Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
1960 - 1988 - Crosswalks - Crossing Guards - Pedestrian Cros
y REQUEA FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION Sa Date July 6, 1988 Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Clerk (� Submitted by: Paul E. Co , City Administrator � Prepared by: G. L. Payne, Chief of Police p Les G. Evans, Acting Director of Public Works Subject: APPROVED HY CITY COUNC;.". �T 191 CITY CLERK ._ Establishment of a Crossing Guard on Garfield at Florida Consistent with Council Policy? [X] Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception Statement of Issue, Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments: STATEMENT OF ISSUE: Concerns raised by the senior citizens residing on Florida Street regarding crossing Garfield Avenue at Florida Street prompted an investigation by the Traffic Engineering Division. RECOMMENDATION: To establish a crossing guard on Garfield Avenue at Florida Street during the following hours on the days of Monday, Wednesday and Saturday: 8:00 a.m. - 11:00 a.m. 1:00 p.m. - 4:00 p.m. ANALYSIS: The City Council at its meeting on May 2, 1988 requested that the Traffic Engineering Division study the pedestrian crossing on Garfield at Florida. The staff report was presented to the Transportation Commission on June 14, 1988. The staff's recommendation to install yellow flashing beacons was reviewed and discussed. The Commission's recommendation was to establish a crossing guard at this location for five hours of the day. The hours were to be established based on the input from the residents. The residents would prefer crossing guard coverage seven days a week from 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. The Police Department feels that such extended days and hours would be very difficult to recruit for and supervise. The recommended hours for the crossing guard have been proposed by the Police Department. FUNDING SOURCE: Funding for establishing a new crossing guard is not available in the program at the present time. Additional funds need to be allocated to this program, from the General Fund, in order to provide a new crossing guard. The estimated cost is $5,000 per year. \ '` 6 P10 5/85 Request for Council Action Establishment of a Crossing Guard on Garfield at Florida July 6, 1988 Page 2 ALTERNATIVE ACTION: 1. Modify the number of hours per day and/or days per week for the crossing guard service. 2. Deny the recommendation and propose alternative solution(s). ATTACHMENTS: 1. Staff report 2. (Minutes of the Commission meeting LE:JR:lw 1702g TRAFFIC STUDY Florida Street at Garfield Avenue Florida Street between .Garfield Avenue and Main Street has been constructed as a typical residential street with 40 feet of pavement and eight foot sidewalks on each side. The street accommodates one 12 foot travel lane in each direction and eight foot parking lanes on either side. All street improvements including sidewalk have been installed on this section of Florida Street. The property_ adjacent to Florida Street has developed in senior housing and senior serving medical on both sides of the street. Approximately 5B0 seniors live in this block including ambulatory rest home patients. There are also 702 apartment units of which 490 are occupied by seniors. The most convenient grocery shopping for the residents of this area of Florida Street is Beach/Garfield Market at the corner of Garfield Avenue and Beach Boulevard. Although there is a traffic signal with pedestrian push buttons at Garfield Avenue and Beach Boulevard, the residents of Florida Street find it much more convenient .to cross Garfield Avenue at the intersection of Florida Street and Garfield Avenue. By crossing at Florida Street, the pedestrian saves an additional walk of about 1200 feet. Another peculiarity of Florida Street is its signalized intersection with Main Street. The signalized intersection encourages traffic to use Florida Street as an access to the Five Points Shopping Center since it offers an easy way to cross Main Street. This shopping center traffic in addition to traffic for the medical uses on Florida Street create traffic volumes of about 2000 vehicles per day. There is also considerable on -street parking on Florida Street which creates a sense of a narrow street with lots of traffic. City traffic engineers evaluated the intersection of Florida Street and Garfield Avenue for traffic signals and a four way STOP. TRAFFIC SIGNAL The City of Huntington Beach, along with most California cities, has adopted CALTRANS criteria for determining locations which would benefit from traffic signals. The criteria are based on traffic and pedestrian volumes. A review of the traffic and pedestrian volumes at the intersection of Florida Street and Garfield Avenue indicates that volumes are not adequate to justify a -traffic signal. Surprisingly few Pedestrians cross Garfield Avenue at Florida Street. Our counts indicate 242 pedestrians crossed at this location on a typical weekday based on the data gathered on 5/26/88 and 5/27/88. Of 242 pedestrians, 110 were seniors. Over 70% were those who crossed the street back and forth. FOUR WAY STOP Based on the criteria established in the State Traffic Manual, a four-way stop is not justified at this location. . Florida Street at Garfield Avenue Traffic Study Page 2 ACCIDENT HISTORY: The accident history for the study area indicates one reported pedestrian accident in the last four (4) years. The accident report revealed that the pedestrian was cited as well as the driver of the vehicle that struck his shopping cart as he was pushing it westbound in the eastbound bicycle lane. There was no injury reported. This accident took place in 1986. An accident which took place in April of 1988 was written as incident report since the pedestrian reported that she was not struck by the vehicle. There have been a total of 16 accidents (including the pedestrian accident) at the intersection in the past three years. Nine of these accidents are of the type that may have been prevented by a traffic signal. However, the rear -end accidents are susally increased as a result of installing a traffic signal. PREVIOUS ACTIONS: In 1986, the Florida Street -speed limit was lowered from 35 mph to 25 mph. This action resulted from a citizen group petition request to install speed bumps. GARFIELD AVENUE Crosswalk was painted and advance warning signs were installed in 1988. 50K lumen street lights were installed in 1983. Routine maintenance (re -painting) has been performed at regular intervals The traffic volume on Garfield Avenue is approximately '12,000 vehicles per day. ANALYSIS: Signal warrants and stop sign warrants are not met given the existing circumstances. Justification for any special consideration is difficult because we have high priority signal projects that have not been budgeted that do fulfill signal warrants 100 %, with a higher number of accidents. However, in view of the public outcry for a traffic control device and the speeds that are evident on Garfield Avenue, warning motorists of the crosswalk by. providing a flashing beacon and an illuminated pedestrian crossing sign is the most that can be justified at this time. Senior Outreach personnel were contacted as to the feasibility of utilizing a shuttle service from the Florida/Delaware area to the shopping center. They are aware of the need and have looked into the cost of implementing such a program; however, they do not envision the funding for such a project for at least 3 to 4 years. Florida Street at Garfield Avenue Traffic Study Page 3 ALTERNATIVES PROS CONS COST Traffic Signal May reduce accidents Would not reduce 100,000 from 5-6 each year to pedestrian accidents. to 2-4 each year. Would cause traffic delays. Would increase traffic on Florida. Would increase rear -end accidents. 4-Way Stop May reduce accidents Same as above 1,000 from 5-6 each year to Would increase 2-4 each year. rear -end accidents Flashing Beacon Would alert motorists Would set a precedent 12,000 Mid Block Ped Signal May reduce accidents Would cause traffic 50,000 involving pedestrians delays. Would increase rear -end accidents. 1651g MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Civic Center Council Chamber 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 TUESDAY. JUNE 14. 1988 - 7:00 P.M. Commissioners Present: Cohoon, Lo Verde, Robertson, Roth and Rowe Commissioners Absent: Garza and Mays APPROVAL OF MINUTES After reviewing the minutes from the May Transportation Commission meeting, Commissioner Roth motioned to accept the minutes as submitted. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Lo Verde, and passed on an unanimous vote. 4 OLD BUSINESS Heil & Saybrook Staff reported that the construction of flashing beacons for this intersection should begin in July. Humboldt Drive Traffic Study Staff mentioned that Traffic Engineering will design a sign that will be acceptable to both the residents of Humboldt Drive and the Planning Department. NEW BUSINESS Garfield/Florida Pedestrian Stud Staff stated that the City Council requested that the Traffic Engineering staff study the intersection of Garfield and Florida. Referring to the attached traffic study, Staff stated the concerns that have been brought to the Council's attention regarding senior citizens crossing the designated crosswalk on Garfield at Florida. Staff mentioned that based on the number of pedestrians crossing the intersection and the warrants established in the State Traffic Manual, a four-way stop or a traffic signal is not justified at this location. However, options such as a flashing yellow beacon, an illuminated pedestrian crossing signs, or a shuttle service may assist the senior citizens in crossing Garfield more safely. Staff also mentioned that Commissioner Mays suggested a crossing guard during certain hours which could be provided by the City or the adjacent residents of Florida Street. After some discussion regarding the possibility of a pedestrian signal, a traffic signal or a crossing guard, Commissioner Rowe opened the meeting for public input. Transportation Commission Minutes of June 14, 1988 Page 2 Robert Reid spoke at this time. His concerns were for the safety of the senior citizens who cross Garfield to shop at the Ralphs shopping center, and also that the City should consider the growing number of seniors in the area. He also submitted two petitions with approximately 140 names from residents of the area requesting some type of assistance to the senior citizens when crossing Garfield. There was more discussion relative to the installation of a flashing beacon and also the possibility of.a crossing guard for the intersection. Commissioner Cohoon was in support of the suggestions of a crossing guard and flashing beacons. He questioned, however, the accident history for the left turn movement out of the Ralphs shopping center onto Garfield Avenue. Commissioner Roth requested more information on the crossing guard concept. Commissioner Robertson motioned for staff to contact the representatives of the senior citizens group to discuss the alternative of a volunteer crossing guard at Garfield and Florida. The motion was seconded and passed 3 to 1. Commissioner Roth question Lt. Reinholtz as to the pay scale of a crossing guard. Commissioner Cohoon entertained a motion to install a flashing beacon with pedestrian crossing signs, to pursue a City -funded crossing guard in lieu of a volunteer crossing guard, and also request that staff analyze the westerly entrance to the Ralphs Shopping Center. The motion was seconded, and failed 3 to 2. Commissioner Cohoon motioned that the City fund a flashing beacon for $12,000 at Garfield and Flordia. The motion was seconded, and failed 3 to 2. Commissioner Cohoon motioned to recommend that the City fund a crossing guard for five hours a day at the intersection of Garfield at Florida. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Roth, and passed on an unanimous vote. At this time, Commissioner Roth mentioned that the stop sign at Humboldt Drive may not be a standard height. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None STAFF ITEMS None COMMISSION ITEMS Commissioner Robertson requested that staff present to the Commission next month an objective evaluation from Traffic Engineering regarding existing layout of Main Street (i.e. relating to traffic accidents, pedestrian accidents, and options for limiting bicycles, pedestrians and parking). Transportation Commission Minutes of June 14, 1988 Page 3 Commissioner Cohoon mentioned that the Commission would like to be informed of the future street realignment of the Downtown area. Also, Commissioner Cohoon suggested that Caltrans be informed of that the left hand turn phasing for north bound Beach Boulevard at Talbert may not be functioning properly. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:50 p.m. Thomas Rowe Chairman Date Jamal Rahimi Secretary Date REQUES f FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION Date July 6, 1988 Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Clerk Submitted by: Paul E. Cook, City Administrato �N �� 1�� �+ V Prepared by: Les G. Evans, Acting Director of Public Works Subject: Establishment of a Crossing Guard on Garfield at Florida f g Consistent with Council Policy? [ x] Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception - Statement of Issue, Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments: IV STATEMENT OF ISSUE: Concerns raised by the senior citizens residing on Florida Street regarding crossing Garfield Avenue at Florida Street prompted an investigation by the Traffic Engineering Division. RECOMMENDATION: To establish a crossing guard on Garfield Avenue at Florida Street during the following hours for seven days a week: 7:00 a.m. - 9:00 a.m. 11:00 a.m. - 1:00 p.m. 3:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m. ANALYSIS: The City Council at its meeting on May 2, 1988 requested that the Traffic Engineering Division study the pedestrian crossing on Garfield at Florida. The staff report was presented to the Transportation -Commission on June 14, 1988. The staff's recommendation to install yellow flashing beacons was -reviewed and discussed. The Commission's recommendation was to establish a crossing guard at this location for five hours of the day. The hours.were to be established based on the input from the residents. FUNDING SOURCE: Funding for establishing a new crossing guard is not available in the program at the present time. Additional funds need to be allocated to this program, from the General Fund, in order to provide a new crossing guard. The estimated cost is $14,000 per year. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: 1. Modify the number of hours per day for the crossing quard service. 2. Deny the recommendation and propose alternative solution(s). ATTACHMENTS: 3 1. Staff report 2. Minutes of the Commission meeting Plo 5/85 REQUE-, FOR CITY COUNC. `ACTION Date August 9, 1985 Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council _.rPROVED BY CITY CO L. %-;;s _ Submitted by: Charles Thompson, City Administrator (/"" -2 c) ¢ Prepared by: Paul E. Cook, Director of Public WorksA CITY CLERK Subject: Railroad Crossing Improvements Consistent with Council Policy? [ ] Yes [X] New Policy or Exception Statement of Issue, Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments: Statement of Issue: The condition of the Southern Pacific Transportation Company railroad crossings has been a source of continual complaint. Recommendation: 1. Approve the concept of rubberized crossing installations at six locations, with the City to purchase materials and the Southern Pacific Transportations Company to make the installations. 2. Approve a priority list for rubberized crossing projects. Analysis The Mayor and City staff met with the Southern Pacific Transportation Company to discuss improvements to railroad crossings in the City. It was agreed that the railroad would permit the City to enter railroad right-of-way to make pavement repairs under supervision of a railroad -inspector. City forces will make repairs to the Slater Avenue crossing within 30 days. .The subject of.rubberized crossings was also discussed. The railroad policy is that rubberized crossing materials must be purchased by the City while the installation is funded by the railroad. Cost of materials would be about $25,000 for each crossing. A review of the crossings in the City which considered maintenance problems, traffic volumes and truck traffic generated the following recommended priority list: Slater Avenue Talbert Avenue Edinger Avenue McFadden Avenue Warner Avenue Heil Avenue The railroad could not make a cmudttment on a time schedule for installation. However, they estimated that they could begin work on the first rubberized crossing in 6-12 months. Funding Source: Gasoline Tax Funds could be utilized -by the City to purchase the necessary materials. Alternative Actions: -_l. Continue to patch the pavement with asphalt. 2. Do no approve using City funds for participating in the installation of rubberized crossings. CWr:PEC:LE:lw / PIO 4/84 REQUE'S T FOR CITY COUNCIL`ACTION' Submitted to: MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL Submitted by: Prepared by: Subject: CHARLES THOMPSON, ADMINISTRP WARREN G. HALL, CITY TREASUF CROSSING GUARD LIABILITY INS Date August 31, 1982 E 9-21- :APPROVED I3y CITY COUIVCIL CITY Statement of Issue, Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments: STATEMENT OF ISSUE In September 1981 City Council authorized purchase of first dollar coverage for Crossing Guard Liability. Renewal of that policy has been offered to the City at a premium of _$3,612.00, which is budgeted. RECOMMENDATION Renew Crossing Guard Liability policy for another year with Agricultural Excess & Surplus Insurance C Tpany. ANALYSIS Crossing Guards are hired and trained by the police department. Their work is a constant exposure to motorists who.may or may not be observant of school children crossing and the guards stationed there. The liability potential is that if there is an incident and claim that it will be serious. We have had two.cros.sing claims, both before this. policy was purchased, but none during the period of this policy. I recommend the coverage be renewed for the year starting 9-21-82. PIO 4/81 EI i Pow REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION Date August 30, 1982 Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Submitted by: C. W. Thompson,_ City Adninistr APPROVED BY CIT ,gyp Y C() UNCIL Prepared by: Paul E. Cook, Director of Public Works Subject: Crossing Guards and Crosswalks c 1 CITY Statement of Issue, Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments: STATEMENT OF ISSUE: The Fountain Valley School District has submitted a request to the City Transportation Ccm4nission for the addition and relocation of crosswalks and crossing guards. tU.NUHl'lUNS The Transportation Commission recommends the following: 1. Relocate existing crosswalk.and crossing guard at Yorktown and Rockcrest to Yorktown and Windward. 2. Add a crossing.guard at the intersection of Magnolia and Yorktown. 3. Add a crossing guard at the intersection of Bushard..and Yorktown. 4. Add a crossing guard at the intersection of Magnolia and Pioneer: 5. Add a crossing guard and crosswalk at the intersection of Bushard.and_Woodland. 6. Negotiate with the Fountain Valley School District regarding the cost of the crossing guards. ANALYSIS: Due to falling school enrollments, the Fountain Valley School District .has closed several schools and readjusted attendance boundaries for.reasons.of economy. The.changes have made.it necessary for more children to cross arterial streets. The new crossings have prompted the School District to submit a request for additional crosswalks and crossing guards. The Transportation Commission approved a motion to recommend hiring the necessary crossing guards and negotiating an arrangement with the School Districts-where.the Districts would bear.the costs of crossing guards.necessitated by school closings. The cost of the four crossing guards for one year will be approximately $13,000.00. FUNDING SOURCE: City Contingency Account #101593 ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Deny the request for new crossing guards. . 2. Approve the request for crossing guards on the condition that. the Fountain Valley School District fund the positions. ATTACH ENTS : W/anagram, F . I. R . C6TI': PEC : LE: jy l-:91 w rN- c.� 0 O OLIPPE 0 �N PIONEER Al O EXISTING C PROPOSED L A L� YORKTOWN WOODLAND WARBURTON �,4' CITY OF HUNTINOTON BEACH INTER -DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH To Charles W. Thompson From F. B. Arguello City Administrator Chief of Administrative Services Subject Requested Funding for Addition Date August 27, 1982 and Relocation of Crosswalks and Crossing Guards FIR # 83-15 In response to the Public Works Department, a Financial Impact Report has been pre- pared and submitted relative to the requested funding for addition/relocation of crossing guards and crosswalks in the eventuality that the school districts are unable to shoulder the respective costs. It has been estimated that the related expense will not exceed $13,000 for the current fiscal year, or $12,000 annually thereafter within the Police Department budget. Sufficient monies are available in the City's Contingency Account #101593 that may be used as the funding source for the current fiscal year. Should the City Council approve this project, the unencumbered balance in the account will be reduced to $85,938. -IV F. B. Arguello Chief of Administrative Services FBA/AR/cg CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH FINANCIAL IMPACT REPORT Project Name Funding for the Addition/Relocation-of Crosswalks -and Crossing Guards Description Requested funding of'this project. 1. DIRECT PROJECT COSTS 1.1 One -Time Costs Land Acquisition Construction urn., aci i- -ties, Equipment. Other Total Cost _ 1,000 12,000 13,000 1.2 Recurring Annual Costs" - Pa roll Additional. Personnel Materials supplies Outside Services Revenues Total Cost 12,0.00 12,000 1.3 Replacement/Renewal Costs N/A 2. INDIRECT COSTS Loss of City's earning capability due to expenditure of funds. Financial Impact Repor* Page 2 3. NON -DOLLAR COSTS N/A 4. BENEFITS TO BE DERIVED FROM THE PROJECT City Council approval of this project, and concurrent acceptance of the funding responsibility, would sidestep the potential of the school district's inability in bearing the required costs and allow for the Transportation Commission's recommendations to be implemented in their entirety. 5. PROJECT USAGE Daily. 6. EXPENDITURE TIMING Subsequent to City Council approval. 7. COST OF NOT IMPLEMENTING THE PROJECT City Council would maintain the options of either outright denying the request for crossing guards or make their approval conditional on the Fountain Valley School District's providing the necessary funding. a REQUES i FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION IS-8 Submitted to: Honorable P4ayor and City Council Submitted by: Prepared by:. Subject: Date T-rch_..1.7_,_l9.82 I A rX0 Y A 7 CV-VITC11 Charles W. Thompson, City Administrato 1, 1/, C. Paul E. Cook, Director Public Works C_— SCHOOL CROSSING AT EDWARDS STREET AND EL CORTIJO (Fallingwater) � Y—S 19pz CITY Statement of Issue, Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments:' A STATEMENT OF ISSUE : Parents and school officials have expressed concern for the students using the crosswalk enroute to school at the subject location.- RECONWNDATION : The Transportation Commission recommends to the City Council that flashing yellow beacons be installed at the subject location and'that a temporary crossing guard be assigned until the beacons are in operation, or until the school semester terminates, whichever occurs first. ANALYSIS: The California Department of Transportation promulgates warrants for the installation of school area pedestrian safety measures. ;A comparison of these warrants, with actual conditioiis,.are summarized in the following tables CROSSING GUARD WARRANT Warrant 1. Alternate controlled crossing must be greater than 600' 2. Vehicular traffic volume must exceed 350 v/hr 3. Elementary school children (K-6th) crossing during any two hours 40/hr Note: Since students crossing are not K-6th graders, the warrant isinot technically met. FLASHING YELLOW BEACONS -WARRANT Warrant 1. Uncontrolled school crossing is "Suggested Route to School". Yes 2. School pedestrians using crossing during each of any two hours 40 3. Alternate controlled crossing must be greater than 600' 4. Minimum vehicular volume (urban) , 200 v/hr S. 85th percentile approach speed exceeds 35 mph PIO 4/81 Actual ,> 1500' 816 v/hr 58-60 (7 $ 8th) Actual Yes 58-60 1500' .816 v/hr 49 mph RCA SCHOOL CROSSING/EDWARDS AND EL CORTIJO -2 r.4a.rch 17, 1982 Although the warrants for an adult crossing guard were not met, based on the age group, the Commission felt that other" conditions' such as the Edwards Hill and the potentially high speed were sufficient reasons .to assign a guard. It was noted "that the warrants were a guide and that reasonable judgement should be applied in addition to those warrants. Since construction of a traffic signal has begun at Goldenwest and Talbert, the existing flashing beacons at the location could be'installed at Edwards and El Cortijo/Falling- water, at minimum cost, It is estimated "that the beacons could be installed for approxi- mately $3,500.00. Crossing guards are currently paid $3,75 per hour. They normally work 5 hours per day, 5 days per week. Under the new schedule they work 38 weeks "annually, Therefore, the annual 'cost for a crossing guard would be about $3,563, FUNDING Funding for the flashing beacons could be "derived -from City gas tax funds. Funding for the crossing guard would be charged "to"Police Department general operating funds,. ALTERNATE ACTION: Increase police surveilance and enforcement during the hours when children are going to and coming from school: ATTACH%IF,NTS: 1. Suggested Route to School' Map." 2. Police Department internoffice memo. PEC.. RL; ik- attachment 1620 4L C 4 CROSSWALKS O= R2 R3 Rl Rl R5 Rl CF-R Rl Rl T— 0. RI Rl Rl Rl RI RI RI Ln 8 — CF-E c RI RI RI RI '-RI--I- Rl Rl Rl JRI SUGGESTED: ROUTE TO SCHOOLS I RI J o.Rl Rl Rl T T— RI IRI Rl RI ATER RI c -------- 7641- RI PRICE OR RI RI �E, CA R I _ij Rl 1 Rl RI Pil RI Rl I R RI R I R I CF-E CF- CA ANGEL... DR —E IR - L:=R I CF-E R I -c R j_a.. c.' ]RI RI CR C. CR LOURDES OR R I Rl. RI Rl Rl �w Rl L Rl Rl L C..O;. DR I - RAPHAEL DR RI RI Rl LDRAB IJe I RI RI Rl —s 0. u RI PINON R I R I R' c R I RI :LrR I RI RI Rl 0 EL COR TERRIER D., OR Rl Rl Rl RI AE_y RI RI RI RI F11 PADUA --w- DR) Rl Rl Rl Rl - RI Rl y PI ki wf Rl R�IjR:l I Rl R I Rl - RI R I R I 21111i Rl o.—,D RI R I RI R I I i RI i Rl RI Rl 1� I K I Rl RI ji .. I , k I DR RI RI_ RI-CDI'L R— R Rl Rl RI —CD Rl 1�1 RI DR.] RI — Rl a Rl Rl C.) L) CF.-R i z LSD a i UNFIN TON BLACH INTER-DEPARTMEI',1T COMMUNICATION From Subject !"�"G�CTId� �Ci✓FO.[,e°��sl�,�+7` Date 4PkVi1KaX:F'/ ,EL LO/4T/Ta 774iv /*;� A 4f !/O� lil.f/�JG . 741%gam Foy -7U/0 dA�� go -gw 7Iig�- hares OJ` d oo - opoo /4'(00 -- 50 o . T Fi7�r Der-, Tlvo L�/r7.o,�1C G✓�zc/i /l�y,� fvGco�✓�,�oG . o Fib to.J�,¢� IN A r W 1A) A�K Prn - /-h%K ,ram"/ PWSP&P .SLR Ave,� pc 1/-2 q-,P/ Yllpiodj 4 fS % 7 V 13,9 ?hh� fG�ED JEWmf 1"P - air 4 fOPC" R7✓D /S /ZrrL&0kl5 D9 7/'4ffo7c C�JDV"O/t/S II J M % L awauf / OAJ If Thy-*T TNf'aF_ /, f NOT A7V OFrc,X0iv fT 77t7S l eosv, 1. A---7— ., J. HUNTINGTON BEACH To Subject CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTER -DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION Charles W. Thompson City Administrator Requested Funding for School Crossing at Edwards Street and E1 Cortijo (Fallingwater) FIR # 82-14 From F. B. Arguello Chief of Administrative Services Date March 26, 1982 In response to the request of the Public Works Department, I am hereby submitting a Financial Impact Report relative to the installation of flashing beacons at the intersection of Edwards and El Cortijo (Fallingwater). It is estimated that an appropriation in the amount of $3,500 would be sufficient for this purpose. Adequate monies are available in the Gas Tax Fund for this project. Should the City Council approve this expenditure, the balance in the fund will be reduced to $2,319,966. �/lealv& F. B. Arguello Chief of Administrative Services FBA/AR/cg r CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH FINANCIAL IMPACT REPORT Project Name Financing of School Crossing_at Busy Intersection Description Requested funding for safety flashing beacons at intersection of Edwards St. and E1 Cortijo (Fallingwater). 1. DIRECT PROJECT COSTS 1.1 One -Time Costs Land Acquisition Construction urn., aci i- ties, E�ui ment Other Total Cost 3,500 3,500 1.2 Recurring Annual Costs Additional. Personnel Materials Supplies Out7side Services Revenues Total Cost .Payroll 1.3 Replacement/Renewal Costs N/A 2. INDIRECT COSTS Loss of interest earning potential due to this expenditure of funds.. Financial Impact Report Page 2 3. NON -DOLLAR COSTS N/A — - ---- - -- ---- - -------------- _�._ 4. BENEFITS TO BE DERIVED FROM THE PROJECT Allay fears of parents and school officials while reducing potential for accidents to .children at this heavily trafficked intersection. 5. PROJECT USAGE Daily. 6. EXPENDITURE TIMING Actual expenditure of funds should be within 30 days subsequent to City Council approval. 7. COST OF NOT IMPLEMENTING THE PROJECT Rataiu the status guo and/or increase police surveillance and enforcement during hmirc of peak ppdpctrian traffic. CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH P. 0. BOX 711 CALIFORNIA 92648 CITY TREASURER -WARREN G. HALL MEMO TO: C. W. Thompson, City Administrator MEMO FROM: Warren G. Hall, City Treasurer DATE: September 18, 1981 SUBJECT:. CROSSING GUARD LIABILITY INSURANCE Based upon our discussion, I have bound a liability insurance coverage for all our crossing guards,both paid and volunteer, effective 12:01 A.M. on Monday,_9-21-81.. Coverage to be issued by Coast Insurance Agency with American Universal (rating A+12) for coverage from first,dollar to $250,000 and it is accepted as underlying coverage to our excess insurance coverages to $20,000,000 with no deductible amount. Coverage will be only for people acting as crossing guards who have been trained and are on a roster of trained individuals to be maintained by the Traffic Division of Police Department. It covers both paid and volunteer crossing guards. It will not cover any untrained (unauthorized) volunteer who may attempt to be a crossing guard. The premium for the coverage is $5,160.00, which.I hope can'be funded ,q�ut f H.C.D. funds. %1 Wax^d"f/G .' Hal WGH/vt �!�e 50 REQUES' FOR CITY -,COUNCI ACTION September 28, 1981 Date Submitted to: Mayor and City Council ® -_ Submitted by: Charles Thompson, City Administrator ®YED BY CITY COUNCIL Prep Y� pared b Warren G. Hall, City Treasurer J l Subject: CROSSING GUARD LIABILITY INSURANCE _ ciTY ciE>ig Statement of Issue, Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments: STATEMENT OF ISSUE: At the September 8,.1981 Council Meeting approval -was given to allow volunteer crossing guards to be trained by the police department.and stationed at the Florida/Main Street crossing. As part of the discussion I was instructed to find out if liability insurance coverage was available. RECOMMENDATION: Approve purchase of Crossing Guard Liability Coverage (both paid and, volunteer) for first dollar to *250,000 from. Coast Insurance Agency for "-.$5,160 for one (1) year premium and approve transfer of $2,000 funds from Misc. Contingency -Account 101593. AT\TAT•YRTS The approval of volunteer crossing guards at the Florida/Main inter- section further increased the liability of the city for their dangerous dutiesprotecting pedestrians at school crossings and intersection cross- walks throughout the city. The Coast Insurance Agency is the broker of_ record for the present city excess liability coverages from $250',000 self insured retention to *20,000,000. This gives them full access to obtain additional coverages which will be accepted by the excess liability carriers as an integral part of our program of selective risk coverages. We now insure our life guards and their vehicles when they work under contract with Orange County at Sunset Beach. Mr. John Beckendorf of the Coast Agency contacted several specialty companies and obtained this bid from American Universal (Best Rated A + 12) for $5,000 premium plus $160 state premium tax. In;this case the insurance broker solicited bids from the companies in the specialty business and submitted the best bid to us. I consider this an excellent coverage for the , premium dollar cost. (continued) 5 i PIO 4/81 -2- FUNDING SOURCE: There is a balance of $3,160 in Account 121-481 Surety Bonds which will not be needed this. year due to our bonds being cancelled last fiscal year, effective June 30, 1981. They were placed with another company and the premium.paid in advance out of last year's funds. The balance of $2,000 is requested from Account 101-593 Misc. Contingency Funds. