Loading...
11-29-1965 - Regular Meeting - Minutes0 MINUTES OF THE ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA NOVEMBER 29, 1965 The adjourned regular meeting of the City Council was called'_to'"order by Mayor Pro Tem Krieger at 7:55 P.M. in the West Covina City Hall. Councilman Jett led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Pro Tem Krieger, Councilmen Jett, Heath Chairman Mc Cann, Commissioners Adams, Travis, Gleckman, Mottinger Others Present: Mr. George Aiassa, City Manager Mr. Robert Flotten, City Clerk & Admin. Assistant Mr. Herman R. Fast, Public Services Director Mr. Harold Joseph, Planning Director Mr. Byron Larson, Traffic Engineer Mr. George Zimmerman, Assistant City Engineer Mr. Raymond Windsor, Administrative Analyst Absent: Mayor Nichols • Councilman Snyder Mr. Harry C. Williams, City Attorney CITY CLERK REVIEW PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION November 17, 1965 VARIANCE NO. 577 Eugene Wood APPROVED Councilman Heath: UNCLASSIFIED USE PERMIT 106 Hope House DENIED Mayor Pro Tem Krieger: • VARIANCE NO. 569 Leslie Sugar. DENIED So indicated by Mr. Flotten. The following items were called up. Called up by Councilman Heath for the following reasons: I don't think the requirements for a variance have been meta Called up by Mayor Pro Tem Krieger for the following reasons: I feel this is a decision that should properly be made by the Council having to do with the use in an R-1 zone. Called up by Councilman Heath for the following reasons: Councilman Heath: I would like to call this up because of the fact that both the Planning Commission and the Council are in agreement with the end result but the means of getting there is where we have a conflict. Councilman Krieger: -1- This has already been called up by Mr. Sugar. C, C, 11/29/65 Page Two. CITY CLERK Continued PORNOGRAPHY Councilman Jett: I want to get Council approval of a draft of a letter I have I am sending out in relation to the appointment that was.made asking me to contact the adjoining cities regarding the drive,against.pornography. (Read said letter re this matter,), Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Krieger, and carried, that Mr. Jett as chairman of this committee be authorized to send this letter on behalf of the City to the ten cities in the East San.Gabriel Valley, Councilman Heath: I. would like the City Council to consider an idea of a form of recognition for these stores which have removed the smut and pornography from their shelves, What I have in mind is a decal that could be mounted on the window.of the store with the City seal whereby it would read something to the effect that this store is commended by the City of West Covina for its aid in the elimination of certain literature. I feel that merchants would remove a lot of this smut and pornography if.they were given some kind of a meritorious sign to be posted on the window of their shop, I would like to go into this • procedure further at a later time; Mayor Pro Tem Krieger: I would suggest that we defer this until such time we are further informed. The chair will call a recess of the Council for the purpose of a study session for those items on our schedule,. STUDY SESSION MINUTES FREEWAY EAST STUDY Mayor Pro Tem Krieger: As I remember the progress or lack of progress at the time we last reviewed this Freeway East Study, we had opened the hearing and had taken testimony from interested parties and we had continued the matter to this evening with the hearing closed for the purpose of coordinating our thinking somewhat with the Planning Commission, to question the recommendations submitted to us by the Victor Gruen people, by the Planning Commission, and by our staff. Is there any.necessity or any need indicated by any members of the Council to review the proposals or do we have them pretty clearly in mind? It would be my suggestion • in order to expedite the business of this meeting, unless the majority.. of the Council has some objection, to�take these interchanges one by one, Perhaps it would be best to start at the western most point of our Freeway East, which would be Citrus, Mr, Fast, let's start in the northwest quadrant of Citrus, SM C, Co 11/29/65 Page Three 'FREEWAY EAST STUDY - Continued • Public Services_ Director, Mr, Fast: We do have something new that we have prepared for the Council in regard to this overlay (indicating) which is a full cloverleaf, ....right turn, all interchanges, for comparison against what.has been proposed and approved by the Planning Commission, Mayor Pro Tem,Krieger: We have then before us the original Gruen recommendation, which is A; we have the Planning Commission's recommendation, which was the acceptance of the Gruen report with certain modifications, which is B; then we had the staff's further recommendations, which is C; now, tonight.we have something that we might refer to as D. We have heard A, B and C at previous meetings. Would you concentrate only at this time on a presentation of.your D? Public Services Director, Mr, Fast: Yes, The Planning Commission is not aware of C, either, Can I take time to run into C and the ramifications thereof, also? Mayor Pro Tem Krieger: Yes, Public Services Director, Mr, Fast: (Presented overlays and explained same,) • Mayor Pro Tem Krieger: You indicated before the Planning Commission has never seen C and D before, Has the consultant seen C or D before? Public Services Director, Mr, Fast: We have discussed both C and D with the consultant. C was in our report to the Council. The consultants have had the opportunity o-f reviewing our report. D is essentially the full cloverleaf approach. Other than intimating we would compare it for comparative purposes,.we have advised them it would be here and ready but they have not seen it as it exists here, Mayor Pro Tem Krieger: Does the consultant have any observation to make or give to the Council and the Planning Commission on either C or D at this time? Mr, Harold Marks: Not at this time, Mayor Pro Tem Krieger: Mr, McCann, I appreciate the situation that your Planning Commission is in specifically with reference to C and D. We are starting from the point of common confusion in this matter, Again, if the Council has no objection as far as procedure is concerned, with the A. B, C and D all • in mind, if that is possible, let's go back to Citrus and work our way east on this Freeway East, We have available for purposes of questioning, questions by the Council or the Planning Commission, all four proposals, A, B, C, and D. A is the Victor Gruen plan, B is the modification of the Planning Commission, C is the additional revisions of the staff. D is a pretty comprehensive change in most of the interchanges, -3- C, C. 11/29/65 FREEWAY EAST STUDY —Continued Page Four • Councilman Heath: These counts we have designated on each one of these off and on