Item 15 Staff Report Approving the Installation of Temporary Bulb-Outs and Speed Humps on Johnson Avenue as a Traffic Calming MeasureDATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
MEETING DATE: 9/16/02
ITEM NO.
COUNCIL/AGENCY AGENDA REPORT
SEPTEMBER 10, 2002
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AG
DEBRA J. FIGONE, TOWN MANAGER/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
APPROVING THE INSTALLATION OF TEMPORARY BULB -OUTS
AND SPEED HUMPS ON JOHNSON AVENUE AS A TRAFFIC
CALMING MEASURE.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approving the installation of temporary bulb -outs and speed humps on Johnson Avenue as a traffic
calming measure.
BACKGROUND:
Three petitions have been received by the Town over the past fifteen years from Johnson Avenue
residents, (1987, 1996 and 2000), requesting various devices to slow traffic. For the first two
petitions, reports were submitted to Council after staff conducted traffic studies, engineering reviews
and/or neighborhood polls. The third neighborhood petition is the basis of this report.
The first petition, received in 1987, requested rumble strips to slow traffic. It does not appear that
traffic data was collected, as after staff conducted a neighborhood poll, the results indicated a
majority of residents were opposed to rumble strips. Staffs recommendation to Council was to
abandon the request. (Attachment One).
In 1996, a petition was received requesting stop signs and speed bumps. Staff conducted traffic
analysis which indicated the 85' percentile speeds were 31-32 MPH. As staff did not consider these
speeds excessive, staff did not recommend installing stop signs or speed bumps, citing safety issues;
staff recommended increased enforcement . (Note: At that time, the town did not have a Traffic
Calming Policy; whereas the town's current policy would indicate those speeds qualify for traffic
calming). (Attachment Two).
PREPARED BY: ( JQHN E. CURTIS
irector of Parks and Public Works
Reviewed by: /-'Assistant Town Manager
Community Development
5c-
Attorney Clerk ance
Revised: 9/10/02 3:09 pm
Reformatted: 5/30/02 N:\B&E\CNCLRPTSVohnson Ave 9-16-02.wpd
PAGE 2
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
SUBJECT: APPROVING THE INSTALLATION OF TEMPORARY BULB -OUTS
AND SPEED HUMPS ON JOHNSON AVENUE AS A TRAFFIC CALMING
MEASURE
SEPTEMBER 10, 2002
In 2000, a petition was received requesting speed humps to slow speeding traffic. Staff met with
residents and at that time determined to install a stop sign at Spring Street/Johnson and a centerline
down Johnson Avenue. The centerline was to visually narrow the street to slow traffic. (Attachment
Three). The stop signs were installed but a centerline was not, as it was later determined by
Engineers that Johnson Avenue is too narrow. After the stop signs were installed, residents' feedback
indicated the stop signs were not located near the hill where speeding occurs. Staff were requested
by residents to revisit the original petition requesting speed humps. Residents were informed the
town was revising the Traffic Calming Policy and staff would address their concerns once the revised
policy was approved.
The town's Traffic Calming Policy was revised in April 2002 (Attachment Four). Staff collected
volume and speed data and scheduled a neighborhood meeting that month. The traffic data collected
indicates speeding still occurs: the 85`h percentile is 31 MPH. The traffic volumes remain low,
averaging 543 vehicles per day for both directions. According to the town's Traffic Calming Policy
, if the 85`h percentile speed on a residential street exceeds the posted speed limit by 5 MPH and/or
volumes exceed 1500 vehicles per day, the street will qualify for traffic calming. For Johnson
Avenue, (a 25 MPH zone), 31 MPH qualifies the street for traffic calming.
Residents from Johnson Avenue, Johnson Hollow and Spring Street were invited to attend a meeting
on April 30, 2002. (Attachments Five). At this meeting, the Town's Traffic Engineer presented the
traffic data and possible traffic calming solutions, including bulb -outs, speed humps, raised
intersection and/or chicanes. Consensus was overwhelming in support for a combination of speed
humps and curb bulb -outs to slow traffic on Johnson Avenue between Cross Way and Johnson
Hollow. Several property owners with off-street parking also indicated an interest to place either of
these devices near their home, as other residents do not have off-street parking.
The town's Traffic Engineer drafted a concept plan for three (3) speed humps and four (4) bulb -outs
located between Cross Way and Johnson Hollow, with the intent for the devices final placement to
meet the adjacent property owners' approval. A neighborhood vote was then conducted. (Attachment
6). A total of seventy-seven ballots were sent to residents of Johnson Avenue and Johnson Hollow.
Of the seventy-seven ballots, forty-seven residents completed and returned their vote -form, a 55%
return rate. Of those who responded, 72% were in support of the devices, 25% percent opposed and
2% abstained. Comments were also received indicating support, opposition and/or preference for one
device over the other. (Attachments Seven).
PAGE 3
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
SUBJECT: APPROVING THE INSTALLATION OF TEMPORARY BULB -OUTS
AND SPEED HUMPS ON JOHNSON AVENUE AS A TRAFFIC CALMING
MEASURE
SEPTEMBER 10, 2002
DISCUSSION:
The town's Traffic Calming Policy requires 67% support of the neighborhood to install traffic
calming devices. In this case, more than 70% of the neighborhood who responded are in support of
these devices. Following the town's Traffic Calming Policy, the next step is to receive Council's
approval to install temporary devices.
The outcome of these devices is to slow traffic, which can be determined effective or not by
collecting data three to six months after installation. Working with the neighborhood on the devices'
placement location will reduce potential impact to residents without off-street parking.
Over the past fifteen years, this neighborhood has requested traffic calming assistance three times
from the town. There is a speeding issue on the Johnson Avenue hill. Volumes are relatively low.
Staff recommends installing temporary devices to address the speeding issue. There are always
concerns that installing devices on one street may divert the problem to adjacent streets. However,
the volume on Johnson is relatively low for a residential street. As the volume is low, it is possible
the adjacent street will not be adversely effected. Collecting additional data after the devices are
installed can provide factual information whether or not they create an impact on neighboring streets,
and the amount of impact.
CONCLUSION:
Staff recommend Council direct staff to install temporary speed humps and bulb -outs on Johnson
Avenue for a period of three to six months, and to then collect additional traffic data to determine
if they are effective in traffic calming. After the installment review period, staff will report back to
Council on the temporary devices' effectiveness and whether or not permanent devices are
recommended for placement.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:
Is not a project defined under CEQA, and no further action is required.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The following is the cost estimate to install the temporary devices:
Temporary devices, 2 humps $ 15,000
Temporary devices, 5 bulb -outs 5,000
Total Materials Cost $ 20,000
PAGE 4
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
SUBJECT: APPROVING THE INSTALLATION OF TEMPORARY BULB -OUTS
AND SPEED HUMPS ON JOHNSON AVENUE AS A TRAFFIC CALMING
MEASURE
SEPTEMBER 10, 2002
The installation will be conducted by Parks and Public Works staff, and the labor cost will be
absorbed by the department's operations cost. Sufficient funds are available in this fiscal year's
traffic calming program budget (Account # 400-0208) as demonstrated below:
Project Name
FY2002-03 FY2002-03 FY2002-03 Ruing
Musted BcpendecVBic nbered Available Source
Budget To tbie Eblanoe
Traffic Calming FY2002`03 $ 17Z 110 172,110 GFAR
79,O50 (79,050)
Fimated Materials Cost Per this Item $ 20,003 (20,000)
Total Traffic Caking FY200203 $ 17Z110 $ 99,060 $ 73,060
Attachments:
1. Council Report dated 9/8/87; Item No.37
2. Council Report dated 11/18/96; Item No.10
3. Petition from Johnson Avenue Residents, August 2000
4. Town Traffic Calming Policy
5. Agenda, Johnson Avenue Neighborhood Meeting, 4/30/02
6. Letter, Traffic Calming Solutions for Johnson Avenue ballot, dated 6-17-02
7. Vote Outcome Spreadsheet, with comments, 7/16/02
•sivjcy
rv4
Council Agenda
Date: Y/d/d7
item rJO. , 37
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
Council Agenda Report
DATE: AUGUST 31, 1987
TO: MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
FROM: DEBORAH SWARTFAGER, TOWN MANAGER C.-3
SUBJECT: PROPOSED RUMBLE STRIPS ON JOHNSON AVENUE
RECOMMENDATION
Abandon the plan to install rumble strips on Johnson Avenue.