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: Do not approve the purchase of this coverage and revert to self insurance of the volunteer crossing guard program. i, CITY OF HUQ TING TON BEACH P. 0. BOX 711 CAL! FOR NIA 92648 CITY TREASURER -WARREN G. HALL MEMO TO: C. W.. Thompson, City Administrator MEMO FROM: Warren G. Hall, City Treasurer DATE: September 18, 1981. SUBJECT: CROSSING GUARD LIABILITY I14SURANCE Based upon our discussion, I have bound a liability insurance coverage for all our crossing guards,both paid and volunteer, effective 12:01 A.M. on Monday, 9-21-81. Coverage to be issued by Coast Insurance Agency with American Universal Crating A+12) for coverage from first dollar to $250,000.and it is accepted as underlying coverage to our excess insurance coverages to $20,O00,000 with no deductible amount. Coverage will be only for people acting as crossing guards who have been trained and are on a roster of trained individuals to be maintained by the Traffic Division of Police Department. Itcovers both paid and volunteer crossing guards., It.will not cover any untrained (unauthorized) volunteer who may attempt to be a crossing.guard. The premium for the coverage is $5,160.00, which I hope can be funded ;9)ut jof H.C.D. funds. WGH/vt . J� We CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTER -DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH To Charles W. Thompson From F. B. Arguello City Administrator Chief of Administrative Services Subject Crossing Guard Liability Date October 1 , 1981 Insurance FIR # 81-75 In response to the City Treasurer's Office, I am hereby submitting a Financial Impact Report relative to the requested additional funding tp accommodate one year's premium fo-r purchasing crossing guard liability coverage. It has been suggested that an appropriation in the amount of $2,000 would.suffice for this purpose. Adequate monies are available in the General Fund Miscellaneous Contingency Account (#101593)• Should the City Council approve this request, the balance in the account would be reduced to $138,275.20.. -O F. B. Arguello Chief of Administrative Services FBA/AR/cg CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH FINANCIAL IMPACT REPORT Project Name Crossing Guard Liability Insurance Description Requested financing to provide for one year's premium towards crossing guard 1.iabil_ity ii.nsurance. U 1. DIRECT PROJECT COSTS 1.1 One -Time Costs Land Acquisjtion Construction urn., aci i- ties, Equipment- Other Total Cost 1.2 Recurring. Annual Costs Payroll Additional. Personnel Materials & Supplies Outside Services Revenues Total Cost 160 1.3 Replacement/Renewal Costs N/A G 2. INDIRECT COSTS Loss of interest_ earned on the monies expended on this.expenditure. Financial Impact Report Page 2 - 3. NON -DOLLAR COSTS N/A 4. BENEFITS TO BE DERIVED FROM THE PROJECT The City Treasurer feels that this coverage is in the best interests of the City and that the premiums are not unreasonable. 5. PROJECT USAGE Daily. 6.; EXPENDITURE TIMING Jj Subsequent to City Council approval. 7. COST OF NOT IMPLEMENTING THE PROJECT Since the Crossing Guard program in question has already been approved by the. City Council, the City would have no alternative but to resolve any and all poten claims with its self insurance reserves.-. September 28, 1981 Date Submitted to: Mayor and City Council Submitted by: Charles Thompson, City Administrator % Prepared by: Warren G . Hall, City Treasurer�b Subject: CROSSING GUARD LIABILITY INSURANCE aStaternent of Issue, Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments: , STATEMENT OF ISSUE: At the September 8, 1981 Council.Meeting approval was given to allow volunteer crossing guards to be -trained by the.police department and stationed at the Florida/Pain Street crossing. As part of the discussionI was instructed to_ findout if liability insurance coverage was available. RECOMMENDATION: Approve purchase of Crossing Guard Liability Coverage (both paid and volunteer) for first dollar to $250,000 from Coast Insurance � F 10.�. J ).16-fl�or-6ne��)year premium and approve transrer or $2,000 funds ��. :� Mise. Contingency Account 101593. _ _. ANATX1;TS : The approval of -volunteer crossing guards at The Florida/Main inter- section further increased the liability of the city for their dani-erous duties, protecting pedestrians at school crossings and intersection; crop: walks throughout the city. The Coast Insurance Agency is the brol-er_oi record for.the present city excess liability coverages frog, $250.,Ou0 self insured retention to $'20,000,000. This gives them full access to obtain additional coverages which will be accepted by the excess 1_'�bility carriers as an integral part of our program of se-Lective risk coverages. We now insure our life guards and. -their vehicles when tht-.y work under contract with Orange County at Sunset Beach. Mr. John Beckendorf of the Coast Agency contacted several specialty cor:pani(2s ai-_u, obtained this -bid from American Universal (Best Rated A + 12) for 5,007. pr.eAum plus $1GO state premium tax. In -this case the insurance broker solicited bids from the companies in the specialty business and s.�n�itt:.d the best bid -to us. I consider this an excellent coverage for the premium dollar coat. (continued) Plo 4/81 (• -2- FUNDING SOURCE: There is a balance of $3,160 in Account 121-481 Surety Bonds which will not be needed this year due to our bonds being cancelled last fiscal year, effective June 30, 1981. They were placed with another company and the premium paid in,advance out of last year's funds. •• The balance of $25000 is requested from Account 101-593 Misc. Contingency;Funds. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: ; Do not approve the purchase of this coverage and revert to self iinsurance of the volunteer crossing guard program. 4 t•. Y.�i.� u _ c4ak3Ca a+...r. _ . CALIF CIRNIA 92648 CITY TPEASUREF, -WARRED! G. HALL MEMO TO: C . W. Thompson, City Administrator. MEMO FROM rren :G . Mall , City Treasurer j DATE: September is, lJIIl SUBJECT: CROSSING GUARD LIABILITY IMSURANCF' ' Based upon our discussion, I have bound a liability insurance coverage for all our crossing fguards,botb paid and volunteer, effective l'2_:01 A.M. on Monday, 9-2.1-81. Coverage to be :issued by Coast Insurance Agency with '":merican Universal (rating 4012) for.coverage from first dollar to $250,000 and it is accepted is underlying coverage to our excess insurance coverages to $20,000,000 with no deductible ' I amount. T s , ,•-�., CoV�rage �_. will b�_ only for pc.opl�� a��tinr, a�; cz osA gin;; :aho have been trained a5d. a.re on a ,:roster of train od 7.1" divitua is � to be maintained by the Traffic Division of Police Depdrtmcr, :. It covers both paid and volunteer cros =ing . gu.ar,_IIs . It will not ( cover any untrained (unauthorized) volunteer who rllny to .be a crossing guard. l he. premium, for the coverage is $ 5 ,1 G 0 . 0 0 , wh i ph d hope funded aut;If H.M. funds. REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION Date August 28. 1981 Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council. Submitted by: Charles W. Thompson, City Admi ni strato VED BY CITY COUNCIL A,,pp$Os� Prepared by: Department of Development Services/HCD Division i90 Subject: CROSSING GUARDS AT MAIN/FLORIDA CIT CLt Q m&.- i L Ar / , Q Backup Material Attached: [X] Yes [ ] No Statement of Issue, Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions: STATEMENT OF ISSUE: Councilwoman Ruth Bailey has asked that an investigation of the provision of crossing guards at Main/Florida be pursued. Transmitted herewith are the re- sults of this investigation. RECOMMENDATION:. Authorize the provision of crossing guards at Main/Florida only if a sufficient number of qualified volunteers can be garnered from Wycliffe Gardens, and authorize the Police Department to train these volunteers at no charge. ANALYSIS: Since the occupancy of Wycliffe Gardens in October 1980, pedestrian traffic at the intersection of Main/Florida,has increased. Many of the residents of Wycliffe Gardens shop at the 5 Points Shopping .Center immediately across Main Street. At this time this is an "uncontrolled intersection" without any traffic signal or any other traffic control device. The City Council has authorized the expendi- ture of $95,000 in HCD funds to provide a traffic signal at this intersection; however, this signal will not be installed and operational for approximately four to six months. ' In the meantime, Councilwoman Ruth Bailey has suggested that to ease the current conflict between/automobile and pedestrian traffic at,this intersection that the City coodinate a volunteer crossing guard program. Through the investigation of this matter the following issues have been identified. Paul E. Cook, Director of Public Works., has expressed the following concerns regarding this proposal (see memo attached): (1) young people do not generally cooperate with crossing guards, (2) a•recent.study indicates that 28 percent of the pedestrian traffic at this point are persons between the ages of 51 and 60 (see traffic study attached), (3) crossing guards do not control traffic but PIO 3/81 Page Two assist in the visibility of pedestrians, and (4) providing crossing guards at this intersection will establish a precedent and precipitate a request for the same services at Garfield/Florida and other locations. The Police Department has stated that it's able and willing to train the volunteer crossing guards using the same procedures applied to the train- ing of the school crossing guards hired by the City. This department has also indicated that there would be no charge for this service., The Administrator of Wycliffe Gardens, Inc. has stated that this facility's management will cooperate in every way in this effort, and would solicit volunteers for this program from the -.residents of Wycliffe Gardens. At this time, however, no list of volunteers has been received by this office. The City Attorney's office has expressed concern regarding this proposal and the additional liability which may befall the City should any accident occur at this intersection at which a crossing guard is involved (see memo attached). However, i.t does not appear that any liability incurred through this volunteer program would be any greater, nor any less, than the liability already incurred by the City in its provision of paid school crossing guards. Based on the information referenced above it appears that, if it is the wish of the Council, a volunteer crossing guard program can be established at the Main/Florida intersection. While the provision of volunteer crossing guards may help mitigate the current traffic conflict at this intersection, there is no guarantee that it will eliminate the problem. Some additional liability will accrue to the City by virtue of the larger number of crossing guards in the field. These volunteer crossing guards would be trained by the Police Department as any other crossing guards. With the authorization of Council, the management of Wycliffe Gardens will be requested to specifically advise residents interested in participating in this program. FUNDING SOURCE: Police Department budget to absorb training costs and equipment costs (approximately $70) for jackets and paddles. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. The City Council may wish not to provide crossing guards at this inter- section at this time, and await the permanent solution to the problem with the installation of the traffic signal. 2. The City Council may wish to hire crossing guards to provide services at this intersection as is done in surrounding schools in the City, and re- quest that these paid crossing guards be trained by the Police Department in the usual manner. CWT:TT:SVK:jb attachments BRIEF FOR VOLUNTEER CROSSING GUARDS Volunteer Crossing Guards are -not Traffic Officers as defined in the California Vehicle Code, and as such have no police power. They are civilian volunteers accepting responsibility for pedestrians which cross the street at an assigned crossing. Volunteer crossing guards serve as a supplemental technique and are not to be construde as a traffic �G\ control device as defined in the California Vehicles Code. Volunteer crossing guards shall not, at anytime, attempt to direct traffic. They shall not wave at vehicular traffic to proceed, nor shall they in any way obstruct or interfere with the normal movement of traffic. They shall wait for the normal break in traffic before stepping out into the street. Volunteer crossing guards shall not attempt to apprehend traffic law violators. If a violation is observed by a crossing -guard, he shall attempt to visually identify the driver, get a description of the car., obtain the license plate number and forward this information to their super- visor for possible police action. Training in proper crossing guard techniques shall be the. subject of a separate program approved by the Chief of Police and the City.Administrator. 1 t To Suhjcct CITY C1= HUNT1NGTCN BEACH INTER -DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION Charle. Thompson From City. Administrra.tor tlnav:I 1.1ab1_111 of' r.tppl.emcntary Date i:I'03S:i11„ Guard ln5iwatice for City of Huntint ton Beach Gail_ Hutton City Attorney 1•}ny 13, 1981 I forward herewith a tile tnor'a11dum fr.`orn Stephen V. Kohler informing this o.f'fice that twelve independent insurance carriers declined to [Take Insurance av,allable to the City of Iluratinirton Beach to provide supplcmentar,y insurance cove1.r.°age for city crossing guard 'voluntee-rs. It would seem that this volunteer undertal;:i.nC ci'e.ites a high der;ree of ri.s'k even far' i:n:,urtance cornl)an=ies. We tare cu.rrent.l,y defenc}:i_nt* to major 'la.wsu.i_t from city cros11i.n4; F,tlard rjcti_vity for which . the c:}_ty' ; exposure' Is from the fir st; dollar in attorney fees and : ny settlement. .or judgirlent down the line. GALL .HU`17014 City Attorney Gll: be Attachment cc: lli.11firu S. Am:::bary, A:;sirstant City Attorney . Stephen V. Kohler, Senior Comrnunit:,y Development Specialist 4. r To CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 'Z INTER -DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION 111 \11•:l.II IV NI U 11 - 005�teubgm_01 , Gail Hutton From enior nn n ty City Attorney Devel pme pecialist slihicct SUPPLEMENTARY INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR Date April 22, 1981 CROSSING GUARDS At the suggestion of William Amsbary, we contacted John Jones of Dahri Insurance Company to investigate the availability and cost for supplementary insurance coverage for crossing guards. Specifically, it was Mr. Amsbary's suggestion that the City secure.insurance coverage from the first dollar of loss up to the City's total deductible amount of. $250,000. This insurance was to ease the City's liability in the event an accident may occur in which a crossing guard was involved. Mr. Jones contacted 12 independent insurance carriers to request a quote for such an insurance policy. All 12 of these carriers declined to make such insurance available to the City of Huntington Beach. It appears from this investigation that the City will not be able to secure additional insurance coverage as suggested by Per. Amsbary, and further it appears that any resultant loss attributed to the City's liability would have to be paid up to the amount of the City's deductible of $250,000. This office is to receive within a few days the names of tenants within the Wycliffe Gardens building willing to serve as crossing guards at the intersection of Main and Florida. I would welcome any suggestion your office might make to ir.-plement this volunteer crossing guard program. If you have no alternative suggestions I would recommend that we bring this information regarding the. unavailability of additional insurance coverage to the attention of the City Council prior to the implementation of the program. If you should have any questions please call me at extension 5542. SVK_:jb l+ii pp�, t In!►J 718191I,�ttl114 � %tvl Jl5l(j CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH !`? INTER -DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH - To Steve Kohler From pa.ul E. Cooke.. Housing and Community Development Director of Public Works Subject Crossing Guard - Main & Florida Date August 25, 1981 This memo is in response to your inquiry regarding the feasibility of assigning a crossing guard at the subject intersection. We feel that a crossing guard at this location would be ineffective for the following reasons: 1. Young people over the age of twelve do not generally co- operate with crossing guards and will usually cross a highway regardless of traffic conditions. 2. A recent study indicates.the largest age group (28%) using the crosswalk was between the ages of 51 and 60. This group is generally capable of crossing a street without assistance from another adult.. 3. Crossing guards do not control traffic. Their function is,to wait for gaps in the traffic and then assist by increasing the visibility of the pedestrian and by display- ing a "stop" paddle while the pedestrian is within the crosswalk. 4. Assigning a crossing guard at Main and Florida may establish a precedence and.precipitate a request for a crossing guard at Garfield and Florida and other locations. We trust this information is adequate for your response to the City Administrator. A copy of the traffic engineering report containing the pedestrian survey is included with this memo. PEC:RRL:jy Attach. cc: Lt. Price, H.B.P.D. Traffic Bureau Traffic Engineering The Traffic Engineering Section of . the Department of Public Works for the City of Huntington Beach has been directed to conduct a detailed analysis to determine the priority listing for the construction of three traffic signal installations. The intersections which are encompassed in this study. are as follows: 1. Main Street at Ellis 2. Main Street at Florida 3. Main Street at Delaware During the process of evaluating these locations, it was determined that the intersection .of Main and Ellis will .have to be equipped with a traffic signal in the near future. This intersection is currently operating at unsafe levels and is a_potential accident hazard. All counts and surveys conducted showed that,this intersection experiences the greatest level of vehicular traffic among the locations in question. One method used by Traffic Engineers to determine the priority order of constructing traffic signal installations is the Delay Accumulation Method. This method was developed by the FHWA in the early 1960's when money was plentiful and when the drive behind the FHWA was to increase traffic control facilities rather than maximizing existing traffic control facilities. Although the method was developed . in the early 1960's,. it has been revised, updated and reworked to become a very helpful tool to traffic engineers of the 1980's. Based on the findings of the Delay Accumulation Method (DAM) study, the intersection of Main and Ellis experiences 37% more vehicle delay than the other two locations. A brief summary of the DAM study follows in Table 1... TABLE .1 DELAY ACCUMULATION METHOD STUDY belay Per Initial Delay Per Percentage Ranking Location Vehicle (Sec) Vehicle -Stand Start (Sec) of Overrun 1 Main at Ellis 8.75 2.53 37.45 2 Main at Florida 6.53 1.78 19.23 3 Main at Delaware 3.61 0.75 14.74 The remainder of the studies dealt with comparing the two remaining intersections. Many.. factors and methods were used to determine which of the two intersections would benefit most from a traffic signal installation. It is important to point out that both intersections would benefit considerably by a traffic. signal installation; however, if both locations were equipped with traffic signal installations, it is quite feasible that one of the locations and . possibly both of the locations would not function or operate to the levels which are required for this project. One of the major points to support this reasoning is that if a traffic signal is installed at Main and Florida, most of the Five Points Shopping Center's traffic will utilize this intersection rather than Main and Delaware. It is the opinion of the Traffic Engineering Section that a possible traffic signal installation at Main and Delaware at this time would .be more of a convenience than a necessity. This viewpoint is further supported by the pedestrian usage study which was conducted to aid in the selection of a single traffic signal installation location. The Traffic Engineering Section believes that a major concern to the evaluation process for this project is the pedestrian input and usage characteristics. The Traffic Engineering Section conducted a pedestrian usage study to further develop realistic data which would enable the City to decide the matter at hand. The pedestrian study was conducted over a two week period and encompassed all areas surrounding the project site. The areas surveyed are shown on Figure 1. In brief, the study questioned and interviewed all persons affected which would possibly use pedestrian crossings at Main and Florida or Main and Delaware. The study surveyed all of the senior citizen facilities, the hospital, medical offices, conference centers, shopping centers, apartments and the commerical developments in the area. - The total. number of responses to the questions and interviews was approximately -1,128 pedestrians. The ages of the pedestrians surveyed ranged from 14. to 86. The following is the breakdown of the ages of all Persons surveyed. Percentage of Age Group Total Number Persons Survey 14-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70 71-80 81-90 Not Available TOTAL 112 10.0 215 19.1 179 15.9. 100 8.8 104 9.2 316 28.0 45 4.0 26 2.3 31 2.7 1,128 -2- 100.0 Ellis ti: }: { • ::tiff':: �ti$:ti:i;{:$t �' I 1 Office Professional Senior Citizen I Residents[ I Residental Medical f: O .. fD ++ Z C 0. 3 N Garfield ,Figure 1 City ,Mai m Street Signals Pro ject� r�ry = - �� Huntington Beach 7"�% I i i xrr (1t } �a i ti sJrDS.y: + rr �F r y !' '•S:r: �i.ti��..J. �.t •,lii. :r.: :`':,11.}J `�1.A'���r'•j� i All of the persons .surveyed were either shown or given a detailed plan which clearly illustratedi the locations of the proposed signals and 'their associated crosswalks. It is important to point out, at this time, that one of the major criterias for deciding which location to install the signal was pedestrian activity. In all of the questionnaires and interviews conducted, 82% of persons polled indicated that they would rather use a crossing at Main and Florida than a crossing at Main and Delaware. Another point to consider is that most of the stores in the Five Points Center are accessible easier from Main at Florida rather than Main and Delaware. If pedestrians are forced to divert to Main and Delaware to cross Main Street, it is only a matter of time before these pedestrians get tired or just do not care and start crossing wherever they wish. It is a reasonable assumption that if a traffic signal is installed at Florida, pedestrians will use this direct path to the Center. Furthermore, pedestrians will continue to use a crossing at a signal for it provides them with a feeling of security rather than using a unprotected crossing. Another area concerning crosswalks which was investigated dealt with the amounts of time used to traverse separate crosswalks. Crosswalks at both Main and Delaware and Main and Florida were reviewed to determine which location would provide pedestrians with the safest crossing. Based on a study which was conducted by the Federal Highway Administration in 1979, it. was calculated that an average physically adequate person walks at a rate of 3.8 feet per second. This rate is based on a person walking at a normal or comfortable rate. Using these figures, it would take a person .approximately 27 seconds to walk across the proposed crosswalks at Main and Florida. Using the same figures, it would take approximately 51. seconds to cross in the proposed crosswalk at Main and Delaware.. The results that were derived from these calculations clearly illustrate that a person crossing at Main and Delaware is exposed to traffic for an additional 24 seconds. The amount of additional crossing time (24 seconds) will have to be made up somewhere. Most likely this tinning will be made up in the controller. - The controller will have to be prograrnmed to provide pedestrian's with the necessary pedestrian clearance time which will enable safe passage. This method for adding the 24 seconds is great for the pedestrians, but will be a problem for vehicles. The addition of pedestrian clearance timing will cause motorists to be delayed for approximately 24 to 30 seconds. Based on the four way ADT for the intersection of Main and Delaware, the amount of energy spent because. of the added delay will run between $235,000 and $317,000 yearly. However, the timing addition will save lives or. is intended to save lives and all the energy spent is not worth the possibility of someone losing their life. There is an alternative to the situation at Main and Delaware. This solution is to not install a signal at this location and to divert. all efforts to designing an efficient and effective traffic signal at Main and Florida. This location will not be affected by additional pedestrian clearance tirne and therefore will not delays. Furthermore, the installation of a traffic signal at. Mai as a controlled access to and from the Five Points Center. -3- cause excessive vehicular n and Florida will function As I continued to study these locations, I conducted field. observations to acquire data concerning vehicle gaps. The results were tabulated and summarized so that averages could be obtained for both locations. During the actual observations it was clearly visible that the existing gaps were not sufficient enough to provide safe crossing times at these locations. The field investigations showed that the average sufficient gap at Main/Delaware and . Main/Florida was 19.3 and 18.7 seconds, respectively. These gaps differed from time to time due to peak hour traffic. During AM and PM peak hour traffic, the gaps were found to be 10.1 and 9.6 seconds, respectively. Also, the noon time traffic (11:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.) altered the gaps by about 17%. • - Based on the results received from field observations, it is clearly evident that these times are inadequate to service pedestrians at these locations. Under existing conditions it is impossible to cross the whole street, at one time without being in danger of being picked off by unattentive motorists. . Currently, the raised median serves as a midway point where pedestrians can wait until the second part of their journey is clear. As you and I both know, allowing pedestrians to occupy medians while motorists pass by at high or low speeds is an unwanted practice which this city tries to discourage. It has been determined that the conditions mentioned herein concerning these two . locations can be remedied by a traffic signal installation at Main and Florida. The signal will provide motorists with protected turning movements and will .aid in clearly defining traffic patterns through the intersection. The installation will also provide pedestrians with a "protect crossing". The timing used for the pedestrian clearances will correspond to the vehicle timing and will eliminate any need for additional pedestrian clearance time. Another benefit. which will be brought about because of this installation is the increase in vehicle gaps for. pedestrian crossings. Based on a 60 or a 90 second cycle length at Main and Florida, coordinated feedback into Main and Ellis and signal. coordination at Main/Garfield/Gothard, the gaps at Main and Delaware could be increased by as much as 165%. As hard as it is .to believe, gaps of up to 51 seconds could be achieved during off peak hours. The,gaps during peak hours will also be increased by approximately 85% to 121%. -4- t 14 � F/ario�a you ��ou� G,�f� yeas �r2 Seniot- fih�r� R. HUNTINGTON BEACH CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTER -DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION To - Paul Cook, Director of Public Works From Alicia M. Wentworth, City Clerk Subject Written Communication from Robert bate May 7, 1981 Reid Re-: Florida/Garfield Attached.is a letter from Robert Reid which he requests be placed on the agenda regarding Florida and Garfield. I believe Mr. Reid is requesting a crosswalk. AMW:CB:bt CC: Charles Thompson, City Administrator p4te-, -s-C-) REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION Pa-y--4%5" v k:s Submitted by Paul E. Cook, Directar� Department Public Works Date Prepared March 28 , 19 80 Backup Materiel Attached Yes a No Subject Request for Crossing Guard at Graham Street and Glenstone Drive City Admi AP D BY CITY COUNCIL Approve as recommended Statement of Issue, Recommendation, Ana is, Funding Source, Alternative Actions: S%D w Q Statement of Issue: 00 Sim, Ooncern for a school crossing at the subject intersection in a r t for a crossing guard. Recommendation: 1. Reduce the speed .limit on Graham Street between Warner Ave. and Slater Ave. from 40 m.p.h. to 30 m.p.h. 2. Install flashing beacons at the intersection for north and south bound traffic. 3. Provide periodic enforcement of the speed limit and stop requirement. Analysis: A pedestrian and vehicular count was -made -to determine if a crossing guard was warranted using two warrant procedures. Using Chapter 10 of the California Traffic Manual, the vehicular count reached 84% of the required 500 vehicles per hour during any period when children are normally going to or'fram school. The_;conflict count used by the City also reach 84% of the required index of.30. The reduction of the speed limit is primarily a result of the vertical alignment of Graham Street over the Orange County Flood Control Channel. 'There is a prevailing opin- ion of concerned: citizens in the area that motorists are.travelling too fast for conditions. The reduction of the speed limit is justified under the premise that the vertical align- ment constitutes a condition of' -the roadway which is not readily apparent to the motorist. The request for the crossing guard was prompted in part, by the reasoning that an adult crossing guard is more readily visible_to,routhbbitrid.motorists..than a small child. How- ever, in the absence of a crossing guard, a flashing redrbeacon mounted at an elevation IS of 10 feet is even more visible. than a tall person crossing the intersection. Alternatives: " 1. Leave existing conditions as they are and reduce the speed limit and provide periodic enforcement. 2. Provide one yellow flashing beacon at the top of the bridge to warn motorists that there is a stop sign ahead for"southbound traffic only. `> 3. Provide an adult crossing guard as requested. f Request for Council Act Crossing Guard March _28, 198Q Page 2. Oust and Funding Sources: ReccmTiendaticn 1. There is a nominal cost to change the speed limit signs and installation of additional sgns.at the bridge. Existing budgeted funds can be used. Recommendaticn 2. The installation of flashing beacons is estimated to cost $2800. The energy and maintenance costs is estimated to be $240 per year. The installation can be financed frcen Gas Tax Funds and the annual cost is normally charged. to General Funds. Recommendation 3. No additional funds are necessary to implement this reccm end- ation. Alternate 1. - The cost is nominal as described in Reeomnendation 1 and 3. Alternate 2. - The installation of a single beacon is estimated to cost $1500 which can be financed from Gas Tax Funds. The annual cost is estimated to be $120 and normally charged to the General Fund. Alternate 3. - The average cost to provide a crossing guard.is $3000 per year which is charged to General Funds, within the Police Department Budget. PEC:RRL:ek S0 REQUEST ' FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION Submitted by Floyd G. Belsito, Acting Department Public. Works Director of P is Wor s Date Prepared September 11 , 19 79 Backup Material A0ached ® Yes No Subject Crossing guard at Yorktown and Canberra. City Administ at}r�or s Comments 131' CITY COUNfJ%g, ............. Approve as recommended. M 19�- 4 dir�eef 34aPP 4v CITY F'JM Statement of Issue, Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions: (k� Statement of Issue: The Fountain Valley School District has requested a crossing guard at Yorktown and Canberra Avenue due to the closing of Lamb School and the reassignment of school children to Arevalos School. Recommendation: Eliminate crossing guard Monday through Fridays (only) at Goldenwest and Rio Vista. (The crossing guard will remain Saturday and Sunday.) Assign crossing guard to Yorktown/Canberra Monday through Friday. Analysis: The average daily traffic (ADT) is 4800. The children walking will be Kindergarten through the 8th grade (approximately 304 children) crossing Yorktown during the hours of 7:30.A.M. to 8:15 A.M. and 2:00 P.M. to 3:30 P.M. A total warrant for crossing guards at the location will be made by the Public Works Department as soon.as possible. A week must normally pass before the school routine is settled. (See attached letter from the Fountain Valley School District requesting a crossing guard.) The Goldenwest crossing is not a school crossing. The average number of children crossing at this intersection is 5 per day. (See attachment) Alternative: 1. Leave the guard at Goldenwest and increase the crossing guard budget to provide a crossing guard at Yorktown. 