ramps, as of what date are those counts to be? As of now, if there was a ramp there, or as of 1970 when the ramp would be finished, or what? Public Services Director, Mr, Fast: In Mr, Marks' presentation several months ago, I believe they are for 1975 and his counts were arrived at independently and compared with what the State had for the same areas and generally they were very close, In a few instances there were some minor variations, Councilman Heath: What was your off ramp count at Holt? Eastbound off ramp at Holt? Public Services Director, Mr, Fast: Northbound would be 2,500 and southbound would be 2,000, Councilman Heath: In 1975 we would only expect 4,500 cars off the freeway at that point? Public Services Director: Right, • Mayor Pro Tem Krieger: At Citrus north you have no difference as I understand it between A. B, and C. The only difference is in D. Is that right? Public Services Director, Mr, Fast: That is correct, Commissioner Mottinger: This sort of question rose in our Planning Commission discussion and I got the impression that the full cloverleaf in the limited area as is shown in this particular D presentation seem to be too restricted. In other words, the radius of turns for the speed of the traffic coming off made it impractical. I think most of us would agree that a full cloverleaf is an ideal situation if it can be constructed in the space available. Are these radii of turns practical from an off - ramp speed consideration? Mr, Harold Marks: I don't know the radii that were actually used. Perhaps Mr, Larson could better answer that question, Traffic Engineer, Mr, Larson: We used 150 feet on the off ramps and 100 feet on the on ramps; Public Services Director, Mr, Fast: They are approximate, • Mr, Harold Marks: They are minimal standards. They are not the best but they are minimal. The 100 might be a little bit below. The 150 is more customary, Mayor Pro Tem Krieger: Do you exclude the 100 on ramps as being practical of suggestion? -4- • • • C, C, 11/29/65 FREEWAY EAST STUDY - Continued. Page Five Mr, Harold Marks: Under restrictive conditions they have been known to accept less. It is a matter of trying to get the most that you can and in some instances they have had to go considerably under their standards, Mayor Pro Tem Krieger: Mr. Harold Marks: Difficult but not impossible? That is right. Commissioner Mottinger: In other words, the off -ramp speed or on -ramp speed would be reduced commensurate with the radius of the turn? Mr, Harold Marks: Yes, This doesn't necessarily lead to the safest conditions, however, Commissioner Mottinger: You can back traffic up on the freeway to a dangerous extent, Councilman Heath: Whatever we put into this freeway is something we are going to live with for a long time so let's do it right. There is no sense in putting in some changes that are inadequate, something we are going to have to suffer with for years, We have been lucky to have a chance to revise this. We won't get another chance, This D is what I would call the ultimate from what I can see as ideal, what we should strive for; what we should fight for, if necessary. I am in complete agreement with D right now. I think we should put all of our energies, all of our strength to the adoption of D. Councilman Jett: If this is what I think it is, this is what I have had in mind as being the ultimate result. Whether we would be able to achieve this or not could only be determined after we presented it to the State, I certainly go along with Councilman Heath, This is what we would like to have and I think this is what we should fight and go all out for, Mayor Pro Tem Krieger: Let me ask a question on that northwest quadrant, What does this do to the physical situation we have there now? That would be Akron, How does that northwest quadrant affect the operation of that facility? Public Services Director, Mr, Fast: Again, the purpose of the freeway agreement was generally in regard to the adoption of concept and not specific alignment. We did plot this over an aerial photograph in an attempt to see what would happen generally speaking. The frontage road still essentially clears Akron as it does today if this alignment were specific as opposed to general. In the northwest quadrant it is essentially all on vacant property.and speaking of vacant property, we ran a very rough calcu- lation of properties utilized in land in D over and above that recommended, and there would be about 28 acres, I don't believe it would interfere with Akron, -5- Co -Co 11/29/65 Page Six FREEWAY EAST STUDY —Continued • Councilman Heath: On the northeast corner and southeast corner of Citrus, those are both contained completely within State owned property at the present time so you would have some condemnation in the southwest and a slight amount of vacant land condemned in the northwest. I don't see how it can be any cheaper than that, Mayor Pro Tem Krieger:. Your comment on the observation in the northwest quadrant is basically there would be no major interference with the facility in existence,.that you are maintaining only a realignment of your frontage road apparently straightening it out a little bit with less -of a curve and in the.intervening space you are putting in an off ramp and changing the entrance of your on ramp? Public.Services Director, Mr, Fast: Correct, Planning Director, Mr, Joseph: You are talking about develop- ments. Akron is there now, but the Planning Department has been contacted by the owners of that property which the revised frontage road would go through and there is.proposed a.motion picture house and restaurant with a precise plan being filed before the City, • Councilman Jett: On the northeast quadrant there would be no problem in enlarging that because the State now owns all the property so there would be no acquisition of property there? Public Services Director, Mr, Fast: The problem would be the undesirable feature of the distance of the off ramp and the intersection, Councilman Jett: I think we would be eliminating a left -turn pocket there which could probably be utilized. I would think that could be utilized and perhaps blend that traffic a little closer to the intersection and enlarge that particular one. The other would only entail perhaps the acquisition of one more or possibly two residences. I think the southwest would not be too difficult or expensive to expand, Mayor Pro Tem Krieger: Unless there are some more questions or comments or observations by the Planning Commission or by the Council, we would invite people who are here with us tonight to speak on the northeast and northwest quadrant on Citrus and the freeway. Is there anyone here tonight who wanted to make any observation restricting their comments to that particular interchange? • Mr, Chuck Dowding: I don't understand the balance between economics and what we want, Mayor Pro