAX 562 -430 -0912
AUG -12 -2001 11:47 5624300912 97 %: P.01
08/12/01 SUN 12:55 FAX 5624300912 TRICOM SYSTEMS
August 12, 2001
Brian Brown VIA FACSIMILE
Planning Commissioner 562 - 431 -4067
Re: New 8 unit single family residence development
Seal Beach Boulevard
10001
I would like to go on record that this appears to be a pathetic
addition of residences to Old Town. A pathetic "welcome" to Old Town
if I can be more blunt. Even more so than the 8 single family
residences that were built on the old motel site at the intersection
of Seal Beach Boulevard and Electric Avenue.
I walked the site this morning. The foundations are exactly 72"
apart between residences. I would assume stucco and backing would
add at least las" to each house, leaving a clear pathway of 69 ". Is
that a Seal Beach code violation? I thought it was a minimum of 72"
on finish. I measured the distance between the 8 single family
residences referenced in my first paragraph and found them to be over
72" apart, more like 74" to 78 ".
Each foundation is exactly like the next. Maximum lot depth with
minimum front and rear setback. Each front entry is identical and
each garage entry is identical. These are starting to look like
$700,000 ghettos, with a liquor store next door and an OCTD bus stop
outside the front door. And these "residences" are to be the
"Welcome Sign" on the "Gateway" to Old Town Seal Beach. And people
will buy them because there is nothing else. Whatever happened to
architectural review? Is there no one on the planning commission who
recognizes what developers are doing to this City? Do we have the
Ci{tty, \Council �to thank for this?
Walt Miller
231 Seal Beach Blvd i3
Seal Beach
Tel. 562 -598 -8455 FAX 562 -430 -0912 e-mail waltfm @earthlink.net
RUG -12 -2001 14:10 5624300912 97% P.01