SR-032470-8AFROM: Bartlett L. Kennedy, City Engineer
~-
~ i
+'f~~1,R 2 ~ l~~o
TRIG iVIUST
RETURr,;rO Z, BE
CITY CLERITag O F CE
fir.n
IPdG.
SUBJECT: Report and Recommendation on Signalization of
Hazardous Intersections.
The City Council, at its meeting of February 24, 1970, instructed
this office to study and report on the following at the March 10 Council
meeting:
(1) The need for a traffic signal at 6th Street and Broadway.
(2) Signals included in current budgets.
(3) Hazardous intersections throughout the Gity in need of
signalization.
The three items will be reported on separately, but first, some
general information.
We currently have 125 signalized intersections, and are at
present advertising for bids on the installation of another signal
20th and Montana) and the modernization of three existing signals
Olympic at 11th, 17th,and 20th), with the contract to be awarded at
the March 24, 1970 Council meeting. (These are shown as existing on the
attached Signal Location Map).
Of the above intersections, 72 are out-dated installations in
need of modernization. This modernization, depending on circumstances,
will vary from complete reconstruction to minor changes such as the
installation of mast arms and larger or more directional signal faces.
The cost of signal installation varies greatly, ranging from
abouty8,000 for the modernization of a simple two-phase signal
installation to upwards of y~20,000 for a multi-phase signal, computer-
controlled to vary the signal timing in proportion to the variation in
traffic volumes on the intersecting streets.
Attached hereto
Planning Manual listing
signals and emphasizing
a signal location by th
Prior to the passage of
funds could not be used
is an excerpt from the Division of Highways
the Warrants for the installation of traffic
the importance of preceding the consideration of
Trough study of traffic and roadway conditions,
the Collier-Unruh Act in 1967, Gasoline Tax
for traffic signals unless these warrants were met.
March 3, 1870 Page 2
Subject; Report and Recommendation on Signalization
of Hazardous Intersections.
This requirement no longer is in effect (authority - NIr. Birnie, Deputy
District Engineer, District VII); but the State continues to require
compliance on State highways and urges, but cannot require, cities to
do the same.
In spite of the fact that the use of State Warrants no longer
is mandatory, this office proposes to continue to use them in its
future recommendations re traffic signal installations,
In the past several years we have spent approximately 50,000
per year on installation of new signals and modernization of existing
signals, approximately half of this amount coming from the County's
allocation of "Aid To Cities" Gas Tax and half from City funds.
It seems to me appropriate to comment at this point that traffic
signals are not a panacea for intersectional traffic problems, but are
merely another means of assigning alternate right of way. An over-
abundance of signals on a street system can react to the disadvantage
of a community by causing undue delays and congestion, with resultant
accidents, due to the inability to provide -reasonable traffic flow
progression.
Following are the reports requested by the Council:
(1) Sixth Street at Broadway.
Eight hour manual traffic counts to determine directional
vehicle and pedestrian traffic volumes were conducted on February 26,
1870 to ascertain if this intersection satisfied traffic signal warrants.
This data showed that three of the five basic warrants, as well
as the combination warrant, have been met. (~~larrant tabulation is
attached hereto).
tde therefore recommend that traffic signals be installed at this
intersection. Present budgetary considerations and previously scheduled
priority projects would normally schedule this signal for construction
in 1871-72: if the Council wishes to expedite this installation it is
recommended that additional funds be made available for the lgo'g-70
signal budget so that our presently proposed projects are not affected.
March 3, 1970 Page 3
Subject: Report and Recommendation on Signalization
of Hazardous intersections.
(~} Signals Included in Current Budgets.
Included in the 1869-70 budget are the following traffic signal
installations:
Estimated
Location Type Cost
(a) 2nd and Arizona New $ 14,000
(b) 5th and Arizona. NSodernization 10,500
(c} 7th and Arizona New 14,000
(d} 7th and Broadway New 14,000
Total Estimated Cost ~ 52,500
In addition, a new signal installation at 17th and Pico, included
in the 1968-69 budget but deferred pending reconstruction of the south-
east leg of the intersection by the School District, is scheduled for
inclusion in this contract.
Items (a) and (b) above were originally requested b~> the Chamber
of Commerce. Investigation by this office indicated that the work,
though desirable, rrras not urgently needed, and the City Council, at its
meeting of July 23, 1968, authorized their inclusion in the 1969-70
budget. (See attached memo dated July 17, 1908}. Increased volumes on
Arizona, the impending completion of Parking Structure No. o' and the
Laurence ti~Telk Plaza, and the recent Signalization of Lincoln at Arizona,
have increased the importance of Arizona Avenue as an arterial and have
made these signals much more urgently needed.