DISCUSSION
At their August 3, 1987 meeting, the Town Council directed the Engineering staff
to re-evaluate the need for the installation of rumble strips on Johnson Avenue.
To accomplish this objective, the Engineering staff surveyed the residents and
landlords who live or own homes in the neighborhood, whether they want the strips
and where they want them installed. In all, 88 survey questionnaires were sent.
As of September 2, 1987, 33 (38%) have been returned. Of these 31 replies, one
(3%) expressed no opinion, 10 (30%) want the strips on their street, and 22 (67%)
feel that the installation of these strips in the neighborhood is unnecessary and
counterproductive. These last 22 respondents believe that the strips are either
ineffective in controlling speed or unwarranted on Johnson Avenue. In particu-
lar, they feel these strips would create noise (especially at night), cause dis-
comfort to motorists, and damage to vehicles.
PREPARED BY: RONALD J. ZAPF
Town Engineer
RJZ:SC:ms
(ENG03:TC 9/8-4)
cc: Regular Distribution
Special Distribution
Reviewed by: Attorney Clerk Treasurer
TOWN COUNCIL ACTION DIRECTED TO:
ACTION OF COUNCIL:
COMMENTS:
Attachment 1
0
z
NOINIdO ON
9d1111. 71YNf1Y 1NVM
fd1Y111 f1INAY 1NYM 1011 OQ
tji
ti
1
m
0
ns
v
•
i
•
•
•
^a
if
•
•
• •
•
Pat
.41I
MIR
tag
Pia
afti4.11,16
•
•
,
• 29
1.1 I1
'_ A
-
v
w
i a
aft irsa
C •
•
• a
r.
• ▪ Y
•
t
•V,
"•4rh
1
1.,
,K
• ' • a f
•
e '
at
•
•f
r
�•.
•:
•
0
` %.2-. /W -' //!f v / .54. < rfr l%‘/rrtwa ,7' / A /ram---.0
:;1--;7-1"-z-y W/mil €.e
451417c Ale'74/I-- , #126,q,7/:e .--57---
,7464C04. kkiL .7-(PLEASE CHECK APRpPRIATE BOXES , ' �,�i/.
C'fi�l� w � � /ltD' � ��
Do you want rumble strips installed on Johnson Avenue?'"`•� //
71 ; .
51 YES NQ iZe-GyQe..--.%-2.e. C-i/e/z../.9..=.--fil
7 q• air,477 ' 70 Q' 1
/Ceezi ?a a%4,0 °f
The location you nave sel :ted b*twee;i 24U and :46
Johnson Avenue).
if YES,. I want the strips installed at:
c9t. ,6a7--:(1&( "77_4 /17/
Some r location -(please state):
��S/ eta
1e'Ar Gas ze4"),
SST« J L 447 / /7�S
y= 3J Ve.7 .4 sir -
73.4odd4/9
r strips. ins l l ed on
. f N0 , I do not want the st Q
.51r9 476Pidfc
Johnson Avenue because:
They will not be effective in controlling speed.
They- will create -noise, especially at night_
E
Other reason(s) (please state):
e,0254c,A)Asi-d,..Z.--,9-7n. (v130fevi. ,140s/7-
Y i171 0 fre-14:4KSl /2l'd��
l�es7 ��, zs ao��i1 TIC
- o'AM ' GLS l 't-
,ecr- ` .c%ts 7e r iP <9.f7w•
Name: ieetd1 5 /cv
Address: �7 e 4, '44 h AXE".
Date:
/s/Aw 7
llii�uq�'Q.
/h -
ph �GliJoocale
(PLEASE CHECK APPROPRIATE
Do you want rumble strips installed on Johnson Avenue?
YES
' NO
If YSS, I want the strips installed at:
The location you have selected (between 340 and 346
-�; Jonnson Avenue).
I�
Some other location (please state):
If NO, I do not want the strips installed on Johnson Avenue because:
Name:
Address:
Date:
They will not be -effective in controlling speed.
They will create noise, especially at night_
Other reason(s) (please state):
AUG 17 1987
(PLEASE CHECK APPROPRIATE BOXES)
Do you want rumble strips installed on Johnson Avenue?
YES NO
if YES, I want the strips installed at:
The location you nave selected (between �40 and 346
Johnson ,avenue)
77 Some other location (please state):
If NO,. I do not. want the strips installed on Johnson Avenue because:
i
They will not be effective in controlling speed.
They will create noise, especially at night.
I !! Other reason(s) (please state):
} tKa
Name: �-Y�. _� � `�
Address: o;3
Date: _
(PLEASE CHECK APPROPRIATE BOXES)
Oo you want rumble strips installed on Johnson Avenue?
YES
NO
If YES, I want the strips installed at:
The location you have. sal ecta.i (between 340 and 346
onnson Avenue).
Some other location (please state):
� r
,cam
If NO, I do not want the strips installed on Johnson Avenue because:
I !
They will not be effective in controlling speed.
They will create noise, especially at night.
Other reason(s) (please state) :
Name: L7"."J ' ,,P,071.1
Address:
Date:
(PLEASE CHECK APPROPRIATE BOXES)
Oo you want rumble strips installed on Johnson Avenue?
NO
If YES, I want the strips installed at:
n
e location you nave selected (between 34U and 346
Johnson Avenue).
Some other location (please state):
If NO, I do not want the strips installed on Johnson Avenue because:
They will not be effective in controlling speed.
They will create noise, especially at night.
Other reason(s) (please state) :
Name:: Cr v to Ja-c - i
Address : 2 1 `F
Oate: s77/7/Q7
AUG21
J96r,
(PLEASE CHECK APPROPRIATE BOXES)
Do you want rumble strips installed on Johnson Avenue?
YES ANO
If YES, I want the strips installed at:
1-7
The J
i CC t'•C!i cu h`Ve cal e:taii (between
Johnson Avenue).
Some other location (please sate):
340 and 346
If 40, I do not want the strips installed on Johnson Avenue because:
They will not be effective in controlling speed.
They will create noise, especially at night.
Other reason(s) (please state):
Name: . Ut CiJE
Address: 1 o, A-vf
Date: g " I T - 87
I
August 18, 1987
Town of Los Gatos
Engineering Dept.
Attn: Ron Zapf, Town Engineer
Ref: Your Letter "Survey for Installation of Rumble Strips -
Johnson Avenue", Dated 13 August 1987
Dear Ron,
I appreciate your request for our opinion on the above
subject.
In that our family lives at 131 Johnson Ave., I do not feel
that we are qualified to venture forth a recommendation that
"Rumble Strips" should be or not be installed within the
"300" block area of Johnson Avenue.
In my opinion, I believe that the primary function of "Rumble
Strips" are used to warn a driver that a traffic control
device is near (Stop or Yield sign). In this area, that is
not the case.
The effect of sound generated by the various types of
vehicles that would pass over these "Bumps" would vary
greatly due to the following reasons:
o Vehicle weight
o Vehicle wheel base
o Vehicle tire pressure
I feel that the net result of the above effort to install
"Rumble Strips" would not be productive overall once the
local drivers that frequently use this portion of Johnson
Avenue realize that this is a localized "Speed Deterrent" and
truly has no effect once beyond it in either direction.
Sincerely Yours
54erf
(PLEASE CHECK APPROPRIATE BOXES)
Do you want rumble strips installed on Johnson Avenue?
YES
'c.77r NO
if YES, i want the strips installed at:
The location you have selected (between 34U and 346
Jonnson .avenue).
Some other location (please state:
AU, 2j
if NO, i do not want the strips installed on Johnson Avenue because:
1 They will not be effective in controlling speed.
fi They will create noise, especially at night.
98?
;:i: Other reason(s) (please state):
'\, j77— r� �f!�if /� L'I •
/,U 'a,e _spfib i.ut 1 --Grp PA ,c.tS6C _.
telfficY
Name: ('HH , E5 7&/.