Tem Krieger: We have had discussions in the past having to do with various subject matters. We are trying to get to the nuts and bolts of this thing now, C, Co 11/29/65 Page Seven FREEWAY EAST STUDY - Continued • Mr, Chuck Dowding: What is there to prevent us from going the ultimate? What are the restricting things? Is economics a factor?. I recommend the ultimate if we can pay for it, Mayor Pro Tem Krieger: It has been called to my attention that the hearing was closed by the Mayor on November 15, 1965, Unless the Council has any objections, I would still like to entertain any comments from people in the audience, because of this Plan D. We have never had this before us, Councilman Heath: I would have no objections, Councilman Jett: I have no objections, Mayor Pro Tem Krieger: We will move9 gentlemen, to the south interchange of Citrus, both in the east and west quadrant, Now, here we have a basic change between A and B. C is the same, and D. The real impact has to do with the accessibility to the freeway and from the freeway to Citrus or to a frontage road, Public Services Director, Mr, Fast: The Planning Commission felt that • it would be possible, based upon a qualified recommendation from the staff, that we could allow the frontage road to stay in the same location to serve existing, commercial. D. of course, is the full cloverleaf, Mr, Harold Marks: I don't want to comment on the individual details of each interchange in this manner. I would prefer to reserve my comment to discuss the entire philosophy with the approach used in D as compared with the approaches used in our recommendation, Chairman McCann: I have a question about the southeast quadrant of Citrus as shown under D. One of the reasons for the changes that we recommended was that it was taking quite a bit of commercial property there and distorting that whole corner. Does this accomplish about the same thing that B does as far as additional property in the southeast quadrant? Public Services Director, Mr, Fast: I believe the frontage road alignment, which is the boundary, is about the same under D or B. Commissioner Mottinger: With regard to this southeast quadrant, I believe that the latest proposal would answer the objections that most of the people • who had protested the other alignments and would overcome some of the difficulties that we had endeavored to correct. I think the whole problem is still a matter of engineering if it is a practical approach, Mayor Pro Tem Krieger: Mr, Fast, you indicated the radii was approximately the same in those quadrants, the 150 and 100. I gather your philosophy in D was to take the recommendations of the consultant and attempt to reconcile it with the modification of the Planning Commission to preserve the -7- Ce C, 11/29/65 Page Eight FREEWAY EAST STUDY - Continued • .frontage road and to further frost the cake b putting in ram in the southwest y p g another p quadrant and this in line with the comment of Councilman Heath last time, What you have is an amalgamation of three schools of thought, Public Services Director, Mr, Fast: There might be one other point that Mr. Larson pointed out to me, another reason for the tight and limited 100-foot radius on the on ramp was to bring it in as tight as possible so that the off ramp adjacent to it could be as high as possible so a person.would be able to make this off ramp and still make the left-hand movement on the frontage road property, which in this case, would be commercial, Mayor Pro Tem Krieger: That would be a problem in B. would it not? Public Services Director, Mr, Fast: No, The distance would be more, Mayor Pro Tem Krieger: What is the distance? Public Services Director, Mr, Fast: On D from the nose of the off ramp to the service road, probably somewhere between 150,200 feet, Mayor Pro Tem Krieger: As contrasted to B. what is it? Public Services Director, Mr, Fast: . It would be 50 feet more on B. Mr, Chuck Dowding: The beauty of this ultimate plan is we have a uniform on, off type of situation, The thing that concerns me about this whole freeway system is that every off ramp and on ramp around here is different and if you come to West Covina and get off one way, you don't have to turn around every time you go off a ramp and try to get back on. If you can't get off and on the freeway conveniently, the commercial property in the City isn't going to do you very much good. I am in favor of Plan D. Mayor Pro Tem Krieger: We will move to Barranca North, A and B and C would be the same so the difference is between A and D. Public Services Director, Mr, Fast: The big difference in the north side being the northwest quadrant and the relocation of the entryway into the Eastland area, Councilman Heath: In both cases, in the northeast quadrant we are still using State owned land and in the northwest quadrant we are utilizing some parking spaces and not interfering with any improvements at the present time, Public Services Director, Mr, Fast: There is a filling station and a restaurant, which is vacant now, Commissioner Gleckman: In adopting, if we should do so, this type of on and off ramp system as in D, doesn't the State have to share in the cost of re- placing the service road? ME Co Co 11/29/65 Page Nine 'FREEWAY EAST STUDY - Continued • Mr, Harold Marks: I don't think the re re is much chance of this happening so I think the question is academic. If you would like to go into this question at this point, I am prepared to do so as to whether the State can accept a proposal like,D Cr whether they would not be in a position to do so, Mayor Pro Tem. Krieger: In line with your previous comments, I understood you would prefer to get the general comments and observations on D before you got into any specific details, Mr, Harold Marks: I think I have gotten most of them by now, Mayor Pro Tem Krieger: Let's get into this subject matter because I keep getting the feeling there is something laying back that we don't know about that we should know about. Go ahead, Mr, Marks, Give us your observations on D, Mr, Harold Marks: Generally, the proposal that is suggested in D is to provide a four-leaf clover in every quadrant, This is one approach that is possible; it is not an approach that is feasible or likely for very simple reason that the State does not design four-leaf cloverleafs any longer, Only in very rare instances do they use the four quadrant cloverleaf in their new design or in any design. I have made a study of this recently because I knew this question was coming up and we have examined all the new freeway plans that the State has put out in District 7 over the past several years to find out what is their current practice and what is not their current practice and we have discovered that they almost never put in a four quadrant cloverleaf any longer and for very good reason, They have, however, used a