Items (c) and
frequency (7th and Br
north-south arterial.
at the 1969-70 budget
Design of the
"Aid to Cities" funds
amount of 22,500 are
(d) were proposed by thi
~adway} and the increased
T_nis recommendation was
hearings.
above projects currently
in the amount of 30,000
available to finance the
s office, based on accident
use of 7th Street as a
approved by the Council
is ir. p-rogress. County
and City funds in the
taork.
These projects are included in the resolution requesting the
allocation by the County of 199-70 "_Aid to Cities" (Gasoline Tax) funds
for certain street improvements. This resolution twill be presented to
the Council at the March Ib, 1970 meeting.
March 3, 1970 Page 4
Subject: Report and Recommendation on signalization
of Hazardous Intersections.
(3) Traffic Signal Priority List.
In the short tune available for this report, it has not been
possible to obtain all of the data required to thoroughly evaluate
every intersection ;n need of signalization.
Therefore, the following projections are based on our experience
and knowledge of the City together with a necessarily cursory study of
available accident and traffic volume records.
If intersection signalization were based solely on the accident
warrants, a x"ar greater number than we have projected would be required
due to the ever-increasing volumes of traffic and the corresponding
increase in accident motential.
Our projections reflect only those locations which we believe
are either presently hazardous enough to warrant signalization or will
be required to be signalized in order to assure proper right-of-way
assignment now and as traffic volumes increase. Our recommendations
include both new signal installations and modernization of existing
installations,
A complete "package" incorporating our recommendations could be
summarized as follows (the cost estimates are very approximate):
(a} Modernization of all out-dated signal installations -
minimum estimated cost 500,000,
(b} Interconnection of signals on major arterials to provide
for better traffic flow progression - minimum estimated
cost $250,000.
(c) Installation of "Opticon" emergency vehicle signal
preemption system - estimated cost 150,000.
(d) Installation of nevr signals - estimated cost X675,000.
Tde have projected the above caork to be done in the follo*rring
stages: funds available are assumed to remain as presently budgeted.
vo priority within stages has been assigned.
(1} 6Tork (either new signals or modernization} needed now.
(2) Work needed within five years.
(3) Work needed after 1975.
(4) Pedestrian overcrossings in lieu of signals.
March 3, 1970 Page 5
Subject: Report and Recommendation on Signalization
of Hazardous Intersections.
Stage 1
For 1970-71 budget.
(a} Modernization of signals on Lincoln Boulevard, Pico Boule-
vard to Southeast City Limits. The State has programmed this work for
1970-71, and. is paying for the signals ax'fecting Lincoln Boulevard.
The City must pay for the signal work on the intersecting streets.
Lncluded in this project will be the installation of left turn pockets
on Pico Boulevard, east and west of Lincoln Boulevard.
(b) New signal at Broadtivay and Centinela, planned by Los Angeles
for 1970-71. Our share of the cost will be 25/.
(c) New signal at 5th. and Colorado.
of Commerce and concurred in by this office.
Council December q, 1969.
(d} New signal at Arizona Avenue and
on accident record and high traffic volumes.
neti^r Fire Station at lgth and Arizona is const
Stage 2
For programming 1971-1975.
Proposed by the Chamber
Approved informally by
20th Street. Need based
Will be essential when
rutted.
(a) New signals on Colorado Avenue at 6th Street and 7th Street.
Needed to complete the signalization of Colorado Avenue between Ocean
Avenue and Lincoln Boulevard. Will reduce the hazard at the Transporta-
tion Department entrance {oth Street) and at the heavily-traveled 7th
Street intersection.
{b) New signals on Arizona Avenue at o'th, 11th, 14th, and 17th
Streets. Needed to allow the development of Arizona Avenue as a rel3e f
arterial to Wilshire and Santa Monica Boulevards and to reduce the
hazard at the intersections with the above listed north-south arterials.
(c} Pdew signal at Broadway and Yale Street. Truth the extension
of Stewart Street to a signalized connection with Colorado Avenue near
Yale, this street will become another north.-south secondary street, It
is already signalized at Wilshire Boulevard and at Santa Monica Boule-
vard: signalization at Broadway trill be essential.
(d} New signal at 14th Street at proposed future Freeway off-
ramp. Would be required concurrently with State's construction of off-
ramp,
March 3, 1870 Page 6
Subject: Report and Recommendation on Signalization
of Hazardous Intersections.
{e) New signal at Broadway and Ocean Avenue. Has been -re-
quested by senior citizens groups for many years. We would propose a
pedestrian push-button actuated signal at this location.
(f) New signal at Ocean Park Boulevard at oth Street, Need
based on high accident frequency since the completion of the Ocean Park
Boulevard widening.
{g) Modernization of existing signals at locations to be
selected and to the extent of available funds. Examples would be Ocean
Park Boulevard at 11th, 14th, and 17th Streets, concurrently with the
scheduled widening of the boulevard to 16th Street.