Address: P 3 f r NSVe-
Date:oS7 !77Y'fr 7
(PLEASE CHECK APPROPRIATE BOXES)
Do you want rumble strips installed on Johnson Avenue?
YES NO
If YES, I want the strips installed at:
The location you have selected (between 340 and 346
Jonnson Avenue).
Some other location (please state):
If NO, I do not want the strips installed on Johnson Avenue because:
They will not be effective in controlling speed.
They will create noise, especially at night.
Other reason(s) (please state):
C °' J U H 54'fret
(�•:( G{ �%,c.[ S fYl 1 �i'� C V1. a ;,L A i e
Name: f;<u,
Address: ` `)Gjl +�'�^
Date: 11 R� f I'7
10
198?
(PLEASE CHECK APPROPRIATE BOXES)
Do you want rumble strips installed on Johnson Avenue?
YES
12S NO
If YES, I want the strips installed at:
The location youhave selected (between 340 and 346
Johnson Avenue).
Some other location (please state):
If NO,. I do not want the strips installed on Johnson Avenue because:
Name:
Address:
Date:
They will not be effective in controlling speed..
They will create noise, especially at night.
Other reason(s) (please state):
AEG 24
1987
(PLEASE CHECK APPROPRIATE BOXES)
Do you want rumble strips installed on Johnson Avenue?
YES LJ NO
If YES, I want the strips installed at:
The location you have selected (between 340 and 346
Johnson Avenue)..
Some other location (please state):
If NO, I do not want the strips installed on Johnson Avenue because:
They will not be effective in control 1 i speed.
They will create noise, especially at night.
Other reason(s) (please state):
Name: t
Address:
Date: i....e S S C .
eiSo3
l°87
(PLEASE CHECK APPROPRIATE BOXES)
Oo you want rumble strips installed on Johnson Avenue?
E YES
NO
If YES., I want the strips installed at:
The location you have selected (between 34O and 346
.Johnson Avenue).
Some other location (please state):
If W3, I. do not want the strips installed on Johnson Avenue because:
They will not be effective. in controlling speed.
They will create noise, especially at night.
Other reason(s) (please state):
Name: C l-rn- i S ,, ` aZ- �/�, it�✓�-�Z. -r
Address: 2- `t' Z2 ker\-)S Div /1' X
Date: 4
1
(PLEASE CHECK APPROPRIATE BOXES)
Do you want rumble strips installed on Johnson Avenue?
YES
NO
If YES, I want the strips installed at:
The location you h.ve (be -weep, 340 .nd 246
Johnson .Avenue).
7-'1 Some other
1
lo••tion (please state):
-AO -7 !'fit
faor
If NO, I do not want the strips installed on Johnson Avenue becae:
�✓h They will not be effective in controlling speed.
7:Ern-hey will create noise, especially at night.
ElOther reason(s) (please state) :
4 740cr.
Name: joo7 S `.1t
Address: _ _. �-J'egiLl"/
Date: < jam- ,,2-J—
G
_./(seeile
AUG P4 7,967
(PLEASE CHECK APPROPRIATE BOXES)
Oo you want rumble strips installed on Johnson Avenue?
ICI YES
•
NO
If YES, I want the strips installed at:
I ,
The location you have selected (between 340 and 346
Johnson Avenue).
Same other location (please state):
If NO,. I do not want the strips.installed on Johnson Avenue because:
They will not be effective in controlling speed.
They will create noise, especially at night.
:::1 Other reason(s) (please state):
Name: J/.Z n L G L Y
Address: 3 4z/ c 1 Jr!) Ste' h A If `2-
AUG 20
198,E
Date:
(PLEASE CHECK APPROPRIATE BOXES)
Do you want rumble strips installed on Johnson Avenue?
YES . NO
If YES, I want the strips installed at:
LJ
The location you have selected (between 340 and 346
Jonnson Avenue).
Some other location (please state):
If NO, I do not want the strips. installed on Jonnson Avenue because:
They will not be effective in controlling speed.
They will create noise, especially at night.
Other reason(s) (please state):
QA ry\et:. ; c_amnA,..0 fli Ai tiz)
Nly rv‘ 1;) c3nA S - ;p4c)s.ej 42.1) (1,4
Cv\ Cet�; �l'o \k IV\ c.� 5� - / I S Q ). vec v E vP r
v\ive„ acrQsS a 1,-/ bas
Name: ►1 Li SOVI
Address: LIA VIS a✓�
Date: I `-1 \ S1
AUr " i 7
(PLEASE CHECX APPROPRIATE BOXES)
Oo you want rumble strips installed on Johnson Avenue?
YES El NO
If YES, I want the strips installed at:
The location you have selected (between 34U and 346
Johnson Avenue).
Some other location (please state):
If NO, I. do- not want the strips installed on Johnson Avenue because:
Name:
Address:
Date:
They will not be effective in controlling speed.
They will create noise, especially at night.
0ther reasons) (please state):
L a M ;1 • ��
ti
S
(PLEASE CHECK APPROPRIATE BOXES;
Oo you want rumble strips installed on Johnson Avenue?
I ' YES
2 NO
If YES, I want the strips installed at:
The ca t hn ys.lu 'nave _elected (between 340 and 346
Jonnson .-venue,.
Some other location (please state
If NO,. I do not want the strips installed on Johnson Avenue because:
Name:
Address:
Date:
N! They will not be effective in controlling speed.
D
They will create noise, especially at night.
Otner reasonis, (please state,:
2 — z C'relU4 4.7e,
-7—
AUG 20 1987
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
MEETING DATE: 11/18/96
ITEM NO.
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
November 12, 1996
MAYOR AND TOVLCOLNCI
TOWN MANAGER
ACCEPT REPORT REGARDING STOP SIGNS AND SPEED BUMPS ON JOf-L*iSON
AVENUE
RE C ON/EMENDATION:
Accept report regarding stop signs and speed bumps on Johnson Avenue.
BACKGROUND:
On September 4, 1996 residents of Johnson Avenue submitted a petition requesting that speed bumps or stop signs be
installed to control speeding on that street (Attachment 1). According to the residents, traffic volume and speeding have
increased since the installation of stop signs to control speeders on Lorna Alta Avenue in August of i 991. Staff dispatched
Traffic Data Services ("TDS", the same firm contracted for radar speed survey work) to independently collect speeds.
Preliminary data showed that some speeding was occurring in the westbound, or downhill, direction. Stag' again called on
TDS to complete a more detailed study of the speeds in that direction. The speed monitoring report is attachcd (Attachment
2). The following generalizations can be made:
The average and the median speeds westbound are in the 25 to 26 mile per hour range
The 85th percentile critical speeds westbound are in the 31 to 32 mile per hour range
Approximately 5% of vehicles are excessively speeding at over 35 miles per hour
The results of the speed study were sent to the petitioning residents. Staff then received calls and one letter requesting that
no stop signs or speed bumps be installed. This letter also requests that traffic enforcement needs to be increased to reduce
speeding. (Attachment 3).
Staff recommends against the installation of stop signs or speed bumps to slow vehicles. Both these options make a street
less safe as described below. Strict enforcement of the traffic laws is the best method to reduce speeds.
DISCUSSION:
In reviewing this matter, sta fbelieves that the neighborhood is equally concerned about the number of cars using the street
as well as the speed issue.
PREPARED BY: Scott R. Baker
Director of Building and Engineering Services
N ',5 '.CNCLRYSNONN SON.WPD
Reviewed by:
Atto ev ante
Revised: 11/12/96 8.59 am
Reformatted: 10/23/95
Attachment 2
PAGE 3
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
SUBJECT: ACCEPT REPORT REGARDING STOP SIGNS AND SPEED BUMPS ON 1OI-12•ISON AVENUE
NOVEMBER 7, 1996
Enforcement Personnel
Studies have shown that drivers respect a particular street's speed limit more when they can see the speed limit being
enforri- i. Johnson Avenue is not the only street where residents have complained about speeding drivers. Occasionally
residents of other small streets such as Loma Alta, Wimbledon, Wedgewood, Chirco, Thomas, and Alexander have called
in to request relief from speeders. The Police Department usually sets up the radar trailer to try to educate drivers to their
speed. Sometimes they are able to send out a traffic officer for short periods of enforcement. Speeding on these streets,
thoutzh, is not a constant occurrence. These streets have very low traffic volumes compared to arterial streets, so an officer
would be required to spend a large amount of time on any one street to have any effect on speeds.