2. Eliminate the crossing guard at Goldenwest and do not assign a crossing guard to Yorktown and Canberra. 3. Eliminate crossing guard at Goldenwest and assign to Yorktown/Canberra crossing. FGB:BW:ek P10 W79 • 1 90untain. ` alle ! X hool `District Number One Lighthouse Lane • 1`,lailing Address: P. O.. Box 8510 FOUN-FAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708-•.'(714) 842-6651 Office of the Deputy Superintendent Business Services August 28, 1979 HUNTINGTON BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT P.O. Box 190 Huntington Beach, Ca 92648 Attention: Bill Waddell, Crossing Guard Supervisor Subject: CROSSING GUARD REQUIREMENTS FOR 1979780 Dear Mr.. Waddell.: We are requesting crossing guards for the following schools for the 1979-80 school year: OKA SCHOOL Yorktown & Brigintine TALBERT SCHOOL Garfield & Magnolia The first d of school is September 10, 1979. Sincer y . n M. Hardy . erintendent nvw cc: Principals r7ll �'1 tahu ValleyXhool �� /s/7" ct. NumbL C)nc Lighth,)LISC 1_.MI ;� ddillg Ak-Wlrti>: 1'. O. 13_ \ 5510 FOUVIAIN VAIAI---Y, CALIFORNIA 92708 (7_1,1) 842.6651 September G, 1979 hlr. Bill GVaddell, Civil Engineer Assistant_ City of Huntington Beach, Public Works ucpartment 2000 Main Street Iuntington Beach, California SEP 71019 HUNTINGTON SE:ACH• CALI.--. Subject: Yorktown Crossing Guard and Edison Pedestrian Easement at Pitcairn Dear I,Ir. Waddell: After.reviewing with you and Dave I,Liller the need for a crossing guard at Pitcairn and Yorktown, I have taken the following actions: e Letter to the City of Huntington Beach a Letter to parents explaining safest route to school and bicycle route as you described a 64ork order to construct an access gate in the Arevalos playground fence . Please consider this letter a request for a crossing guard as described in our meeting. In addition, this .letter will serve as a District request to keep the pedestrian access open at Pitcairn and the Edison easement because of the following supporting data: ® Students.crossing.Yorktown - 304 ® Students using .the pedestrian access.- 64 Thank you for your assistance this afternoon. Sincerely, Or... Xo"'.Ae'v N%-.- JACK E. I•IAHNKEN, Ed. D. Assistant Superintendent Personnel Services cj/ 0 CRMING GUARD SURVEY CENTRAL PARK CROSSING GOLDENWEST RIO VISTA Time Pedestrians Date K to 5th Grade 6, 7, 8 Adult 0955 1 8/13/79 1130 1 1437 1 1505 2 1620 2 ,bikes 1645 1 TOTALS 1 3 4 0936 2 8/14/79 1055 1 1240 1 1650 2 bikes TOTALS 2 1 3 1110 2.bikes 1 8/15/79 1230 1 1405 2 2 1510 1 2 1,653' 3 TOTALS 5 1 8 1,040 3 1 8/16/79 1155 1 1235 1 2 1250 1343 2 1420 1 1 bike 1655 1 TOTALS 6 2 5 1035 1 bike 8/17/79 1140 2 1230 1 1305 2 1420 2 TOTAL 2 1 5 CROSSING GUARD SURVEY Page 2.. CENTRAL PARK CROSSING GOLDENWEST RIO VISTA 'Lime Pedestrian Date K to 5th Grade 6, 7, 8 Adult 1 0935 1 8/18/79 1100 2 1315 1 2 1655 2 TOTALS 1 5 3 1135, 2 8/19/79 1240 6 1650 3 1 bike 1715 1 TOTALS 3 3 7 0 SURVEY - YORKTOWN/CANBERRA 9/11/7.9 1:20 P.M. to 2:20 P.M. 2:30 P.M. to 3:30 P.M. 9/12/79 7:15 A.M. to 8:15 A.M. Children 26 (Kindergarten -,Second) Vehicles' _a. 381 Children 121 (Third Grade - Sixth) Vehiclestes 390 Children (Kindergarten - Eigth) 149 Vehicl'esl-_L 708 Sa REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION RCA 79-42 Submitted by - Floyd. G. Belsito Department Administration Date Prepared May 14 , 19 799 Backup Material Attached Yes 0 No Subject CROSSING GUARDS City Administrator's Comments Approve as recommended. s 4,o Df'��' f�r�iGl 7/1 Statement of Issue, Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions: STATEMENT OF ISSUE: Last week, Governor Brown vetoed SB 182 (Dills) which would have repealed the authority for schools to hire crossing guards. RECOMMENDATION: Appoint a committee to meet with representatives of the school boards to discuss a shared crossing guard program. ANALYSIS: Since SB 182 was vetoed by the Governor, we are now back where we were several months ago. City staff had met with school district staff at that time, but had met with a somewhat negative reaction. It was suggested that the policy makers meet, and the school districts submit names of Board members,willing to.meet on this issue in the event the bill failed. ALTERNATIVE: Do not meet with the policy makers. FUNDING SOURCE: No funds are necessary. /a— Pio ane �-A TO: ATTN: FROM: DATE: City of Huntington Beach P.O. BOX 190 CALIFORNIA 92646 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Honorable Mayor and City Council Floyd G. Belsito ��/� H.E. Hartge, Director of Public Works Earle W. Robitaille, Chief of Police February 24, 1978 SUBJECT: Budget for Crossing Guards. STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Recent policy changes by school districts and other factors have in- creased the demand for -crossing guards. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Consider alternative methods for financing the Police Department's Crossing Guard Budget. ANALYSIS: Declining student enrollment at the elementary school level has resulted in the closure of some schools: This situation has caused' an increase in the attendance area of the remaining schools, thereby lengthening the walking distance to school and increasing .the number of highways that must be crossed. In addition, some of the school districts have reduced the school bus program because of budget con- straints-. Consequently, additional students are now walking to school. Several :exhibits have been prepared to identify the impact of these changes -and to determine the future trend. Exhibit 1 is a graph which plots the population growth of the city and the increased number of crossing guards. This chart indicates that the slope of the crossing guards i"s much greater than the slope of the population growth. In other words, a small change in the population will result.in a much greater change in the number of required crossing guards. Exhibit 2 is a tabulation of a survey (dated April 19, 1976) of ten Orange County cities including Huntington Beach. The results indicate that Huntington Beach is fourth in the ranking of cities in terms of annual cost per capita. The fifth column is the number of crossing guards per 10,000 population. In this category, Huntington Beach is fifth in the ranking. This exhibit leads to the conclusion that des- pite the fact that the demand for crossing protection is increasing at a greater rate than the population growth, this impact is apparent- ly being felt by other cities within the county. w Honorable Mayro a: City Council ' February 24, 1978 Page 2. Exhibit 3 is an inventory of the existing crossing guard program. This program now employs 33 regular crossing guards and retains 6 guards in reserve. There are 3 crossing guards assigned to duty at Central Park. The Police Department has assigned one service officer to full time supervision of the program. Currently, there is a total 26,876 school children which are crossed on a daily basis. Exhibit 4 shows the approximate location of each crossing guard and the location of the schools and activity centers. Another factor which contributes to the problem is the fact that al- though the funds for the program appear in the Police Department's budget, the decision to assign a crossing guard to a particular location is made by the Traffic Engineering Division of the Public Work's Department based on published warrants or by the City Council based on warrants and other considerations. There has been come con- cern expressed about this situation since there has been budget over- runs on several occassions ALTERNATIVE/FUNDING SOURCES: 1. Crossing Guard Maintenance District Act of 1974 - Assembly Bill 3129 which adds Chapter 3.5 to the Education Code provides a means whereby any local agency may form districts within which land and inprovements may be assessed to pay the costs and ex- penses of providing pedestrian crossing guards at street inter- sections in order to insure.the safety of schoolchildren who use such intersections. Proceeding for the formation of a crossing guard maintenance district may be initiated by petition signed by two-thirds of the registered voters in the proposed district or by resolution of intention by the legislative body of the local agency which has jurisdiction over the territory proposed to be included in the district. The procedure for the formation of assessment districts is some- what complex and time consuming. The cost is approximately the same whether the assessment is for one million dollars or a hundred thousand dollars. In addition,passage of the Jarvis Initiative would have a significant impact on the available funds obtained by this method. 2. Revenue Sharing Funds - This source of funding could be used to supplement general funds in the event that budget increases con- tinue at the same rate. 3. Existing expenditures could be reduced by removing crossing•guards who are assigned to intersections which are controlled by traffic signals or four-way stop signs. However, this.alternative has serious political and liability implications and should be used only as a last resort. Future assignment of crossing guards could be more selective by considering only locations which are uncon trolled. HEH/EWR/RRL"/ek + y ' EXHIBIT 1 c • BY DATE 2 4 78 sue,EcTTI ME V$. POPULATION 8t SHEET NO. OF /. cHKD. BY DATE NUMBER OF CROSSING GUARD cc NO. ol HUNTINGTON BEACH40 r t o4 3( 2° 2( It 114 5 ' I Lo N V. 78 -170, 00 'rti7 'I,A 'F,9 'Jo '71 '72 '73 '7:4 '15 ''i6 7 '78 '79 'k 'AJ FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING LEGEND QPOPULATION LEVELS L� NUMBER , OF GUARDS CITY SCHOOL CROSSING GU 7 QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSE'RESULTS 'w. oQJ �4� 4 � / (o A-� 4� �wti0 moo) oy Q EXHIBIT April 19, 1976 4w ANAHEIM 193,000 29 54� $80,9.12 2..1 BUENA PARK 63,000 14 58¢ $36,347 2.2 ` FOUNTAIN VALLEY 523,000 16 74¢ $38,340 3.1 FULLERTON 941475 19 40� $37,940 2.0 GARDEN GROVE 123,200 16 35¢ $42,900 1.3- HUNTINGTON BEACH 150,000 32, 54¢ $80,912 2.1 ORANGE 85.,000 24 40� $34,000 2.8 x H SEAL BEACH 28,000 4 $ 8;887 1.4 F--1 H TUSTIN 30,000 9 63� $ 18, 922 3.0 WESTMINSTER 69,000- 20 43¢ $30,000 2.9 EXHIBIT 3 a !1 11 ral Eiji �D 0 UEd 01 ill I J-4 .11cfj i ;I 41 1 IOSPITAL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL . FIRE HIGH SCHOOL GOLF COURSE, COLLEGE 01 PARK AIRPCnT bF'5 CITY YAnD RECREATION CENTER V AOUATIC PARK CITY BEACH STATE BEACH rT PIER CIVIC CENTER COMMUNITY SW— CTR. POLICE A- LIBRARY OC SEWAGE 4v--p4 EDISON STEAM PLANT _TREATMENT PLANT .A CROSSING GUARD �a I - �0-1, 1 ' / I 1 1 4-1 //- . I Figure 3-14. c EXHIBIT 3 b ELE1' IENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICTS ,eoof , WE SIMI N I STir,* EST f" C H 0 0 L D 1-5 T-F t lima 'PlAIIIIIIIIII Iloilo 11415151 0 CEANV� IEW CHCOL I STF IC naa 1411"1 G T CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ORANGE 'COUNTY CALIFORNIA III 17 AIN-VALLEY- CHO ISTRICTE LID S R I CT SCHOOL CROSSING GUARDS 1978 - 1979 33 Regular Crossing Guards 3 Central Park 6 Reserve Crossing Guards EXHIBIT-3 c Number of School Children Crossed Daily 26,876 LOCATION SCHOOLS SCHOOL ENROLLMENT TRAFFIC CONTROL REMARKS SERVED DISTRICT DEVICES Springdale Clegg Westminster 433 1 Beacons operate only when guard Croupier Stacy 81S 2 is on duty 3 Edwards Schroeder Westminster 508 1 Flashing varicon Cornell 2 signs are on order. Saybrook Harbour Ocean View 780 1 Bradford View 2 Heil St. Ocean View 740 1 Bradbury Bonaventure 2 Eleil Spring- Ocean View 77S 1 Trudy view 2 ueil College Ocean View 725 1 :dlands View 2 CROSSING GUARDS i Page 2. SCHOOLS SCHOOL TRAFFIC LOCATION SERVED DISTRICT ENROLLMENT CONTROL REMARKS DEVICES Heil Park- Ocean View 750 1 Sabot view 2 Heil Sunview Ocean View 600 1 Silver 2 1 Heil Westmont Ocean View 500 Monroe 2 Springdale Marine View Ocean View 660 1 Palo Alto 2 Goldenwest Goldenview Ocean View 405 1 flashing beaco) Slater. 2 operate 24 houi 3 Warner Goldenview Ocean View 405 1 Edwards 2 4. Slater Lakeview Ocean View 520 1 Geraldine 2 McFadden Robinwood Ocean View 375 1 Andaman 2 CROSSING GUARDS Page 3. LOCATION SCHOOLS SERVED SCHOOL DISTRICT ENROLLMENT TRAFFIC CONTROL I. REMARKS DEVICES Main Dwyer Huntington 800-D 1 - Lake Park Smith Beach 810-S 2 City Indianapolis Peterson Huntington 475 1 Farnsworth Beach_ 2 City Yorktown Newland Huntington 555 1 Rockcrest Beach 2 City Magnolia Wardlow Huntington 1 Yorktown Beach 2 City 4 Newland Moffett Huntington 620 1 Norfolk Beach 2 City Newland Ketiler Huntington 500 1 2 St. Augustine Beach City Banning Eader Huntington 600 1 Malibu Beach .2 City Bushard Eader Huntington 600 1 Banning Beach 2 City 5. CROSSING GUARDS Page 4. LOCATION SCHOOLS SCHOOL TRAFFIC SERVED DISTRICT ENROLLMENT CONTROL REMARKS nrVTr.. Atlanta Burke Huntington 600-B 1 Strathmoor Gisler Beach 1040-G 2 City Hamilton Gisler Huntington 1040 1 Spyglass Beach 2 City Hamilton Eader Huntington 600 1 Northshore Beach, 2 City Bushard Burke Huntington 600-B 1 Yellowstone Hawes Beach 56-0-H 2 City Indianapolis Sowers Huntington 1150 1 at Sowers Beach 2 School City Magnolia Sowers Huntington 11S0-S 1 Indianapolis Moffett Beach 630-M 2 City 4 Garfield Perry Huntington 67S 1 Colchester Beach 2 - City CROSSING GUARDS Page S. 'i i i LOCATION SCIIOOLS SCIIOOL ENROLLMENT 1'RAFF fC REMARKS SERVED. DISTRICT CONTROL. DEVICES 17th Street Dwyer Huntington 800-D 1 Palm Smith Beach 810-S 2 City 5 Goldenwest Dwyer Huntington. 800-D 1 Palm Smith Beach 810-S 2 City Garfield Talbert Fountain 650 1 Magnolia Valley 2 4 Yorktown Oka Fountain 620 1 Brigintine Valley 2 Goldenwest Central Fountain 1300 1 Flashing beacon, Rio Vista Park Valley 2 operate 24 hour! Crossing 3 LEGEND - TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES 1. Marked Crosswalks 2. 'Warning Signs 3. Flashing Beacons ` 4. Traffic Signal 5. Four -Way Stop � CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 1INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH . To Floyd G. Belsito From Vincent G. Moorhouse, Director City Administrator . Harbors, Beaches $ Development Subject MUNICIPAL PIER MAINTENANCE Date November 21, 1977 As you are aware,.for the past ten years I have asked that the City Council consider placing funding into contingency to offset predictable deteriora- tion on the municipal pier. Because of a.critical cash flow, the City has not been able to set these monies aside. Two years ago we budgeted $6,000 to do a preliminary engineering analysis of the municipal pier. In seeking bids, we found that to be insufficient funding for the type of analysis that was needed on the pier and that the expenditure of $6,000 would only provide a cursory overview and would require additional analysis to substantiate the findings of the less costly report. We have been unable to budget those additional monies to do the type of study that needs to be done. Meanwhile, the pier continues to deteriorate. Bud, I sincerely feel we need to have a Study Session with the Council to update them as to the problems facing this structure. You and I both know that any structure subjected to the stresses of the sea and the adverse elements of that environment must be maintained properly. Some deterioration can be allowed, but if it accumulates over too long a period, the cost to repair the structure could be astronomical. The pier originally cost the City approximately $78,000. The value of that structure to replace it.today is $2,500,000 to $3,000,000 and going. up. The structure is not only ai integral part of this community and provides a recreational outlet for millions of people annually, it is also a major deter- mining factor for 'stabilizing the beach erosion on our beaches. I have attached a folder with photographs of some of the problems we are facing. I feel this folder should be circulated to the Council or, better yet, if time permits, we have a Study Session with the Council with the City Engineer and some of his staff in attendance to discuss this matter in more detail. Mr. Hartge and I met with representatives of Moffatt and Nichol, an en ineering firm, over a year ago and it was estimated it would cost in excess of 35,000 to do an indepth engineering analysis of the structure. That report would provide us with a detailed report as to specifically what needed to be repaired and how it should be repaired. This is a very specialized field and being that the structure is in the ocean, it is much more difficult to physically inspect, particularly underneath the pier and in the water. If you could place this on a Study Session agenda at a time that would be convenient for you and the Council, we would certainly appreciate the oppor- tunity to bring this serious matter to their attention. If you have any Floyd G. Belsito -2- November 21, 1977 questions concerning this memorandum, please contact me. These are the only photographs we have, so I would ask that either you hold onto them for the prgsentation or return them to my office. %I%fncent G. Moorhouse Director Harbors, Beaches $ Development VGM:eh cc: Richard A. Harlow, Assistant City Administrator W. E. Hartge, Director, Public Works soil : t1�1`h:1 Huntington Beach City Council, 2000 South Main, Huntington Beach, February 27, 1978, A. J. R. Elpers, M.D., Program Chief, Alcoholism, Drug Abuse and Mental Health Services, Human Services Agency ETMODUCI'ION B. Peter Kimmel, M.D., Deputy Director, North Coast Region, Alcoholism, # Drug Abuse and rkntal Health Services, Hunan Services Agency KEY ROLE OF RESIDE TiTAL CARE HOi9ES C. Lynn Slaven, Recruiter, Social Services, Ih-mn Services Agency NEED FOR HO: TS , FAIR SHARE FOFU�iULA, STATE' S VIEW OF RESID=IAL CARE HOMES D. Dennis Carlson. Continuing- Carp Coordinator. North roast Rpvion. Alcoholism, Drug Abuse and Mental Health Services, Hun»z Services. Agency CLINICAL SC=TING OF RESID:2ITS, SUPPORTIVE CLINICAL SERVICES TO RESIDENTS, I=I NGTON BEACH RESIDENTS WHO REQUIRE SERVICES E. Linda Martinez, Monitoring Worker, Social Services, Human Services Agency LICENSING AI'D MONITORING OF RESIDII`TI AL CARE HOMES , j•;HAT IS t^I'.ANT BY SUPERVISION OF HOrM BY OPERATORS, TRAIN= OFFERED TO CARE PROVIDERS F. Nancy Harris, Associate Director, Mental Health Association ROLE OF MRIM HEALTH ASSOCIATION G. Lynn Slaven RECO144ENMTIONS TO THE COUNCIL QUESTIONS AND ANWERS February 27, 1978 if CITY'S GOALS AND OBJECTIVES I. SOUND ECONOMIC CONDITION 1. Maintain the lightest possible tax burden consistent with the service needs of the community. A. Approve only programs and goals that are financially feasible throughout the life of the program. B. Establish user fees wherever possible. C. Structure taxes and fees in such a manner that the distribution of the financial burden within the com- munity is commensurate with the benefits received. 2. Provide continuing fiscal integrity of the city government. A. Establish a long range capital equipment replacement program. B. Establish a long range capital improvement program to cover the next five years. 3. Effect efficient operation of the city government. A. Establish a council/administration/department head management team. B. Maximize leveraging funding sources. 4. Achieve a balanced economic base for the community. A. Adopt a redevelopment plan for downtown. B. Provide financial assistance in attracting commercial/ industrial developers. C. Assist in the development of postage stamp lots through consolidation. D. Develop low intensity resort facilities with a mix of primarily private and limited public development. II. PUBLIC SAFETY 1. Insure service delivery and law enforcement in areas in- volving protection of life and property at the maximum level that is financially feasible. e 2. Build and maintain facilities needed to protect life and property. A. Develop a local storm drain system sufficient to protect against a 2S year storm. B. Encourage development of a county storm drain system sufficient to protect against a 100 year storm. III. BALANCED PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT 1. Adopt standards for public.and private development that will insure a clean, healthy, attractive and.functional environment. 2. Develop public facilities that are clean, attractive and reliable. 3. Establish replacement programs and financial plans for public facilities such as buildings, streets, water system, sewers system and storm drain system. 4. Optimize the use of the community's natural resources. A. Plan the ultimate use of the Bolsa Chica. B. Complete the development of the shoreline in con- cert with State agencies. IV. HUMAN DEVELOPMENT 1. Encourage citizen participation in government. 2. Achieve civic pride and identification through community activities. 3. Provide services that inform, entertain, enlighten and develop the potential of residents. A.• Accelerate the development of neighborhood parks. B. Develop parks at the rate of four acreas per 1,000 population. C. Establish branch libraries. D. Establish a strong library material budget. E. Provide an adequate cultural program. P. Combine libraries and community centers where possible. -2- G. Establish a major sports center. 4. Encourage employee involvement with community affairs and concerns, -3- rc ' Minutes - 12/12/77 ` REQUEST FOR CROSSWALK - MAGNOLIA STREET - DENIED The City Clerk presented a communication from the Department of Works regarding the request of Mrs. Valentine for a crosswalk, rather than a crossing guard at Talbert Park for Talbert School children. The =-matter had been deferred from the November 21, 1977 Council meeting for further consideration. Mrs. Valentine, Talbert Safety Council, addressed Council regarding an appeal on behalf of the Talbert School, and inquired whether there were any alternatives. On motion by Shenkman, second Siebert, Council denied the request for a crosswalk rather than a crossing guard at Talbert Park for Talbert School children. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Bartlett, Coen, Shenkman, Pattinson NOES: Wieder, Gibbs, Siebert ABSENT: None Discussion was held between Council pertaining to a crosswalk and the Director of Public Works informed Council that such a crosswalk would be dangerous since it would give pedestrians a false sense of security. Following further discussion, a motion was made by ebbs/ s c n ed by Wieder, 7 / "' i /" , that the Director of Public Works arrange for a sign to be put at the crossing, notifying motorists The motion �j carried unanimously. back up north to enter where the school is located. Another important int, he children who cros ith t e crossing.gu d at Garfield and Magnolia olia on is g � ycle, have to ide against the traffic in order to reachthe school, o(up ide a full b00%,k/ down to Yor town and with the guard there, then ride half the block in order t enter/the area where the school is located!!! / V City of Huntington Beach P.O. BOX 190 CALIFORNIA 92648 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Lv r 1v T0: Honorable Mayo, and City Council ATTN: Floyd G. Belsito, City Administrator FROM: H.E. Hartge, Director of Public Works DATE: December 5, 1977 SUBJECT: Mrs. Martha Valentine's Request -for-6ros,swdlk atr(aMa-gnol.ia and Hyde Park. STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Mrs. Valentine desires a crosswalk at Magnolia and Hyde Park to accommodate adults residing on the east side of Magnolia to cross to the K-Mart Shopping Center on the west side of Magnolia. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Deny request for crosswalk at Hyde Park and Magnolia. ANALYSIS: The California Vehicle Code states that a.crosswalk exists at all intersections unless pedestrian crossing is phohibited by signs. Some of these. crosswalks are marked with painted lines, but most of them are not.. Pedestrian crosswalk marking is a method of encouraging pedestrians to use a particular crossing. Such marked crossings may not be as safe as an unmarked crossing at the same location. Therefore, crosswalks should be marked only where necessary for the guidance and control of pedestrians, to direct them to the safest of several potential routes. A signalized intersection exists 970 feet north of the location and is signalized for pedestrian crossings. The speed limit on Magnolia is 40 miles per hour. The street is 84 feet wide and pedestrian pace - 4 feet per second, this will require 21 seconds to cross the street.. This would indicate that the best plan for the pedestrians to cross at Magnolia and Garfield where an exist- ing traffic signal will protect'_ t--h-,eem. A number of years back, the City of San Diego published some startling results of a very extensive study of the relative safety of marked and unmarked crosswalks. San Diego looked at I< Honorable Mayor and City Council December 5, 1977 Page 2. 400 intersections for five years (without signals or four-way stops) that had a marked crosswalk on one side and an unmarked crosswalk on the other. About two and one-half times as many pedestrians used the marked crosswalk, but about six times as many accidents were reported in the marked crosswalks! Long Beach studied pedestrian safety for three years C1972 through 1974) and found eight times as many reported pedestrian accidents at intersections with marked crosswalks than at those without. One explanation of this apparent contradiction of common sense is the false security pedestrians feel at the marked crosswalk. Two painted lines do no provide protection against an oncoming vehicle and the real burden of safety has to be,on the pedestrian to be alert and cautious while crossing any street. A pedestrian can stop in less than three feet, while a vehicle traveling at 25 MPH will require 60 feet and at 35 MPH approximately 100 feet. ALTERNATIVE: Install a pedestrian signal mid -block at an initial cost of approximately $40,000 plus annual maintenance near $1200.00. FUNDING SOURCE: The cost of a marked crosswalk Fund. Funds for a pedestrian from the gas tax account. HEH:BW:ek Attachment would come from the General traffic signal could be budgeted ZONING W ZONING T MAP I-6—II _TIONAL DISTRICT MAP 4 NOTE: .ADOPTED - JUNE 20. 1960 rftl - •.. [oNIX�.o.IOI.11 c . CITYCOUNCIL ORDINANCE N0. 770 1sN'. N o +o ��� ®� w sucN M T or D...r AMENDED ORNO. AMENDED RD.NO. LEGEND LN -- .. _ 5-I-61 B34 -1-2D-69 5 031465 -15=61 . 9 9-7-71 657- Q SCIUNNaNEUNIft. Lfr RnEro]ESW 6-7-62 900 Q LIGHT INDUTIAO' .C1LITlIO-IS-62 932 1E TNG-i N BEACH EACH 1-21-63 942 6-3-63 .969 D2 GONUN_ AUSINEss 0T 12-2-63 - 1021 - - - - a' 0 R N I A NIRNR.T O�NNERDLL 1 267664 106 C� RESIDENTIAL ♦ORICULTUR\T G E' C 0 U N T-Y-, CALIFORNIA 4.4-66 IISS SUFFIX LEGEND: vBY ZONE CASE: - ,.:•,66-62 6-15-66' 124 X)- 3_ 66 12 3 277, 280. 294, 309,311, 321, 345, 346, 393, 427 1-16.67 - 1290 452."11.544.66-27.66-42.66-59. 66-58 Qo CONRINEO 1RTP OIL PRO66-3. 6B-8. SO-19, 69.16.70-6.71-12,T0-26,73-11, -__ SCTDA LINE . .AREA OF CONCER AVE. GARFIELD 4p4RI -- RI I t•I YNERI CA J gR RId RI `" RI �RI RI 1 RI RIRI RI RI 3RIRR5 romL♦s3 a+. I C 2.'uI,cLN a ,^ I, _ �RIRI RI RIRI - C 4 1. R 3 N ATN�RTENa ITCNFIE D DR R Iw MTES♦LS D0. R^ fP44�i W Oif�ELG ERI RI RI RI r RI RI «I ELPRDO R.::iCNfICED CPRRI - NYM F.R. - 0. RI a RI RI .. ........... ,..RI - R �.�,o, .,,.E -�..OR EI KREPP DR. J - _ DN ynOL`_ R I ,( li t i RI CF—E CF=ERONNE I, DR J RI RI RI RI .RII,(TALOERTS..1,..;,1 API RI ; J Isc+`:" RI u RI RI RI RI ER _ LpIRN,K OR � DANBURY CR RI R1 1F RL ERND - P�nM pi R-,i _ w a Z 'AP CR' I TARI'L_.• t.5 u i GILFORD CR - RI r RI _ -� •' RI- 1jIY� i�RI emuR¢ wAK - DR Ir�g4D -RI_-- O- RI i AVE ARI RI J f -- YORKTOWN ' RI RI OP. RI RI 8 RI I 'RI DN T W AKE OR ALBATROSS - OR VERONICA y GREEN'WICN r z RI RI V R1. R:�: F = RI o RI IRI ' R! ' PIERRE z ANCH R DR CR. Rr1EL0 OR- L' PORTGMOUTH 09 �-- o OR J R I i RI '4USTIN DR. RI g RI RI RI RI TI,' RI _I RIfA. NANTUCNET UR---- "•` RI o - RI — --- I` BREAKERS - DR. R NIS PORT RI BOI DR DOLPHIN OR pn nl ..4D, IN, oR N RI r- - OR RI ' - SI - OSW ^R. za IC—APE0 DR ' RI RI J RI RI DORF-MERE D R 1 F• - C F— E IJ I ' Z JCUTTER �_ ROR4 R GR7TON DRJ RI RI RI u r— CLLMEAD DP IFF CR z PIOHELP--- P. R I _ --- I I LSSFORO RI 3 RI RI RI RI RI i I RI R ": R1. RI RI . R I CLIPPER R I OR. Ge?TrsBURG DR RI ( 3I �4 11z0, I _ RI R RKPORT - - i M iiNE i0T 45 rniiml o N, I W CRAWFORD RI RI.�a C2 i {oe. C4 3a1,, EI o • m a • o ^ - L WM 11 DR Ws RS1FI o 1 u �` s u n AVE. ADAMS I ;.,..- .-'�-''�'r.. . Tr4. . tl+ys ��'1.�: ,-—'T- -t.. ;N.'+3;t. i.✓r��"^+'._.y.,�.6.ir ...;,.GIs �^i&.-�,"� '`-7i1 ;�.,'Yts�.�.. 'k".?W``. °",A�-.. .'4••'- .. ..=r _ ,'"7`i:.n, °F'1c,1Wr` syr-� d ' - erosr•.."'. _:'Y �_'s •.^`" ' RI C F— E x. 1'�EW1..vrD Gr.:aD�I 8 Bill. Hartge, To Public Works Director Date 11123/77 AGENDA ITFM M-2 - MID-RLnr.k CROSSWALK Ulanse prepare a re -art as backup to the request filed by Mrs."Valentine relative to a crosswalk rather thA i a cr6g . - -card And have this preuared for the 12112 Council meeting. } u` -°J Signed Floyd G. Selsito, City Administrator ic t Date Signed Redifl. 4S 465 SEND PARTS 1 AND 3 WITH CARBONS INTACT. Poly Pak 150 sets) 0465 PART 3 WILL BE RETURNED WITH REPLY. \ /1 City of Huntington Beach P.O. BOX 190 CALIFORNIA 92648 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT AIX TO.: Honorable Mayor and City. Council ATTN: F1oyd.G. Belsito., City.Administrato.r FROM: H.E. Hartge,- Director of Public Woxks.6�� DATE: Novemb ex 14, '19.7 7 SUBJECT: Petition for mid -block crosswalk and crossing guard on Magnolia Street between Garfield and Yorktown. STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: School children living south.of Garfield and we of Magnolia are'attempting to.`cross Magnolia Street in the vicinity of Talbert Park -These'schooT children attend Talbert school which is located east of -Magnolia Street: RECOMMENDED ACTION: Deny the request -for .the placement.of a crossing guard and crosswalk at this -location. ANALYSIS: The City. Council .received. a-pet.ition from Mrs. Valentine dated. 7/19%77,.- Agenda No. E.-l-, requesting crosswalks and crossing guards at Talbert'Park-for Talbert -School children. - The Council reque.ated the staff meet with Dr.. Charles.Woodfin and .report back :to.the Council. - A meeting was -held on 9/23/77 at 2.P.M. at.the Talbert -School. Attendees were Dr. Charles Woodfin, Assistant Superintendent of Fountain Valley School District; Mrs. Roberta Hennigan, Principal of Talbert School; Lt:.Tom Patton, Huntington Beach Police Department; -and Mr._Bill-Waddell, City.of-Huntington Beach Public Works Department.. - Prior to the meeting-Lt.. Patton, Mrs.' Hennigan and Mr. Waddell met at the proposed crossing to observe the crossing conditions. It was determined that it would be extremely dangerous to in- stall'a crosswalk at the location. The School District would not recommend the area for a "Safe Route. to School The Police Department does'concur with this -decision: ALTERNATIVE: There is an existing crossing guard at the intersection of Honorable Mayor and City Council November 14, 1977 Page 2. Magnolia Street and Garfield Avenue.