design which they consider far superior and one which is much more modern and works much better, and that is the two quadrant cloverleaf design, This has numerous advantages that overcome the disadvantages of the four quadrant cloverleaf and I have here, just for purposes of illustration, the entire route of the Pomona Freeway, which I chose simply because it was the closest parallelling route to the San Bernardino Freeway and one that would represent one facility that you would be familiar with and one that has gone far enough so that a portion of it is constructed and is of their latest design and it shows almost invariably the two quadrant cloverleaf design, There is not a single interchange that has more than a two quadrant cloverleaf and the vast majority of this is so, They used at their principal intersections, the ones carrying the greatest loads now and in the • future, far more than anything travelling through the City of Lest Covina, the two quadrant cloverleaf, They feel the two quadrant cloverleaf handles this situation better, more efficiently, safer, with less expense, and less cost to the City in loss of land and in many other aspects so that in effect the entire discussion about asking for an ultimate design of this type to me is somewhat academic because it is not likely to occur, • Co Co 11/29/65 FREEWAY EAST STUDY - Continued Page Ten On the other hand, I think it would be very well to review the reasons why the State does not resort to the four quadrant cloverleaf because I think it would tend to amplify what this discussion tends to be about. First of all, the four quadrant clover leaf is the first type of interchange ever built, It was built 35 years ago in New Jersey, and since that time, hopefully, we have learned something and we have learned that it does not work. In fact, it has much poorer operating conditions than the two quadrant and I want to illustrate on the board because it would be difficult to write on these renderings. First, the four quadrant clover- leaf is not suitable for urban conditions. It is not used in urban areas. In most urban areas they are using a simple diamond interchange and, according to the State's Design Engineer, works well even under the worse urban conditions. (Drew sketch of diamond interchange on the board and explained same.) It is used almost exclusively in the City of Los Angeles and in many other areas throughout the State. Fortunately, in West Covina we have a Design Engineer who is willing to accept something higher than a diamond interchange and this is exhibited by the Pomona Freeway which shows the two quadrant • cloverleaf. (Drew sketch of two quadrant cloverleaf on the board and explained same.) The reasons that they discarded the four quadrant in favor of the two quadrant other than operational is that the four quadrant is very wasteful of land, takes land off the city tax rolls for no good purpose because they can do a better job with this design, the two.quadrant. This is one of the reasons they have adopted it. (Drew sketch of four quadrant cloverleaf on the board and explained same.) Once you have accepted the State's design standards, which means the proper design for cloverleaf, the proper radii for the entrance ramp and the collector road, now we have in true scale what a four quadrant cloverleaf really requires. You have to take them off the freeway at a decelleration lane, give them a minimum of 600 feet, and preferably greater, in order to give them directions of whether to turn right going southbound or continue around here going northbound. You have all these design criteria for that curve. You have to design criteria for this. You have to spread this out in order to get enough weaving distance from one point to another, and you have to go further this way (indicating) in order to get the proper radius. You join them together and you have to have a certain area from here to here (indicating) in order to permit weaving of the man coming on, the man coming off. You have to give at least a quarter of a mile for the two to be able to do this safely. By • the time you have finished with all of this, you find you cannot accomodate two four -quadrant cloverleafs in a half -mile area. Physically it could not be done. Besides that, there are a number of problems. The problem is does this do a better job and for that we have to examine for the motorist coming off the freeway whether it does. -10- C, C, 11/29/65 FREEWAY EAST STUDY - Continued Page Eleven • The best example of this is the San Diego Freeway., the Centinella off. ramp, They have no free flow, They have two signalized intersections because no one could make a turn off the freeway and get into the left lane within the short distance provided. It depends on the volumes on the cross street and the off ramp and this has been what they have to resort to in so- called free flow conditions, Another example is what has happened in the State of New York on the Long Island Expressway, and this I saw last summer. They signalized the entrance from the cloverleaf ramp into.the main expressway roadway simply because it wasn't safe for them to do anything about.that, This was an extreme condition, The other thing about a four quadrant cloverleaf, it doesn't give you the capacity that the two quadrant does, The free flow so-called is not free flow but must conflict with all the traffic on the cross street., This merging becomes very difficult and they have found by experience when they try to do this sometimes the traffic will back up right onto the freeway off ramp and it has been found not to work successfully so they have found that rather than do that, the two quadrant where they actually • widen the off ramp out to three lanes, if necessary, will handle far greater capacity than any other type of design, including the so-called free flow condition, This is something you don't have to take our opinion on. This is what I have been told time and time again by the Division of Highways people whenever this question has arisen. These problems with the four quadrant cloverleaf cannot be overcome and you will find that neither the State nor the Bureau of Public Roads nor any other agency would entertain the idea of considering a proposal of this type. They know better, They feel that is not subject to discussion, When you present them with a realistic suggestion they can listen to, I feel you will get them to cooperate, but when you present them with something that has been discarded years ago and will not work successfully, they. won't even talk with you about it, They will simply say this is where we were several years ago but we hope we have progressed beyond that today. When you talk about a realistic design, one that can be done, one that can be substantiated by traffic volumes, we get into the kind of design we have proposed at these