Stage 3
For programming after 1875. Based either on anticipated condi-
tions, as traffic volumes increase, or on need to encourage use of
alternate routes.
(a) Ocean Park Boulevard at 25th, 28th and 32nd Streets.
Requested by Douglas Company for many years to replace present portable
signals.
(b) Airport Avenue at Walgrove - Dewey.
{c) Marine Street at 16th. Together with (b) above, and con-
currently with proposed widening of Dewey Street in cooperation with
Los Angeles, to encourage use of Derrrey-Marine as an east-west secondary,
(d) Centinela Avenue at Pearl Street.
{e) Ocean Park Boulevard at 20th Street.
(f) 16th. Street at Pico Boulevard, and at Ocean Park Boulevard.
(g) 14th Street at Pearl Street.
(h} Bicknell Avenue at Barnard Z9ay and at Neilson Way.
(i} 4th Street at entrance to Civic Center.
(j) Ocean Avenue at State Highvray 163 southeast of Colorado
Avenue.
{k) Nebraska Avenue at Centinela.
(1) Santa Monica Boulevard at 23rd Street,
March 3, 1970
Subject: Report and Recommendation on Signalization
of Hazardous Intersections.
Page 7
(m) Giilshire Boulevard at 15th Street.
(n) ~~iashington Avenue at Ocean, nth, 7th, Lincoln, 11th, lath,
17th, 20th, 26th, and Yale Streets.
(o) Montana Avenue at Ocean Avenue and at Yale Street.
(p) Carlyle Avenue at 14th Street.
(q) San Vicente Boulevard at Ocean Avenue, Lincoln Boulevard,
and l~Fth Street.
(r) Modernization of existing out-dated signals,
(s) Interconnection of signals on major arterials.
(t) Installation of "Opticon" system.
Stage ~
Pedestrian overcrossings in lieu of signals. Pedestrian over-
crossings are proposed in five locations, as follows:
(a) Isz lieu of a signal at Pico Boulevard and 6th Street.
Pedestrian (student) traffic at this location both causes a potential
accident hazard and is a constant source of vehicular traffic delay.
A signal, unless aceornpanied by a fence along Pico from ~~rest of 6th
Street to 7th Street, would in all likelihood not be observed and would
only add to the present problem. On the other hand, a pedestrian over-
crossing, together with the above mentioned fence, would completely
eliminate interference with vehicular traffic.
(b) In lieu of a signal at Santa Rionica Boulevard and 22nd
Street, to carry the pedestrian traffic between St. John's Hospital
and the Medical Building on the south side of Santa Monica Boulevard.
The State would prefer this to a signal, to avoid further interruption
of traffic on the State Hightaay, and St. John's administration has also
indicated their approval of this proposal.
{c) At three locations over the Coast Highway - at Montana
Avenue, at tdashington Avenue, and betvreen Santa Monica Boulevard and
Broadway. These pedestrian overcrossings t~rould eliminate the present
accident hazard at these locations and would permit the removal of all
pedestrian crosswalks. This is particularly critical because of the
high speed at which traffic emerges from the Freeway tunnel and continues
up the highway. The City previously has recommended the construction of
March 3, 1970
Su:oject: Report and Recommendation on Signalization
of Hazardous Intersections,
Page 8
such an overcrossing at Montana Avenue, but negotiations rrrith the State
Division of Beaches and Parks have not yet been consu_mznated, The
State Division of Hight~rays suggested a similar crossing between Santa
Monica Boulevard and Broadway, in 1867, but the City Council disappproved
of it at that time, (See minutes of Council, July 11, 1867, Item ~3B,
and attached memo dated June 30, 1967). The State is again recommending
pedestrian overc-rossings, this time at all three of the above locations,
as indicated by the attached letter dated March 2, 1970.
~c°~~'+~
J , REN-
P r ~'_ g and Traffic Engineer
BARTLETl^ DiNEDY
City Engineer
Attachments:
Signal Location P~1ap
Excerpt from Planning Manual
;warrants for Traffic Signals
o'th and Broadway - Signal tiwarrants
July 17, 1968 memo re Arizona signals
June 30, 1967 memo re Pedestrian Overcrossing
Letter from State dated March 2, 1970.
Part 8-Traffic PLANNING A1ANl1AL 8-811.1
-- Ja ovary 1, 1965
SIGNALS Ar9D ILLLlIv11PdAT1CJfV (~-~o®~
TRAffiC .CONTROL SIGNALS (8-810}
Basic Information and VYarrants (8-8T I)
8-8 T 1.1 Introduction
Traffic control signals am power-operated traffic
control devices which alternately direct traffic to stop
and proceed at lti~hway and streef- intersections.