- This intersection is on the Safe Route to School Plan. The city in cooperation -with the School Principal and the School'Safety Chairman will enlist the help of the parents to instruct their children to cross Magnolia Street at the -traffic signal which also has an adult crossing guard. FUNDING SOURCES: No expenditure of funds is required by this -action: HEH:BW:ek Attachment 4 L C. n TZ e T76 T Z I 1 6' z U /Zl ee6 Ir ' TZ6 liz Z Z �6 OZ6 U - J- 016 Z OZ61 lo�% ZOZ6 161J6 6 17616 T616 I MT 6, 6 Z6T611616 6 T �Ilzb , Z616 �()Z6 y 151-675TC TBT6 L - Z 11 6 T116 Lu Z 8 T 6 -8 L 6 ZBT6 7816 IL 6 6 LJ m < _Z1116 16 -- Zj Cc- Z816 e9T6; T9TG 1: -J, Z9 1 91 6 1 6 LL) '���IONVH ZZIT6 _ _ N -1 I ZPT 6 6- IZ16 ZZ16 TT16 ZTII 1016' ZOT6 z 1606 Z606 0 T806 IL Z806 1906 Z906 LLJ < 0 F ISO- *6 LL) ZS06 X ZV06 C%j r1106 14- (M ZE06 0 TZ06 iZ06, 00000 CC) �Z/6 CQ 1,-! TNT -�NT Ol N L616 2816 T816 cr Z816 2 Q- ZLT6 106 ZL 16 Z916 T9T6 Z916 ZS16_ IS16 ZSTG 0 0 T 6 -T V 16- ZtT6 M ZI 16 TET6 Z(16 U) m ZZT6 IFT& Z?16 CO x ZTT6 tjjT6 ZIIG Ld ZOT6 T016 ZOT6 co < _LG16 IT6 ' 06 N-1 V-10-1 Z806 1806 0) Z906 IT906_ Z906 -7 LO 6 LIO 6 z ZS06 z 2 < N-1 Z106 N38V-1 OW 8, 0, - I �l 1 z, rd no 0< - I - - Y M- I - Y 1, 1 -v R a� -T VI'IONUVYY V -IONEWN ILF- ::i LO 66 IT FTFT CL z z JO TL69 a 0 z I T96:; < — cr < < TS68 Z118 0 TV68 S68: I . . (D - ZV68 668 ZMS �68 Oi CD CINIM-11VS ZZ68 T66.1 8VLSHi8ON ZZ68 TZ68 r. 7 IT68 Z16': ITGO - Z169 IMZ:ZGS. IZ68 Z 68;0, a) T06P n69 T 0 Z068 T068 Z069 TT6R ZT68 T 7. (9 T603 7(98 TO,? Z688 1638 Z68U T068 ZC-68 T808 Z288 109r,' Z8R8 1888. Z838 Z6^�' 168H N -1 ),VSGNI-1 TL8R ZLSU TLP4 ZLOS TL88 ZL88 Te" M-1 128H - - -1 -, (r r -- 7 --- T 71 P88 - TS38 z w ZC38 ISOR < TS88 Zr-- 0 IL�- UCC ZLRR U) TV'sw 0 [SRO z.qL e TVse U) ZV8? Tm 3 Zl!R d ZT88rT88 Z188 IT88 ZT88 1188 zise 1188 ZT88 u IM F128 Icsl - W ZE3z - [r88 >z < -' f -Zr38 - ZV38 T.68 V) f-- ZO88tOS8 Z088 T088 ZO88 TZSJ -m zz8o rz88 C ZZ88 TZAR 3 ZZ83 IF38.LL LE"es 1188088088 ZC88 Z6LB.T6L8 Y - Z6LB T6L8 M Z6L8 16LB ULS ZGLE3 - ZT88 TTftB ZICS tIC8 Z188 TZ88, :D U ZZES TZ83 C) a_ ZZ88 I LLI Z8L8 TBLR < Z8Lq T8L8 C) - T6L8 Z8L8 TRL8 Z Z8LS I ZBW ITSS TGL8- Z6L:' T6LB Z6L9 TUS ZGL8 TISO Z1138 IT88 < z Z9LB 19L6 < S )V Irk IBLB . 94 8- ZLL8, IBLB Z8LB TBLU z8L8 18LP. Z "`C��� L 8 l(L8 i c"p LLJ 19L8 Z9LS � z 0 ILLO ZLL8 TLL8 ZLLO T LC8 ZLL8 GL8 TOL8 AV83dOH rm 76t8 ZOL8 <0 U) 9L t Z9L9 TLLB 1w, 19 I T T . 2 Ot 0 LL 0 City of, Huntington Beach P.O. BOX 190 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CALIFORNIA 926M . D r. u 1977 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council ATTN: Floyd G. Belsito, City Administrator FROM: H.E. Hartge, Director of Public Works DATE: August 1, 1977 SUBJECT: CITY OF HUiNTINGTON BEACH ADMIMSTRATIVE OFFICE School Crossing Guard at Talbert Park on Magnolia between Garfield and Yorktown. STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: A request has been filed by petition of 93 citizens for crosswalk, guard and flashing light at Talbert Park. RECOMMENDED ACTION: City Council direct City staff to meet with Dr. Charles Woodfin,-Assistant Superintendent,.Fountain Valley School District to determine the "safe route to school'.' and report back to the Council ANALYSIS: Last year an investigation of the need for the crossing guard at Magnolia and Garfield was conducted. The resid- ents of the Coral Shores felt they still wanted the crossing guard matter tabled. .The CalTrans Traffic Manual states that "the safety of school crossings" is the joint responsibility of parents, school administrators, other public officials and the general public.. The school officials will not be available to meet until just prior to school starting in September. They have requested a meeting at that time.. The Public Works staff will prepare a full report after the meeting. J ® ®TY OF ® ® NTON _/ram INTER -DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH To H. E. Hartge, Director From Alicia M. Wentworth Public Works City Clerk Subject Petition re: Crossing Guard Removal Date July 28, 1977 Attached is an informal petition from Martha Valentine regarding the removal of the crossing guard at Magnolia & Garfield, together with a request on the matter from the Safety Committee of Talbert Elementary School. We received the petition from Bill Waddell, who along with Ralph Leyva is familiar with .the, iriatter. Also attached is a letter from our department to Mrs. Valentine, following up on Bill°s phone call to her informing her that her request is scheduled for the 8/15/77 agenda. If you plan to.submit a report for the Council packets, please deliver to our office by 8/8/77. Thanks. cc: Bud Belsito P bEP7'. OF PUBLIC WORKS J U L. ' 1977 DqUI�tnN TON BEACH. CALIF. 7// 9%7,2 Y /� 10 Pr/> To The Huntington Beach City Council, Concerning the removal of the creasing guard at Magnolia & Garfield, we the undersigned would like to share -our views and possible solution. We fool the $3000 per year to a pitance to pay for the safety of our ehildrtu. We are sure the City of Huntington Beach doesn't want to put a price on our ohildrone heads, but removing the creasing guard- would do just that. Porbapi a solution is to move the crossing guard to Talbert Park. Put a arose walk in and flashing yellow caution lights to be used when our children are on their way.to & from school. Placing the crossing guard at that location would satisfy La Ouesta, Ooral-ghoros, Huntington View, and S & 3 parents* As taxpayers we have the right•te demand proieotlon for our children and we the undersigned homeowners of the La.Cuesta tract are demanding just that. Name Address �� h- , f . - ..'; : 1,.!. i, r� `...-.f-.-i� l' i�I?.� •.'�o sJU!'{ �.-•�C�i..-� !_i� / .�--Lr� - l (_.I� -� - �• �� I !r - . r l-`-t�`V� �Z�lt It 'C C/ �/!i J !! �l C l-C rL-C.' (� �7CC.!!., �)r„ r' �•_ Y -���• -�{. ,, .:� y�:�.....�,���.<-. � , •'i i � /(_.' •�-_ � �. -IJ ,r. 1. � .,..;� �: _• t'•, _ . . . ':F} ' - '. c. 1 •- .} ,. _/ J 11 _.�✓1= l' •r - - `/ .. ` ,'� - C. V P 1' .t .) ,' t.r.l! L' • ! 1 i, L'�' �(�'� ' 4 Kc, .Y��y' � ✓l=� 1 ��f t. i-rig /�i.• .. �i��.-��+� ���. t� � j��..1.!1C' ���-• '-� 1..1 (J7 li, r` Brame Address r, 71 IL..• VISA , � I `\ ex�C.Lc� C Q Vu, 7a-2&ut p To � I-c --lf-1 i -mac c.-L1 ,�% L �'•a� ���%��+.�u���GG�=+.� 19o5i ���n.::zlu�cr��n . �✓ �s . Ci- .� �1 � �`` " i� bSis� r � c�.�� v►'�n�v � �� ��. ' �'� h . � 1 I�� t �_ '�j`�L.L' f r (tom' y( •� Z� � ��� b"4vi.--�-- Y•7'� � i�../ •� 5 �;Pd, ze,G��t���� O/x. M/W, t-`\ 15 THE SAFETY COMMITTEE OF TALBERT ELEMENTARY SCHOOL IN THE FOUNTAIN VALLEY SCHOOL.DISTRICT, WITH THE ENDORSEMENT OF THE SCHOOL COMMUNITY COUNCIL AND THE PARENT TEACHER ORGANIZATION OF TALBERT SCHOOL, WOULD LIKE TO SEE A CROSSING GUARD PROVIDED BY THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH FOR.THE.PROTECTION OF STUDENTS ATTENDING TALBERT SCHOOL. IT IS THE COMMITTEE'S SUGGESTION THAT A CROSSING GUARD BE -STATIONED ON MAGNOLIA STREET BETWEEN GARFIELD AND YORKTOWN AVENUES - SPECIFIC LOCATION BEING.THE.SOUTH•END OF TALBERT PARK. - THE COMMITTEE NEEDS THE SUPPORT AND SIGNATURES OF PARENTS OF STUDENTS ATTENDING TALBERT SCHOOL. KINDLY SIGN YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS BELOW. YOU WILL BE ASSISTING IN THE SAFETY OF CHILDREN. THANK YOU ML n o �L s Y. a . o a .16. aLh NI'PiC C%4 c/". - /j/, R . A /q • 6 , Ja' City of Huntington Beach P.O. 136X 190 CALIFORNIA » OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK July 28, 1977 Mrs. Martha Valentine . 19242 Hickory Lane Huntington Beach, California 92646 Dear Mrs. Valentine: Please be informed that the petition which you submitted to the Department of Public Works concerning the removal of the crossing guard at Magnolia and Garfield has been scheduled for. the August 15, 1977 agenda. We would appreciate being informed as to whether you plan to attend the meeting and address Council. If so, your item will appear under the "Oral Communications" portion of the agenda. If you will not be attending the meeting, we will'schedule'your item under "Written Communications" which occurs later in the meeting. If we may be of further assistance to you in this matter, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Sincerely yours, Alicia M. Wentworth City Clerk AMW:tr cc: H. E. Hartge • CITY OF 14UPITIO t" TON BEACH INTER -DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION H1 NINMON OF A( H To H. E. Hartge, Director From Alicia M, Wentworth � Public Works City Clerk Subject Petition re: Crossing Guard Removal Date July 28, 1977 Attached is an informal petition from Martha Valentine regarding the removal of the crossing guard at Magnolia & Garfield, together with a request on the matter from the Safety Committee of Talbert Elementary School. We received the petition from Bill Waddell, who along with Ralph Leyva is familiar with the matter. Also attached is a letter from our department to Mrs. Valentine, following up on Bill's phone call to her informing her that her request is scheduled for the 8M/77 agenda. If you plan to subadt a report for the Council packets, please deliver to our office by 8/8/77. Thanks. cc: Bud Belsito CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 76 - 66 COUNCIL - ADMINISTRATOR COMMUNICATION Vv H UNTINGTON BEACH To Honorable Mayor and From Acting. -City AdministratorC City Council Membefs /p Subject CROSSING GUARD MAINTENANCE Date May 12, 1976 DISTRICT At the May 3, 1976 adjourned Study Session, the subject of crossing guards and the responsibility for the program was discussed. At that time, the City Council indicated that the school districts should pay for them. After discussing the matter with the City Attorne-y's Office and reviewing.past legal opinions, (see attached), the conclusion was that when4the City determines whether crossing guards are required and deemed necessary at various locations, the City must bear the full cost of furnishing the service. State legislation allows the local agency, meaning the City, County or combination City/County to establish crossing guard maintenance"districts. Chapter 3.5 of the Government Code (attached) spells out the method by which the City can form the maintenance districts which results in assessments to pay for the Crossing guard program. The Police Depart- ment has indicated that they have the capability of defin ng-t]?e='.d s" tr.icts-With-'Iinput from --.the: school districts: The reason we are requesting CppAcil_direction on the,matter is that the crossing guard budget has tentatively been-eliminated.from the, -Police De- partment's preliminary budget. It is=this office's opinion that since -..the City is required to pay for crossing guards, the program should be on a self-supporting basis. The cost for the program is $80,000. RECOMMENDATION Direct the Police Department to establish district boundaries and the City Attorney's Office to prepare an ordinance establishing Crossing Guard Maintenance Districts in accordance with Chapter 3.5 Crossing Guard Maintenance District (New). Respectfully submitted, Floyd Be'&sito Actin City Administrator FGB:p Attachments ../ r r OFFICE OF L ; IE CITY ATTORNEY OPINION .TO. 76-19 April 7, 1Q76 SUBJECT: Snecial Assessment Districts for Crossing Guards REQUESTED BY: Erich '_T. TTatthews, Administrative Analyst, Sr. PREPARLD BY: Don P. Bonfa, City Attorney QUES^IOI-T: Under the Crossing; Guard Maintenance District Act of 1974, is the City rather than the School District required to establish the assessment district? ANS1411R: Yes . DISCUSSION: Government Code Section 55535 states, in part, "the purpose of this chanter i.: to provide the means whereby any local aglency may form districts within w�hich land and iriprovements may be assessed to pay the costs and expenses of providing; pedestrian crossing guards." As defined in Government Code Section 55532, "Local agency means a city, a county or a city and a count-." By definition, this rules out the possibility of a school. district beinE—the local agency involved in the formation of the assessment district. The Act goes on to set out the procedures whereb�T_a_-special assessment district for crossing; guards may be set up by the local agency by its o:an action, or upon petition to that body by tyro -thirds of the voters within the boundaries of the pro- posed district. -�� / DOLT P. BONFA City Attorney DPB:CC: er Legal Research performed by Charles G. Cohan, Le&al Intern AM IA5 S-0 12 'a ' vwJ 71 Iss 47 �ScE� Dulvoh e�r�,r�s Qza/„�.r.d�, (fc OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY OPINION INO. 74-51 November 6, 1974 SUBJECT: School Crossing Guards REQUESTED BY: Erich H. T-latthews, Adis nistrative Aide PREPARED.BY: Don P. Bonfa, City Attorney John J. O'Connor, Deputy City Attorney QUESTION: Is the City of Huntington Beach legally obligated to provide crossing guards for school districts? ANSWER: The city has a duty to provide protection for all citizens, including children crossing streets to and from school, but whether a crossing guard is required at a particular site is a policy decision depending on the conditions at each particular site. DISCUSSI N : This responsibility of the city to supply crossing guards has been analyzed by the Attorney General in 24 Ops. Cal. Atty. Gen. 143, which states in part: "The real problem arises not in the pronouncement of the duty but rather in specifying the particular form which it is to take. Having a patrolman assigned to the various school sites would obviously be a fulfillment of that duty. However, while the duty to protect immature students on their way to or from school is certainly established, whether it must take the form of having a patrolman at the school site is a question which must depend upon the particular local situation at each school. While common sense may dictate the presence of a police officer at a grammar school attended by very young children, which is contiguous to heavily traveled streets, it is possible that providing the same protection to high school students in rural areas would serve no useful function. In short, the circumstances of each case would require analysis to determine if the duty 50 to protect the children required the actual presence of an officer at a particular school during the critical school traffic hours. Several factors would have to be considered, such as the volume of vehicular traffic, the number of students and their ages, the width of the street, and the general character of the risk encountered by the children as they go to and return from school. Ultimately, the decision as to what means are necessary to protect the public at a given place and time rests in the sound discretion of the proper police officials." The Attorney General also states in this opinion that: "The school safety patrol, established in coop- eration with the chief of police, as authorized by Education Code section 16435, is not to be, deemed protection in lieu of actual police protection, but rather it is supplementary so as to afford a broader base of traffic protection and patrol in the areas where needed and suggests the necessity for the presence of police officers on proper occasions." COi1CLUSIOi : The decision on whether school crossing guards are required and deemed necessary in a particular location is a policy decision to be made by the city. However, if the city deter- mines, as a policy matter, that such crossing guard protection is necessary at any site, the city must bear the full cost of furnishing this service. 51 Ops. Cal. Atty. Gen. 213. DON P. BONFA � City Attorneys JOHNJ. 'D' CONNOR Deputy City Attorney DPB:JJO'C:cs Other authorities and collateral subjects: 30 Ops. Cal. Atty. Gen. 73; Vehicle Code Section 42200; Education Code Sections 12050 et seq. 51 § 55530 GOVERNMENT CODE CHAPTER 3.5 CROSSING GUARD MAINTENANCE DISTRICTS [NEW] Article Section I. General -------------------------------- 2. Formation of District---------------------------------------------55540 3. Administration----------------------------------------------------55558 4. Annexations, Detachments, and Dissolution--------------------------55565 Chapter 3.5 was added by Stats.1974, c. 317, p. 633, 11, urgency, eff. May 31, 1974. ARTICLE 1. GENERAL Sec. 55530. Short title. 55531. Clerk. 55532. Local agency. 55533. Maintenance. 55534. Crossing guard maintenance district; district. 55535. Purpose of chapter. Article 1 was added by Stats.1974, c. 317, p. 633, § 1, urgency, eff. May 31, 1974. Library references Schools and School Districts (8:=21. C.J.S. Schools and School Districts § 25. § 55530. Short title This chapter shall be known and cited as the Crossing Guard Maintenance District Act of 1974. (Added by Stats.1974, c. 317, p. 633, § 1, urgency, eff. May 31, 1974.) § 55531. Clerk "Clerk" means the clerk of the legislative body of a local agency. (Added by Stats.1974, c. 317, p. 633, § 1, urgency, eff. May 31, 1974.) § 55532. Local agency "Local agency" means a city, a county or a city and county. (Added by Stats.1974, c. 317, p. 633, § 1, urgency, eff. May 31, 1974.) 5 55533. Maintenance "Maintenance" means the performance of all acts and the doing of the things necessary to carry out the purposes of this chapter including the employment of persons to act as guards at pedestrian crossings. ( Added by. Stats.1974, c. 317, p. 633, § 1, urgency, eff. May 31, 1974.) § 55534. Crossing guard maintenance district; district "Crossing guard maintenance district" or "district' means any district created pursuant to the provisions of this chapter to pay the assessments for 'providing crossing guards as provided in this chapter. (Added by. Stats.1974, c. 317, p. &13, § 1, urgency, eff. May 31, 1974.) § 55535. Purpose of chapter The purpose of this chapter is to provide a means whereby any local agency may form districts within which land and improvements may be assessed to pay the costs and expenses of providing pedestrian crossing guards at street inter- sections in order to insure the safety of schoolchildren who use such intersections. (Added by Stats.1974, c. 317, p. 633, § 1, urgency, eff. Alay 31, 1974.) GOVERNMENT CODE § 55540.1 ARTICLE 2. FORMATION OF DISTRICT Sec. 55540. Petition or resolution; contents; procedures. 55540.1 Territory within more than one local agency. 55541. Preliminary report; contents. 55542. Consideration of report by legislative body; approval; hearing; resolu- tion of intention; public inspection. 55M3. Resolution of intention to form district; contents. 55544. Boundaries. 55M5. Costs and expenses; payment. 55546. Publication of resolution. 55547. Mailing to property owners. 55548. Written protests; filing. 5M49. Protests; contents; procedure. 5M50. Hearing; majority protest; termination of proceedings or submission of formation to vote; continuance. 55551. Changes in boundaries; inclusion of additional land; procedure. 5M52. Changes in boundaries; majority protest. 55553. Determination of protests; finality; majority protest. 55554. Ordinance. 55555. Waiver of protests; validity of proceedings; estoppel; actions. 55556. Elections; law governing. Article 2 was added by Stat8.1974, c. 317, p. 633, § 1, urgency, eff. May 31, 1974. Library references Schools and School Districts (=24. C.J.S. Schools and School Districts § 27 et seq. § 55540. Petition or resolution; contents; procedures Proceedings for the formation of a crossing guard maintenance district may be initiated by petition signed by two-thirds of the registered voters in the proposed district or by resolution of intention by the legislative body of the local agency which has jurisdiction over the territory proposed to be included in the district. The sufficiency of such, petition shall be determined by reference to the county voter registration rolls at the time at which the petition is presented to the legis- lative body of the local agency. The petition or resolution shall contain a general description of the exterior boundaries of the proposed district and shall identify the street intersections at which crossing guards are desired. . A petition submitted pursuant to this section shall be filed with the clerk, who shall determine its sufficiency. If it is signed by the requisite number of qualified signers, the clerk shall certify to that effect and shall present the petition and the certificate to the legislative body. The legislative body shall thereupon order the preparation of the preliminary report as provided in Section 55541 and shall adopt a resolution of intention to form the district as provided in Section 55543. (Added by Stats.1974, c. 317, p. 633, § 1, urgency, eff. May 31, 1974.) Library references Counties (=18. C.J.S. Counties § 41. § 55540.1 Territory within more than one local agency In the event that the territory proposed to be formed into a crossing guard maintenance district, or annexed thereto, is located within more than one local agency, the application to forin the district, or to annex territory thereto, shall be submitted to the local agency within which is located the largest area of such territory. Such agency shall conduct all proceedings for the formation of the dis- trict or for annexation of territory thereto. Before commencing such proceedings, § 55540.1 GOVERNMENT CODE however, the conducting agency shall first obtain the consent of the legislative body of the city or the county having jurisdiction over such territory. (Added by Stats.1974, c. 739, p. 1636, § 1, urgency, eff. May 31, 1974.) Library references Counties a18. C.J.S. Counties 9 41. § 55541. Preliminary report; contents Before the legislative body adopts a resolution of intention to form a district, the appropriate officer of the local agency, as designated by the legislative body, shall make and file with the clerk a preliminary report which shall contain the following information: (a) A general description of the area proposed to.be included in the district; and (b) An estimate of the cost of providing crossing guards at appropriate street intersections within such district. (Added by Stats.1974, c. 317, p. 633, § 1, urgency, eff. May 31, 1974.) § 55542. Consideration of report by legislative body; approval; hearing; resolu- tion of Intention; public inspection After the filing of the report, the clerk shall present it to the legislative body .for consideration. The legislative body may approve, amend, alter, modify or correct the report. When the report has been approved by the legislative body, it shall fix a time and place for hearing protests against the proposed formation of the district or to the report and shall adopt a resolution declaring its intention to form the district. The report shall thereafter be open to inspection in the office of the clerk until the public hearing. (Added by Stats.1974, c. 317, p. 633, § 1, urgency, eff. May 31, 1974.) Library references Counties <�=18. C.J.S. Counties 3 41. § 55543. Resolution of Intention to form district; contents If the legislative body determines that the public safety and welfare requires the formation of a district, it may. adopt a resolution declaring its Intention to from a district pursuant to the provisions of this chapter. The resolution of In- tention, in addition to making the foregoing determination, shall also contain: (a) A general description of the exterior boundaries of the proposed district; (b) An estimate of the cost of providing appropriate crossing guards; (c) A statement that an annual assessment may be levied to pay the costs and expenses of providing such crossing guards; (d) A statement of the annual assessment limit on each one hundred dollars ($100) of assessed value of taxable land and improvements within the district and that amounts so assessed shall be levied and collected at the same time and in the same manner as general taxes of the local agency are collected; (e) The day, hour and place for the hearing by the legislative body of protests against the formation of the proposed district, and a statement that any owner of property liable to be assessed for the maintenance may make written protest against the formation of the proposed district by filing such protest with the clerk at any time not later than the hour so fixed for the hearing. The time for the hearing shall be not less than 15 nor more than 60 days from the date of the adoption of the resolution of the legislative body. (Added by Stats.1974, c. 317, p. 633, § 1, urgency, eff. May 31, 1974. Amended by Stats.1974, c. 739, p. 1636, § 2.) Library references Counties «18. C.J.S. Counties; 41. § 55544. Boundaries The proposed district may be described in the resolution of intention by stating the exterior boundaries thereof or by referring to the description provided for in the preliminary report. (Added by Stats.1974, c. 317, p. 633, § 1, urgency, eff. May 31, 1974.) GOVERNMENT CODE § 55551 § 55545. Costs and expenses; payment The legislative body in its discretion may, in the resolution of intention or at any subsequent time, order that a portion of the costs and expenses of the main- tenance shall be paid out of the treasury of the local agency from such funds as the legislative body may designate. (Added by, Stats.1974, c. 317, p. 633, § 1, urgency, eff. Diay 31, 1974.) § 55546. Publication of resolution The resolution of intention shall be published pursuant to Section 6061 of this code at least 15 days before the date set for the hearing of protests. (Added by Stats.1974, c. 317, p. 633, § 1, urgency, eff. May 31, 1974.) § 55547. Mailing to property owners A copy of the resolution shall be mailed at least 10 days before the date of the hearing of protests, postage prepaid, by the clerk to each property owner within the district as shown on the latest equalized assessment roll. (Added by, Stats.1974, c. 317, p. 633, § 1, urgency, eff. May 31, 1974.) § 55548. Written protests; filing At any time prior to the time set for hearing protests against the formation of the proposed district, any property owner liable to be assessed for maintenance may make and file with the clerk a written protest stating his objection to the proposed district. (Added by Stats.1974, c. 317, p. 633, § 1, urgency, eff. May 31, 1974.) § 55549. Protests; contents; procedure The protest shall contain a description of the property sufficient to identify it and shall be delivered to the clerk. Only protests made at the time and in the manner required in this chapter shall be considered. The clerk shall endorse on every such protest the date of its receipt by him and shall at the time appointed for the hearing present all protests to the legislative body. Any protest may be withdrawn by the person making it, in writing, at any time prior to the conclusion of the hearing or any adjournment thereof. (Added by Stats.1974, c. 317, p. 633, § 1, urgency, eff. May 31, 1974.) § 55550. Hearing; majority protest; termination of proceedings or submission of formation to vote; continuance At the hearing all protests shall be heard and considered. If the legislative body finds that more than one-half of the owners of property within the proposed dis- trict who also own more than one-half of the assessed value of the land and im- provements Included within the proposed district and subject to assessment have filed written protests which are not withdrawn prior to. the conclusion of the hearing or any adjournment thereof, the legislative body shall, in its discretion, either terminate all further proceedings or submit the question of the formation of the district to a vote within the territory of the proposed district. If the pro- ceeding is terminated, no subsequent proceedings under this chapter for the forma- tion of the same or substantially the same district shall be commenced within six months thereafter. If the legislative body finds that the protests filed are less than a majority in number and assessed value, it may continue with the hearing. (Added by Stats.1974, c. 317, p. 633, § 1, urgency, eff. May 31, 1974.) § 55551. Changes in boundaries; Inclusion of additional land; procedure At the hearing the legislative body may order changes In the proposed boundaries of the district by the elimination of any portion thereof which will not, in its opin- ion, be benefited by the provision of crossing guards. If the legislative body proposes a change in the boundaries to include additional land in the district, the legislative body shall adopt a resolution briefly describing the change proposed to be made and giving notice of the time and place when and where any interested person may protest such change. The time of such bearing of Protests shall be not less than 15 nor more than 60 days from the date of the adoption of the resolution proposing a change in the boundaries. The clerk shall § 55551 GOVERNMENT CODE mail, postage prepaid, a copy of a notice of intention to make a change in the boundaries to each property owner within the area proposed to be added as shown on the latest equalized assessment roll. The notice shall be mailed at least 10 days before the date of the hearing of protests and shall describe the proposed change and specify the time for hearing protests. The notice shall also be published in the same manner as provided in Section * * * 55546. (Added by StatsAK4, c. 317, p. 636, § 1, urgency, eff. May 31, 1974. Amended by Stats.1975, c. 678, p. —, § 36.) § 55552. Changes In boundaries; majority protest If the boundaries are changed, protests made by owners of land or improve- ments excluded by the change shall not be counted in computing whether there Is a majority protest, but protests made by owners of the remaining assessable land and improvements in the district, including assessable land or improvements added by a change in the boundaries, and filed with the clerk not later than the time set for hearing objections to the proposed change, shall be included in comput- ing whether there is a majority protest. (Added by Stats.1974, c. 317, p. 633, § 1, urgency, eff. May 31, 1974.) § 55553. Determination of protests; finality; majority protest Except in the case of a majority protest, the legislative body may sustain or deny any or all protests and its determination is final and conclusive. The deter- mination shall be entered upon the minutes. If the protests are denied or if no protests are filed, the legislative body shall immediately acquire jurisdiction to form the district and to proceed further in accordance with the provisions of this chapter. In the event that there is a majority protest against a change of bound- aries to include additional territory, as provided in Section 55551, no change of boundaries shall be ordered by the legislative body. (Added by Stats.1974, c. 317, p. 633, § 1, urgency, eff. May 31, 1974.) § 55554. Ordinance If the legislative body decides to proceed, it shall by ordinance fix and establish the boundaries of the district, declare that the district is formed pursuant to this chapter, order the maintenance to be performed and provide that the cost and ex- pense of doing the maintenance shall be paid by annual assessments upon the land and improvements within the district. The ordinance forming the district shall be final and conclusive. ` (Added by Stats.1974, c. 317, p. 633, § 1, urgency, eff. May 31, 1974.) § 55555. Waiver of protests; validity of proceedings; estoppel; actions Any protests not made at the time and in the manner required by this chapter fire deemed waived voluntarily. The validity of proceedings taken under this chapter shall not be attacked subsequent.to the hearing upon any ground not stated in a protest filed pursuant to this chapter. Any property owner is estopped to attack the proceedings upon any ground not stated in a protest filed by the owner pursuant to this chapter. The validity of the formation of a district formed pur- suant to this chapter shall not be contested in any action or proceeding unless the action or proceeding is commenced within 30 days after the date of the ordi- nance forming the district. Any appeal from a final judgment in such an action or proceeding must be perfected within 30 days after the entry of the judgment. Any defect, error, or informality in the petition, the clerk's certificate, the pub- lication, posting, or mailing of notices, or failure of the property owner to receive notice shall not Invalidate any proceedings pursuant to this chapter. (Added by Stats.1974, c. 317, p. 633, § 1, urgency, eff: May 31, 1974.) § 55556. Elections; law governing Any election held pursuant to the provisions of this article shall be called, held and conducted, as nearly as practicable, in accordance with the procedures 'for calling, holding and conducting elections in general law cities. (Added by Stats.1974, c. 317, p. 633, § 1, urgency, eff. May 31, 1974.) Underline indicates changes or additions by amendment GOVERNMENT CODE § 55561 ARTICLE 3. ADMINISTRATION Sec. 5:i558. Powers of legislative body; payment of costs and expenses; crossing guards outside district. 5M5.9. Special assessment; levy and collection. 55560. Public lands and improvements; assessment; consent. 55561. Special assessments; payment; transfer of funds; repayment. 55562. Special assessments; deficiency; advancement of funds. 