various interchanges. We have a compromise between A and B, (Presented rendering and explained same,) On Citrus we have provided the two quadrant cloverleaf design, We don't use the typical two quadrant design which would have put the quadrant in this southwest corner, The reason we haven't done that is because we are faced with some very special conditions in the Eastland area, • and that is the preponderance movement is to and from the west, We don't have this equal distribution that occurs in some freeway areas. In order to accomodate this westerly predominance, we put the two quadrant cloverleafs into the quadrant that would help the westerly .movement, In other words, it serves the movement to the west and from the west, It also has the other movements to and from the west for -the opposing movements, On the other hand, we have provided service to and from the east but because of the movement in that direction being of a much lesser magnitude, we can easily suffice with the two ramps we have shown, -11- Co Co 11/29/65 'PREEWAY'EAST STUDY - Continued Page Twelve If you will recall Plan A shown at the bottom, this is what we originally recommended and it was done for a very specific reason, to try to get all service to and from Citrus Avenue, In other words, what this hook ramp does is it does require a left turn into the frontage road and another into.the freeway ramp, which isn't the most desirable situation. We would have much preferred having a direct turn into the ramp and divorcing the frontage road completely from that complex, Now, when it came down to designing physically how that could be done and we arrived at a solution and that is shown. The solution was that the frontage road be divorced by a new road to the relocated frontage road which would be the continuation of Holt Avenue, That would provide access from the freeway frontage road that exists today out into Citrus Avenue, We did provide a service road, discontinuous in nature, to serve the shopping area that lies in that quadrant. We feel that this is a feasible solution and one that would operate to the best.interests of perhaps the freeway oriented traffic, It would have some detrimental influence, perhaps, on the shopping facilities in that quadrant, Recognizing this particular specific problem, it had been suggested that perhaps we should retain the frontage road and put in a --hook ramp similar to what exists today and eliminate the circuitry that might otherwise affect this business area. We consider this to be a less desirable alternative but as a compromise we think it is • workable and feasible so we have accepted tentatively the idea that we would use a hook ramp at this location recognizing its limitations but knowing that it would, perhaps, be workable and yet not have a detrimental influence. That was the thinking that went into the Citrus Interchange, There are a number of other problems I might just cite, If this freeway off ramp was so designed to the proper standards, a larger radius, a proper radii for this road, you would find that the point at which the west bound off ramp reaches Citrus Avenue would be very close to that intersection and therefore it would make the left turn almost impossible. The typical situation where you try to put a frontage road in close proximity to a freeway and it interferes with the frontage road and off ramp and the service you have to provide to the area round it. Once.you have designed this to the proper standards, it would make a very unworkable situation. This is why we sought to retain the present off ramp as shown in the Eastland area because it does provide an opportunity to turn left safely and get wherever you want to go. Going to the Barranca Interchange, we had exactly the same objectives which was we had a very preponderant flow to the west so we provided the two cloverleaf quadrants in those areas where it would serve the westerly oriented traffic, In other words, we have twice as many ramps serving westerly oriented traffic as we have serving easterly oriented traffic. It avoids all the • conflicts that would otherwise occur if you had the four quadrant cloverleaf, We have here divorced the freeway on and off ramps going to Barranca directly from the frontage roads which have been proposed for relocation on the north side and proposed for relocation on the south side, There was this other plan B, I believe, that used a hook ramp at this location very similar to what was used in this quadrant at Citrus. In this particular instance, although the same reasoning could apply that if it could be used in the —12— C. C, .11/29/65 Page Thirteen 'FREEWAY EAST -STUDY - Continued one case it.might be used in the other case, we had a specific reason for using it in the first instance, which was at Citrus, and that was that there was an existing situation that was very difficult to resolve in any other fashion but to provide that hook ramp. This is an undersirable situation which we are sometimes forced to go into because we don't want to create a detrimental influence on that which. is in existance. This same situation does not exist, to my knowledge, at Barranca and here we would say because there is nothing that would be seriously effected we would still recommend the higher type of interchange and that is what.we would recommend as shown on Barranca and we feel this is obtainable and would be perfectly feasible. Going now to the third one, and this is pure philosophy as to how we did it and why we did it, here we have a situation that if the quadrant where the cloverleaf were put in were relocated to the southeast quadrant instead of the southwest quadrant, by the time you had gotten the proper cloverleaf the on ramp and the merging distance all taken care of, you would come fairly close to the point at the Holt Interchange where you would want the off ramp and the distance between the two might be so little.that you would have to abandon the Holt Interchange com- pletely, Rather than do that, we have recommended in this instance for a number of reasons that the quadrant cloverleafs be put into the northwest and southwest quadrants and there was one additional strong • reason for this recommendation. On the north side we wish to maintain the continuity of the frontage road and in order to do that, it would have been impossible if the cloverleaf ramp had been put in the northeast quadrant instead, The State originally proposed something of this order. We, upon studying it, revised it to improve upon it and we feel now -we have a very good design that would work very well and would permit the retention of the Holt Interchange and the rentention of the northerly frontage road, two major objectives, The Holt Interchange is the classic interchange. This is an exact design that the State prefers to use for the two quadrant cloverleafs. They are