Their purpose is the orderlc assiguwent of right of
way to the various traffic movements.
When justified and properly. desi~ued, a traffic
signal ntstallatiou may achieve these results:
(a) Reduce the frequency of certain types of acci-
dents;
(b) Effect orderly traffic movement;
(c) By proper eoordinatiou- ensure the continuous
or nearly continuous Sow of traffic at a definite
speed alone a given route;
(d) Allow other vehicles and pedestrians to cross
a eontinnons traffic stream ;and
(e) Control traffic mare economically than by man-
- ual methods.
Unjustified, ill-designed, improperly-operated; or
poorly maiutaiued traffic cmttrol signals may cause:
(a) Increased accident frequency,
(b} Excessive delav,
(c) Disregard of signal indications, and
(d) Circuitous travel by alternate routes.
Contrary to common belief, traffic control signals
do not alvays increase safety and reduce delay. Ex-
perienee shows that the number of right-angle cotli-
sious may decrease after the installation of signals,
but the number of rear-end collisions will increase in
many instances. The installation of signals may also
increase over-all delay and reduce intersectimt capa~-
ity. Consequently, it is of the utmost importance that
the eonsideratiou of °ignal installation and the
selection of equipment be preceded by thorough study
of traffic and roadway conditions made by an engineer
experienced and trained iu this field. Equally impor-
taut is the need for checkiJig the etficienep of tt traffir_
cmttrol si+gnal iu operation. This determines the de-
gree to which the type ofinstallatimt and the fluting
program meets the requirements of traffic ~md penults
_ intelligeutoperating adJUStmeuts iu the coot role.
Careful plauuing in the locatimt of traffic signals
is of utrnostimportauce. This is especially tree ht the
location of the first signal to be iustaRcd iu a eotn-
mwtity where it may be expected that in the future
a series of signals to form a nro,ressive ~ystent may
be required. The location of the first sigtiaL should
be so planned that it will fit the future over-all pro-
-gr•essive scstetri..aJ}~rl,prgvide a reasmtable speed for
through ~ehioles,
8-811.2 Warrants
The minimum warrants Tor traffic control signals
are based ou the analysis of data from a large number
of simtal installations coupled with the judgment of
engineers with long experience in this field. These
warrants are given lu Table 8-811.'3. These warrants
apply qtly to semi or full traffic actuated signal sys-
tems and to pretimed s=isal installations which are
part of a progmssive system: Warrants for isolated
Sled time signals are givetti in tits ~CaimxL ou Intiferm
Traffic Cou±rol Devices `roc Streets auci ilirh•,vays pub-
lished by the Bureau of Public Roads.
The satisfaction of a warrant is not necessarily
justification for signals. Delay, ctinr*estion, confnsicu,
or other evidence of the need for right of way assign-
ment must be shown.
Far purposes of this manual, the term xrban aon-
.ditions shall appl}• to maces that are ut~oau in nat,Jrc
due to buildings, tuu•ro^; lanes, frequency of inter-
sectious, parking, and ather conditions that reduce
operating speeds. :111 other places are regarded as
rnralin character. -
Part 8-Traffic PLANNING MANUAL Table 8-811.2
_-- Ianeary 1, 1965
TABErB s-s>i >I.a
Warrants for Traffic Coniro! Signals
WARRANTS TJrban Rural
Conditions Conditions
(1} Minimtem Vehicular Vohanae
(a) The total vehicular volume per hour entering the intersection from
all approaches for any 8 hours of an average day must average______ 750 veh. 500 veh.
(b) In addition, the total vehicular volume per hour entering the inter-
section from the minor street or streets for the same 8 hours must
average ____________________ ____________ 175 veh. 125 veh.
(2) Internaptiora of CantinaaotasTr¢ffac ,
(a) The vehicular volume per hour entering the intersection. on the major
street for any 8 hours of an average day must avei•age_____________ 750 veh. S00 veh.
(b) In addition; the combined vehicular and pedestrian volume .per hour
entering the intersection from the minor street or streets for the
same 8 hours must average_________________________ ____ 75 50
(e) And, the average vehicular speed on the major street must exceed___ 20 mph. 35 mph.
(3) Minimum Pedestrian Votunae
(a) The pedestrian volume per hour crossing the major street for any 8
hours of an average day must average ____________________ 250 peds. .125 peds.
(b) In addition, the vehicular trait'ic per hour entering the intersection
from the major street for the same 8 hours must average__________ 600 veh. 300 veh.
(e) And the average vehicular speed on the major street must exceed____ 15 mph. 30 mph.
(4) Caordin¢ted ~llovement
A coordinated signal system may be warranted if a majority of the signalized intersections composing
the system comply with one or more of the established warrants, and if the system fits an over-all time-
sgace diagram. Signals at an intersection may be warranted as part of a coordinated svstem if they fit
into an existing time-space diagram. -
(5) Accident H¢zard
Five or more roported accidents of types susceptible of correction.by a traffic control signal have
occurred within a recent 12-month period.