55563. Unexpended funds; credit for ensuing year. .W64. Inapplicability of provisions of Rev. & T.C. § 2263.2. Article 3 teas added by Stats.1974, c. 317, p. 633, § 1, urgency, eff. May 31, 1974. Library references Schools and School Districts a 45. C.J.S. Schools and School Districts $ 83 et seq. $ 55558. Powers of legislative body; payment of costs and expenses; crossing guards outside district The legislative body shall have complete charge, supervision and control of all districts established pursuant to the provisions of this chapter. The legislative body may enter into such contracts and may employ such personnel as may be required. The costs and expenses of maintaining crossing guards shall be paid for from the funds of the district or out of any fund which may be provided or advanced by the legislative body for expenditure for such purposes. The payments so advanced shall be reimbursed from district funds when moneys are available. Crossing guards may be provided at street intersections located outside the boundaries of the district, if in the judgment of the legislative body, the provision of such crossing guards is necessary for the safety of residents of the district. . (Added by Stats.1974, c. 317, p. 633, § 1, urgency, eff. May 31, 1974. Amended by Stats.1974, c. 739, p. 1637, § 3.) § 55559. Special assessment; levy and collection The legislative body shall levy an annual ad valorem special assessment on all taxable land and improvements within the district to pay the costs of maintain- ing crossing guards. The annual assessments shall be levied and collected at the same time and in the same manner and with the same interest and penalties as general taxes of the local agency are collected. (Added by Stats.1974, c. 317, p. 633, § 1, urgency, eff. Slay 31, 1974.) § 55560. Public lands and Improvements; assessment; consent Any land or improvements belonging to the state or to any county, city, city and county, district or other public agency, being used for the performance of a public function and lying within the district is not subject to assessment unless the con- sent of the governing body of the agency owning such land or improvements is filed with the legislative body. If consent is filed, the land and improvements are subject to assessment in the same manner as other land and improvements within the district. (Added by Stats.1974, c. 317, p. 633, § 1, urgency, eff. May 31, 1974.) § 55561. 'Special assessments; payment; transfer of funds; repayment The proceeds of the annual special assessments shall be paid to the treasurer of the local agency, who shall place the proceeds in a special fund to the.credit of the district and payment shall be made out of the special fund only for the pur- poses provided for in this chapter for the district. If a district is organized in any year too late for the levy of a special assessment in that year or in the next ensuing year, the legislative body is hereby authorized to transfer funds out of the general fund of the local agency to the special fund of the district to be used for the payment of the expenses of the district until Asterisks * * * Indicate deletions by amendment § 55561 GOVERNMENT CODE such time as special assessment receipts are available therefor. The legislative body shall include in the levy of the special assessment for the district for the first fiscal year in which the assessment may be levied a sum sufficient to repay the local agency the amount so transferred for the portion or portions of the preceding fiscal year for which no levy of assessment was made for that purpose. The amount so transferred shall be repaid into the general fund of the local agency from the district fund out of the first available receipts from the special assess- ment levied. (Added by Stats.1974, c. 317, p. 633, § 1, urgency, eff. May 31., 1974.) § 55562. Special assessments; deficiency; advancement of funds If for any reason there shall be a deficiency in the funds derived from the annual special assessments levied for the district, the legislative body may meet the defi- ciency by an appropriation out of the general fund or may advance such sums, to be repaid out of the proceeds of the annual special assessment for the next or ensuing years, as deemed appropriate by the legislative body. (Added by Stats.1974, c. 317, p. 633, § 1, urgency, eff. May 31, 1974.) § 55563. Unexpended funds; credit for ensuing year Any unexpended balance remaining in the special fund for the district after the payment of the costs and expenses for which the assessment was levied shall be credited to the fund to be raised for the next ensuing period of maintenance for the district. (Added by Stats.1974, c. 317, p. 633, § 1, urgency, eff. May 31, 1974.) § 55564. Inapplicability of provisions of Rev. & T.C. § 2263.2 The provisions of Section 2263.2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code shall not apply to any ad valorem special assessment levied pursuant to this chapter. (Added by Stats.1974, c. 317, p. 633, § 1, urgency, eff. May 31, 1974.) ARTICLE 4. ANNEXATIONS, DETACHMENTS, AND DISSOLUTION Sec. 55565. Reviewal of boundaries; resolution to annex or detach territory. 55566. Hearing; notice. 55567. Notice of hearing; publication. 55568. Hearing; determinations. 55569. Detachment of territory; procedure. 55570. Automatic dissolution of district; time. Article 4 was added by Stats.1974, c. 317, p. 633, § 1, urgency, eff. May 31, 1974. Library references Schools and School Districts (�=32 et seq. C.J.S. Schools and School Districts § 27. § 55565. Revlewal of boundaries; resolution to annex or detach territory Annually, prior to the beginning of each fiscal year, the legislative body shall review the boundaries of each district and shall determine if all areas within such district will be benefited by continued inclusion within the district. The legisla- tive body shall also determine if any areas outside the district are being benefited by the services provided by the district. If the legislative body determines that territory is no longer benefited by inclusion within the district or that territory outside of the district is receiving benefit from the services provided by the district, whether because of changes in school district boundaries or_ for other reasons, it shall adopt a resolution stating this fact and describing the affected territory. The resolution shall state that it is the intention of the legislative body to annex such territory to the district or to detach it from the district, as the case may be. (Added by: Stats.1974, c. 317, p. 633, § 1, urgency, eff. May 31, 1974.) Underline Indicates changes or additions by amendment GOVERNMENT CODE § 55566. Hearing; notice The legislative body shall hold a hearing on any resolution adopted pursuant to Section 55563 and shall direct the clerk to give notice of the time, place and purpose of such hearing by mailing written notice to each property owner within the boundaries of the territory described in the resolution whose name and address appears on the latest equalized assessment roll. (Added by Stats.1974, c. 317, p. 633, § 1, urgency, eff. May 31, 1974.) § 55567. Notice of hearing; publication The legislative body shall direct the clerk to publish a notice, at least 15 days prior to the date of the hearing, as provided in Section 6061 of this code. The notice shall state the time and place of the hearing and shall contain a description of the territory proposed to be annexed or detached. (Added by Stats.1974, c. 317, p. 633, § 1, urgency, eff. May 31, 1974.) § 55568. Hearing; determinations At the time fixed for the hearing the legislative body shall hear and pass upon the proposal. (1) In the event that a proposal is fer the annexation of territory to a district, the legislative body shall provide for the same actions and proceedings as provided in Article 2 (commencing with Section 55540) except that such actions and proceed- ings shall be limited to the area proposed to be annexed. (2) In the event that a proposal is for the detachment of territory from a district, the legislative body, at the conclusion of its hearing, shall determine if that portion of the district sought to be detached will be benefited by remaining within the district. If the legislative body finds that such territory will not be benefited, it shall, by ordinance, order the territory detached. The detachment shall become effective beginning with the fiscal year next preceding the enactment of the detach- ment ordinance. (Added by Stats.1974, c. 317, p. 633, § 1, urgency, eff. May 31, 1974.) § 55569. Detachment of territory; procedure In the event that a proposed detachment of territory from a district would reduce the area of the district by more than 25 percent of the original size of the district, the hearing on detachment shall also consider if the district should be continued in existence or should be dissolved. In such a case the legislative body shall pro- vide mailed notice of the hearing to all property owners within the district. In addition, at the conclusion of such a hearing, the legislative body may determine, by resolution, either to dissolve the district, to continue the district in existence, or to submit the question of the district's continued existence to a vote_. In the event that an elecion is held, it shall be called, held and conducted, as nearly as practical, in accordance with the provisions of Article 2 (commencing with Section 55540) which provide for an election on the formation of a district. (Added by Stats.1974, c. 317,-p. 633, § 1, urgency, eff. Nfay 31, 1974.) § 55570. Automatic dissolution of district; time Any district formed pursuant to this chapter shall be automatically dissolved at the conclusion of the loth year after its formation. (Added by Stats.1974, c. 317, p. 633, § 1, urgency, eff. May 31, 1974.) CHAPTER 4. FIRE AND POLICE PROTECTION § 55632. Power of local agency to contract for furnishing of protection by another local agency The legislative body of any local agency may contract with any other local agency for the furnishing of • • • fire or police protection to such other local agency. (Amended by Stats.1970, c.,1068, p. 1905, § 1.) Asterisks • • • Indicate deletions by amendment 1r 5'_D City of Huntington Beach P.O. BOX 190 CALIFORNIA 92648 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT December 10, 1975 ``1 1 W Honorable Mayor Y and City Council �J City of Huntington Beach Attention: David D. Rowlands City Administrator Subject: Petition from Brian Reid regarding Crosswalk at Wintersburg School Dear Council Members: Transmitted herewith is a memo from Ralph.Leyva in response to the petition from Brian Reid. It is our recommendation that a crosswalk not be installed at Goldenwest.Street at the Winters - burg School. Ralph lists six reasons leading to the recommendation, the most significant being reason "F." We plan to have a joint project with the High School in 1976 to improve'Goldenwest Street -and Warner Avenue in this area. The contract will include upgrading the -existing traffic signal at the intersection of Goldenwest and.Warner. These improvements will lessen the.need for the requested crosswalk. Enclosed is a map showing the requested crosswalk. Very truly yours, �.E:'_ artge Director of Public Works HEH:ae Trans. f .k dI y,l M a • CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH LjINTER -DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH To H. E. Hartge From Ralph R. Leyva. Subject Petition- from Brian Reid Re Date December 8; .1975 Crosswalk at Wintersburg School Some .students have been observed to.cross Goldenwest Street-. from'the High School to the Donut Shop that is -located in -the' shopping center on the southwest quadrant of Golderiwes.t Street. and Warner Avenue. In -discussing the problem with Brian Reid,. he ment-ioned there were a number of students who were restricted to -wheelchairs and had a desire to cross Goldenwest-Street"in front of the :school. He stated that some other handicapped students also wanted to cross at the same location. I informed Brian. Reid that a marked crosswalk would not be recommended for the :following reasons: A. The location in question constitutes a midblock crosswalk at an uncontrolled location. This type of situation has - been found to be the greatest source of pedestrian accidents. B. The crosswalk may cause pedestrians to have a false sense of security and to place themselves in a hazardous position with respect to vehicular traffic. C. The .crosswalk may cause the'pedestr.ian.to think that the motorist can and will stop in all cases, even when it is impossible to do SO. D. It may cause a greater number of rear -end and associated colli- sions due to pedestrians not waiting for gaps in traffic. E. The High School District is planning to construct street improve- ments, including sidewalks and bikeway on the east side of Goldenwest from Warner Avenue to Wintersburg High :School. These improvements would eliminate one of the reasons for concern. F.- Every effort -.should be made to encourage pedestrian-s to. cross a high volume, high :speed highway at an intersection that is controlled by a traffic signal and pedestrian -crossing equipment. A marked crosswalk is not recommended for this location because of the reasons given. GI!" Vf . i ,V alph Lei, a 1 Traffi Engineer V/ RRL:ae 1-74 ao,a 261 179 2-71 272 O CORSI N / O C F C D -- -f TOULOUSE7 I A L PHA BETA Van O db� 0. Q 1 WA INGTON F ELK ^ g J o /700G ay WARNER II — - `- y�- -F -COCAT�ID--,`:�J CAIN ' O: IwNT. O w O 1 GRAANTAQA I O— a - r \ ROOK — - - — — — — 49 W/NTERS8UR(o 48 pp J of- O I CEQo►R HIGH SCH. � ± :j 52 TUCAN Q I SI BETTY 0 1 � �BEACH �. a 728/ I V/EWAY /fib CAPSTONE 63 TR PK. d lk J W Z > pID c as i " _ /7370 O 81 ORD 8 3 84 O MANHATTAN SPICKARD. h .17500 91 LATER /7500 O O LOS AMIGOS-. ' w W � g 1� �� HUNTINGTON BE/ H UNION • ,,PHIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT 5201 bolsa ave. (714)898-6711 hunt ington beach, ca. 92647 Frank J. Abbott, ED.D. Superintendent of Schools NGEdi lNGrC7N BEACH . WEST?AlNSTER . k9AR:NA , r'o ii AbTA;N VALLEY. =rii$O?d >'}'d €'YTERSRU iiG-OCEAN YsEW. EYE. NEkG '7EG}i SCHOOL. ADl:t7 SCmpol. November 21, 1975 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: �cr E1VRif _.. 11Vti! CAt.1F, rgj i (?y 24 !jti ; 2 2 I would like to express my concern with the need for a crosswalk in front of the Wintersburg High School complex: Presently, the only crosswalks in the vicinity .are at,Warner Avenue" and at Slater Avenue. There i,s.no.sidewalk on the high school r side of Goldenwe'st-to'Warner, and this creates a_dangerous.condition A crosswalk at the north end of the Wintersburg High School campus where the sidewalk ends could remedy this situation. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, Brian Reid, Student BR:JH Enc. Board of Trustees ` Ron Shenkman m Robert A. Knox ® Ralph H. Bauer, Ph.D.■ Helen E. Ditte a Don MacAllister Vice President President Clerk 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23_4 24. 25. ,r PETITION SIGNATURES OF CONCERNED CITIZENS 26. rl4,,. J,, L,�4%ea.,r�.efn 27.�� 28. ht4T G 29. QArid,FRej c )AS 1) (k �GEXj�yR�c s-r, c 44. �/� 45. 3 46. C � 47, CITY OF HUNTINGTON . BEACH INTER -DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH To From Bill Hartge Alicia M. Wentworth Director of Public Works City Clerk Subject Date Petition from Brian Reid December 4, 1975 RE: Need for crosswalk at Wintersburg School Please be advised that Mr. Brian Reid who has submitted a petition requesting a crosswalk at the north end of the Wintersburg High School Campus has requested that this item appear on the December 15, 1975 Council Agenda, instead of December 8. His phone number is 536-7919 cc: Bud Belsito - Administration ti H CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTER -DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH To From Bill Hartge. Alicia M.. Wentworth Director of Public Works City Clerk Subject Date Petition from Brian -Reid November 25, 1975 RE: Need for Crosswalk at winters - burg High School Complex .Attached is.a letter from Brian Reid together with a copy of a petition requesting a crosswalk at the north end of the Wintersburg High School campus. He has re- quested that this item appear on the December 8,. 1975 Agenda. If you have any material you wish to be submitted please forward by December 3, 1975. His phone number is 536-7919. cc: Bud Belsito.- Administration PETITION 1. =r 31. 1/ a.celz 32. 3. `��d 33. Ay�o,e nlooE� 4. 34. 5. 35. 6. 36. 7. 37. 8. 38. 9. 39. 10. 40. 11. 41. 12. 42. 13. 43. 14. 44; 15. 45. 16. 46. 17. 47. 18. 48. 19. 49. 20. 50. 21. 51. 22. 52. _ 23. 53. 24. 54. 25. 55. 26. 56. 27. 57. 28. 58. 29. 59. 30. 60. 1b 11 City of Huntington Beach P.O. BOX 190 CALIFORNIA 92646 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT December 30, 1975 Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Huntington Beach Attention: David-D. Rowlands City Administrator Subject: Springdale Ped Crossing at Jade Circle Dear Council Members: This is in reference to the letter of December 22, 1975, from Westminster School District and -the memo of December 29, from Ralph Leyva concerning crossing protection on Springdale Street to serve school children in the area north of Bolsa Avenue. Jade Circle is opposite the existing_ traffic signal which leads into the McDonnell Douglas plant and would provide a direct access -� for the students from the west side of Springdale Street going to the Stacey -Intermediate School if there was no block wall. There is no opening in the perimeter wall on the east side of Springdale Street at Jade Circle and the residents are adamantly opposed to such an opening. The school district recommends the installation of a traffic signal on Springdale Street and -as an alternate,,the installation of a stop sign. The traffic engineer recommends a crosswalk with a flashing beacon and with a crossing guard at times.of need. Alternates and Discussion 1. Traffic signal at a cost of approximately $60,000. A signal at this location is not on the priority list and is not likely to make it on warrants. Therefor, the signal could not be justified with Gas Tax -Funds for many years 2. Stop Sign. The.stop sign would serve as a pedestrian crossing only a small percent of time and would cause an inconvenience to the traveling public on Springdale Street with a corresponding increase in: (a)f%iel consumption, (b) .air pollution, (c) year- end type accidents. 3. Crosswalk with a flashing beacon at a cost of $3,500. This would reduce the inconvenience, waste of fuel, air pollution, and rear -end accidents when compared to alternate 2. 0 �,1 Honorable Mayor and City.Council December 30, 1975 Page 2 4. No change from present procedure. Students from the west side of Springdale must walk across the highway to the Stacey Intermediate School: Education and enforcement has not been effective in pursuading the students to cross at the existing. signal. The situation will get worse if the school district closes the Cook School as is being recom- mended according to District Superintendent, Dr. Kenneth Ricketts. Recommendation It is recommended:that the City Council authorize the installation of the crosswalk and flashing beacon on Springdale at either Glenwood or Croupier. The decision of the cross street will be coordinated with the Police Department and the school district. The project is eligible for Gas Tax Funds. Very truly yours, 10 � EZ.1,0a ty Director of Public -Works HEH:mc cc.: Dr. Kenneth Ricketts District Superintendent LAt CITY OF HUNTINGTON ®LEACH INTER -DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH To H . E . Hartge . From R . R . Leyva Subject Jade Circle E Date December 26, 1975 A meeting was held at the Stacey School Library with residents of Jade Circle. The meeting was attended by two members of the Board of Trustees of the Westminster School Board and Ms. Nichols, principal of Stacey Intermediate School. Dr. Kenneth E. Ricketts, District Super- intendent, spoke in behalf of the School District. After Dr. Ricketts spoke regarding his letter of October 3, 1975, Phil Gallagher and I showed a video tape of the students crossing Springdale Street and the' related problems. After a short presentation,of the proposed solution, the homeowners presented their opposition in the form of a position paper which was signed by all the residents on Jade Circle. A lively discussion followed with each side presenting strong arguments for and against the proposed action. However, in the final analysis, the people on Jade Circle will definitely not allow a pedestrian opening i& t'he block wall to Springdale Street. It appears that we now have only two possible situations from the standpoint of funding; one, keep the crosswalk and crossing guard at the traffic signal and continue to try to encourage as many students as possible to cross at that location. Our most recent survey shows that only about 25% of the students are using that crossing. In essence, we are providing a very safe crossing for a one-fourth of the students that are crossing Springdale Street. The second situation which is available is to place the marked crosswalk and crossing guard at Glenwood Drive. This location would probably serve about 900 of the students at a location which is less de- sirable than at the traffic signal. In order to minimize the hazard of crossing the highway, a flashing beacon with an overhead sign should be used. (See the attached photograph taken north bound on Euclid in Garden Grove). The flashing beacon would operate only when the crossing guard is on duty. This type of operation would increase the beacon's effective- ness. Using salvaged equipment, the installation is estimated to cost $3,500. This alternative has been discussed with Lt. Haslett of the H.B.P.D. Traffic Bureau. He concurs with the recommendation and feels that this is the best solution available at this time. Recommendation The following is recommended in an effort to increase bicycle and pedestrian safety: 1. Paint a marked crosswalk at Springdale Street and Glenwood Drive., 2. Relocate the crossing guard from Springdale and east entrance to Douglas northerly 7251t to Glenwood. Memo to H. E. Hartge December 26, 1975 Page 2 3. Install Type III poles with flashing.beacons and overhead ped crossing signs. 4. Request Westminster School District to participate in half of the crossing protection. 5. Request the City Council to approve expenditure of funds upon concurrence from the School District. z R., LeyVa Traffic Er,-yineer RRL:]y cc: U . Haslett Ms. Nichols, Principal, Stacey School Dr. Ricketts, Superintendent 14121 Cedarwood Avenue / Westminster. California December 22, 1975 David Rowlands Huntington Beach City Manager P.O. Box 70 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Dear Mr. Rowlands: 894-7311 Kenneth E. Ricketts. Ed.®.. Superintendent 1971, CITY OF HUNTItdu10t) ADMIIIIISTRATKIr OF" Mrs. Marion Aguirre, Mrs. Ada Clegg, Miss Mary Lou Nichols and I recently met at Stacey Intermediate School with Mr. Ralph Leyva and Mr. Joe Caporicci for a meeting that was called to confer with the residents of jade Circle. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the possible opening of jade Circle to Springdale Street. At the end of the evening it was clear to those representing the School District that Mr. Leyva would be recommending to you and the City Council that jade Circle not be opened. If that is actually Mr. Leyva's recommendation, then the School District will continue to have a safety problem for the walking students coming from the Eastwood and Springdale areas of our District.. The Board of Trustees is requesting the Huntington Beach City Council to still take action to help prevent possible serious injury to students walking to Stacey Intermediate School. The following recommendations are being made: 1.0 The installation of a traffic signal light at Glenwood and Springdale. 2.0 An alternative to 1.0 would be the installation of stop signs at Glenwood and Springdale. This is the intersection that most of the children are presently using to cross the street. Some of the students are crossing just south of the railroad tracks. However, if either the signal light or stop signs were installed at Glenwood and Springdale, we are sure that the students a Board of Trustees: Marion P. Aguirre Harlene Barrett Ada E. Clegg Flay M. Schmitt Dewey L. Wiles 0 2 Oold kowlancis December 22, 197115 P4ge 2 would walk to that intersection where they would be protected from the traffic. We would also like to request that our District be notified when the Subject is to be discussed by the City Council so that a Board member might attend. We informed you in Our previous letter that students going to Stacey Intermediate School have been involved in bicycle accidents. The District is still concerned for the safety and welfare of these children, especially those who are presently walking and taking their 1. ' ives into their own hands by crossing the street in unprotected areas. We do not wish to have a child killed before corrective action is taken. We hope the City feels likewise. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Kenneth E. Ricketts District Superintendent KER:ah 1 1: WE MINSTER SCE OL DISTRICT FM 14121 Cedarwood Avenue j Westminster, California 92683 (714) 894-7311 Kenneth E. Ricketts, Ed.D.. Superintendent /o/ 4yaww ro October 3, 1975 Mr. David Rowlands Huntington Beach City Manager. Post Office Box 70 Huntington Beach, California 92648 Dear Mr. Rowlands: The Westminster School District has had three bicycle accidents so far this school year. Two of the three have been in the City of Huntington Beach on Springdale near Glenwood. Our Board is desirous of making all routes to school as safe as pos- sible, thereby reducing to a minimum possible injuries. With this in mind, the following is being requested from the City of Huntington Beach. These are: 1 .0 The opening of Jade Circle to Springdale as a walkway to the. Clegg -Stacey School .grounds. 2.0 Providing crosswalks and red curbing for students at Jade Circle and Edgeview Lane when the Jade Circle walkway is opened . through to Springdale. 3.0 As an alternative to No. 1 .0, provide signal lights and a pedestrian crossing at Springdale and Glenwood. 4.0 The installation of signs on both sides of the ° street from Glenwood to Croupier Drive stating that "This is not a crossing," if No. 1.0 request is granted. t Board of Trustees: Marion P. Aguirre Harlene Barrett Ada E. Clegg Ray M. Schmitt Dewey L. Wiles Mr. David Rowlands October 3, 1975 F-lage ;? It is the desire of -our District that immediate action be taken on our requests. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Kenneth E. Ricketts District Superintendent KER: me cc: Mr. Bill Waddle Sgt. Ed Groom 41 1 • Sob City of Huntington Beach P.O. BOX 190 CALIFORNIA 92646 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT October 1, 1975 Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Huntington Beach Attention: David D. Rowlands, City Administrator Subject: Dear Council Members: Crossing Guard - Magnolia and Indianapolis- ' Per the instructions of the City Council, a study has been made concerning a request for a crossing guard at the intersection of Magnolia Street and Indianapolis Avenue. The report from Ralph Leyva is transmitted herewith. The intersection indicates that compared to four (4) other signalized intersections with crossing guards, the subject one also should be assigned a guard. Recommendation The City Council should authorize the Police Depart- ement to assign a crossing guard to the intersection of Magnolia and Indianapolis. If there are insufficient funds in the budget, the guard at Springdale and Jade should be eliminated. Very -truly yours, E. t� Director f Public Works HEH:mc' Trans. A M of Ljow CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH Le" INTER -DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION. HUNTINGTON BEACH To H-. E. Hartge From Ralph R. Leyva Subject Crossing Guard - Magnolia and Date September 29, 1975 Indianapolis Crossing Guard Request The subject intersection is used by about 342 students who attend the following schools: School School District Grades 1. St. Simon and Jude Parochial K - 8 2. Moffet H. B. City School K - 5 3. Sowers H. B. City School 6, 7, 8 4. Edison H. B. High School 9 - 12 About 68 students are in the K - 5th grades of which 8 are riding their bicycles. The remaining 274 students attend 6th through 12th grade with about 204 riding their bicycles. Attendance area for Moffet School extends easterly of Magnolia Street (see attached maps). However, those students are normally bussed to school. Therefore, most of the K - 5th grade students (68) are attending St. Simon &Jude which is located on the northeast quadrant of the intersection. The following table is a list of signalized intersections where school crossing guards are currently assigned. The average daily traffic entering the intersection and the one-way student trips is listed in order to compare the relative merit of assigning a crossing guard to Magnolia and Indianapolis. ADT PED Location -Existing Guards Entering Crossings Springdale and Jade 18,200 15* Goldenwest and Slater 25,800 35 Warner and Edwards 28,600 112 Magnolia and Garfield 37,100 87 Proposed Crossing Guard Magnolia and Indianapolis 19,800 342 A comparison of the above volumes indicates that a crossing guard should be assigned to the intersection of Magnolia Street and Indianapolis Avenue. *All 15 students attend Stacey Intermediate School. More. students (about 50) could use this crossing but they prefer to cross at railroad tracks. Two recent accidents involving bicycle riders on Springdale has precipi- tated an investigation by the Westminster School District. This problem will be the subject of a report very soon. Mr. H. E. Hartge - Memo September 29, 1975 Page 2 Supplemental Information Other signalized intersections which may be candidates for assign- ment of a crossing guard are as follows: 1. Brookhurst and Yorktown 2. Brookhurst and Indianapolis 3. Brookhurst and Atlanta 4. Main and Adams School is currently in session 176 days per school term. There are 29 school crossing guards working an average of 163 man-hours per day. The Police Department has established a $70,000 budget for this activity. The Traffic Bureau of the Police Department is responsible for the hiring and training of school crossing guards. School Safety Patrol Mr. Chuck Palmer of the School District and the principal of Moffet School were contacted to determine their reaction to the sugges- tion.of using a School Safety Patrol at Magnolia and Indianapolis. Although both support the concept of.a School Safety Patrol, it was their opinion that this location was.not appropriate for a patrol. A review of the warrants indicate that School Safety Patrol can be used at controlled locations where the 85th percentile vehicular speed is less than 35 miles per hour. Both highways have aiapproach speed in excess of 40 miles per hour; therefore, a School Safety Patrol is not advisable at this location. Recommendations 1. A comparison with other signalized intersections having assigned crossing guards indicates that Magnolia and Indianapolis also warrants a crossing guard. 2. If the budget does not provide for an additional guard, the one currently assigned to Springdale and Jade could be reassigned to Magnolia and Indianapolis. 3. A School Safety Patrol is not RRL:jy cc: Lt. Haslet, Traffic Bureau H.B.P.D. recommended for this location. Ralph R.neyvaaV Traffic gineer �' -.. : � � jai ..v .� ii/i// :•�111111! IS 11 emilli ilium ��%�� IIi11/1/ �iiti/i //M lsIl/! ... � `� • • O va 11/ � i via aaagaa,.. ]loss �••� ... - � , -- - � \ _ �. '�. � !+ C���Q� �li11ni11111 /11r MOFFET SCHOOL BOUNDARY LINE. AiR, ■ 0--BUTTONS PEDESTRIAN •SCHOOL *-VIALKS AND ADVANCE WARNING =-i� it ■1 GUARWAND AOVANCE WARNING SIGNS.1.1110 e _ - ® � � :� � �- � iiiiii• � � iil�iililiiiiite►�F 0,.iCHwL- X-WALK WITH A&ANGE all WARNINGS. No STOP SIGNS. i �s�� IIIIIt1�i� - I=: Los �� �1 �� � ia� nNua/u///NH ► i1 t111i/ � �u/// /�� _�e�sl►ei_-I _ Sa t- City of Huntington Bea P.O. BOX 190 Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Huntington Beach CALIFORNIA ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 11 October 11, 1971 Attention: Brander Castle Acting Administrator Subject: Goldenwest and Palm Gentlemen: The attached report dated October 4 is the result of a traffic study conducted after school had opened in mid -September. It indicates that no crossing guard is warranted at the subject intersection. Further, this location ranks sixth in priority of intersections where requests for guards have been received by this office. All of these locations will be re -studied periodically and approporiate action will be taken when justified. The report of October 7 will clarify for you our warrant pro- cedure. You will note that we have nearly cut in half the requirement that is recommended for use. The last paragraph relates to the cost of guarding 17 locations during the regular school year and 11 during the summer. At the meeting of September 7, 1971, the City Council directed that a temporary guard be placed at Palm and Goldenwest. In view of the results of the traffic study it is requested that the guarding be terminated. Very truly yours, 'James R. Wheeler Director of Public Works JRW:ml Attach. / 1� '710E MEMORANDUM ,A To James R. Wheeler, Director of Public Works Date October 7, 1971 From Ralph R. Leyvat Traffic Engineering Division In Re Crossing Guards Attached is a copy of the recommended warrants for adult crossing guards as published by the California Traffic Control Devices Committee of the League of California Cities. The warrants were prepared as the result of legislation enacted in 1968 (Sec. 21372 of the California Vehicle Code). The Legislation provides that "local authorities shall with respect to highways under their respective jurisdictions, establish and promulgate warrants to be used as guide- lines for the placement of traffic control devices near schools for the purpose of protecting students going to and from school". The Traffic Engineering Division has been using warrants even before the 1968 Legislation. The warrant used by the City is the product of the vehicles and pedestrians during the peak hour (where the product is maximum) divided by one thousand. If this product is 30 or greater, then a crossing guard is warranted. Applying this procedure to the volumes required in the League's warrants yields a product of 56 for urban conditions and 36 for rural conditions. The City's warrant, therefore, represents 53.6% of the League's warrant under urban conditions. The annual cost for crossing guards last year was about $30,000 as itemized on the attached sheets furnished by the Police Department. Although the total cost is about $28,000, including summer employment, the Police Department estimates that the use of patrolmen in substituting for absent guards brings the total cost near the $30,000 figure. This year the cost will be higher since crossing guards are now paid.