in exactly the location where the State normally puts them, In the case of the Holt Avenue Interchange, the volumes are not very high, that is the anticipated traffic volumes are far below the ranges anticipated for the others for the foreseeable future, and as such we would have difficulty justifying the full interchange as shown in this diagram, meaning that the traffic volumes would not justify it within the next ten years, However, the feeling generally is that when they widen the freeway and when they reconstruct the ramps, it would be folly to simply replace substandard ramps as they • exist today. Rather than do that we feel it would be appropriate for the State to put in a high type of design, one that would serve for many years into the future and would be the one they would finally wish to build anyway but perhaps not immediately. They might choose to do this ten years from now but we say rather than rebuild that which exists, upgrade it today. This is a general feeling about the Holt Avenue Interchange, -13- C, Co 11/29/65 FREEWAY EAST STUDY - Continued Page Fourteen • I think this explains the philosophy of the approach, I could go into. some details but I suppose now would be well to ask for further comments, Mayor Pro Tem Krieger: opportunity to pose some questions to point before we do so we don't end up C,.and D. The only modification that you have been referring to is a hook Mr, Harold Marks: Mayor Pro Tem Krieger: Planning Commission recommended to us I would like to give the Council and the Planning Commission the you, I want to clarify one with an E.as well as an A, B, I have seen on the board that ramp at Citrus, That is correct, It is the same as we showed it to you gentlemen a few months agog That would be the same type of design, in effect, that the in B? Mr, Harold Marks: This is right, Mayor Pro Tem Krieger: We still basically have A, B, C and D. Councilman Heath: First I would like to start with Grand because this is the most prominent question, At Grand Avenue you have an off ramp and an on ramp immediately adjacent to each other. It seems to me that the State is in quite a quandry at the present time trying to derive methods of keeping on -running traffic out of off -coming lanes. They have tried to put up red signs, wrong -way signs, everything they possibly can because there have been so many head-on collisions and I can't help but think that left turns in a condition like that can do nothing more than confuse the people, I am against left turns. I think that is one place where there should be no left turns, Secondly, I would like to go to the Holt ramps, We must keep in mind that the Holt ramp is the last ramp until you get to San Dimas Avenue, It is going to have to take practically all of the load of the Phillips Ranch, the Covina Ranch, the Highlands, and the Mesa, I don't see how 4,500 units per day could possibly be a true count for that ramp. It has a good area to serve, Over on the left-hand side at Citrus and Barranca we do not have a continuity of the frontage road, We have a road that sets back quite a way from the freeway but I don't think you can call it a frontage road or let it serve as a frontage road, On Plan D there is a continuity of the frontage road, . This is on the south side. On the eastbound traffic coming off of the freeway and travelling a short distance and turning left, in this plan we have created that problem which was the main objection to the plans shown on D, If it is wrong on D, it is wrong on this. I don't think a difference of 50 feet in location is going to help that much, In other words, if an off ramp near an intersection is 150 feet instead of 200 feet, I don't see where it will make that much difference, -14- Co Co 11/29/65 FREEWAY EAST STUDY - Continued Page Fifteen • Therefore, with everything considered, I think with that D plan you get the continuity of traffic, you get the best handling of traffic, which is satisfying the State, you serve our businesses better by better access, i U On Barranca, how would anybody coming off the freeway, why would anyone coming off of the freeway go all the way down to the so-called frontage road and then back to patronize the businesses on the south side of the freeway and east of Barranca? I don't think they would go in there. We would have another West Covina Center, dead as can be, My comments would be summed up to this extent; That Plan D as I started to say before handles the traffic fluidly as the State wants it, It also patronizes or makes an easy access to our business, which we want. It gives a continuity of frontage road and, I dare say, if you put the cost of the Plan D against this plan on the board presented tonight by Mr, Marks figuring in condemnation, et cetera, that there would be very little difference and yet would give us an ultimate in a good design, Mayor Pro Tem Krieger: Mr,, Marks, could we have your comments on four basic questions that Councilman Heath has raised -- the left turns, the frontage road continuity, the off ramps near intersections and the Holt Avenue traffic? Mr. Harold Marks: On Grand, it so happens this is the safest possible design for the simple reason it is a divided highway where anybody turning left knows he is supposed to be to the right of the divider because you have two way traffic. It makes the safest possible kind of design because a person knows what to expect there, where he might have some difficulty here you don't have them side by side and where you have only one, Secondly, no left turns, We are all in favor of no left turns, I wish it were possible to eliminate all of them everywhere. However, it is always a question of. waiting. What have you done to effect the plan when you try to do a no left turn design and it turns out that the problems you have created far outweigh the disadvantage of the left turn. A left turn out is a very simple maneuver. A single lane can be widened out to three lanes where the volume requires, The signal changes and people go in whatever direction they desire with no problem, They are on a city street where they expect to have traffic controls and you have to give them a situation where they can recognize there is a transition from being on the freeway to being on a surface street, This does it quite well, There is'no better design than that type of left turn, Regarding the volumes on Holt, we have difficulty at this time even justifying the design we are proposing based upon the projected volumes on Holt in the next ten years. We feel perhaps in the next twenty or thirty years this interchange will be used close to capacity, In other words, what I am saying is you can handle three times the volume of traffic at the Holt Interchange than we expect it to have in ten years. Obviously, we have not underdesigned the Holt Interchange, -15- C. C, 11/29/65 'FREEWAY EAST