(6) Cambin¢tion
_Where no one warrant is satisfied but two or more are satisfied to the extent of 80 percent or more of
each of the stated values.
Nares
1. Left turn movements from the major street may be included with minor street volumes
if a separate signal phase is to he provided for the left-turn movement.
2. Accidents susceptible of correction by a separate left-turn signal phase may 6e inc]uded
in the Accident Hazard R'arrant:
l
`~
i
~,
^t
~/
TRAFFIC ENGINEERING FORM 102
TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS Date ,_.' r~ ?~~
Intersection 6 th ST. ~ ~.7 t'c'AL~Y/A
A. N`IiII;iUi~I VEHICULE.ft SATISFIED NCT SATISFIED
1. Vehicle volume. entering inter-
section, average per hear any p~n
eight hours, average day ~ (750}
2. Vehicle volume entering inter-
section from minor highway, average
per hour for same eight hours 9 (375}
~. INTERRUPTIGN GF CCNTIDti CUS TR~.Fr^IC SATISFIED Nv^1 SATISFIED
1. Vehicle volume, average per hour
any eight hours, average day, on
the major highvray 80! (750)
2. Combined vehicle and pedestrian
volume from minor highway or high-
. . ways, average per hour, same eight
hours ~~ (75 )
3. Average vehicle speed on the major
hightaay a_;:,proaches to intersection ~rJ (20 mph)
`.. MINIPiUM PEDESTRI.~V SATISFIED NvT SATISFIED
1. Pedestrian volume crossing major
highirray, average per. hour any
eight hours, average day ~~ (250_) .2.~~
2. Vehicular traffic entering £-rcm °~'
major highway, average per hour ~ ~~,v
same eight hours 80 f (bC0) /aa~
3. Average vehicle speed on major
h~,gharay approaches to intersection sd (15 mph)
i .l~E •~ T~_i~~i A i r, r t.,~ sril r l~.
Submit time space diagram Cycle 60 Speed ~O Signals set for
• Length existing system.
Nearest signal both sides:
E. ACCIDENT HAZ1'.RD SATISFIED NGT SATISFIED
Number of accidents in 12-month period susceptible of correction ~
;~`, CONIBINATICAI SATISFIED NOT SATISFIED
's:arrants fulfilled 800 or more of ~ ~ - _/~
A B C D E
~' . ~>PFCIAL CCNDITIO2~IS
TRAFFIC ENGINEERI2IG
FORt~i 101
~•
~OTµ
ric+ r nn.^e 2
~.
m
w
TOTAL PEAK ~~
f A
~w~i O .~t "~.
~~
;.
O ~lZCtttlµ [y
w ~~~1 ~i ~ DIREGTIONt'1L T
RP.FFIC COUNT
7
Ho ~R I ~
~! INTERSCTION (wive Har~~es-j
~
r,R~, s i
D~;Y DATL
t N~B.~._I
r
O
Z?~~
~
~
`I - `Z c, Nt I I -L PM 3 -G> P. tom.
T
TI~
.
; HOUR TO HOUR.
_
~~ r ~ -
_
NO . OF LANES . ~
~ ~~'- 3 G
PEliK HOUR TOT!`.L ALL LEGS
i 2 ~co.t
l : P, r1.
S. _ _
_ PEe':K HOUR TO HOJR
_~ `I
INSERT NORTH POINT
July 17, 1~5f3
Perry Scott, City ~:snager
Bsz~tlett L. Kerredy, City ~~ireer
Recom~~endation s'e Tr&i'fia Si~is on Arizona at
2nd St3 yet arzi~ ath Street.
The City Council, at Sts tieetin~ of `,ay 2~3, 19St3 ~I~e3 7-~),
iri I'ft3°:'Jn;.,L' t0 ~ 3'e t7t1C3t 2'S`W~ file C;1,':;CCr aF C:'.i:;."'w'rCC, iI3-
BtrClCte:i ~r~ ~::;iili3tration to 'u't.:'# e:sa^a'n~ 2'L"JrJrt L'n :.f1C r,''.2'3
for trsPt to ui_;n is ~;~. end ~~nci ra~s,~.e.nd aild 3acdli'ieat3::tls to
e:ciatin~ 3iynr:ls a~: jth and It~•iz~na.