$2.20 per hour as compared to a previous $1.99 per hour. al h R Leyva Traffic Engineering Divisio RRL:ml OFFICE MEMORANDUM To From James R. Wheeler Date October 4, 1971 Ralph R. Leyva In Re Goldenwest and Palm Avenue Pedestrian and vehicle counts were conducted on Monday, September 13, 1971 and on Thursday, September 16, 1971. The results of these counts are as follows: Palm and Goldenwest Time Vehicles Peds % of Warrant Date 7:30-8:30 a.m. 759 14 35.4 9/13/71 7:30-8:30 a.m. 719 16 38.4 9/16/71 ° 8:30-9:30 a.m. 432 13 18.7 9/16/71 Deep Harbor and Goldenwest 7:30-8:30 a.m. 719 9 21.6 9/16/71 8:30-9:30 a.m. 432 1 - 9/16/71 Little Harbor and Goldenwest 7:30-8:30 a.m. 719 9 21.6 9/16/71 8:30-9:30 a.m. 432 0 - 9/16/71 The pedestrians crossing at Deep Harbor and Little Harbor were all high school students enroute to Huntington Beach High School. The attached work sheets show the breakdown by age group. It appears that 18 of the 29 pedestrians crossing at Palm during the two-hour period were kindergarten through fifth graders. The remaining students were sixth, seventh, and eighth graders. Mr. Wes Cowling, the Transportation Officer for the school district, relayed that the bus for the kindergarten through fifth grade students stops at Goldenwest and Deep Harbor at 8:04 a.m. and at 8:06 a.m. at Goldenwest and Palm Avenue. In addition, a bus stops at the same two locations at 7:03 a.m. and 7:04 a.m. for the sixth, seventh, and eighth grade students. Another bus stops at 8:47 a.m. and 8:48 at the same two locations for the older students. However, there have been no children to catch the early and late buses. Therefore, the school district has dis- continued the 7:03 a.m. and 8:47 school bus schedules. Mr. Cowling informed me that if a crossing guard was assigned permanently at Goldenwest and Palm Avenue, he would recommend to the school board that bus service at the subject location be discontinued altogether. Without bus service, there would be sufficient pedestrians crossing Goldenwest at Palm Avenue to warrant a crossing guard. a James R. Wheeler October 4, 1971 Page 2 Although the intersection does not warrant a crossing guard under present conditions, and if the Council wishes to lower the warrants for a crossing guard, it is recommended that the following locations also be considered for crossing guards. Location Vehicles Peds % of Warrant Yorktown & Waterbury 222 98 72.1 Hamilton & Northshore 444 48 71.0 Garfield & Colchester 495 30 48.7 Indianapolis & Farnsworth 259 57 48.7 Atlanta & Strathmoor 279 51 47.5 Goldenwest d Palm 719 16 38.4 It should be pointed out that the pedestrians appearing in the counts are all elementary school children counted during the peak hour. The first location on the list showed that 31 high school students crossed which were not included in the warrant count. The League of California Cities recommends that at least 40 elementary school age pedestrians per hour for each of two hours utilize the crossing on the way to or from school as a criterion for assigning adult crossing guards. The warrant also specifies that the vehicular traffic volume exceeds 350 (urban) and 300 (rural) during each of any two hours during which the required number of school children normally cross. It is felt that the City's warrants are somewhat less restrictive than those recommended by the League. RRL:fa Ralph A. Leyva Traffic Engineering Division 0, City --of Huntington Beach P.O. BOX 190 CALIFORNIA 92649 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT November 13, 1970 Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Huntington Beach Attention: Doyle Miller City Administrator Subject: Request for from P.U.C. Funds Gentlemen: Allocation of Funds Crossing Protection The attached Resolutions are a required part of two applications . we are sending to the Public Utilities Commission requesting allocation from the State Crossing Protection Fund for one-half of the City's cost for construction of signal lights and crossing gates at the Warner Avenue -Southern Pacific Railroad crossing and for one quarter of the City's cost for the construction of signals, lights and crossing gates at the Heil Avenue -Southern Pacific Railroad. The improvements at both of these crossings have been completed. If approved by the Public Utilities Commission, these allocations will amount to approximately $8,600.00 reimbursement to the City's Gas Tax Funds. It is respectfully recommended that your Honorable Body approve the two Resolutions and authorize the Mayor to sign each along with the actual request for Allocation of Funds to be submitted to the Public Utilities Commission. It is also requested that you direct the City Clerk to execute seven (7) copies of each Resolution and return, along with the Request for Allocation of Funds, to this office for transmittal to the Public Utilities Commission. JRW:JM:mp Attach. r truly yours, G�r�i�' �C 6a mes R. Wheeler Director of Public Works U October 26, 1970 Re:: Crossing Guard Capistrano Lane and Banning City Council Huntington Beach, Californ ::7-:9 Gentlemen:: / On October 12, 1970-, a crossing guard was placed at the corner of Banning and Malibu Lane near the John Eader School.. This crosswalk is used by the children who live in Unit One of the Newport West tract, bound'ad on the east by Bushard and on the west by Malibu Lane. However, the children who live in Unit Twoof the Newport West tract, bounded on the east by Capistrano Lane and on the west by Magnolia, must continue to cross Banning without the aid of a crossing guard. There is a flood control channel running north and south between Malibu Lane and Capistrano Lane, located approximately 50 feet from each of the two streets. If the children from the Capistrano Lane side cross with the Malibu Lane crossing guard they are then forced to cross this flood control channel -vralking agains� oncoming traffic in a traffic lane since there is no sidewalk. Consequently these children cannot safeiy use the crossing guard at Malibu Lane and must continue to walk from school across the flood control channel on the north side of the street where there is a narrow area next to the traffic lane for their use (no sidewalk there, either) and then cross Banning at Capistrano Lane to reach their homes in Unit Two.. The traffic on Banning at Capistrano Lane is the same traffic that reaches Malibu Lane, since there is only a distance of approximately 100 feet separating the two streets. Concerned parents have communicated with the Traffic Engineering Department and, although they acknowledged the hazard to the children on the Capistrano Lane side of the flood control, Capistrano Lane did not get a crossing guard for two reasons: 1) a pedestrian count was taken and at that particular time Malibu Lane showed about seven more pedestrians crossing than did Capistrano Lane; 2) there were funds for only one guard. Banning has become a street of fast moving traffic and, not only do our children daily face the hazard of crossing a narrow flood control channel without so much as the benefit of a sidewalk,they then must cross Banning alone when a mere 100"-feet away at Malibu Lane the City has acknowledged Le hazard and placed a crossing guard. We the undersigned are parents of children attending the Eader School using the Capistrano/Banning crosswalk each day. We feel -that the k Wo, wamol - 2 - conditions there are extremely hazardous and that the placement of a crossing guard is more than justified. We would appreciate your careful consideration of the matter. N � EAD6R (— F 5c HooL Aw l c 4 (�EvJPoRT -' NaWPoleT WEST a J w w ES-r UNrr 2 oa uN,r I u u� X LCA"�_ mil. zzo q /74 C T Q i 0 L � ' r DY BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION bF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Investigation, for the purpose of establishing a list for the year 1970 of railroad glade crossings ) of city stteets. oi.,"county .made . . most urgently iri. Tided of scpaiIaiiont ) or existing separations""ii need of ) alteration or reconstruction as ) contemplated by Section 189 of the ) Streets and Highways Code. ) Case No. 8950 .:,:,(Filed 'August 12, 1969) ORDER INSTITUTIN�ESTIGATION Each year the California Public Utilities Commission is required by legislation contained in the Streets and Highways Code to'establish a priority list of those railroad grade crossings of city streets or county roads most urgently in need of separation or existing separation structures most urgently in need of alteration. follows: Section 189 of the Streets and Highways Code reads as 11189. On or before the first day of each year the Public Utilities Commission shall establish and . furnish to the Department of Public Works a list of crossings at grade in separation of grade districts, of city streets or county roads and the tracks of any railroad corporation or corporations, and of existing grade separations in need of alteration or reconstruc- tion in the order of priority which in the judgment of the commission justifies the elimination of the cross- ing at grade by the erection or construction of separa- tion structures or justifies the alteration or recon- struction of existing grade separations. The commission shall include in such listing only such crossings which in its judgment are most urgently in need of separation or alteration, taking into consideration the possibility of financing the same under the provisions of this code. "The priority list shall -terminate on the last day of the year for which it is established." Amended by Chapter 1403, Statutes 1967. Section 190 of the same Code provided that in each annual budget report prepared by the California Highway Commission. and the Department of Public Works, $5,000,000 shall be set aside: 1°for allocations to grade separation projects, includ- ing the elimination of grade crossings and the altera- tion or reconstruction of grade separations, of - 1 - separation of grade districts, cities, cities and counties, and counties on county roads or city streets as provided in Sections 139-191, inclusive, of this code. An allocation shall be made of one- half of the estimated cost, after deducting there- from any contribution to be made by the railroad corporations involved, towards any project which qualifies therefor under the provisions of said sections, except that in no event shall alloca- tions be made to projects for the alteration or. reconstruction of grade separations unless the affected railroad or railroads have agreed, or have been required by decision of the Public Utilities Commission, to.contribute not less than 10 percent of the cost of such alteration or reconstruction Project. An allocation shall be made only when the affected local agency or agencies furnish evidence to the department that all necessary orders of the Public Utilities Commission have been obtained, that all necessary agreements with affected railroad or railroads have been executed, that sufficient funds from the local agency or agencies are available and that all other matters prerequisite to awarding the construction contract within a period of six months have been or can be taken care .of within that time. Funds of a local agency shall be deemed available for purposes of this section to the extent of the amount of any general obligation bonds authorized but unsold if all proceedings prior to the. issuance and sale of the bonds have been validly taken and if the bonds may be validly issued and sold by the local agency at any time, even though at the time of alloca- tion under this section the bonds have-not been issued or sold. Where such bond proceedings have been taken, if -the bonds are not issued and sold within six months after the time of such allocation, the commission may order the allocation canceled, and shall thereupon revert the amount thereof to the fund set aside by this section, for reallocation to another eligible project. In any event, regardless of the method pro- posed by the local agency for the financing of its share of the project cost, if after an allocation has been made, the construction contract has not been awarded within one year, the commission may order the allocation canceled and the funds allocated shall revert to the fund set aside by this section. ."The department and the commission may make allocations from a succeeding fiscal year's sum of five million -dollars ($5,000,000) on and after January 1st preceding the beginning of such fiscal year. Engineering, ri ht of way acquired for the project and utility relocation costs expended by a. local agency or agencies prior to an allocation of funds for a project shall be included in the total cost thereof, even though expended prior to an alloca- tion of state funds. - 2 - C. 5950 DY "A local agency that furnishes evidence to the department that it has complied with all requirements for an allocation pursuant to this section may, if it has sufficient funds available for that purpose, proceed with the advertising for bids and the construction with- out prejudice to its right to receive an allocation if an allocation becomes available for that local agency before the termination of the priority list established for the year during which the construction commenced. "Funds set aside for the purposes specified in this section shall be available for allocation and expenditure without regard to fiscal years. "Such project may be constructed by the local agency or agencies concerned, or, by agreement between the local agency or agencies and the depart- ment, the department may acquire the necessary rights - of -way in the name of'the local agency.or agencies, execute agreements with railroad corporations, present necessary applications to the Public Utilities Commission and perform all other acts to complete the project. Construction work by the department shall be subject to the State Contract Act. Agreements between the department and local agencies are author- ized relative to the handling and accounting of funds, including the making of advancements thereof so as to permit prompt payment for,the work accomplished, and relative to any other phase of the work. "In the event the actual cost is less than that estimated, the allocation shall be reduced accordingly. If, after completion of _tine project, the actual cost. exceeds that estimated, the allocation may be increased proportionately by the department and the commission. If more projects comply with the require- ments hereof than can be financed from the fund set aside by this section, allocations shall be made only to those highest on the priority list submitted by the Public Utilities Commission, except for those allocations made for projects which exceed the estimated costs. Allocations to specific projects by. the department shall remain available until expended. As used in this section, °local agency' includes a separation of grade district, as well as a city, city and county, or county." Amended by -Chapter 1403, Statutes 1967. Allocations are made by the'Department of Public Works and .the California Highway Commission, and not by the Public Utilities Commission. The Public Utilities Commission is required, on or before the first day of each year, to establish and furnish to the Department of Public Works a "priority list" of grade crossings or of existing grade separations in need of alteration or - 3 - C.89.50 DPI reconstruction which in the Commission's judgment_jxl.stifies the elimination of the crossing at grade 'by the construction of separ- ation structures or justifies the alteration or reconstruction of existing grade separations. Such annual list shall be of crossings in separation of grade districts and of city streets or county roads. By Decision No. 75114, issued December 171 1968 in Case No. 8830, the Commission established the -twelfth priority.list of forty-five projects for the year 1969. This list will expire on December 31, 1969. A new list for the year 1970 should be established. Attention is drawn to the fact that the 1959 Legisla-- ture and 1967 Legislature amended Sections 189 and 190 of the Streets and Highways Code in.several respects, the most important, for the purposes of this proceeding, being the provision which now makes projects for the alteration of existing separation structures eligible for inclusion on the Commission's priority list and for financial assistance from the five million dollar ($5,000,000) annual appropriation, and -.that funds set.aside,shall be available for allocation and expenditure without regard to fiscal year. IT IS ORDERED that an investigation on the Commission's own motion is hereby instituted for the purpose of establishing.a-new list for the year 1970 of railroad grade crossings in separation of grade districts and of city streets or county roads most urgently inneed of separation, and existing separation structures most urgently in need of alterations, as contemplated by Section 189 of the Streets and Highways Code. Public hearings in said investigation shall be held before Commissioner Symons or Examiner Daly commencing,at 1:00 p.m. on. October 16, 1969, in the Courtroom of the Commission, State Building, 107 South Broadway, Los Angeles, and commencing 4 _ - C. 3�50 DY at 10:00 a.m. on October 20 and 21,_.1969, in the Courtroom of the Commission, State Building, Sari Francisco. The Secretary is directed to cause a copy of this order to be mailed forthwith to each of the following: Each city, county, and city and county in which there is a railroad grade crossing or separation structure. Each railroad corporation. California Department of'Public Works. California Highway Commission. Greater,Bakersfield Separation of Grade DistricQ�- League of California Cities. County Supervisors Association. Any city, county, city and county or such district desiring to have a particular crossing or crossings or separation_ or separations considered as 'a possibility for incision in the thirteenth annual list (1970) to be established pursuant to Section 189 of the Streets and Highways.Code, should send to the Commission, by September 19, 19692 the original and -three copies ofa letter request for such consideration, setting forth the following information as to each such crossing or separation: For Crossings at Grade Proposed for Elimination 1. Identification of crossing, including name of street or road, name of railroad, and crossing number. 2. Twenty-four hour vehicular traffic volume count, by either 60- or 30-minute periods. 3. Number of train movements for one typical day segregated by type, i. e., passenger, through freight, or switching. 4. Statement as to vehicular delay at crossing. 5. Type of separation proposed (overpass or underpass). 6. Preliminary cost estimate of project. - 5 - i . C. 8950 DY 7.. Statement as to the amount of money' available for construction of the project. B. Statement as _..to .;need--fors--:the proposed improvement. For Grade Separations Proposed for Alteration 1. Identification of crossing, including name of street or road, name of railroad, and crossing number. 2. Twenty-four hour vehicular traffic volume count, by either 60.- or 30-minute periods. 3. Description of existing separation structure with principal dimensions. 4. Type of alteration proposed. S. Preliminary cost estimate of project. 6. Statement as to the amount of money available for construction of the project. 7. Statement as to need for the proposed improvement. Dated at San Francisco , California, this 12th day of _ August .., 1969. Commissioner J. P. Vukasin, Jr., being necessarily absent, did not participate in the disposition of this proceeding. William Symons, Jr. President A. W. Gatov Fred P..Morrissey Thomas Moran Commissioners Attention Due to the unfortuate tragedy that ha just taken placep and in an atteWt to avoid any repetition in the futuraq the Harbour View P.T.O. Board foals that we should act Isawdiately and with your full eupp®at on the follavfoS palates 1. Stop 818M an Davowort at. Saybrook U WDavewirt at t" 4/e w Dave rt at Ban" q A WDoardvalk at Ssybmh W l0 A MaTalft staT at SaybTWAs- w-l' 2. No parklas = Saybrook betmem 7800 AA, MW 3500 pail. 3. Crosswalks to a:amr all comrs. L, 6. Reduced spoed 1Wt to 23 Odlaes per hour Or lover am Saybrook and Davenport. 3. Creaming guards. s,/ 6. Police supori88oa in mormiseg vhft children are on the gray to school. Please check all points with c leh you agree® and afila awed mail this iawdiately tog HUntingtoa Beach City Coil City Hall Huntingtoft Bests, Callforalm The Beard also suggests that it Is tim tM resMG00 =716W tleeir cm respMeWlity in their hmdling of their autembnles and reduce spaedm, Tha a yam HARBOUR VIM P. T. o. 0z' I 16542 Cotuit Circle Huntington Beach California 92647 December 26, 1968 Mayor Alvin Coen City Hall Huntington Beach, Calif. Dear Mayor Coen: We would like to request time on the agenda of the January 6 City Council meeting to present safety recommendations for the Huntington Harbour area. Please call either Mrs. Ralph Bauer (847 5487), or Mrs. Richard Secord (431 0485) to confirm our request. Thanking you in advance. Sincerely, Patricia Secord December 30, 1968 Mrs. Richard Secord 16542 Cotuit Circle Huntington Beach, California 92647 Dear Mrs. Secord: Your letter to Mayor Coen regarding the presentation of safety recommendations for the Huntington Harbour area at the next Council meeting was turned over to me to answer. Please be advised that at every regular,Council meeting D there is a section for oral communications under which any interested citizen or citizens may address the Council regarding any matter comcerning the welfare of the community and its citizens. Mayor Coen has requested that I invite you to appear under this section of the agenda with the matters you wish to present. The oral communications is always the last item on the agenda, and while I am unable to say exactly what time we will reach that point, I can assure you that it will be in the second section of the meeting which begins at 7:30 P.M. Sincerely yours, Paul C. Jones City Clerk PCJ : pa 3 G Fty �Cotzncil� _�_ __-A-P-PROVED BY CITY, Yaul C, Jones _FF City Clark Huntinton Beach oIT Dear S.ir_, _-- Qri_ Febru.ary Oth.,-the-dat.e,.,..of_..youur next...._ p$�.y.__ . Council meeting, we would 'li}e to be put_ on the <a agenda,. to speak in behalf of the _ prerits ot- the_._ Lark. View school district students, These students have to cross the �interspction of Springdale.& Slater and it has proven to be unsafe, Our purpose is to, get -a_cr_o,s,sing-guard— at this""intersection,_ - f Thank _Y,ou.� —Parents-of: the --Lark View --Student 0 tyNtINGTp� `��ouxrr TELEPHONE 536-6571 crr)7 or Paa 1". 0. BOX 70 CALIFORNIA October 4, 1965 REFERRED BY COUNCIL To T TO:---- �w . OCT 4 1965 --------- ...................... Honorable Mayor and City Councilmen City of Huntington Beach, California DENTS ff POLI Iw OCT-1-8-065---- Attention: Doyle Miller Refer: Item F-3, Council Agenda City Administrator 4/4/65 (Mrs. Tonie Taite) Gentlemen: Mrs.. Tonie Taite, 6812 Shannon Drive, City, was contacted September 27, 1965, in reference to her letter dated September 25th. She was advised that the Engineering Department had been informed of her letter and would conduct a survey beginning September 28th in order to establish a need for a crossing guard at the intersection of Edwards and Clare Drive. It was also brought to her attention that the speed limit had been re— duced and posted at 40 MPH on Edwards Street, some 14 school crossings had been painted in the area of the Circle View School, and that a new crossing sign had been placed on Edwards Street at Clare Drive. She appeared tobe very appreciative of the fact that she was personally contacted and advised of the aforementioned progress. Mrs. Taite stated she would relay this information on to the Safety Committee of her PTA group. In addition to the above, there has been Radar speed checks on Edwards between Clare Drive and Hughes; also, it was found that better than 80% of the motorists were complying with the posted 40 MPH zone. The Police Department has also made a special effort and will continue such effort to increase patrol in the area. Sincerely, JOHN H._SELTZER Chief of Police cc: Traffic Commander JHS:ebh R Address all communications to the Chief of Police 4 .k COUNCIL, February -24, 1967 -r. Parents of Lark View Students, c/o Mrs. Charles Seymour .17592 StillHarbor Lane Huntington Beach, Calif. Dear Mrs. Seymour; ?lour letter requesting the employment of a cros- sing guard at the intersection of Springdale and Slater Streets was presented ab the City Council at their reg- ular meeting held February'20, 1967. The. Council, by minute action, directed that a crossing guard be employedd to serve this intersection. If there is any further information needed in regard to this matter, please feel free to contact my office. Sincerely yours, PCJ/st Paul C. Jones City Clerk 6312 Shannon Dr. x . :runtiruton reach September 25, 1965 Mayor Shipley, and Council t-`:embers: I am,, writtins in regards to a street crossing probleim le have :in our area. The street we need: help at is Ed,.!ards at Claire bet,;Een Edi never anC.. Susar. '.e want to than;_ you for the nc, tainting of the cross,lal'_T on Ed:lar6s and the painting of school crossings, but it just isn't enough. The traffic is to fast and heavy, and'I feel the only :lay for you to see how bad it is, is to investigate yourself. =-iothers are ready to Pic!=zet the city hall for the safety of their children, but I thou`,ht perhaps if I conducted a survey and you really 1mew hoer tiiany children cross that walk - we get some help. The mothers have contacted the police deoart-nme it and were told a flat no. Last year t,:,ey put a si,_;n out there for us clhich iielped. a little, but then ;'.,e had bused children_, this year there are no bused children at Cir•Cle View School so everyone walks, and the danger is 10 ti?i1es Brea i:er, but now :'e can't even have a sign. It. doesn't make sense. I`Ihat did they do 1;:ith the sign_ they put out for us last yeZ:r? rn?hat we really need is a crossing guard . I have conducted a house to house survey of the children who have to cross Edwar6s to go to school, and it totals 103 to elementary school only, now I can't believe-,untington Beach has grom so large and it tiliniks so .little of it's future citizens, that they can't give them, a little protection. I realize there are :.iany import- ant issues before you in reguar6s to zoning, but could anythinb` be more iriporta.nt than one life. I think the city officials should �::ork: hams in hand with school district offices. If buses can't be suonliedt then the city sho. ld ta'>e the re rOnsibli ty of oe tting children across streets safely. Our children ,Talking also is your fault. It would not gave been for the poor plan -,,in- and ap-:rovals of the tracts bet,•:een Edc:ards, Goldencest, Edin er, and Su ;ar, "these children ei lsht be soini- to a perma.nan.t school. I have livoc liv-e -O" j years acid all of ?vy'"C._11dE=en, there ar 7, have never e.t vendee t_^.,c sa_,e school at one titre. 7e have si ;!_t 13 purci_asec for a school, but it sveins the.^c aren't enough' homes, atit-child-cen to 'errant one. SO ': P.' 7.1 Dro:aably be s' Oved aIrou_'lc for the ne_>>;t f1 fe yews and -?e--•sOna1 �': si Chi and t7_='ec? Of this s;hold- :.'e s. ChilC. Scifc _y Circle +lien: _ .T.A . �f Tonie Taite - 5 -0 1yNTINGTp�� p a Q �C A TELEPHONE 536-6571 L-- CITY OF P. 0. BOX 70 CALIFORNIA June 30, 1965 Honorable Mayor and City Councilmen City of Huntington Beach Huntington Beach, California Attention: Doyle Miller City Administrator. JOHN H. SELTZER CHIEF OF POLICE I APPROVED sy CITY CO UNCII 6 1965 CITY CLE&E Reference: Recent Additional Requests for Summer School Crossing Guards Gentlemen: See attached copy of letter from Fountain Valley School Dis- trict requesting the following: 1. Crossing Guard at Brookhurst and Continental. 2. Crossing Guard at Pioneer and Cannery. The Crossing Guards to be at said locations during Summer School Session from June 28, 1965, through July 30, 1965, from 8:00 AM to 8:30 AM and from 12:30 PM to 1:00 PM. As a result of this request, this Department assigned an Officer Officer Cooper) to be at the intersection of Brookhurst and Continental during said Summer School Session. This assignment has been given to Officer Cooper in addition to his normal duties. At this time, we informed the Fountain Valley School District, by letter, that we would be unable to provide a Crossing Guard at Cannery and Pioneer based upon budgetary items. The following day this Department received numerous calls from individual parents of children attending said Summer School, re- questing additional Crossing Guards at other locations as follows: 1. Cannery and Adams. 2. Adams and Bushard. 3. Pioneer and Cannery. Address all communications to the Chief of Police Honorable Mayor and City Councilmen -June 30, 1965 City of Huntington Beach.. Page 2 As a result of these calls, this Department re-evaluated the problem. Subsequently, we have assigned a Reserve Officer Officer Perry) to the intersection of Pioneer and Cannery during the dates and times.in question. 'A personal observation was made of the area in question by the undersigned whereas it was determined that it was advantageous to place the Crossing Guard at.this location and not at the other two locations. Our determination of the -appropriate location to place this Crossing Guard was confirmed by contacting Dr. Charles F. Miller, Assistant Stiperittendett':of Fountain Valley School District. In addition, these are --the two locations warranting a Crossing Guard during the regular school.sessions. 1; Continental and Brookhurst. 2, Pioneer and Cannery. Reserve Officer Perry will be scheduled to work from 7:30 AM to*=1:60=PM', five days per week starting June 30, 1965,-until July 30, 1965. When not actually working.as a Crossing Guard, he will assist Mr. Gidney, winding parking meters, collecting meter monies and assisting in minor repairs. His rate of pay is.$3.05 per hour. I was unable to assign a Regular Crossing Guard that was used _atiMain•and Quincy during regular school session. It was inadvisable to attempt to start.a third Police Cadet at this time. - Enclosed for study are maps of the area in question, showing Locations where -Officers are now assigned, the -location of the Wardlow School, and the reasons for not placing a crossing•at every location requested should be obvious, and is concurred in by Charles Miller, Assistant -Superintendent, Business Services, Fountain Valley School District., I would-like'for you.and the Council to note that these extra 'requests for'Police Service are'not'budgeted'and are being paid out of salary accounts for the 1964-1965 and 1965-1966 budgets. Also, I would like to -point out for your consideration that we'- are undoubtedly going to have additional requests for Crossing Guards this September when schools are back in session, and I would like to be. given the authority to train some other people as -Crossing Guards, pro- vide the uniform and equipment they will need, and be given the --necessary add tional"m6ney to pay for them in 1965-1966-. Respectfully, OHN H..SELTZER iJR Encl. Chief of Police JHS:ebh 'PLANNING _ ZONING 99061.15 SECTIONAL DISTRICT MAP 6-6-10 - NOTE_ 4� w-MfY»f Aa �• t[[r LEGEND CITY Off' LEEND.; A77 Y�rr.. Izvom.u[ w,n�a AADOr[ED: ALWA,T pIR! 0.ANGNG CDINILNTINOTON BEACHCl"iT CDGMC1l CROIMUItpEf, E3019GDo0l1MES WWE4 19NU0709 pstR9®®[ -[vwr4rl[[_n rY•l-[" wr sw`a�[rsvt,-wS[A.Wrr[s,r4[A,tcvwr ,.