STUDY — Continued Page Sixteen • Frontage Road Continuity, We are.all in favor of continuity of the south frontage road. We would very much have liked to have taken that road and straightened it into Walnut Creek Parkway and have a straight shot all the way, If the City so desires to flow through that shopping center and maintain that frontage road continuity, that could be done but it would be expensive. The decision is up to you, The Citrus off ramp. I believe what is referred to is that in this instance we have a right turn lane and then you have a little more distance between the right turn exit and the left turn into the frontage road, That is about twice as much as the other and makes the difference between it being workable and being unworkable, Councilman Heath: I have one more. You have looked into this quite a bit, What is the definition or purpose of a frontage road and is it the same as a service road? Maybe I am going under the wrong impression here. I would.like a definition of a frontage road and a service road and use, Mr, Harold Marks: A frontage road in the normal sense is a road that fronts the freeway and we must agree on the terminology that that is in effect a frontage road, A service road is very similar to a frontage road except it is used generally in conjunction with residential streets or arterials where it sides an arterial highway, The road that we are talking about that would be the extension of Walnut Creek Parkway, Holt, is not either one of these, It is an arterial highway, Commissioner Gleckman: Mr, Marks, I would like to know along with what Mr, Dowding's question was originally, was your plan designed based on economics or based on the best traffic flow the City of West Covina could get regardless of what presently exists? Mr, Harold Marks: We gave very little consideration to economics insofar as attempting to deterime what the cost of these facilities would be. We consider that the State is interested as we are, as the City is in providing the best solution for the freeway through traffic, for the external traffic coming off of these interchanges, and also for City traffic, that is coming from the freeway to the City, and to the central busi- ness area, to the Eastland area, et cetera. We have provided what we consider to be the most realistic and the best design solution that we know how to provide recognizing that we must at the same time meet the criteria that the State has established as far as what is acceptable and what is not acceptable. To simply say that we are going to bridge everything, we are going to provide four quadrant cloverleafs everywhere and get a gold-plated solution, in my opinion, is completely unrealistic, It will be simply bounced back when it reaches the State. It will serve no useful purpose. It will create an atmosphere, an animosity rather than good will, My feeling about this whole matter is you must approach it from the point of view that the State is willing to cooperate, is anxious to cooperate, and that if you give them a reasonable and workable solution that they can accept according to their criteria that you have justified from the point of view of traffic carrying capacity, that you have justified each ramp that you have proposed that it will carry a substantial volume of traffic, and -16- C. C, 11/29/65 FREEWAY EAST STUDY - Continued Page Seventeen iif you work with them on that basis you will get the greatest cooperation from the State, If you take the other point of view, I believe that nothing is to be gained and you will have set back the City's entire program for years to come. Councilman Heath: I think we heard before that a two quadrant cloverleaf is the most workable of any. If we are not concerned with cost, why don't we just install that at each one of these intersections and have no left turns, no problems, and all interchanges the ideal if we are not considering the Mr, Harold Mark-:: I'lie two quadrant cloverleaf, the typical diagram is the one that puts it into the northeast quadrant and the southwest quadrant similar to what is shown at Holt Avenue, Variations are made on that design based on actual origins and destinations of traffic, If you have a free distribution both east and west, then you propose the kind we proposed at Holt as being the typical design, On the other hand, here we have a rather special situation where you don't have equal distribution east and west; you havea predominantly westerly orientation so you don't try to follow a formula but try to design your interchanges to take care of those volumes that you know you have and the orientation that you know you have, Therefore, these designs where the cloverleaf serve the westerly traffic happen to be the most effective and the ones that will do the greatest service for the City of West Covina, Councilman Jett: You referred several times to the new Pomona Freeway and you have remarked that the interchanges that are proposed on that are the two quadrant as proposed here, I would like to ask this question: At the intersections on the Pomona Freeway are any of those in relation to major shopping areas similar to the Plaza Center area and Eastland, or is it just interchanges into streets? Mr, Harold Marks: I'm not familiar with all the interchanges on the Pomona Freeway, I haven't been down there in many years and I don't know what major shopping centers there are along the Pomona Freewav, I can only assume that the proximity of the freeway has introduced shopping areas in the various locations along it and that the conditions although perhaps not exactly comparable to West Covina are at least similar. On the other hand, what you design the interchange for is basically the volume of traffic you anticipate and when you come across an intersection like Rosemead Boulevard, which we recognize as being he heaviest traffic carrier in the San Gabriel Valley, and when they come up with a two quadrant cloverleaf on a highway of that magnitude, I would say it would serve almost any volume of traffic that would ever happen in the City of West Covina, • Councilman Jett: I think you have two different situations, What we are attempting to accomplish here is an interchange that would not only service the people getting on and off, but we are also attempting to bring into our area those shoppers that we can get into the business centers conveniently, rapidly, and back on their way home again, keeping in mind what you have always expressed to us as being the ultimate, swm C, Co 11/29/65 FREEWAY EAST STUDY - Continued Page Eighteen • and that is to be able to get back on at the sameplace where you get off. With this in mind, this I think is where we came up with the idea that by handling these two different types of traffic, the shoppers coming in and the traffic commuting, would this two quadrant interchange here accomplish