Follo~in ~ is t:le #~etin~, 2'raPi'ia ia1 ineer's report azld -reeoa°
reudaticns
"sue to the eY.ibtenee ai' ::!?_aeF•o~t~ ~eaeatrian ~;~nerators
/in the °~lli,c~.nltt of 3t;'~y ~t-:;et L..,ci :oi,~cna ,~ae~_?w ~<o:3L'
id`fiCL, AJ `w"rip 6nin~F :.ivll; ~ J :: (': a ~ qc ) a C 3 _ 3
'1~a...3 £C s ~ r:'C:2TY. :.S
# n;~a '~' r~.~,~n< r. `a^s~ ~ i~.'F'r ?-~ ~:.ti~inrl
auP~i. w>-n: __a...3t3"1L1T3 <<...I.I.Y.i~~ i;J .. 3'It t t- F:,e..«c......,
'Jf 'r'`=":~0':, ~,.':;Ti~try~ '?1' 5±.~~7.°.3. :S.n~1.C.,::i;~GSl3 T:~J ~.llu £,'Y2svsn;'a
tr8i'i` ~ u S%:;nii ~iy`iGE:r:l 1:7 `~~El a to:2.
irh7:'d2V£'2'y tIt:E2 tS) thy' aPltit'1'ti d~ Oi' fit"iE G*}"~.uti$?_~ ~1.:~?I:°.a~
$;f:3tL?.~i, it iJ:I~CI did ?'aC^.+' 'T3~. C~ is?2~~ El°Sa 3::G12.'a• '~~~ U.3:3
8t1CYl,Lea L'EC"-?:3ai3 11aa ~.72~'it;,.t,.-'.'r~ O.1.L:;r' u3 S:^xZ'i. t3:t :1 ~a<a°~~11
~70C'iErn#,'v?C~.~~3Z t i1( U;~::ai.3.t1' ~ 4:i' ti3E'. #,T`s'aZ'~'iC si~,n~l E~;,'?:1.;~-
f:tf~'I1G c'b~ tniw ? them ~F "L1.G;1.
Ei~{^~,-?'1'T~ ~i0'ef~rJ i?i??UL'l '~;?'?:~'~~`.C i:~1.`.:1~`.} ~.^.tElrli _i fi...•-~rY.ii.
...Ytirs ~ Lc w ..... v n:~.
f~n1L.1~ lis:ld ri~:s'...3tF a~ (i>'4.x1 ~i. C'~~ua.,,vs3 "-as~ fli :'i~4.iKV VC~.4
ii12F.5(~i~.~~s t~:3.i.;y i:~, ~.~~:~ t'J :1va:r:~3.<'Y.'. a.®' ~'_".E :~,iii.:E:::'iCC~:'}OSl
i7~' ~',4 f.ri'(:~r Fa:t~ 1;2'.1ZQRi3 %i;.~.i1UF' :.i^=~'..$..`"al':~LiL tG'r^_'.'i'iC «>~`.;y7ii1
t~c'~rs't?rt u ~ .
"flP the i•ia'~~' bwuiC tliYfwS.iv ~i-,:aF..I i'?~x~ar~aKltlb.~j{t?'Li:, in~4>"°
Yeati\t.{ ;'~j,.Sv.l ~~} Ya4~V Lt4e'y. r`.n:.~}:.Id~'f.i:nYa~ ~lA' i'Qv~~ ~t.' L:d:~NV
trae~~anta 3nc:1;?ain~: _
A. Aiinir~asy E=u:~aicul: r
I3. :fazter,vantaa;3 v.' c~;r3tinuous trabfia
fl• iiri=t;~~.1;7 T~^~:~'_-.':3rF'7.E':3
l
onsider for inclksion in 1909-70
ignal progra: t.
er Council 7/23/08.
!~J
1 ,
July 17, ,9~8 Page 2
SubSects R~eGt^:~ndation ~ '~'~-aLfio ~i:~ala
on Arizena nt Ord ;;treat a:nd ~t`h Sti~et.
°ThA intersection did coat t#:A comhinaLian z~arraRt s~hich
is~...°.8':~ 012 F'..ITSr C2' y',,'r.'. htn.^..j.^ :'in.?'C".'s!'2"i.~ ~7`~t t,a.J? :^t'r?~l i^~'t
by $~ ~erc4nt or r,.or:: Ga" the 1:2diviLual r~quire..rane~.
Tn this x°e~,a E`. tu.d 13 exccedeEi u0 ~erccnt, ca;iise D
Cooxt~inated i.3averent haci alreAdy satisficct the zac tguire~
G18nt8 •
"l~ttached is a corn, oP the ~fore:rentioned trst'f is ai:~n81
r~arrar2ts su3::lvey, tt1+5n~ utit:: c~p~.es oi' tha Jvhicle $2:ti
Pecie3tr1~x2 `{l~lu,::o oounts, i'or ~{ou2~ irato2:~tion.