Since the Police Department has just one officer dedicated to traffic enforcement, it is difficult to control speeding in this
manner. Perhaps a policy should be adopted whereby a neighborhood could cost -share the hiring of overtime police officers
to perform extra traffic enforcement over existing available levels. Neighborhoods like Johnson Avenue, however, may htnk
that they should not be made responsible to pay for this service when some of the traffic does not originate in their
neighborhood.
There is not a good "engineering" solution to speeding. However, we know that residents are frustrated. Telling residents
that "enforcement will reduce speeds" does not reduce that frustration when there are no officers to perform this enforcement.
Funding for extra neighborhood enforcement or re-priotitiztng such enforcement would reduce the need for nuisance step
signs and speed humps. This staff report reflects the opinions of the Building and Engineering Services Department, the vast
preponderance of traffic safety engineers and the Institute of Transportation Engineers.
CONCLUSION:
Reducing speeding on Johnson Avenue is best achieved through rigorous enforcement. Staff recommends that Council deny
request for stop signs and speed bumps on Johnson Avenue.
ENVIRONNTAL ASSESSMENTS:
Is not a project defined under CEQA, and no further action is required.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal impact as recommended Should Council provide direction to staff with a fiscal impact, staff will return to Council
at a date certain with fiscal impact and pertinent details as requested.
• Attachments:
1. Petition from Johnson Avenue residents
2. Speed Study
3. Letter from Mr. Thomas Robinson
4. Article regarding speed humps
5. Letter requesting removal of Stop Signs
Distribution:
Johnson Avenue Residents
August 23, 1996
Town Council of Los Gatos
110 East Main Street
Los Gatos, CA 95032
Chris Gjerde
Traffic Engineer
101 East Main Street
Los Gatos, CA 95032
Subject: Traffic Control on Johnson Avenue
TOWN MANAGER
Flee =+ e d :
To:
lei
1 ; !• _on
1 1 C-r,
Otter:
C
0 1
c�-4��%
Dear Mr. Gjerde and the Members of the Town Council,
We, the undersigned Johnson Avenue residents of Los Gatos, do hereby petition the Town of Los Gatos to take whatever
measures are necessary to relieve the traffic problems on Johnson Avenue. The majority of traffic that travels our street,
does so at excessive speeds (no matter the time or day, although the morning and evening commute times are the worst).
This past year a dog was killed on Johnson and just last week a parked car was hit (the driver responsible did not stop).
We do not want anyone to die before something is done. In our opinion there are two issues to bring to your attention and
we have two possible solutions. First, the speed at which vehicles travel the street greatly excess the posted speed limit.
Second, Johnson Avenue has become a thoroughfare for residents who live in the mountains, yet the street was not designed
for such a heavy volume of traffic. When you combine the speed, the amount of cars and the fact that Johnson Avenue has
residential parking on both sides of the street, we believe a dangerous situation exists.
Our first request is to place three 3-way stop signs at the intersections of Johnson Avenue with Cross, Foster and Spring..
This will not only slow down the traffic, but it will also decrease the amount of traffic that cuts over from Lorna Alta to
avoid its stop signs (a street which obtained stop signs a few years ago because of a similar traffic situation). Our second
possible solution is to place SaSGO at various points on Johnson, thereby forcing traffic to slow down. We understand
that these measures will inconvenience our own vehicle movements and accept these inconveniences as necessary to achieve
a quieter, safer street.
This is an extremely important and urgent matter for us. Many of us have young children and we are concerned for their
safety. We will not allow this situation to continue. We request immediate action and we will not stop our crusade until our
street is safe.
Thank you for your time. If you have any questions regarding this petition, please contact Sharon Litvinoff at 395-6133.
We look forward to hearing from you as soon as possible.
s
Sincerely,
SIGNATURE
NAME
. TELEPHONE
aitcy, E
,
harc)n L`+v i_nof f
,ADDRESS
L 12. J c,h nsovl gve.
.iQS- 1 Q3
,-C_ I..4-•/€ not -
ai,z TIYI1,5,'n Pi \ z
.sc_ � f F -2 ,
i,
k)
Mo iicA ovqNSWo
13T Jo1nson
_39 s-9(-,
.✓4,.,,----/i
r n,Th_z,/L
A
354 —7379'
07Inf j N s 041
'
'
Q c 2& ► So L
2.°3 --olni..
35 - *;
6 e.�f c-.>,./e
,2 27 J - 5. - Av.
:7. -, 73 9
jJ&.cl' Ate., C� a r (c.
ao a Jvh rnnl
3 �S- G5'1
_ QANtL 3: c1.,4,c Y
202 .70h',,s0,4/ , vg
[..7G,t `o .t-72
Attachment 1
Subject: Traffic Control on Johnson Avenue
3
SIGNATURE
: NAME
ADDRESS
TELEPHONE M
2x.,. % ..7,—,.. -
g n „ lest-9 ... a K
3 CY 37.4--«-- 4+'4 LoS e, P�
1v�t.,.. a44.,-s.r✓
,G9,C4s! SfoiYNON
,
/D d s/?/ /,i y Y. .Cla 'miss a
'Etv---
J 0,7,1 LA; r
I (9c ctorf.ss lAJQy, C,G CR ,
C're''
AN Ai
nson
3 > 474,
,—AA' i 4r1&`-(��
1( o,+.ttSe1, Avv
Y-(lhS
orwc
L41,( g • G4$‘24 5
2)51! 7a,J i4-i)L
-67/ -/f j 7 i
47/
- ,,., : „ ...., 7,
-..,‹----,/,
gi, .
'"W/ ., / /�, i, 2j A
il... i •"/�} _ ,' iJ - %=
'� ". . , A . - A - ' L�
�� / ''-(� ?
r ,&,.+ i( V Z I Kiq
/ /% /! iA�e46f7
3 o ( ' ) / k tsnA -(1 /
•
_ ,
/`
Ti' s 5".17\.7'
3 _ - ----.., ,- `. A-: 4.
39 c - 41,+. 4,2.
-
,-Tiv, C_„+M� bei,l
_ s-Nrc ns ,, vQ
- o.
f/ Aiue.-
/)av, (.i 4(..,S Ci
ZO 5 :1;h_c•ed Atvot
4/ 14
%Gic% i D
_
4
].) Y,- ,*e
35g ?�sQ ,-,... A.��---.t
,,5
35 '- i. S
_4
,
f ,yw
F!_..o,ecN = f-1/Gti ct
3_3 / (.1aff4✓�R/4-ve
{is VI V6i; r
1,,
9 /il V '11114 ig21Yi1/1/ 1'