[ ® -sEOm4 tl+YM4[ru[reit[ ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA W �M,Haall,, qE °GRD�Q9x AYENMO .t NUAUIY ), gfl GRO MG 91l I, 19ES ND 9!a AMENDED BY ZONE CASE: A,(»DED APR&AYflmm rn � •sl No 9" eurnx LEGEND. f w. z3G, zsa zn, zeo, x9A, 309, v I, 3x1, �•!. ]A°,3w. A27 .r[r. o.o •.: 101, sfE, NE, •!t "A Il OEG OA"GCTt R •� I1°9e! DIID 1�q o .f W['tn�•. AMEN= rEDRW1RY a, 196A ONO NO. 1034 _.- Yr•ACr Oft. NO JOIN) NMU= li IfG• MA »D. b7• �Ak'1�[pKQDpp A,(lKD tlRRtll I!, Ifa! °R0�,10. IOap r t GARFIELD AVE. i -- - - - [ RI RI n C 2 I RI RI V RI RI RI s C2 I � �I R2 RI l °A RI V jl;�RI RI RII IQ of R I RI '" it RA aREir a , rc RI Y RG»!EY ;k R I RI RI RI RI J RI RI _ arI!» DP RI RITARMN al i jLa RI RI RI�RlI AVE. _ R I .•o: E f ° GREEY»ICM ON RI I�V I L M dt. 1- RI MYA»»I! [Ml R I R A ryryry,,, R I I R I ,�y � try CAK COD R I Oa. GROta»ORJ 113 R3 R3 ::R3 R3 •� R3 w a I R3.,�=_ ________ RI 1 RI RI RI RI RI Ra; R3::, R3 R3 RS ::. R3 R3 :; R3 R3 R3 R3 ,f¢ G[nYSBWG a. 1 soi+wa..._-.o:i:o S ._....P�•�L-`-...i_____ _ i."[ w•a r.t-4 C RIU qt � �wa Su_. `u. ,i ya_�+�3-' : R3 �R3 L Rl G R3R3 t R3�..._R;____ .___ ADAMS L 4 W& OV,�- / W q L�1 �iYl.l. �" `� yi T/7E AVE Cf!?aSS L%Or�MS• SECTIONAL DISTRICT MAP 5-6-10CITY .. . r. NDrE: OF w .rtam b sno ro r.w a.rt. LEDEMD: .°°C° 2"' •I� Tl ® ° " HUI�I'INGTON BEACH K�MIt• 1 wtlOaytgll ara oouweL-owomwm wn. rwe I>D a rs.-tw mM ®�•� am[r m.er ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA ..� �.. wrt o� M a, ..acm ww A A to ao. wL on ®..� ,pan ®wtt AMENDED BY ZONE CASE: 210. t», t». t!, tM. tq ll•. M! �.NDom p o .AL I. no own Ne M!1[[D ®iCt 7. icicle cm R gyp/ Turn. L[f♦[ND, u .mfa. w rras m •ra r r ' -RFKLD AVE ■r — RI RI RI RI RI RI Cl a � : RI Rl a a RI RI 'u RI RI wAWAM. RI RI RI J vowrroww - t Rl R I !f rartro� w RI RI RI Rl mlo LA `i R I 3 RI RI RI R I RI - RI RI RI Rl RI n7i a. R2 R2 R2 I I RI ' R3 �.._._ R3 R3 := R3 R2�- RI RI Rl y.�w R3 R3 IR2!i - Q R3 Naat'.-aR3 R2ADAMS 9 5C ,("L . f AVENUE Foun Valley School District a-r1 --..d �r The Friendly District" I hen Each Indiriduid Is Important Mr. John H. Seltzer Chief of Police City of Huntington Beach Huntington Beach, California Dear Sir: 9502 Velardo Drive Huntington 13eac'h, California Telephone 962-1331 June 22, 1965 This district will be conducting summer school from June 28 through July 30. The summer school hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. The children who presently live west of Magnolia between Adams and Yorktown will be crossing to Wardlow School at the intersection of Pioneer and Magnolia Streets. Children from Huntington Continental, west of Brookhurst, will be crossing to Lamb School at Brookhurst and Continental Drive.- The parents in both areas are requesting a crossing guard be furnished from 8:00 to 8:30 and from 12:30 to 1:00. We are relaying this request to your office. Very truly yours, Charles F. Miller Assistant Superintendent Business Services CFM:lc DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION BOARD OF TRUSTEES EDWARD W. BEAU8IER. ED. D. MRS. NAOMI JONKMAN DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT PRESIDENT SECRETARY TO THE BOARD ALVIN KRUKENBERG DALE ST'JARD CHARLES F. MILLER. ED. D. JEROME THORNSLEY CLERn TRUSTEE ASSISTANT SUPERINTEt4DUN— 455!STANT SUPERINTENDENT BU?INESS SERVICES INSTRUCTIONAL SER—CES CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Huntington Beach, California Ar I% 10 1965 April 14, 1965 Honorable hTayor and City Council City of Huntington Beach 0 Attention:- Doyle Tiller City Administrator APR 19 1965 Subject: Requested School Crbssinp- Guard at Bushard and Adams INTRODUCTION The Fountain Valley School District has requested a crossing guard to assist children crossing the north leg of Bushard Street at Adams Avenue. Traffic on this leg of Bushard is controlled by a stop sign. SM8TARY AND RECOTvMNDATION During the 45-minute morning period when school children use this cross- walk, -only 128 vehicles went through the crosswalk. Two-thirds of this traffic has no trouble yielding to pedestrians as it is already stopped at the stop sign. The remaining volume is one-fourth the volume needed to warrant a crossing guard. It is recommended that the request be denied. VEHICLEE AND PEDESTRIAN VOLU!,Ti On April 9, a normal school day, counts ivere made at this intersection between 8:Q0 and 9:00 a.m. During the 45 minutes vhen school children crossed Bushard, 79 vehicles traveled southbound on Bushard. It is important to remember that all of these vehicles stopped before entering the crosswalk because of the stop sign for Bushard traffic. A total of 44 vehicles turned from Adams onto Bushard through this crosswalk. Northbound Bushard traffic crossing Adams was 'only five 5) vehicles. During these same 45 minutes, 34 children crossed Bushard. CROSSING GUARD NOT WARRANTED Based on the warrants adopted by the Council, a total of 250 vehicles per hour is required to warrant a r-'. _uard. At this intersection, only 49 vehicles in 45 minutes can be considered as traffic affecting the crosswalk since the remaining.traffic must stop before entering the crosswalk. Honorable Mayor and City Council April 14, 1965 Pave 2 It is also rnquirod that the number of children multiplied by the volume of vehicles expressed in thousands equal or exceed 30. In this case., 34 x .049 = 1.7, which is far below the requirod.-30. It can be readily seen that a crossing guard is not warranted based on either pedestrian or vehicle volume. Very truly yours J fcstR. Whecle,.r eel Director or 0� 1)u rector of Public Works JP,IV.ALK:am 5 1965 K TA I omr, � 14 1 E , Foun Valley School District "The Friendly District" Where Each Individual Is Important V 9502 Velardo Drive C)�) Huntington Beach, California Telephone 962-1331 March 18, 1965 City Council City of Huntington Beach Huntington Beach, California Gentlemen: The attached resolution was passed unanimously by the Board of Trustees of the Fountain Valley School Di'strict at its regular meeting of March 18, 1965. It is forwarded to you with the urgent request that your honorable body take the appropriate action as soon as possible. Our district personnel are anxious to co-operate with you to the utmost, in the interest of the safety of the children of the district. Very truly yours, lc DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION BOARD OF TRUSTEES EDWARD W. BEAUBIER, ED. D. MRS. NAOMI JONKMAN DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT PRESIDENT SECRETARY TO THE BOARD ALVIN KRUKENBERG DALE STUARD CHARLES F. MILLER, ED. D. JEROME THORNSLEY CLERK TRUSTEE ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT BUSINESS'SERVICES INSTRUCTIONAL SERVICES WHEREAS, the Huntington Beach City Council has provided a crossing guard in the Huntington Beach Elementary School District, and WHEREAS, the pedestrians within the Huntington Beach City boundary lines are experiencing hazardous traffic conditions at two locations: Brookhurst and Continental, and Bushard and Adams, and WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees of the Fountain Valley School District is desirous of maintaining a most safe as possible condition for. students, NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Trustees of Fountain Valley School District does urgently request the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach to take immediate action and provide all citizens within their jurisdiction equal protection through providing crosswalk guards at the two above named intersections. Board of Trustees, Fountain Valley) School District ,-r � i W April 14, 1965 Fountain Valley School District Mr. Edward W. Beaubier District Superintendent 9502 Velardo.Drive Huntington Beach, California Dear Sir: The City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, at their regular meeting held April 5, 1965, considered a request for the City to provide - crossing guards at the intersections of Brook- burst Street and Continental Drive, and Bushard Street and Adams Avenue. The Council felt that this matter required additional study, and by minute ,action, referred. it to the Traffic Engineer of the City, with a direction that he report back at the meeting of April 19, 1965. Sincerely yours, Paul C. Jones City Clerk PCJ.`sg January 12, 1965 l� HUNTINGTON BEACH CITY COUNCIL City Hall �.....---- H-untington Beach, California cz,�att Dear Mayor Shipley and Council Members: We are concerned with the personal safety of our children in crossing Main Street at Adams since the traffic signals at that location have been removed.. We understand that in the opinion of the traffic engineers,.the intersection at the present time does not comply with the minimum standards for a crossing guard. We sincerely hope you will realize that this is a unique and special problem in that many special hazards confront our youngsters in crossing this divided street. It is our urgent request that a crossing guard be provided until a permanent satisfactory solution can be reached. Thank you for your consideration and cooperation in this matter. Very truly yours, 19 40' at C? /, 1711 /7/7 .7 / 7 C2 �- 7 �- 't., J 1"w - " 0-- /M '00 , . f -S-7 c . 614 ///19 *46) 44. e. i )17 Ir? KC) i Ile rr 0 rr n �jr J� >'2Y2, 7-3e�)� S a; j o 1 7 January 12, 1965 M HUNTINGTON BEACH CITY t'OUNCIL City Hall Huntington Beach, California Dear Mayor Shipley and Council Membf-rs: We are concerned with the personal safety of our childrerr,in crossing Main Street at Adams since the traffic signals at 'that location have been removed. We understand that in the opinion of the traffic -:engineers, the intersection at the present time does not comply with the minimum standards for a crossing guard. We sincerely hope you will realize that this is a unique and special problem in that many special hazards confront our youngsters in crossina this divided street. It is our urgent request 1,h.t a crossing guard be • provided until a permanent satisfactory solution can be - reached. Thank you for your consideration and cooperation in this matter. • Very truly yours, / 14F �unio¢ �oman u 420 SrentA -Skeet c4untington Jr&aag, eah f o¢nia January 14 , 1965 Mayor Donald Shipley Huntington Beach City Council Huntington Beach, California Dear. Mayor Shipley: The members of the Junior Woman's Club of Huntington Beach Are concerned with the safety of children. Therefore, we strongly urge You to support the petitions asking for a crossing guard at Main and Adams Street. We feel that there is a great need for a guard at this intersection due to the large number of children that must cross here on their way to and from school. Your consideration of these petitions will be appreciated. Sincerely, Mrs. Don Pate Corresponding Secretary Junior Woman' s Club of Huntington Beach CITE' OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Huntington Beach, California November 5, 1964 Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Huntington Beach Subject: Requested Crossinn :-Tuard at the' intersection of Warner Avenue and "B" Street. Initiated by: ?J.-rs. ^riffin Gentlemen: T"_e n;-ineerin7,. Department 'has investi" ;t d the above request. A count of pedestrians made on Cctober 2b, 196 revealed that 279 children Crosse; Warner in the peak: pecestrian hoar. about 9�0 vehicles used Wa.hher in this t^ cinit Burin;; approximate- this same hour. ExistinE Traffic Control :�v This intersection is controlled by a portable traffic sip-nal during school ''hours. This is a pre -timed sif-na1 which does not take any account of traffic flow or possible con -esticn on Warner. `quite often Burin:- the day, traffic on Warrer i.s stopped arbitraril-.r and no traffic, •rer4cular or pedestrian, crosses `Varner. Cor:nari.son of Warrants to existing conditions The £ollowri n , warrants are those recomumen ed '.hy the AAA. ; aindation for Traffic Safety and by the Traffic P,n�-;ineerin~ Council of Gran,"e Count -. v,A tFtY_1T EXISTING COINDITIO S 1. Traffic during highest holir of crossi must exceed 750 1060 2. No controlled =ntersectioa -- it<<- ln 600 feet walki r', `ist- n,, done It WARRANT EXISTING CONDITIONS 3. The product of the traffic volume in thousands of vehicles per hour multiplied by the number of children crossing is 960x 279 - 258 greater than 30 W60 4. The total cost of creating adequate gaps in traffic cannot be done more economically by properly designed traffic signals No Analysis Traffic conditions at this intersection fulfill all the warrants required for assignment of a crossing guard. More- over, the numerical warrants are extremely over -fulfilled. The existin,~ portable signal, not bein-T discretionary, is quite harmful to 'Ghe flow of traffic durinc most of the day. Rec oTMme nda ti ons It is recon-nended teat a crossing_; giiard be assigned to this intersection. A determination a.. to w1ho is respons _ble for providing t":is anc? ot"er ^Lards should be made in discussions bet.Ieen the �'o"ancil a.-d the School District. At the ti-e gnat a properly deli ne i signal, coordinated :ritti ;he sJL-n 1. at 7arner and Beach, is installed at. Varner and 3, the cross-,_n;, 7aard should be removed. JR'wV:ALK:h.*n Very _trily ours, f J;_ies R. +iR:eeler i.rector of Public Works X OBTRET �WR EN AV1' HAROLD E. PEDERSEN 7972 WARNER AVENUE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT - HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIF. 847-2551 November 4, 1964 Huntington Beach City Council City Hall Huntington Beach, Calif. Dear Sirs: This letter is to inform you of a dangerous situation that exists at Warner and t1B" Street in -Huntington Beach. There are about 400 elementary school students crossing Warner at this intersection on their way to and from school each day. With the increase of truck and automobile traffic in our city this school crossing has become increasingly dangerous. There has been one accident involvingschool children at this intersection during the present school year. In my opinion, a crossing guard is needed at Warner and "B" Streets.for the remainder of this school year. Sincerely yours, Bernard Elmendorf Principal, Rancho View School BE/r MH HI HAROLD E. PEDERSEN 7972 WARNER AVENUE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIF. 847-2551 November 6, 1964 Huntington Beach City Council City Hall Huntington Beach, California Gentlemen: The Ocean View School District presently has approximately 400 school children from kindergarten through eighth grades crossing Warner Avenue at "B" Street, twice a day. A portable stop light has been in operation for some time, which is certainly appreciated. However, with the large number of children crossing this major thoroughfare twice a day, it appears that very serious consideration should be given to the advisability of providing an adult crossing guard at this intersection. The necessity of providing a crossing guard for school traffic purposes will eventually be eliminated, or reduced, when a school is completed in the housing tract south of the Rancho View School. This new school, if on schedule, should be completed during the next school year. Sincerely, Harold E. Pedersen District Superintendent HE P/ oms pq �J To . Date A;r,-A DUPLICATE Signed Date Signed ` Redif?rm SEND PARTS 1 AND 3 WITH CARBONS INTACT. 4S465 PART 3 WILL BE RETURNED WITH REPLY. of a . 0 OCEAN VIEW [11M DISTRICT HAROLD E. PEDERSEN 7972 WARNER AVE. DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIF. VIKING 7-1214 September 25, 1964 Lieutenant Harold Mays Huntington Beach Police Department 6th and Orange Huntington Beach, California Dear Lt. Mays: Enclosed is some information given to me by Mr. Hilton, our principal at the Circle View School. Would you please make a survey of the situation at Edwards Street and Clare Drive to see if anything can be done to alleviate the problem. Any assistance you may be able to give us will be greatly appreciated. Sincerely yours, Milton R. Berg Assistant Supe ntendent Business MRB/js Enclosure .�TITION FOR CROSSING GUARL 41 p We, the undersigned residents of Ocean View School District, (� urgently request your attention to our pressing need for a crossing guard. Many of the children attending Circle View School must cross Edwards Street at Clare Drive. A freshly painted crosswalk and the "School Crossing" signs have not proved a deterrent to the traffic. Youngsters have been observed with and without their parents patiently waiting for twenty to thirty vehicles to pass before someone has stopped to let them cross in the afternoons. With the constant influx of new people in this area, it won't be long before the morning_ situation will be as bad. Please act on this petition. Don't wait until one of our children's lives or limbs gives impetus to our request. NAME ADDRESS i s5-2�. 15772, w//o co I 0 6"0 STATE Of CALIFORNIA--HIGHWAY TRANSPORTAlivN AOENCY EDMUND G- BRQWN, Governer DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS DISTRICT VII, P.O. BOX 2304, LOS ANGELES 34 September 16, 19" Mr. Rolfe N. Koch 1412 Orange Avenue Mmtington Deach, California mar W. Koch Reference is mde to your letter of June 15, 1964 to the City of Runtington Beach requesting a w rked crosswalk on Ocean Avenue at 156h Street. Since Ocean Avenue is a State highway, your request was forwarded to us for investigation and reply. It is the practice of the Division of Highways to place crosswalk markings only at those locations where there.is a concentration of pedestrian crossings and the placing of such markings is determined to be neecessaarry to reduce potential vehicular pedestrian co Eliot. Observation of the Intersection of Ocean Aver aW 15th Street disclosed the volume of pedestrian crossings to be very nominal. We sincerely believe that the infrequent pedestrian crossing Ocean Avenue in this area can do so with a greater degree of safety, both to the motorist and the pedestrian, without a marked crosswalk. Marked crosswalks tend to instill in a pedestrian a feeling of ssech greater security than actually exists. For the above reasons, we cannot recommend placement of a crosswalk at 15th Street. DkOtlp oai ar�-- IIAtIn Clot of police City of MmtIngton Heaah Very truly yours, A. W. HOY Deputy District 1hg1neer Original Signed by tea 1. Trombitore By, Iho v a • 1 oubato e District Traffic Engineer INR- City of < NTY Mr. Milt -on Berg Aoaj,"6t,&nt Supervisor QdeaTt View School District 7972 '17arner, A -venue Huntington Beach, Cal ifornia RM M'-_Mx*,I od io Rc -it tTes tMOTI School PrpogtTraPf c Crttrol Dear M. Berg-, lie have enclosed a copy of a Ittter and sketch touveying! the Cit'Y. of Huntingtvia Beach proposal for traffic control at West- mont School, and &sking permission from the City of Wmatminater to install same-, U� haVe iftlao iricluded copiesof the reply wherein for the se- cond time our requeat is denied. It- iS Still the' 0 j'rj * , Cf. t-he KUUtiMtGjj beach City :Cot_ CL'I, 'that they away willing to, 000peratte, as agraed with the 0 Vie w School Distridt4 Uowever, Ve Will naea picirtalssion, -f-rom the city Of Weatalns,tler4, Ibe possible for the School District 'to work out sow sim'Llar arr-6ngeraeAtt, with thes, City of Wettminator. Please be aseurod that we, t,,-gnt to hdlp in orty way hsit we, can. Th9rka very Much zor yOUr cooperation and may we loolt, forward to a coiatinuation af a mmat plear AL 4aut and pt-oft,-ttive velation- S inc e r e I y, Doyle 114111e�r City Administrator M R=,Iosure;- 2 MAYOR CALVIN C. BRACK COUNCILMEN PHILIP L. ANTHONY WM. (BILL) MAGILL BUEL G. JARRETT ARTHUR BUTCHER Tity of 10r11t'fift#trr 'k CITY HALL 14381 OLIVE STREET WESTMINSTER. CALIFORNIA TELEPHONE TWINOAKS 3-451I February 8, 1963 Mr. Doyle Miller, City Administrator CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH P. O. Box 190 Huntington Beach, California Dear Mr. Miller: Your letter,of February 6, 1963, requesting permission from the City of Westminster to place a cross walk and a portable stoplight at the West- mont School on Heil Avenue, has been received. We are sorry that this request arrived too late to be placed on the Council Agenda for the regular meeting of February 12, 1963. However, it will be considered by the City Council at their regular meeting of February 26, 1963. KCH/rkv Very truly yours, Mrs. Katharine C. Harper, CITY CLERK ve, February 26,, 1963 R, TO* IfESTMI11STER CITY CO'j�1JCTL T HR 0 UG 11 CITY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: CHIEF OF POLICE SUBJECT: LETTER FROM TIFIE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH REo. PORTABLE STOP SIGN.AL AT WESTMOVT SCHOOL ON HEIL AVENUE GENTLEDMI -. It is my recommendation that the request for permission to place a portable stop light be denied. The reasons given in the original re- commendations are being expanded for your consideration. The reasons are: I. Portable stop signals, or for that matter any device placed in the street at a crosswalk, constitue a hazard. AUT fTOR ITY AO Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Street and Highways prepared, by they National Joint Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, U. S. Department of Commerce Bureau of Public Roads, Washington D. Co, June 1961. Page 68 "Portable School signs shall not be placed within the roadway at any ti-me,,11 Page 156"To fill emergency needs there has been some use of portable types of traffic control signals. These devices have .limited value and are difficult to standardize, particularly as to application and location, Drivers become accustomed to the presence or absence of standard traffic signal controlsq and the introduction of a portable signal.,, even for a temporary period, may create a hazard,, The portable traffic signal is therefore not recognized In this Manual as a standard traffic control device,," B, Report on School Traffic Safety in the Los Angeles City School District., July 1961, prepared by Citizens School Safety Com© mitteet appointed at the request of the City Council., "We believe itwould be wholly inappropriate and-9 in part.9 illegal, for the City of Los Angeles to place signs,, 0 signals, or pavement :markings adjacent to,or in the vicinity of schools which do not conform with the Vehicle Code or reoominended statewide practices as set forth in the Federal or State uniform manual for such signs, signals and pavement marking,s". NOTE-.- THE PROPOSED SIGNALS DO NOT CONFORM TO EITHER STATE OR FEDERAL UNIFORM MANUALS CLC Westminster City CP "mpil page 2 February 26, 1963 (cont.) Page 25 Conclusions anal Recommendations #2. "We recommend against the placement of vertical or standing signsp such as autoat'figures in the form of policeman, children or other figure"s., in roadways to indicate pedestrian crosswalks, as such standing signs In- crease hazards by their presence as obstructions in roadways," C. California. Administrat-ive Code,, Title 5. Section 74, prohibits the use of any sign in connection with schools except those approved and adopted. by the Department of Public Works,, D, The State of California Division of Highways will not permit theuseof this type of signal device on any state highway,, E,, Tho Costa Mesa Tra:Vfic Commission at their January 239 1963 meeting considered a request for the use of this type signal at one of their school crossings. The reasons for denial included the following: (Request contained 13 reasons) 2. Motorists would not expect a signal at this location_, and many drivers would drive through on the red, creating a real hazard to pedestrians and cross street , �traff;ic,, 3. A signal located in the middle of the street is confusing to small children because they can see the lenses that are pointed in two different directions and they may proceed 6n.the wrong indication. 49 The Manual on Uniforra Traffic Control Devices prohibits the use of portable signals.. 60 Since these signals ar,e operated by battery, there is the need to recharge the battery each night with the possi- bility that the battery might fail during its operation .in the street,, 80 Most trucks hide the signal from other vehicles. 9.. The signal used at Harbor and Hamilton was the direct. cause of several accidents and was knocked down several times during operation. F. List of organizations In opposition to the use of these signals: American Association of State Highway Officials Institute of Traffic Engineers National Association of County Officials American Municipal Association National Safety Council The AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety The Crosswalk will be installed., with the proper signing., (as planned.) as soon as the street construction has been completed, Respectfully,, Connor 'a L. Col acott Chief of Police /'-N m Cat of 30rotminster `�UFOiM�a ' MAYOR CALVIN C. BRACK CITY HALL COUNCILMEN 14381 OLIVE STREET PHILIP L. ANTHONY WESTMINSTER. CALIFORNIA WM. (BILL) MAGILL TELEPHONE TWINOAKS 3-4511 BUEL G. JARRETT ARTHUR BUTCHER February 28, 1963 Mr. Doyle Miller, City Adm. City of Huntington Beach P. O. Box 190 Huntington Beach, California Dear Mr. Miller: Your letter of February 6, 1963 requesting permis- sion from the City of Westminster to place a cross- walk and a portable stoplight at the Westmont School on Heil Avenue was presented to the City Council at their regular meeting of February 26, 1963. The City Council denied your request for the in- stallation of the portable stop sign based on the report and recommendation of the Chief of Police, a copy of which is attached. As soon as the street improvements are completed in front of the school, a crosswalk will be installed by the City of Westminster with the proper signing. 0 Sincerely, Mrs. Katharine C. Harper City Clerk KCH : mb Enc. City of Huntington Beach Cali foritia March 16, 1964 Mr. Ben G. Gautier, President Huntington Beach Safety Council P.O.,Box 610 Huntington Beach, California Dear Mr. Gautier: We have enclosed copy of a letter from Col. Glenn T. Eagleston, 8212 Munster Drive, Huntington Beach, requesting that a crossing guard be established at Indianapolis Avenub and Farnsworth Streeti, We would appreciate'al study of this request and a report fro , m the Safety Council at your earliest convenience. Sincerely, Doyle Miller City Administrator DM:bwo CC: Huntington Beach City Council Howard Robidouxj Chief 6f Police Harold Mays, Lt., Huntington Beach Police Dept. John R'. Peterson Supt.,' Huntington Beach Elementary School District Glenn , T. Eagle'ston', Cola,, USAF 8212 Munster Drive Huntington Beach,; California 13 March 1964 Honorable Robert M . Lambert Mayor, City of Huntington Beach Post Office Box. 190 Huntington Bemach, California Dear Mayor Lambert: Last September, I wrote to you, inviting your attention to a hazardous situation involving our school children, specifically the crossing zone on Indianapolis Avenue and Farnsworth. Street. I do not believe that you are fully aware of .the hazard to life and limb of school children using this crossing. I enjoin you to familiarize yourself and the responsible officials of your administration with this problem, and I feel sure that you will share with me my concern and the honest belief that the only way to cope with this problem adequately is to establish a crossing guard. After my last letter to you,. the warning signs were repainted and a school crossing sign (movable) was brought to the scene. However, indicative of -the lack of attention to this problem is the fact that this sign, remains on .the sidewalk and is only intermittently placed on the street., One of my,, neighbors recently witnessed a near tragedy there when a car had stopped at the crossing to let a group of children cross, but a sports car' pulled. around' the first and passed it at a greatly " accelerated rate of speed. Traffic control is only -half the problem. The other is actual physical control of,,.the children. -At the present time, there is none. Because of this{, the need for a crossing. guard is obvious. I realize the value of an education, but I don't think we should ask 6 or 7-year old children to risk injury or possible loss;of life to get their education. I have employed an older child to conduct my daughter, age 6, to and from school; however when this older child is ill, this necessitates my keeping .my child out of school also. I would appreciate an early reply to this letter, and an expression of your intentions in this matter.. Sincerely„--2 p y � f G,LE�N 7 EAGLESTON� Copies to. Colonel, USAF l Chief of Police, Huntington Beach Police Dept, City Hall Supt, John R. Peterson School, Huntington Beach, Calif 2 (D5O CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Huntington Beach, California February 13,, 1964 Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Huntington Beach Huntington Beach, Calif . Subject: Pedestrian Bridge, Wardlow School Fountain Valley ` School District Gentlemen: Per your request at a previous meeting we have met with the Parent-Teacher Group of the Wardlow School. On the evening of February 3, 1964 Bill Hartge attended their meeting to discuss the pedestrian bridge across the Talbert Channel to the school site. • The opinions of the members varied from one extreme to the other. There were members who are perfectly satis- fied with the present bridge. There are those who are in favor of constructing a cover of fence to complete a tunnel effect. This latter method could not be.com- pleted entirely across the right of way due to the necessity of providing a continuous access road for the flood control maintenance forces. A compromise of the two extremes perhaps would be to attach outward extensions to the top of the existing chain link fences and gates and provide barbed wire to discourage fence climbers. It would cost approximately $325.00 to construct this type of protection. We have at this time no quotes from fencing companies as to the cost to provide the tunnel but it is estimated that the cost would be approximately $1,000.00.. Very ly yours, ames R. Wheeler irector of Public Works JRW:HEH:a V.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . I� CI R DIME HAROLD E. PEDERSEN 7972 WARNER AvE. DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIF. VIKING 7-1214 January 20, 1964 Senator John A. Purdy, Jr. State Capitol Sacramento 14, California Dear Senator Murdy: The Ocean View School District Board of Trustees has gone on record as favoring the continued placement of the resp6ns- ibility for school crossing guards under the jurisdiction of the cities and not the schools. The responsibility of the schools is education and not street traffic control. Your efforts to keep the crossing guard responsibility within the city government, and not the schools, will be greatly appreciated. Enclosed is a copy of the resolution. Sincerely, Harold E. Pedersen District Superintendent HEP/oms .