"In c3:ecicin;; t?3e accicents at t:~is intc~rseet~.nn, e.'i~iie
thQ i`itmrri?iY L+ ii'a'.T'ss'_z22".{ v?lU`'Ji e3 1is~3 E'C, L'7.ziL'Ti ` },n .,n
L J 1.32 ~.:,. ?-.., t
t[Y@~.VB T.;4ni<~i:~} 't:C C°CiLQL~ aJ<C.:3:Ja^ c'2 7°c3%'.l.€/L2 OI' LJJ ~'E'ESS'3
FL`1L~ ir1 ~8:"^. Ltia3.i:lfln~ 1 i:ii.~e.V`1 :::ii+.:3 tiers ~iQaL L^3Z,~~ ti12v'e
-* h i n C 3 '~ s +- x no xf f~i
y8C~C1(w~c'1IStB .'] f'.ti `L, t'a~.1 F:, ;w~x~ G L:-- nv3ttGUG2' ~~,. tAl »uLS]t: 1:yy/~;~~n~~,,yy.T}J~S`G3S'
f.lVnbYl:3~ 6{tlb sr ~i~v Y33.YtLr ~•t ia[.'a `/i.12".:' 6Ui1.1 a'c~.ar ~-341v PLV~iL~
dr~aa;e en1y. `~r fth ~:~3 a r°~z=:;s:nas ~n.iuby cy a ;:lr;nr
natures ciut3 to tl.:s ooi7.3sic;n oz' a x:;vtorcycle with z~ e~,r.'{
~2"he`rLf'tlr€.', 7.n Vjt?i~ Gf t~1@ :3in:~=al <PCaic?cnt 2'~3L3OrY~' s^ztit~ t~
f'c`2.a.~.ir'~w C2' i;Fi» r.."^x::z•`?Ct1C:Xt %,3 2: 13~.~.H »:2i::t.;>2'f °t;i?^ L'.ZCi:LU~°
+tR 7ft s a. e~i i P T~{-~.'.'I '>--f `iiT
t'+'c.a.2e.3it`~3 ti%Y'T.c':1c 1;3~ GCZ ts' ~'.s.Y.i. ~;-3~.:.P.<£.og :r. Y: my a.,. L':_..C:_;..:EiS(13~
t ~+Gn Ci3' '~:.+?3.a 03.~`'~C: ~C f; :?r ItixOu t 3 i:-:xZ°:.^.3 '~'s"':i i~(.'C1:8 ~ t.-_,iI~S~:w'r~:i;ai%II
/~,(i q f ..n ~ .~ e - j. y '-t :'j ~: ~r'^•i3 u.: irr!! f.'=`~i.I;°eS L$'.l±'Z.ZZ E: C'.iz~.i'+.'i).~
W3 t~iL ~.n S:~a:Jv ~i 4.1.'.jnh ~d t:.iY.i GiYaia }~ A3xi V
in~i.catic:a~; <3L pi'%h 4~ 1~ sl<"'3.S'.:di:~ o u~' CGf::j.il~:£':"~ila i:.j.r,+3t; '3'.i;l
OtPl~:rz.l'G'2'LC[::.C'k1Y3y u.t .`.;G',ic~- %:ivt!®<: E3fx`.~' '£'~,T;;_:'.P ai.€,-07 CS:1`s%'CSt7Y,
the ex:i~t.in~ ~a2°icrr~.ty a3.°4 0;:' vv~~,s5'ic siti,;,a:t air:~rroveu:ntu.
BLK : T9 : f s
dJF:x"al~t:.dA ~e YS`.eii~l~.Ll~
Gity a73;~,ircar
Attecl^~::cnts
Perry Scott, City ttatlager
Bartlett L. 3.ePlnedy, City Enineer
Pedestrian Overcro3sin3 Over Pacific Caast ¢ii 21:•tay
t'{ith t11c~ co ~pietion oP Lhe Santa tFOn1cA Frc~°way, tale
increa~ec~ vo2u:.;c ~x2d speed ox' tras';:wc on thw coast'
}Ii~;t2~.if i:nCi iil.°. Gv~`:U~nsiG~032 Sri: et1~:i v}?£E'G in1 tia3
li.aite~i :.ie.iPi u:i.:,tr~„ce exitin;.; i'roi the i1i,f:i~ie fcule-
YAr~ tC6i121C.'.l t1u3 G'x'.°.H%c:t1 C:P14v i3 sz iCt;~f }:& 2.r t] 2.1: the
tSlO @:i.~.Si.in:_; S'.PrioCP. 2:~62t?a'P:rS.i:i1 C:K::~3.31"S on %s1f:
Pacific u~xiat ~.i~;t2~ayi t3 anar~ tdl.;itu:.Ce ;;c~r$71 oi' ;laid
Lunsle7..