33 / -J O f/il/ '1 / 1/
f-7-s`�'1.<o�
/
A Len Lein_wanG_
333 Tokson_ A'e
3.s4-S8g4
31 f 7'-
/U,,
/ hi _ C, /4a//
3 44 r IO r..—
10
_.6=e..Le-c,/,
Jor :T,h,,,., /
3ss-/247
LAX f
' aY rliA e. RA TMleCt'V'sKt
331 JotinlsoN AVE.
15-Z{ -S-g-;mac
P�—rAyc,ir-
20-) -1�1a S0..,✓..•
397- i31 u
Speed Monitoring Reps _
Generatad by M5C3000 Version 2.00 Copyright 1990. 1991 Matron Sys-..an5 Corporation
Location JOHNSON
Location Code 11
County LOS GATOS
Recorder Set 09/19/96 10:48
Recording Start .. 09/19/96 11:00
Recording End 09/22/96 23:00
Sample Time 60 Minutes
Operator Number 35
Machine Number . 45
Channel 1
Speed Range 35
Speed Increment 5
Thursday 09/19/96 Channel: 1
0- 9 10-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-t4
45-49 5C-54 55-53
60- ---a's
12:00 0 1 1 5 7 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 20
13:CC 0 0 1 4 10 6 2 0 0 0 0 0 23
14:00 0 0 1 8 7 5 0 2 0 0 0 0 23
15:33 0 1 2 13 12 6 2 1 0 0 0 0 37
16:0C 0 1 4 16 14 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 43
17:00 0 1 0 8 12 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 25
18:30 0 1 1 6 15 13 1 1 0 0 0 0 38
19:00 0 0 2 5 14 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 25
2C:00 0 0 2 4 11 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 20
21:00 0 0 0 6 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 12
22:00 0 0 1 2 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 5
23:00 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
00:00 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
Da-ly Totals 0 7 16 78 1C8 56 10 4 0 0 0 0 279
Percentage 0.0% 2.5% 5.7% 28.0% 38.7% 20.1% 3.5% 1.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Daily Control Session Summary
Average Speed of All Vehicles 26.73
Median Speed 26.78 MPH
Mode Speed 27.50
15th Percentile Speed 21.21 MPH
83th Percentile Speed 32.51 MPH
10 MPH Pace 20-30 (66.67%)
Vehicles Exceeding 55 MPH None
Vehicles Exceeding 60 MPH None
Vehicles Exceeding 65 MPH None
AM Peak Hour 11:00 to 12:00 (20 vehicles)
PM Peak Hour 15:00 to 16:00 (43 vehicles)
Attachment 2
Sneed Reort. 'JOHNSC
Saturday 09/21/96 Channel: 1
0- 9 10-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60. Totals
01:00 0 0 0 0 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
02:00 0 0 0 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 4
03:00 0 0 0 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
04:00 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 3
05:00 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
06:00 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
07:00 0 0 2 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 7
08:00 0 0 1 2 7 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 14
09:00 0 0 2 7 13 9 1 0 0 0 0 0 32
10:00 0 3 2 18 16 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 44
11:00 0 1 2 16 13 8 1 0 0 0 0 0 41
12:00 0 2 1 18 25 7 2 1 0 0 0 0 56
13:00 0 1 7 14 16 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 43
14:00 0 0 2 10 17 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 33
15:00 0 0 1 14 15 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 37
16:00 0 1 1 9 12 5 0 1 0 0 0 0 29
T7:00 0 1 3 6 10 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 25
18:00 0 0 4 6 11 7 2 0 0 0 0 0 3C
19:00 0 0 6 6 8 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 24
20:00 0 2 2 10 8 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 25
2':OC 0 0 1 3 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 3
22: C0 0 0 1 1 4 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 g
23: CC 0 0 0 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
CO: CC 0 0 1 3 3 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 10
Oa^'iy Tctals 0 11 39 153 189 78 15 6 1 0 0 0 492
Percentage 0.0% 2.2% 7.9% 31.1% 38.4% 15.9% 3.0% 1.2% 0.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.C%
race 3
Daily Control Session Summary
Average Speed of All Vehicles 26.14
Median Speed 26.14 MPH
Mode Speed 27.50
13th Percentile Speed 20.78 MPH
85th Percentile Speed 31.68 MPH
10 MPH Pace 20-30 (69.51%)
Vehicles Exceeding 55 MPH None
Vehicles Exceeding 60 MPH None
Vehicles Exceeding 65 MPH None
AM Peak Hour 11:00 to 12:00 (56 vehicles)
PM Peak Hour 12:00 to 13:00 (43 vehicles)
24-Hour Moving Total
0':OC- 454 02:00- 457 03:00- 461 04:00- 463 05:00- 464 06:00- 461 07:00- 452 08:00- 427
09:00- 415 10:00- 432 11:00- 454 12:00- 489 13:00- 5C8 14:00- 515 15:00- 513 16:00- 5C6
17:00- 494 18:00- 498 19:00- 500 20:00- 504 21:00- 497 22:00- 500 23:00- 488 24:00- 492
%aa ,2o&wae.
"Ccaae
Zia 14444. e;1 55G32
October 24, 1996
Mr. Scott R. Baker
Director of Building and Engineering Services
Town of Los Gatos
P.O. Box 949
Los Gatos, CA 95031
RE: Johnson Avenue Traffic Safety
Dear Mr. Baker:
agree with your assessment of the proper response to improve safety
on Johnson Avenue. I understand the safety concerns of some of my
neighbors, some drivers do drive too fast on Johnson (although based
on my observation and your survey, the vast majority drive at a safe
speed). I understand their concerns about too much traffic and a wish
to "encourage" drivers to use Loma Alta or some other street. I
understand people wanting to do "something", but installing traffic
nuisances like speed bumps and/or stop signs to slow traffic and/or to
try to convince drivers to take another street are not good solutions.
During the few years I have lived on Johnson, I do not ever remember
seeing police enforcement on the street. I believe extra police
enforcement is very effective. l certainly know I am more aware and
more conscious of driving slower on a street where I have seen police
with radar. I hope we get increased police enforcement. I truly think it
will be successful. 1 believe it is the most successful approach plus it
Attachment 3
Copied from the APWA Reporter
Official Magazine of the American Public Works Association - September 1996
Seed hunus:
Speed humps are effective strategy when addressing residential safety and quality of life issues
EDITOR's NOTE: One of the most requested articles on
the APB:.. BBS is the one about speed humps written by
Marshall Elizer. Jr.. P.E. several nears ago. The following
are updated excerpts from that article.
Until the 1970s. the impact of motor vehicle traffic on
the quality of urban residential environments was
lar_e!v neglected as a serious transportation problem.
Since then. however. a number of conversing forces have in-
creasingly brought these effects to the attention of both citizens
and local trans-
portation offi-
cials.
While proper
su;;di%ision plan-
ning and residen-
tial street design
are the most ef-
fec:i'.e methods
oI a'. oiling resi-
dential traffic
problems. these
goals are not always achievable. Where problems exist. traffic
management techniques have been successfully employed as
effective strategies for addressing residential safety and quality
of life issues.
Traffic management strategies employed to address residen-
tial traffic concerns can generally be assigned to four basic cat-
egories:
l ( establishing and enforcing general laws and ordinances:
_ ( installing traffic control devices:
13i installing roadway geometric design features: and
=.i educating residents and motorists
This article focuses on one particular type of geometric de-
sign feature— speed humps —that is receiving increasing atten-
tion and use. both in North America and abroad. It is based on
Guidelines for the Design .application of Speed Hunrps. a pro-
posed recommended practice of the International Institute of
Transportation Engineers (ITE) which defines speed humps as
a roadway geometric design feature consisting of raised pave-
ment constructed or placed in. on and across or partly across a
roadway intended to physically reduce vehicle speeds.
Other types of geometric design features that are not ad-
dressed in this document. but which could also be considered in
a residential traffic management program. are raised intersec-
tions. rumble steps, chokers. traffic circles. median 5amers.
diverters, left -turn channelization. and street closures.
.Speed humps vs. speed bumps
A speed hump is different from a speed bump. Speed humps
normally have a maximum height of three to four inches with a
travel length of approximately 12 feet. Speed bumps. commonly
used in parking
lots and on
some private
roadw ay s. are
enerally from
three to six
inches high
itha!en_thcf
one to three
feet.
From an op-
erational stand-
point. humps and bumps have critically different impacts on
vehicles. Within typical residential speed ranges. humps create
a gentle vehicle rocking motion that causes some drier dis-
comfort and results in most vehicles slowing to near 15 mph at
the hump and 20-25 mph between properly spaced humps in a
system. At high speeds. a hump acts as a bump and jolts the
vehicle suspension and its occupants or cargo.
A bump. on the other hand. causes significant driver dis-
comfort at typical residential speeds. and generally results in
vehicles slowing to 5 mph or less at the bump. At high speeds.
bumps tend to have less overall vehicle impact because non-
rigid suspensions will quickly absorb the impact before the ve-
hicle body can react.
Speed humps generally represent a lesser risk to chose 'c-
hides than do speed bumps. And. where designed and installed
with proper planning and engineering review. speed humps have
been found to be effective at controlling vehicle speeds without
creating accidents or increasing accident rates.