� The Xcollowing resol-latiol'I was adqpted by the, Board of Trustacs of t:he Ocean View Sahr--,ol Distiict, at its reZular wx-eting held January 13, 1964. immonist czossiag guardi are preseatly a function of the Police n6pavwent who possess the personael and expezience to successfulXY C=ry out this function, and €. M , diva-tl chars the traffic co-ntrol functionts are those - y -ed as 'a police rcStJansibility watb azteusive training -in this are�a-e and wMiqFAS, the fuitio tmn of the school district is c-',-ducatioaal in q nature and schoci distri-&ct pej>so4nel are not trained in traffte cantzo.I duties, --and wo, . Us, for the school clistnict to assume crossing gunards, super visdon and control would �:equire trataing and supervision by the r-blice D-partmteat (which is noes handled by them), or the of a new dep-artra<,.nit in the School districts with the train-inr, of sL�pe-rvj$jon and an, e7zpanded claerical staff Z; to sdppart a new function, BE 1-2 THBr-Zr70-4ijF. ]RESOILVEM), that U.,� Board of 11rustoer' 09 ebe oc-0-am Schwal Distr4-at urge all legislators to stt-ongly resist avy leg islatioa that wauld change Lhe p--esant rees poes 1-bi I hies Of the employ -went and supervision of crossing ;cards D-014 vested in - the cities atd counties of. thi,; great State. dated January 13, 1964 Gus C v ► PUANI�MR I�TRIC V HAROLD E. PEDERSEN 7972 WARNER AVE. DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIF. VIKING 7-1214 January 20, 1964 Senator John A. Murdy, jr. State Capitol Sacramento 14, California Dear Senator Murdy: The Ocean View School District Board of Trustees has gone on record as favoring the continued placeRtent of the respons- ibility for scuool crossin guards under the urisdiction of tite cities and not the schools. The reeponsibility of the schools is education and not street traffic control. Your efforts to keep tine crossing guard responsibility within Dthe city government, and not rile sc:iools, will be greatly appreciated. Enclosed is a copy of the resolution. Sincerely, Harold E. Pedersen District Superintendent HE V OM-s a. Th-, 2alimUw, sasoUiti tm-s a Wsmki by ekhc : of Trus`"s h- ae-4 .ii'mnel ry 13, 1964, MMMU. CroasGss t3 1 cP� pr4-m-Out ly s f-A:c.clom ref Chet Po1a4e Depatemant ato wl;B as the -Z�Qrz al vi ce to yout this $Mace 02, bula M"gig the traffic CoAtTOR sne?d=tio-as 4" sae alrecsly ahaxgmd a P611*0 ;' �oislblitlty with Fii�£�sa�aF: train I* thl;± ex, 6 mote's-0 awd fiotwe4 district persm-ml iaRc not tvained in emig .e wDzavl dmtLon, wmd RM WAS, Ctx BS A dset t: asses L'�ti csS:s � , by the % Ucz Department (which is =w md1end ioy t&tw) s *ff, with tbe ="61 a zrj Ot zwen ls izo eme am Clerloi ai staft to s:c*Pvrt 0 mw ft tiam. IT Immo-Im mmmas tkz% 4t" SG�Ov! 021 8ra9ceco of ebe OQ.2 43 i;a SJa �iaf lra yfi'sa8 al: a".9 ='GsY'1t dLv-) 0y E1: it,. mri:2 `Y.F OE70nat oz, &"Td5 Z*W '(/cMI Qed LQ dwc e6 Jawm3 a y 13, 19-54 Nls Westminster "chool District 14121 CELARWOOD AVENUE • WESTMINSTER, CALIFORNIA 9W89 • PHONE $93-M63 (Tld) JOMN F. LAND, JR. DISTRICT SV PQRINTQMI)<PIT January 8, 1964 Mr. Doyle Miller, City Manager City of Huntington &catch City Mall - Civio Center Huntington Beach, California Daar Mr. Miller: School officials are seriously concerned over the proposal to shift the responsibility for crossing guards from the police department to the school boards. We vision parent pressure groups coming to school board meetings in mass to pressure them into employing crossing guards for every cross street in town. In the belief that this responsibility should be left, with the local polioe department, the Westminster School Board of Trustees has unani- mously approved the attached resolution and directed a copy to be hailed to ester legislators in Orange County. Yo very truly, f ohm Ir. Land, Jr., Secretary Board of Trustees Jn t ar Encl. ® BOARD of TRUSTRU ADA CLsao. Cf1AINWAN F. N. gAAYNOOO, VICt-CNAMMAN RUSBKLL D. JOHNSON. CLHMK R. M. SCHMITT HEOMIA WILLMORK WF,STYT_ NTSTER SCHOOL DI.>iRICT 14121 Cedarwood Avonue Westminster, California RESOLUTION re CROSSING GUAHnS WHEREAS, crossing guards are preoently a function of the Polio@ Department who possess the personnel and experience to successfully carry out this function, and WHEREAS) the traffic control functions are those directly charged as a police responsibility with extensive training in this area, and WHEREAS, the functions of the sc'1ool district art educational in nature and school district personnel are not trained in traffic control duties, and WHEMKAS, for the school district to assume crossing guards, supervision and control Mould require training and supervision by the Police Department (Which is now handled by them), or the establishment of a new department in the school district with the training of supervision and an expanded clerical staff to support a new function. BE IT THOUPORE RESOLVED, that the Board of Trustees of the Westminster School District urge all legislators to strongly resist any legislation that would change the present responsibilities of the employment and supervision of crossing guards now vested in the cities and counties of this great state. Approved JanuarS► 7, 1964 1� City of Huntington Beach California ' Ocean View E lementary School Board 17021 Beach Dlvd. Huntington Beach, California RE: Safety of school children at street c.ossings. Gentleman: The Huntington -Beach City Council are very keenly aware o2 tha obligation of the city with regard to the above m2ntioned problem. Your honorable body, liltauiCo, has c--.-presced concern for the safety of our school children. In an endeavor to cork out the most satisfactory prog`rarm, co,-t vrise and safet,,p, ui.6��, the City Council has im'structed this office.to Crrango a joint meting b2t-V':�en a committee from both Zlermntary School Boards, and -, commute- of the City, Cc,,,,-rlcil, to convene in the Council Chambar at a time convenient for all concerned. With this in mind, may we invite your group to discuss the mntter and inform this office of two or three ,dates, preferably e',,'-aningsor that would be convenient for C111 Me-2tir.2;1 Loo!kin. lorward to a continuation of a most pleasant . g J. and productive relationship, I ara, M'4': as Very truly ,,yours, Doyle Nill,ler City Administrat;-or O City of Huntiliigton. Beach �f Califibrnia July.23, 1962 PHun-tington Beach Elementary School Board � "2 Tallu Avenue Unotington Beach, California Re: Safety of school children at street crossings Gentlemen: The Huntington Beach City Council are very keenly aware of the obligation of the city with regard to the above mentioned problem. Your honorable body., likewise, has expressed concern for the safety of our school ch-11dren. In an endeavor 'to work out the most satisfactory program, cost wise and safety wise, the City Council haG instructed this office to arrange a joint meeting bet3-ieen a committee from both Elementary School Boards, and a committee of the City Council to con-. vene in the Coun'cil Chamber at a time convenient for all concerned. With this in mindo-may i� invite your group to dis" cuss the matter and inform this office of two or three dates, preferably evenings, that would be convenient for a meeting., Looking fon-yard to a continuation of a most pleasant and productive relationship, I am, Very truly yoursi, Doyle Hiller City Administrator DM: ss - N City of Huntington Beacb Ca4f(nnia July 18, 1962 Mr..Riehard Carpenter, General Counsel, League of California Cities, Hotel Claremont, Berkeley 5, California Are: School Crossing Guards Dear Mr. Carpenter' Enclosed herewith is an opinion recently submitted by Louis C. Lyen, Assistant City Attorney of Huntington Beach to the City Council, pertaining to School Crossing Guards. Since a great deal of research and thought was put Into this opinion.and because it appears to be.a question that may be pertinent to other cities, we felt we should send a copy to your office. JD*h Encl. CC: Doyle Miller Yours very truly. JAMES D. PLUWKETT. JAMS D. PLUNKETT City Attorney W June 19, 1962 Mr. Doyle Miller, City Administrator P. 0. Box 190, Huntington Beach, Calif. Re: SCHOOL CROSSING GUARDS Dear Doyle: You asked who should provide and pay for school crossing guards? Consideration of this question breaks down into obligations of the, 1. County 2. School District 3. City COUNTY Section 2120 of the Streets and Highways Code. Upon the request of the Board of Supervisors of.any county, the Controller may deduct from the apportionment to such county, any amount specified in such request and pay the amount to any State Department for services to be furnished in accordance with the request. County apportionment from the Highway Users Tax Fund are available to pay salaries of pedestrian crossing guards furnished by the California Highway Patrol (1? Ong. Alt, Gen. 157. 1951). In 26 Ops. Atty. Gen. 45, (1955), the County Counsel of Kern -County asked the following questions: 1. May a county request the California Highway Patrol to employ pedestrian crossing guards within the boundaries of an incorporated city located within the county? 2. If so, may the State Controller deduct the payment for the services of such pedestrian crossing guards from that county's apportionment of the Highway Users Tax Fund and pay the same to the California Highway patrol? Both questions -were answered in the affirmative. The discuss- ion states that County Government performs many services for the protection of the health, safety and welfare of county residents and such services are not limited to residents of the county outside the corporate limits of a city. Persons residing within a city are residents of the county, vote for county officers, pay county taxes, etc. "The employment of pedestrian crossing guards is a protective and educational service of the county which is within its general powers and 1. Mr. Doyle Miller June 19, 1962 is authorized by Section 26153 of the Government Code. The performance of such services does not involve the exercise of police power as it pertains to law enforcement or the en- actment of regulatory ordinances. Hence, we have concluded that in supplying such services there is no conflict of jur- isdiction between the county and city". SCHOOL DISTRICT In 30 Ops. Atty. Gen. 73, (1957), the question was raised as to whether or not a school district could enter into an agreement with a city to pay one-half of the expense of furnishing crossing guards. The question was asked specif- ically: "May a School District enter into an ement under the provisions of the Joint Powers Agreements Nov.(GCode 6500 et seq) with a city in which one of it's schools is located, the terms of which, obligate the School District to pay one- half of the expense incurred by the city .in furnishing traffic officers or "crossing guards" for the safety of students going to and from school?" .The conclusion was that a School District lacked power to enter into such a contract. The responsibility of furnishing traffic officers or crossing guards belongs to a" City. Subject to rules and regulations adopted by the State Board of Education, -the governing board of a school dis- trict may establish and"maintain a school safety patrol for the purpose of assisting pupils to cross the street and high- way near the school. A governing board is authorized to adopt rules and regulations in addition to and not inconsistent with those adopted by the State to govern it's school safety patrols. Safety Patrol Members are authorized and required to give traffic signals and directions assisting pupils to cross streets and highways. Members of the patrol must be pupils attending the particular school and must be under the supervision of a qualified school district employee designated by the Board but such employee is not required to be present at all times. (44 Cal Jur 2d, Sec. 378). For information purposes, the following sections pertain to school safety patrols are cited from the Education Code. Section 12051. Establishment and purpose. The governing board of any school district may, subject to such rules and regulations as shall be adopted by the State Board of Education, establish and maintain a school safety patrol in any of the schools of the district for the purpose of assist- ing pupils of such school in safely crossing streets and high- ways adjacent to or near such school, 2. Mr. Doyle Miller June 18, 1962 Section 12052. Membership and supervision. A school safety patrol established in any school as herein pro- vided shall be composed of. pupils attending in such school.The members of the patrol shall be under the supervision and con- trol of a qualified employee of the district designated by the Board,.&►, except as otherwise provided in Sections 11701 and 11907, inclusive, and Sections 12051 and 12059.,. inclusive. The provisions of this section shall not, however, be deemed to re- quire the physical presence of such employee at any particular street or highway location where any such school safety patrol is functioning. Section .12053. Parental Consent. The pupils who serve as members of a school safety patrol shall be designated by the principal of the school in which the patrol is establish- ed, but no pupil shall be designated to serve on any patrol un- less the pupil and the person having legal custody of such pupil consent, -in writing, thereto. Upon the revocation, in writing, of the consent of either such pupil or such person, the pupil shall cease to be a member of the patrol. Section 12054. Rules and Regulations. The State Board of Education.is hereby authorized to adopt all rules and regulations necessary to effect the purposes of this act, and the governing board of each school district is hereby authorized to adopt additional rules and regulations not inconsistent therewith governing school safety patrols established under its jurisdiction. Section 12055. Duties and Bowers of members. The members of a school safety patrol established hereunder shall be authorized and required only to give traffic signals and direct- ion in order to assist pupils of the public schools in safely .crossing streets and highways. Section 12056. Cooperation of gQlice and California. Highway Patrol, The chief of police in each city and the Com- missioner of the California Highway Patrol in unincorporated territory may upon the request of the governing board of any school district co-operate in the establishment, supervision and control of a school safety patrol to such extent as may be agreed upon. Section 120,57. Medical and hospital care in patrol - connected injuries, The governing board of a school district which authorizes the establishment of a school safety patrol may provide for adequate hospital and medical attention to care for any injury or disability that may be suffered by any pupil while performing any act within and arising out of his duties as a mem ber of a school safety patrol provided, however, that no pupil shall be compelled to accept such services if his parent or guardian objects. Section 12058. Expenditure of district funds. The governing board of any school district is hereby authorized to expend funds under its jurisdiction for the purpose of carrying out the provisions of Sections 11701 to 11907 inclusive, and Sections 12051 to 12059, inclusive. 3. Mr. Doyle Miller June 19, 1962 Section 12059. Violation of patrol signals. Any person who shall disregard any traffic signal or direction given by a member of a school safety patrol, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and subject to the penalties provided in Section 42001 of the Vehicle Code. CITY Section 42200. Vehicle Code. Disposition by Cities. (underlining added). Of the total amount of fines and forfeit- ures received by a city under Section 1463 of the Penal Code that proportion which is represented by fines and forfeitures collected from any person charged with a misdemeanor under this code following arrest by an off3ceremployed by a city, shall be paid into the treasury of the city and deposited in a special fund to be known as the "Traffic Safety Fund", and shall be used exclusively for official traffic control devices, the main- tenance thereof, equipment and supplies for traffic law enforce- ment and traffic accident prevention and for the maintenance, improvement, or construction of public streets, bridges, and culverts within the city, but the fund shall not be used to pay the compensation of traffic or other police officers. The fund_ may be used to, pay the compensation of school crossing: guards who are not regular full-time members of the police department of the city. In 24 Ops. Atty. Gen 143, (1954), the District At- torney of Marin County requested an opinion on the following questions: 1. Has the City of San Anselmo a duty to provide policemen at school sites for the protection of school children crossing streets going to and from schools? 2. Has the San Anselmo School. District a duty to provide guards or policemen at school sites to protect school children crossing streets as they go to and from schools? The conclusions were summarized as: 1. The City of San Anselmo has a duty to provide protection to school children crossing streets as they go to and return from school, but whether such protection is required at the school depends upon the conditions existing at each site. 2. The San Anselmo School District does not have the duty to control traffic so as to provide protect- ion for school children crossing streets as they go to and return from school, but at the school site and the streets immediately adjacent thereto, conditions may warrant some form of supervision of students depending on the risks involved. 4. Mr. Doyle Miller June 18, 1962 The above answers are explained when it is considered such pro- tection is needed less at a high school than at a grammar school and that there may be circumstances where the exit of a school joins a heavily trafficked street and it would be nec- essary for the school authorities to provide a control of children pouring out of an entrance onto a heavily trafficked street. Further, the school safety patrol established in co- operation with the Chief'of Police as authorized -by Education Code Section 12056 is not to be deemed protection in lieu of actual police protection but rather it is supplementary so as to afford a broader base -of traffic protection and patrol in the areas where needed and suggests the necessity for the pres- ence of police officers on proper occasions. Where control of traffic at a school site is not furnished by regular members of the local police agency,Section 42200 of the Vehicle Code authorizes a city to pay the compen- sation of school crossing guards who are not regular full time members of the police department, from the Traffic Safety Fund. School authorities, as above noted, are not vested with a simi- lar power to employ school crossing guards. School authorities have the duty to control the conduct of the students but not to control traffic. This particular Attorney General's Opinion winds up with the following conclusion: The problem presented is not one to be solved by the police to the exclusion of the school authorities or by the school authorities to the exclusion of the police. The safety of school children is a community problem and must be shared by community agencies, police and schools in active co-operation for the common good. CONCLUSION It is thus apparent that the County may authorize payment of salaries of crossing guards furnished by the Califor- nia Highway Patrol both in incorporated and unincorporated areas of the County. School Districts have no authority to employ crossing guards nor to enter into a contract with a city to share such expense but can maintain school safety patrols. It is the duty of the police department to patrol the streets and control traffic and it may -assign regular officers to certain schools at particular hours. The city may use it's Traffic Safety Fund to pay crossing guards who are not regular full- time members of the city police department. JDP:h Yours very truly, JAMES D. PLUNKETT) City Attorney 13 -5, P'- / v t HUNTINCTON BEACH SAFETYCCU �. NCI , Hu-. ington Beach, 'C&h_ 3mia .Tune 11, 1962 Huntincton Beach City CouncIA Huntington Beach, California RE: Mr. Doyle Miller, City Administrator pear rr. Miller, As an outgrowth of the crossing guard problem in our commu- nity, you will recall that bhe City Council asked the Huntington Beac!, Safety Council to bring together representatives of the Huntington Beach and Ocean View School Districts regarding the matter of the movement of children from hone to school. As this meeting a ravel discussion was presented which set forth the advantages of the adult crossing guard program and of toe school boy patrol.. Mr. Carl Zoun, supervisor of safety for the Los Angeles City Schools outlined their proCram, and he brought out the Pact that the avera7e crossing guard costs the ci7"y of Los Angeles between twelve and fourteen hundred dollars per year per f-uard. On the other hard, Mr. Mitchel', supervisor for the Elementary Schools of Santa Ana, and Lieutenent Hal Davis, stated that the cost of the school boy oatrol was minimal. Our Safety Council respectfully recommends that the City Council take positive action to seek a solution to our growing crossing guard problem. Please be assured that the Safety Council will cooperate In any way you might desire to solve this problem. Sincerely, j Ben Gautier Chairman Huntington Beach Safety Council 0 Huntington Beach Elementary School District JOHN R. PETERSON, District Superintendent HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA August 10, 1962 Mr. Doyle Miller City Administrator P . 0. Box 19 0 Huntington Beach, California Dear Doyle: Your letter as of recent date requesting two or three alternate dates when my Board of Education could meet with _your body to discuss crossing guards .was read at our regular board. meeting last night. _ They suggested any one of the following three dates: August 16, .21 or 23. If these dates do not meet .with. your approval, .would you kindly suggest other dates. Yours truly, John IR etersoei Distric Superintendent Sa HAROLD E. PEDERSEN DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT DISTRICT August 7, 1962 City of .Huntington Beach P.O. Box 190 Huntington Beach, California Attention: Mr. Doyle Miller Dear Mr. Miller: 7972 WARNER AvE. HUNTINGTON BEACH. CALIF. VIKING 7-1214 Your letter of July 23, 1962 was received, in which you were considering the meeting of school board members and repre- sentatives of your City Counsel, or a committee thereof. The.best available dates for the Board members of the Ocean View School District would be on Monday nights, ex- cept the second Monday in the month. Sincerely, 'C.<�z Harold E. Pedersen District Superintendent HEP/oms Decerrrdber 20P 1961 Mr. Ben G. Gautier 18812 Gregory Lane Huntington Beach, California Reference: Huntington Beach Safety Council Discussion School. Crossing Patrol Dear Mr. Gautier: At the December l8th meeting of the Huntington Beach City Council, yoiry December 6th letter was read and discussed. It was the u-manimous feeling of the group that klon-day, January 22, 1962 was an opportune time to meet and. discuss the crossing guard problem with the Eluntington Beach and Oce-anview School Boards. Thank,you for your very fine assistance with this important problem. Sincerely, Doyle Miller City Administrator Em cc: Chief Wright e, YOU CAN HELP THE UNITED WAY COMMUNITY CHEST OF LOS ANGELES AREA 729 S. FIGUEROA ST., LOS ANGELES 17, MADISON 4-8821 December 6, 1961 Mr Doyle Miller City Administrator City Hall Huntington Beach, California Dear Mr Millers The Huntington 'Beach Safety Council will be happy to organize a meeting of interested parties at which time the crossing gus.rd problem can be presented. - After confering with both Huntington Beach and Ocean View School Boards, the date of Jan. 22, 1962 was set, Monday appeared to be the best date for the members of the school boards, If you have a conflict on this date please inform me and I will seek another. An outline of the suggested program will be sent for your approval at an early date, Thank you for opportunity to be of service to our community. Very Sincerely ours, el Ben G. Gautier, President •n''�°'�...'. 31 17 Ta City Engineer. Date 10/19/61 THRU: City Administrator Doyle Miller Request that . the city traffic counter -b.e- placed across -Warner at "B" Street, to determine.whether it warrants a crossing guard. PLEASE REPLY TO Signed Chief `Wright r If L��� AK,i --57 k5W57 Date Signed Redif�rm SEND PARTS 1 AND 3 WITH CARBONS INTACT. 4S 465 PART 3 WILL BE RETURNED WITH REPLY.. `.�� �� ��� � _ / �� u _. �1... 0 /-- )LE Cf2o S S we (,* vd9/2VJ J Chief, Clinton H. Wright Huntington Beach Police Department City Hall Civic Center .- Huntington Beach, California Dear Chief Wrightt November 20, 1961 We at the Ocean View School District want to extend our thanks and sincere appreciation for the efforts that your organization put -forth in assisting our school district during the week of November 61, in presenting our "Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Pro- gramP .. We especially are appreciative of the courtesy and consideration extended by Captain'Seltzer in assisting us to organize this program Officer Miller is, in our opinion, an outstanding example of the fine attributes that we:like to see in police officers: His presentation of his materials to the children was excellent and his.courtesy and appearance was above reproach at all times. In.olosing, we feel that the success of our program was primarily, through your effort and the members of your organization. Sincerely yours, Woodis Chaddick Curriculum Coordinator WC/eb cc. Captain Seltzer il September 23,1960 Clinton Wright, Chief Huntington Beach Police Department Huntington Beach, California Dear Mr. Wright: There will be a need for a school crosswalk at Taylor Avenue and Beach Blvd. (Highway 39), approximately December 1, 1960, for the purpose of walking children to the Crest View School (located in the Huntington Crest housing tract) from the new 133 home Huntington Riviera subdivision, nearing completion, on Taylor Avenue, west of Beach Blvd. Over 100 children can be expected to cross to and from school each day. A crosswalk, or any other safety measures which can be furnished, will be much appreciated. A request for a crossing guard is an the agenda for the next regular meeting of the Ocean View School Board, to be held October 10. The action of the Board will be forwarded to you. Very truly yours, Harold E. Pedersen District Superintendent HEP/ew cc: Doyle Miller, City Adm. / Ac-A1,44Y 11A - A'q v DEFINES "CROSSING GUARDS" Pedestrian crossing guards may be hired by a county through the California Highway Patrol for use in incorporated cities for the prevention of traffic accidents at busy intersections, ruled Attorney General Edmund G. Brown today. T'he payment for such services may be deducted from the county°s apportionment of the Highway Users Tax Fund, the opinion further declares. Crossing guards are not police officers and not empowered to direct traffic under the law. The placing of county -employed guards within incorporated city is part of the many services for the protection of the health, safety and welfare of county residents, says the opinion. " The performance of said services is not limited in favor of residents of the county who reside outside the corporate limits of a city," said the Attorney General. "Persons residing within a. city," said the Attorney.General, "are residents of the county and vote for county officers. They pay county taxes and receive in return the benefit of services provided for the general welfare, health and safety of residents of the county." Employment of crossing guards is "a protective and educational service of the county." A county may make a request for such services from the Highway Patrol and the.Sta.te Controller reimburse the Highway Patrol for the payment of such services. tjAU7 1 0 _I PINIONS: SCHOOL CROSSWALKS MUST BE MARKED on <trrt-t, nr.o „ In.,,Icr,nlnd, .,:, -:It ,.r'u iu .. it •••I, •,,I I!„ rt-1"11• olliq hr �iainted Ill vrl1.,vs v,Ith Ili' vv,u,l, ,Im. '-I, il,,.•I A:,._ .;,I,.i \1•.,II•ev (., ucl.Il Fdntnnd f, lrsrovvit t,ld.n A,ernthlNtit an (:arlo,; Ittr of Iln\\..I1, ..'1 a Iti,II , ;,.!,It. It,,] tI x \sold 'e"n- [IQl1Un, as 11K'd ill all :illo-ndvil, ,l •iml,' ,,; 1:1, \ � ;, I, ( � ,•. I tl' \:'•,1 ;1o" („ I,. r.,i Itil, d th.tt the word due,n t nn .+r. Ih,� r, t, i —it I, t u i:11 1," aIrrl fit tilt- middle of .t , iiv t.l k I ilt l.e�:,l.,:ute •II 1•11r,+ 6. Irk, ur.0 w hool prnuntl, whit It I am IIt, L'.tlk I,f j„ d. ,irl.ul t'n'}1• ;t. uln, di.:t,. \ u IIIIIN. I'hr . for "l ,'t „,,r, ,,Ill I, It, lit 1,• 7,. oll',u"It- DEFINES "CROSSING GUARDS" }Il• }i•,tf fall , I —silly �bll.l l,liy ,i ll IS- IIC 111 ".':1 1/\ q I.I kjIr\ •llt, �ili•I1 If1f',(..til�'11 I,1�1 I IISII\\.L\ i'atr,ll fo1 utr iu iu, (,I pm ,itr. .,•I I • I IIAI ni„•r ,•f I, ,ii { .,;,. .11 l,•, tiutl,, rol(A Atl,.t'IloA (;,•I1.-:.t1 }.d,iI'm(I Ii I1 r=NII t'i.1,,v Theiiavment I„r sit, If ,rr\ II ,'• tu.n !,e ''I ,'I, I, ,1 ', wl ;h, ,\ ,,I,.,;..•tuu, n' ••I rf„ tiII:h\v,h Uwt, 1 ax I'und. iht- "1,Iu,. •. II,I111, ! '1, ( tosting guards are io,i po!I, r „th, e1,, .111 ,; , , miw\\1 •, j 1,. ,!itI : it •1h, nr,d' I the lax, i'it(• placrilk of coil my enlp!ovrd Cu.u,l• vvIthn, ,nt"ip- I.,. ,I itv ,i.1:I the III.oly ,r1'llitra for tilt- protection "f Ih,• If,-.,IIIf ,I1t-iv .,nd yv''1!.1, , .1.101 I,•.Irlt-u',. „pinicm. "•I'ht• perinrinancc of \;.od wl%I•c, I, I, it Lli.,, Il,S., ill,- ,Iaifm v+ho Ie,ide outside the turp„i'.Itr lon,i, „f a , n\. ,.oil the \;I ,tiu \ 1'„,-1.if p'r„nI, ,e:idnl tiithin I (it\," ,aid tilt- .Ail„tnev (wn,'i.Ii '.tit- l,adrnl• "f III, ,••„u!v and v„I, t„r,ouuty oih, rrs. •hhry Pa}' , hunt% t.+v1•, ,111d et-, co II, moon tilt- III : , ht "' ,oi v It i,l— ;tire) for tilt- vrurral tselfare, health mid ,.if,iv „f Ie,ulrut, "f 111r ,,,,lr;v F,mploytucnl of ct'ossui� Luatd: �, "a 1,1„Ir, in• .unl ,dn..,1;,,u.11. ,ri:,,. "! till ,"mov A 14,mim Iliav stake .I reyi—i t, -I :m if ,-I c1, t-, tiom II,• I I.i1nv. v P.II1 0 cud the 1i,Ih (:outeollcr reimburse tilt. Ilieh.\a\ 1%,u.'I 1"r Ii„ 11.0o1,ill i If. If ..I\I,,, DEFERRED RETIREMENT BENEFITS herb di,missed for mi,t nndn, t, inkil 'T�hr (:soot)' I'.nlplo�et-, krtnt-;nrut i.,,,\ lu,n ilil, , („ ;�,"•I. ," m tu- ,• ,n Int.•,1e1 p„rin,u of the contemplated ,omprmeu„n —I I"I ml. ,11 ill, -n11', I .,+ , Isla, In, ell"' lhI p>rllitica) vtmth and the eoipinver .II,,.Idlne t„ th, I.,vv "It shuu}d hr noted that she l:rinnt\ 1 ulplo%ce,' k,'t1i• 1,te:,r I..1,\ , "ut.i:m n" fu"vi,i,in talliup for forfeiture of peu,ion ru:ht, frr.,ni,, "1 ,It,:n�,• i• t••I nir,I,t;,ln, i.' t.ti,•, Iht- opuiiun. PRISONER FIREFIGHTERS Pitsoucrc of a county nulu,ttt.il ?;Iim o—igi,til i,, hi, ti,hi r_ 111Jt r•i it,- i,.,.d tllrc. tIv by the `,,tatc i orr,trr, 11:.1v nut hr ell, h.l ti- .. , .. .,r,; ,I" :I,.r ' "n1e urdcI tit(- piotection of the I. ill, -1 lt:,n n, v („ - . t 11 1-, m;Ind liro%Nil at the rot}ue'll of the ,i.iit- I)n,, I"r "t \,,t ,rnl Re,•.,,I, The ,mate Forestry most r, inll,ut" thr , om;I% t"I the —1, . i . d ih,• pl:, 11, 1, Prisoners who havr d,•peodt-nt, nl.n he p,nd �_ lot ,n r11:1 1 i1,11u d.i�, "Ild 'h,i.,• %,ithout tlrpeudents Inns be paid -i() , rol, e d.tv, vitln•I pot i,idi(,Illy ''1 ):1, <wl , . x1led i,..1v h, t, - I rrdited to them at dim halg4% Delano on 40-Hour Week MILLION DOLLAR PROJECT Figone & Ricci GROWER SHIPPFR PACKER 1201 West Weber Street STOCKTON JACK M. ALLAN PRODUCE REPACKING STORAGE 1 P. O. Box 1085 Santa Fe Warehouse { STOCKTON REDWING NOVELTY CO. and SPORTLAND LIQUOR STORE 7 South :alifornia St. STOCKTON Meyenberg Milk Products Co. Monvfoctvrers of All Pure kvaporated Sweetened Condensed Milk o,,d Foster Freeze Products RIPON G. L. CORREA CONTRACTOR 1885 Bowers Avenue SANTA CLARA PROGRESSIVE r-:_"``,v;t'f.r)C� ACC:1 .'� (L unfl,", IN` IR CITIES LEND' OF CA M6MSEN AMERICAN MUNICIPAL ASSOCIATION "WESTERN CITY*' OPFiCIAL ►UJILICATION Berkeley (5) Hotel C'larembin THowtuall 3-3083 Los Angeles (17) .. 702 Staller Cower .. MAdson 4.4934 OFFICERS rutid4nt - CHARIkS C. DAIL -- Mayar Ian 01020 - - ..,rat Y+<c.President: ,,,UtI 5i Serkel*Y � .I f*rni& _ "J a PORTER Lay Caunvfman, Pala Alto ��+ jut ,F w '24 1� i<'ellld ViC4•rrttidMf�Trlaiiirlr; 1CxtsN, ►CtCiN � ' ... �. , . r,,. Pat! rrts d.nf: CrcARIES PERRY WALKER -. City Cotincilma arf. Manhattan te ch p L7• ✓ moves D. Plunkett, City Attu rrmy ,r :i £stcuftv4 D'ir44tsr GaiAral Clunselt ,. ,„-' Qe 19 }.7 C770 ' RICHARD CARPENTER ftiii.ington ft.iach, Wifornia • - DIRECTORS ARTHUR ATTESIDGE Dear Mr. �E°IUItY�� � Move'. Salinas FRED HRD City Tee4arar, berkdoy ybank ym very � �Z�� ��•� sending us. a Gew of the opinion ISA , CNRISNIAN :ece.utly suttittes91arowr Cftj Administrator by yA . tiyed" ' - Mayor, Visalia is C��sn v l'1aa�,le� rairiIYved by i'lyn Froe s"�!,Y" 1 n, }y,,.� Cara►GE CHRISTOPHER Msyar. San Francisco �T ,'r:{.XIti / f {.,., L� S. . Note* ,ie d Comments. Ve �rT'El7i4'�-4' ip,:t--clAto GfaTf'. . rAU£IreE dotGRANGES Ass't her. Parks A Rltrtation, it for d7ti7r filee. San Diego, A ,LIEN HALL - Mayor, Santa nta Ana While the langv� i�p tom! opinion refl»rs try th* "duty" of tboe - _ G WI11#9D HEWITT yam ,,,, Police Department to pat the sti"'�,'t'tsit and the Attorney S`i T* mof.t. ValT4l• RCi7ANT KAoTZAKIAN ,� 4 S, u*** i1lallia3r Ag1Jt,�.ge In bis opinion, It to owr. 'vi*v- •tbL I't w-vold i�. AJaywr, tadl b- ,�T,,t.i�Eli`*�' 1t to e111p�.o" the t'i#e of the $.�'.m "owt oritytt in r MAGGIOXA PRCDy Lena man, Oakland to avoldi any : vkplicN,ttonn that tht?rt,"it;y alot bo r"- itilt for t F Adf:DNTef � s X�su lting frow failure to perform a "du t.�" . " F'44tLt Chief,, Salinas , ?AM$S MIKINNEY Moyy," Sacrament! L,Wii.LiAM MILLER ,. - ' Fi+tix iTJePbT°'vtrYA aia '.. ,...., <_:...,:_._."...__�_......�_... _.._...�..,..__.�.- _._.__. .. .,_._.. e`%itatl.'t"✓''i"�`'-. _. _.,.-._.. ._„...:,,...,u.,.,.u....»,.m..,:a:�.z..r>...w.,';.;.a:s:o: - --sa VtxNE PARKER Dirfrcter of tvhfic Works, son Dlats a /s/ Richard CarpenT,er' _ .40fiN.D, PHILLIPS C+oy Manager,b4rkllev THOMAS D'ARCY OUINN City Cltmtllman, AThom" �y Ri ebard Carpenter ED'WARD H. RADEMACHER • Uecvt-'Ive otor - =lot, Callpatria ' RT£otARD RATHFON and General oel i'ia"WA7-Director, Socravnlnto LCK RC be TARUMN Chv Ckitncilmon, Santa Rasa ' VRWIH, SXLAR - 91t_gy�r, Otlnpfsido 1N.1•Apil',0 THOMPSON - tYk`a'}isrr Lxmpt tafTGE UH4 Health Ot' kor, Lori Angeles - - Lidr,RRK W,JLkIrAMS - kty' tatsot ; Akuta t West Cevive ° Al WOODS ' C4, Hitwo( Pasadena F SA"A[iAT.'4V Y,OR,Ty „ J'j;ostAntelos a �` `