'i'YPere are at ns~Nant t2~o sPPCh t2t ,,r8de ero3sin;s
bet2~epn $he we3ter2y ^r$a2 vi L71'3 ;111P1G1 a12ci ~2e
Arizvr.A avenue ~x:k~sirian ovcrcm°t:sai;P:;. '>.s sautiierl;I
Crossing ia~y~~".7vS Y,hL' ~C:t2t::atr~2:S3 dJ:7.^uGh &3hlG72 leaves.
PAlisaC:e3 {~LirS A~!7rO:+i,".]A$E3.~ i:~~f1;'12;~ ~Et'siv'$n ;anLu. (+i4n~.C%3
Boulevard T:dlit j:Cvc`1(2iY:s;~. `1`:'1° :'.t`C^..nti CrJ83122:; 82rtFH7 thv
pedestrian ;path P+hict2 lc3v€rs the parx at a~:aita orPic€1
Faoulevarci ara L:t:ends nort.'z~iesterly Alon;; the Paais~:des
to the coast hi_~i2tray.
Althou~„h it c<r~.ot be directly contributed to the above
factors, A p~ue,3tria,'1 aa.talic:~ 71.x.:3 r;cc~.:i'ro;~ ~.n the
Sauther:L~o3ti 41Y $heSe CI'i?:331Y3;;;3 :3~Z1C8 ~t1G' IrrecYaay ft1A8
op ned.
ZnPOrr:~l di3C:P3SiG:13 i°iith Division OS' z-'~.:°,31.v'3.y3 ~3£rSO7Pn~~
have in~licat~:t t?:at tt10 UlVi4~.'v;i Cil Y{i_~h:lti;y73 ::1>',1PL t''.c.'.
elillin~; to con:;~xrwct cne Feue:3trl:..n ovsrcross~n; to aerye
the youttiern:.:o:lt pat72.FAy iP t.~2u t;lUy r:~u1a aY,z'ee to
abandon the other or nor$i.ern:.~os~ p~::.i1,~ay.
Before proceeciin:; further in has .:.a$tcr, it agper~r3
alvis~.hle to ti•v:c. nine 2:iPethcr t1o t;ity ;,;uneiT tro'~a3d
approve bn?s ^.o;eec. x :1. ~:='.,::o'auS +:au?d Gn$ail, .:n
Ei6}ClitiGP1 t0 £.:~.GG127,~ t0c:UESnUGn t;Ti~ Oi' ti1>> t'.'FU G:;.i.;2:in;; a$
~ra.de Ci'Gu;3~,ia ~:i, :I1: {;it;7 :3lPi;a7Jr~~.n ; tY2w 1J~,V:CSIOn 6t
Iii,;,hr.`~lys in GJ::ialniY>;•, title 11'«eC3:,:SuY;~ T'3uf1t~C3:'-rttC.Y TC?r ti3'.'.
Disapproved by Council July 11, 1967
~~F~
r'ILF. C~YY
Q ~ B
5~~~_ Y
,_ __
~'une 30, 1,57
.~ub~CCti P~de3trian OYBreso33in~ C3ver
Pacific Coast Hi~h:tay
pa;~e z
gedeBtrian Iar.::ir., on the x~an siCe of the hi~~:ay fro:
the State Divis3.cn oi' B.°,aches aa11 Farks.
It is reccrurenuea t2tat tP,is ,-;after ~e brou~;nt to the
s.ttention of tt:e City .Council ;:ar ;La con.~iderati::n.
TA`iTLE1T x,. ~.*~dEDH
City :razoi.~~:er
BLK:fs
STATE bF.CAt7F 0kNlA-iRA NSrGi~TAT{ON AGENCY - RONALD REA GA N, 6overnnr
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS -
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS ._myd.
DiSTRKT 7, P. O. 80% Y30d, LOS ANGELES 9005!
March 2, 1870
o7-LA-1 35.2/47.4
•,';_~., Santa Monica Tunnel to
Malibu Canyon Road
07212 248600
Mr. Bartlett L. Kennedy
Director of Publie 4dorks
City of Santa Monica ,
1685 Main Street
Santa Monica,. California 90401
Dear Nir. Kennedy:
The purpose of this letter.. is to inquire
whether the City of Santa Monica is int.8rested in
participating ir. the elimination of the present
pedestrian cross walks across pacific-Coast Highway
and replacing them ~rrith pedestrian over~,rossing
structures between the palisades and tie beach.
We envision the possibility of three additional
pedestrian overcrossings:
1. Vicinity of the west tunnel portal
2. Vicinity of California - Incline
3. A point opposite Montana Avenue
We believe this proposal is in keeping with the
improvement of pacific Coast Sigh*rray by eliminating points of
conflict and congestion and improving the safety of the high-
way.
Very truly yours,
.7
cf ~~ '~'~
<:
A. D. FIELD
Assistant District Engineer
Design C