Within the United States. speed bumps of varying design
have been routinely installed in private roadways and parking
'o
APWA Reporter SEPTEMBER 199E
Attachment 4
1
Humps need to be eva,udted once in place
Continued from page 10.
and ocher key agencies.
• adoption of procedures For follow-up evaluations and re-
moval. if necessary.
• The addressing of funding responsibilities igo‘e:-;ment.
residents. or ;hared) for installation. maintenance and removal.
if necessary.
Theguidelines also include a number of recommendations
regarding the actual installation of the humps as well as the evalu-
ation once they are in place. Follow-up studies are recommended
to include such items as the possible negative impact of noise
levels. air quality. and social activities such as bicycling.
Finally.. ocher considerations include:
• Liability for tort and vehicle damage claims. including re-
lationship to the Americans with Disabilities .Act (ADA).
• Coordinating humps with pedestrian crossings.
• Incorporating humps in new street design and construc-
tion.
• Ability to meet enforcement and maintenance needs.
Humps reduce speed. traffic volume and accidents
In general. speed humps have been found to reduce traffic speed.
volumes. and accidents depending upon the site -specific circum-
stances of the installation. In addition. they discourage through
traffic from using a local street as an alternative route to incon-
venient ar conger .rtenai and collector sv,cems. Despite con-
cerns over liability. vehicle damage. and ener2enc: vehicle
impacts. these problems have not occurred or have been found
to be insignificant considering the positive aspects of dumps.
The lack of uniform guidance and heavy reliance on indi-
vidual judgment. however. has led to hump -type installations
that incorporated poor design. improper roadway geometric co-
ordination. poor choice of construction materials and -methods.
and absence of needed signs and markings. The safe:'.peed
humps and their ability to perform their intended use :s direcay
contingent upon their proper design and application. When :t :s
determined chat a residential traffic management probiem ex-
ists and that speed humps are the appropriate traffic manage-
ment technique. the ITE proposed recommended practice v. 11
assist in the design. application. and v-aluation of :hose eo-
metric design features.
The proposed recommended practice
the Institute of Transportation Engineers
may be obtained from
at)_0:)55=-S0=0.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR: R. Marshall Elizer Jr.. P,E..
director of public works and transportation for the Cite
of Modesto. California. is chair of APWA's new l%-
formed Transportation Committee and past president
of the Institute of Transportation Engineers µhere he
is now a member of ITE's special task force on speed
humps. For questions, he may be reached at 1209,577-
5213.
ralprvg The SNOWFIGHTERS
Trainiflg Video
Maintenance
Calibration
Pre -winter training
C11eC'k us out 3t. httpli Www.saltiflstitute.or9
r'
Spreading Techniques
From the
Salt Institute
ti
Get ready for WINTER. This new
21-minute training video contains
updated information on cost vs.
benefits of salt as a highway
deicer, maintenance and winter
preparations, scrader
calibration, sncwfight;ng
techniques and much,
much mcre.
cre.
ORDER TODAY!
Order by: FAX: 703-548-2194
Tel: 703-549-4648
Or by mail for $20.00 each.
SALT INSTITUTE
700 North Fairfax Street, Ste. ECG
Alexandria, VA 22314-2040
For more information. circle =:11 on reader sen ice card.
APNA .. etc^.era
Cc cber 23,
Desr S_^ •
•
•a_' J._cr_ c. s J. s Lc.-� _. �e:_�e and
rcurt Se:'t'enb'e=' _- s _ so ec. -''c rc=5- ,-^-:_. _.'=
cns c y c-^v - .. ^- _ T _ ..� cn
1,
Yon a :u .9C9_e:'= t_cr cr
^e---eS--::c:cr.^,_-c_== J:: _ r --
c_' _.ei`'
__l--..ve r�.'c _us scl'.s c .,e 3= '_jer': '. ..r = - -. ....
•
b,Vto ha e he c:__t_n:e_._at eve_^_ _:as,, .._.._._ ?s _J,,- e
7 an v' _N_^; 1dir_.i letter cr c 2"-sO
t'me rr_e ..LL 'eeJ_..._n^ aL, _.._ _c.a A'ta
e e .....)_. ..,
di -nit see the :'east=': f cr sto s_.�so _rs-^ --
:3: t:e:e ai e Pdc_ t_cna= s c s_ ns at
•
.. J'_. J_ �� V �... 'J V•._vn VV•. __ e. -__..r �� - .. .'^iw .L_., �.., C..•
^..
,
_
'114,.7 _e c-, ... : �. , c �_�_�____-.. '_._
•
r•
G'�
Attachment
We. would like to readdress the placement of road bumps on Johnson
Avenue. The need is accentuated because of the many families with young
children that now w live on our street and the continuous excessive speed of
vehicles.
Your consideration to this issue would be greatly appreciated.
I
,� • ?YC
IS)-)n
tk..
�l 8 So S 6,, , Z (°, :9s o 30
C.
02�� ah�l�r��.
W4f,(4- 2S 0((unkov\ 6150.)
2-3-3 jc)iias-cA /41 CG.- .-6;)&
\\ .�
C=KoL iev.\A J o kIAscv v2 °I5-056
C& -cl-NA 1 L-C7 1ziO
5 z o
3z� A sa A-Je: L.
.
3241&- U6- gSc3-O
vi
_.-5)W,S)1\1 qs(xn
o ke o- /&- %,5 9; D
3; 1 . AAA ?Ls-0 ? -D
3 54/ J La ke_
)cz_ctc'no
-54-/ 5-03
3 g 7 Jdt,r srn 6-cG
Attachment 3
x_.
m4
to would hke to readdress the plac�9e�ment ,of road bumps on Johnson
l . f.. ,�Y.oy 93Cii+ ' . Yf+ 1191+lY�
venue. The need is accentuated eeScause of the many families with young .
dren that now live on our street and the continuous excessive speed of
�hicles x
our consideration to this issue would be greatly appreciated.
L.ef.T'Q.�tt�C-
.20
t, Q7 G
vehicles,
�e u1d I�lceo readdress the placement of. road buinps on Johnson
venue., The need is accentuated because`of the many families with young
dren that now live on our street and the continuous excessive speed of
kirca
,Kti e /iteeger
Cervt
issue would be greatly appreciated.
LO-C GIS
( Ate S,%
_..) YISO
orrvsorN3 (?Aso 3o
�So
A-v t 4-s Gt fb s r� _
36 / 3-6a Los 1,
31 't Jokns-�.,. kve- c73z `262D.30
3L%'a ,d w AVe (s ,s q 5632
333 john4 Av.
0?,3 y L7oAhsor...
6-04
lom
Los 6nrfos 9S030
7371/.1 -S-deY 5-24-5" 5)-50-3°
`(-PG i‘ k1
237 ,:jckwsvi FS03O
/ S o\fr: c d5
z4-,016 -t/(c Ca, 9:Sa°
ma's 3 a J L �-� -
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
Parks & Public Works Department
Johnson Avenue
Neighborhood Meeting
Tuesday April 30,2002
6:OOPM
Neighborhood Center, 208 East Main Street
Purpose of meeting: Presentation of alternative traffic calming devices for Johnson
Avenue between Johnson Hollow and Cross Street to slow traffic, and inform
neighborhood of traffic calming policy and procedures, including post -card vote
process to determine neighborhood support.
AGENDA:
1. Welcome & Introductions
2. Review Background
3. Recent Traffic Study Findings & Conclusion of Data
4. Possible Options
5. Process to install temporary & permanent traffic devices
6. Next Steps
7. Meeting Adjournment
Attachment 5
Parks and Public Works Department
Average
Thur 3/14/02
Thur 3/14/02
Wed 3/13/02
Wed 3/13/02
Tue 3/12/02
Tue 3/12/02
Average
CD
Q
C3)
Co
CO
CD
Q
CT)
C.0
Date
1 S of Foster
S of Foster
S of Foster
S of Foster
S of Foster
S of Foster
N of Foster
N of Foster
Location
CO
0
-,
CD
n
0
n
SB
NB
(!)
p0
NB
SB
NB
Bi-Direction
(f)
CD
Z
W
Direcction
-P
(
o
GJ
w
o.)