what the four quardrant interchange would, keeping in mind these two different types of traffic? Mr, Harold Marks: This interchange will handle any anticipated traffic loads that we have been able to find that will take place around Citrus, If you have been able to accomodate the ultimate traffic loads that you can anticipate, you have resolved your problem; that to add more and more that can not be justified doesn't necessarily improve your situation, If I thought that continuing to add more cloverleafs would improve the situation and could be sale.ble, could be obtained, we would entertain that idea, On the other hand, we feel that by doing some of these things, by continuing to add more cloverleaf ramps, we have compounded some of the other problems I have tried to show earlier.; that perhaps you think you are helping yourselves in one way and hurting yourselves in three other ways. As far as I can see this provided excellent access to the business area as well as to the through traffic and would be a solution that would serve everybody most expeditiously, Is Mayor Pro Tem Krieger: of the sale.bility of the product is being created partially by the Mr. Marks, is this, in your opinion, a maximum exploitation that we have in this community that freeway situation? Mr, Harold Marks: In my opinion it is, We are faced with a situation that we cannot set aside, we have existing facilities, We have to serve them to the best of our ability without wiping them out, You have a great deal of potential development that hasn't even come in yet. By trying to force a rather complex solution on a problem that can be resolved with a simpler solution and resolved very adequately and perhaps even in a superior fashion, what you have done is removed all of those potential developments from the City and caused them to locate elsewhere. You have a great potential for future growth there and I don't think a city would want to stifle it by using up all the available land around interchanges for cloverleafs which are not necessary. We are providing the best solution we know how and taking care of all our traffic needs and doing it in a fashion that we feel can be accepted by the people who have to ultimately pass on this, and that is the State Highway Department and the Federal Bureau of Public Roads, Public Roads puts up 900 of the money and any type of solution like proposal D would be laughed at, I can assure you, Commissioner Travis: I have a general comment, It has been said here many times this evening that D is the ultimate planning and Mr. Marks has plainly stated that the State would consider it quite ridiculous, As you know, the Planning Commission studied very carefully Plan A when introduced and by virtue of the study as indicated on Plan A we came up with Plan B. From Plan B certain adjustments were made, one in particular at Citrus south of.the San Bernardino Freeway, which Mr. Marks has agreed can be done and that particular adjustment, I believe, has saved the City some money and let's face facts, this is one of our jobs in spite of what some may say, to save the taxpayers as much money as we C,, Co 1.1/29/65 Page Nineteen FREEWAY EAST STUDY —Continued • possibly can if we can gain the ultimate end,, I think we have in this particular instance. As far as commenting on B, it is my opinion inasmuch as D is quite impossible, at the present time it seems that B is probably the most feasible, Mayor Pro Tem Krieger: It would be the Chair's intention to declare a recess at this time,, (Short Recess) Mayor Pro Tem Krieger: Are there any further comments at this time? Commissioner Travis: Could you tell us will there be any other plans submitted to the Planning Commission, We have studied A and B. Mayor Pro Tem Krieger: You have as much information before you as we have before us,, If there is any further generation of plans, it is unknown to me at the present time, Mr,, Chuck Dowding: Is there any further opportunity for comment? Mayor Pro Tem Krieger: Not at this time,, It was at the pleasure of the Council that any comment from the floor was entertained during a study session,, Hearing no further comments or observations on Freeway East Study, we will go on to the next items,, We have three other items on our study session agenda -- The Municipal Water Purchase, the Water Well Purchase At Cortez, and Set Study Session Date,, On my own initiative and in the absence of the Mayor, I indicated to the City Manager that in all probability we would not be in a position to review that water matter with diligence this evening. With the concurrence of the Council, informally during the recess I have asked him to reschedule that to another date, That date would be the 20th of December. That is not a regular meeting date. We can entertain some formal action on that when we reconvene. Are there any comments on that? City Manager, Mr,, Aiassa: I would like to remind the Planning Commissioners that you have a joint meeting with the Council on December 6th9 7:30 P,,M,, to discuss Center Street,, Mayor Pro Tem Krieger: We will reconvene the adjourned meeting of the Council at 9:55 P.M,, • Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried, that the study on Freeway East be referred back to the Planning Commission for further study and report, such report being returned to the Council prior to our meeting of December 27, 1965. -19- • 17� C. Co 11/29/65 'CITY 'CLERK - Continued RESOLUTION RE SAVE -CO Page Twenty Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried, that the resolution concerning the approval of Precise Plan of Design No,, 263, Revision 5, Save -Co be held over to our next regular meeting. SCAG COMMUNICATION Councilman Jett: I received a letter from the Southern California Association of Governments now known as SCAG. (Read portion of said letter.) They have asked you send in advance payment dues of $100. Apparently they have addressed this to me as the delegate. I don't recall voting to join this. City Manager, Mr. Aiassa; Mayor Pro Tem Krieger: INDEPENDENT CITIES I would suggest you refer that back to me and I will follow through on that. I will just hand the City Manager report. that letter to for further Councilman Jett: I received a letter that was addressed to Mr. Albert Isen, Mayor of the City of Torrance, and I received a copy. (Read said letter re Independent Cities membership.) I will see each of you receive a copy of this letter. I have accepted the appointment and I am calling it to your attention. STUDY SESSION MATTERS Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried, that (1) Municipal Water Purchase and (2) Water Well Purchase At Cortez be held over to the study session for January 3, 1966. There being no further business, Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried, to adjourn at 10:00 P.M. ATTEST: CITY CLERK APPROVED MAYOR -20-