275
276
CD
CO
243
954
�
CJ1
o
CD
Volumes
29 mph
30 mph
28 mph
29 mph
28 mph
28 mph
28 mph
31 mph
32 mph
30 mph
85th% Speed
eteQ bweJi anuany uosuqIor
r
8
7 ^wctap a D AI.
w0 - 5, p3i w �1 LT • • • • • • • A - o
0.
0.
.
1
0R.b°a�KCD9nNw A a. a..oo NAAm B. •
...
O O CD Cot 0c�R cr
y °`"`� ?�ocha< D 'E m c0'0,o on k ey70w0 0xa co°oa0 Cr <:"; a"c5. 3
/ci) ' co A F'oCe) CD p 'i...5.,. CD ,.` P.
,p • 'yCo),C CD • CD 0 co 0CD cij�g'va0 ttC CDo. 0 03a.<t aa a 'tio O �gO ° A0 Q0 0. cA 'a r, 'C m < v,D w o0 vG 0 r o ° o a. Ai5. moA ,Dwcw ;fl " o, 0 << O Z A cA
A a,wv
40
wp�o mp A 0. RA w o oa. D y o ay < o
A A C op^
CD
• Cr ( A cr o rj,ntoa'O g w A p
M Pr
s p co n a r° oco
o.cc..0, , iz. a Cy n0w'd tpGro' v, - 5' < i6 ct��' p to D Gc;a=• A -y y-owcD Ic Qo-�qaa(g N .0 °, r5. ..c, A ,
CD
Cr•
p1. • �y5°oo� ay GOo t►4'ima p4narow�w w '~5' w 10-
0. �
a<< A o = �' "A
0.
o v m 5 a O A. ,wa '� ° b U
o a.
a ,I0 w n N <' w 7 eAp r•. 0
., A w A 8 A a ►e O
r•t,
A
CI,
to) OR. < .0 �' A 0
'. .m**-oO
O-.1 pc0a<o
0 p Aa. o' p 0 m A(D r a.y-
a 0, ,34. ._ iP• i 6.7. 1 E. F-... a =0 E.
on
CD
aoo.wcriO °�:0(4000
"0 Cp yo. C p
p:GJ
kiw ° Co 0 0 '. .E~CO
coai° p .••., O
A y A On tl0C "�
0.
w o g slr y. V.
.,, a
O w PO
CD
c
g.
0 Go
5 g.
o o5.
'
0
b.
o 5.
CD m
A
a
CD N
0
I 8 w A �
o
.o 0 go a• 0
5,.a
tO 0 W y•
of yito
oq CD <
< 00ci)
q °
A
go
cD
o
. g
00 0.0
oQ
p cD
a 0o
1 0 0 .O w CO z- 5. w A A w 'd f,' 3. O w 0 O^. n R �, O 0E €i N
O O 0 w- o C �. �' co �r
0 0 w 0 a> 5,1S•B'a:cPD m p CD O A• O a s m O' a 2
p E. c. a. rio 2 .A" m ° g g. O3 .n `{ w -. c 5. p a ors A °
0 '. , 4 w p o CCD w ^, A O A co cp a .A 0 w
o A A o 0 '. ° n to Oq .
x 0 0.ce.c IQ °.5,O 09.g ��ACD os. gr"z ° as :e m EQ0-a p'a
a 0-p ,o,�o c .a ° a :: �.^ a K A 5-.' .°,,moo °,A�°
co 0-
1 EL
LmUg,.<A oAp+ c'a a.8 .. wcD,� er°
ter* Cr G A_ 5 N R m p,' o°k N A A ~" A° �� `O a•
p 0 nf•. .+. n h ..., A b
,0 aw,co° aA, 07 Via. a �o .g b aQrti m�°so o €-. .
A yisA ya. '.. A A 5L a tt g co i4. n S.
p
A Ar R. ...
44
s °y 5 o .° op
3• Q< po cI°E'oco o�•a7\ava
, c� c : O a+ a
cn .y. N C .", ram, O
o .o A, A .�"�' ' A O.. Cp, n N P• m R a•• R y „Da, ,0 y a•
E, CD pi w 00 ^ sy `�` v,
a o
cA
0 o A•, o 8 sso c .. o• o.~.5' s3.� co ai a A Cr
a �. CC M CD �' O CFO =.
0o y w
• • • • w A lrJ O A w '� 'C 'O �1 a. C w fD w •'t7 A "4 ¢, O\ �'• a.
E.. O A m O a a. `'°G O6 00 p A .A•. 'r3 [""D 1 N ° al I' g• w • R °
A R 'o•A n A �, �. p "d A p co o.'C ,b g b En a. p a
co n q 0e C C q' c°Oi, p ee *0 O. r""i, 0 < o p VAA-. w g c§ C. p co g a g *a . ° ?. p
Q' A ° "" O G. rs oa `< Z. o n E A w cpD • Q° p < ��' cD cD 8 c¢D o aro 0 .t a.7, o
C p * i3 p "0 O M < a o O 5 °, w p p copp p a; ° A v, b A 0
C ,� C a. ,� CD cD O A Q o• °' O �] '*+ L� CD rn ° AC+ 2 �', a p' 5. O "" p N
v p go O v rn CAD „Oy, n t i p cm �i p e a O• "O Op' G. n' ►O+� 0''l3 rpn co a (pp N c_°D' O. CD .A+
m 5••
5. 0
• . co.o ESa 5 5, 8Hg "° 0* 3 paro nc
oa APa n 5', . A J• aga.i. A A O Cco . Cw f9 E. pA D 0= "9-3 AA a,°gas 5. 5' E '8 eQ - CD wo'r.eD?��w °p� Ae7 o' C a.'OO° Cl. oa A O •cD A < a. 5' pcaCw . ��L�
C.EE g"
a35.
g.'A O O V, Coi vy'Is Cp"p ", K ~ O" a. F. 0
1a+a.Am''A' gom`�Ac ~b,< CDif p ca,a cA A �•b' D^oA AA�D a. . C w
a.
o P. °• y•oK§Dni•c°FIr O 5•yO. < �o,�y
• 80.» ., o'. cy
fra FP'a.0Oyti 'O�a'O°c HOA°CO5 °, _ A• A0 CCO°p Cc' A '�A, C a. .-y2.OI-u " '-ma. a,e5 pC• o w p pCo.,9' A»A I
0cr
oao a y a. ° 4 ptrooa p+A o'a0 •• 0 5 ° ° w&.
CD
cv a. CD rwi, .Zi O' n A �' A �, Cr �. ^'S 0, -
a a. A p arc O
a `+
Attachment 4
TOWN OF Los GATOS
PARKS AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
(408) 399-5770
FAX (408) 354-8529
June 17, 2002
Subject: Voting -Traffic Calming Solutions for Johnson Avenue
CIVIC CENTER
110 E. MAIN STREET
P.O. Box 949
Los GATos, CA 95031
Dear Johnson Avenue Neighborhood Residents,
At a neighborhood meeting held April 30, 2002, it was agreed to conduct a neighborhood poll
to determine if there is 67% or more support to install a combination of trial speed humps and
bulb -outs along Johnson Avenue between Cross Way and Johnson Hollow. The Town's Traffic
Engineer has developed a schematic where the devices would be installed. The attached drawing
identifies locations for speed hurnps and bulb -outs, from an engineering standpoint are suitably
arranged. However, the locations may be adjusted slightly to meet the needs of the adjacent
property owners to the extent possible. If installed, these devices would be given a 'test period'
of at least three months. After the test phase, another neighborhood meeting would be held to
obtain feedback on the devices' effectiveness.
A `postcard vote' form is included in the lower section of this letter. Feedback from each
resident/property owner in the affected neighborhood is being requested to determine if 67%
of the neighborhood supports having these devices installed for a test period. One vote is
allowed per property. Please complete the lower section of this form and return it to this
department by July 15th. If you have any need for additional information, please contact the
Town's Traffic Engineer, Jesssy Pu at 395-2859 or e-mail at: traffic@town.los-gatos.ca.us
Sincerely,
(6„a,
E. Curtis
'rector
•
JOHNSON AVENUE NEIGHBORHOOD FEEDBACK
Your address:
circle response
1) Install a combination of temporary speed humps and curb bulb -outs: YES NO
2) Additional Comments:
Please return to: PPW, P.O.Box 949, Los Gatos CA 95031
by July 15, 2002
INCORPORATED AUGUST 10, 1887
Attachment 6 ``
JOHNSON AVENUE
PROPOSED TRAFFIC CALMING PLAN
1
Johnson A‘• .ue Neighborhood Traffic Calming Vote Outcc , July 2002
#
Vote
Comments
Total
Total
122
Yes
none
1
1
126
Yes
none
1
1
131
Yes
none
1
1
138-140
Yes
none
1
1
145
Yes
none
1
1
201
Yes
none
1
1
202
Yes
I live right at the stop sign on Johnson & Cross Way. It's a rare sight to
actually see a car stop for this sign. I'm hoping speed bumps & curb bulb-
outs will alleviate this problem.
1
1
203
Yes
none
1
1
205
Yes
See comments on attached letter and photo simulation.
1
1
207
Yes
Yes to speed bumps, No to bulb outs. Speed bumps only. Parking is
limited.
1
1
208
Yes
none
1
1
209
Yes
none
1
1
212
Yes
Thanks for all your hard work! We would love to see one or two more
speed bumps. We would prefer the bulb -out to be moved. We have
limited household parking. Both (of) our neighbors (at 205 & 218) would
love the bulb -outs in front of their homes. Thanks again.
1
1
218
Yes
You may put a bulb -out between my house and neighbor at 222 Johnson.
1
1
226
Yes
none
1
1
229
Yes
none
1
1
230
Yes
We have three boys between the ages of 2 years and 12 years. The
traffic on this street is frightening. Your help is a must to slow traffic!!!
1
1
233
Yes
We agree with slowing down the traffic but we do have a concern that the
speed bump may cause more noise (breaking and acceleration) Since
the bump will be very close to our home.
1
1
234
Yes
I am very pleased that you are taking these temporary steps & hope they
become permanent after the trial period. Thanks!
1
1
239
Yes
Put a planter between 239 & 233 Johnson. Add more planters and
humps.
1
1
253
Yes
We oppose the planter bulb -out at 250 Johnson as we only have enough
parking spaces now to accommodate the neighbor's and our own cars.
1
1
255
Yes
none
1
1
311
Yes
none
1
1
321
Yes
none
1
1
325
Yes
Thank You!
1
1
328
Yes
Bottom line -I think speed humps will be more effective than planters...
1
1
337
Yes
Over the past few years our street has more & more young children.
Anything to keep these kids safe from the fast traffic will be helpful! What
about "Children Playing" signs posted too.
1
1
340
Yes
none
1
1
341
Yes
Temporary speed humps -Yes, Curb bulb -outs -Why? What would be the
purpose of bulb -outs? I can see where speed humps would help, but I
have no reason to believe bulb -outs should be added.
1
1
345
Yes
none
1
1
346
Yes
none
1
1
348
Yes
We vote to have speed humps only IF they are not any closer to our
home...move hump (at) 355 Johnson closer to Johnson Hollow.
1
1
353
Yes
none
1
1
354
Yes
We are pleased with the locations
1
1
Percentage of Total Votes in Support & Total Number of Votes
72.3%
34
8/22/2002J ohnsonAveVote2002.xls
Attachment 7
2
Johnson Av....ue Neighborhood Traffic Calming Vote Outcc.. . July 2002
#
Vote
Comments
Total
Total
110
No
With cars parked on both sides, street is too narrow as it is. More
bottlenecking will occur.
1
1
115
No
Yes on temporary speed humps, No on curb bulb -outs (reduces parking)
1
1
222
No
Curb bulb -outs are a good thing - Speed humps are not.
1
1
250
No
My one and only parking space in front of my house would be taken away
with the placement of the curb bulb -out as there is a fire hydrant in front
of my house. No!No!No! Do not install these devices!
1
1
301
No
I have not been involved in discussion. Parking is already a challenge
with neighbors cars. I really do not want a "bulb -out" in front of my house.
Let those who favor have the "planter" in front of their home.
1
1
307
No
We are not in favor of temporary nor permanent speed humps nor cub
bulb -outs.
1
1
320
No
We are not sure. We were unable to be at the meeting. Our views
change.
1
1
365
No
1) Unnecessary -few speeders 2) Proposed humps are an annoyance to
normal driving 3) The few speeders will speed between the humps 4) the
proposed solution is more of a hazard than the problem 5) parking will be
eliminated 6) will impact other streets.
1
1
381
No
Yes on humps. Our street is narrow already for bulb -outs. We have
enough cars parking in the street already (acting like bulb -outs) that we
do not need them. The last two humps are close together, I think we onit
need two humps altogether.
1
1
115
Johnson
Hollow
No
Johnson Ave is already congested with all the parked cars. I suspect the
people complaining are those with children who want to play in the street.
The street is not a place to play regardless of the speed limit or humps.
1
1
111
Johnson
Hollow
No
requested comments confidential
1
1
101
Johnson
Hollow
No
Leave things as they are.
1
1
Percentage of Total Votes Against & Total Number of Votes
25.5%
12
245
Johnson
abstain
We are in favor of curb bulb -outs but not speed humps
1
1
Percentage of Total Vote Abstaining and Total Votes Received
2.1%
1
Percentage of Total Ballots Received & # Total Votes Reveived 61%
47
8/22/2002JohnsonAveVote2002.xls
Town Council Minutes September 16, 2002
Redevelopment Agency Los Gatos, California
FINAL MAP/TRACT 9368/VINYARD HIGHTS/RESOLUTION 2002-151 (11.25)
Ray Davis, noted that sufficient funds were not required of the developer to do a substantial upgrade
of Foster Road to address the traffic and fire safety issues of a mountain road.
Motion by Mr. Pirzynski, seconded by Mr. Blanton, that Council adopt Resolution 2002-151
entitled RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS APPROVING THE FINAL MAP
OF TRACT 9368, ACCEPTING THE DEDICATIONS AND AUTHORIZING THE TOWN
MANAGER TO SIGN THE CONTRACT. Carried unanimously.
RE -ROOFING OF TOWN FACILITIES/PROJECT 0339/RESOLUTION 2002-152 (12.24)
Ray Davis asked about the type of materials to be used and how the on the job inspections would be
done.
Motion by. Mr. Pirzynski, seconded by Mr. Glickman, that Council adopt Resolution 2002-152
entitled RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS AWARDING A CONSTRUCTION
CONTRACT WITH CALIFORNIA ROOFING COMPANY FOR PROJECT 0339 -
REROOFING OF TOWN FACILITIES. Carried unanimously.
TRAFFIC CALMING/JOHNSON AVENUE/BULB-OUTS & SPEED HUMPS (15.41)
The following people from the audience addressed this issue:
Lynn Panighetti-Morin, spoke of parking places lost and of a stop sign on her corner property.
Karen Delovmi, asked for more information. She had been told when she called that it was already
decided that the speed bumps and signs would be going in. She said that the traffic safety web site
suggests no speed bumps.
Tony Alarcon, asked about garages in the Johnson area, and speed humps. He said that he favored
the humps but not the bulb outs and spoke of other traffic safety options on the lower portion of the
street. He noted that secondary units will have no parking with the proposed program..
Marc Jensen, noted that children are significantly less likely to be hit on a street with speed bumps.
Ray Davis, spoke of increase of traffic in town and the need to address the planning issues and safety
issues of this fact.
John Curtis, Public Works Director, noted that the proposal would be tested in place for 3 months
and then be evaluated. Information will be given to the residents and others who express an interest.
A review of secondary units on Johnson will be done to address the problem of excessive parking.
The speed humps will be well marked and speed will be reduced to 20 mph.
Motion by Mr. Blanton, seconded by Mr. Glickman, to approve installation of temporary bulb -outs
and speed humps on Johnson Avenue as a traffic calming measure. Carried unanimously.
N:\CLK\Council Minutes1?0021M09-16-02.wpd
7