CL_AGN_240725_TC_AgendaPacket_F1.CALL TO ORDER
2.ROLL CALL
3.PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
4.APPROVE ORDER OF THE AGENDA
This is the appropriate time for the Chair or Commissioners to approve the agenda as is or reorder.
5.BLUE FOLDER ITEMS (SUPPLEMENTAL)
Blue folder items are additional back up material to administrative reports and/or public comments received after the
printing and distribution of the agenda packet for receive and file.
6.PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
This section is intended to provide members of the public with the opportunity to comment on any subject that does not
appear on this agenda for action. Each speaker will be permitted to speak only once. Written requests, if any, will be
considered first under this section.
7.CONSENT CALENDAR
Business items, except those formally noticed for public hearing, or those pulled for discussion are assigned to the
Consent Calendar. The Chair or any Commissioner may request that any Consent Calendar item(s) be removed,
discussed, and acted upon separately. Items removed from the Consent Calendar will be taken up under the "Excluded
Consent Calendar" section below. Those items remaining on the Consent Calendar will be approved in one motion. The
Chair will call on anyone wishing to address the Commission on any Consent Calendar item on the agenda, which has
not been pulled by Commission for discussion.
7.A.APPROVE AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING FOR THE TRAFFIC COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING OF JULY 25, 2024
RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented.
7.B.APPROVE THE FOLLOWING TRAFFIC COMMISSION MINUTES: MAY 30, 2024
RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented.
7.C.RECEIVE AND FILE TRAFFIC CONCERNS AT EASTFIELD GATE ENTERING
FROM PALOS VERDES DRIVE EAST AND FINDING THE ACTION
CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL
2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274
(310) 377-1521
AGENDA
Regular Traffic Commission
Meeting
TRAFFIC COMMISSION
Thursday, July 25, 2024
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
8:30 AM
CL_AGN_230725_TC_AffidavitofPosting.pdf
CL_MIN_240530_TC_F.pdf
1
QUALITY ACT
RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file.
8.EXCLUDED CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS
9.PRESENTATION
9.A.RECEIVE AND FILE A REPORT FROM THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY
SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, LOMITA STATION, ON TRAFFIC STATISTICS FOR
THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS FOR MAY-JUNE 2024 (VERBAL REPORT)
RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file.
10.OLD BUSINESS
10.A.REVIEW AND APPROVE SUPPLEMENTAL TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT
AGREEMENT WITH LOS ANGELES COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT
RECOMMENDATION: Consider and approve as presented.
11.NEW BUSINESS
11.A.CONSIDERATION TO PLACE A TEMPORARY SIGN AT PORTUGUESE BEND
ROAD AND RANCHERO ROAD
RECOMMENDATION: Consideration and possible action to place a temporary
sign at Portuguese Road and Ranchero Road
12.MATTERS FROM MEMBERS OF THE TRAFFIC COMMISSION
12.A.DISCUSS SPEED LIMIT AND ROAD CONDITIONS SIGNS THROUGHOUT THE
CITY AND TRAFFIC CONDITIONS AND SIGNAGE SPECIFIC TO PORTUGUESE
BEND ROAD AND SADDLEBACK ROAD SOUTHERN INTERSECTION
RECOMMENDATION: Provide direction to staff.
13.MATTERS FROM STAFF
13.A.UPDATE ON REQUIREMENTS FOR ENGINEERING AND TRAFFIC SURVEY
RECOMMENDATION: Provide direction to staff.
14.ADJOURNMENT
CO_TRC_240725_Email_RPV_TrafficEngineer_240613.pdf
CO_TRC_240404_Email_Grindle_RHCA_EastfieldGate.pdf
CO_TRC_240530_EastfieldGate_Photos.pdf
CO_TRC_240328_Email_Brodie_EastfieldGate_Redacted.pdf
CL_AGN_240725_LASD_May_SuppTraffic.pdf
CL_AGN_240725_LASD_June_SuppTraffic.pdf
CL_AGN_240725_LASD_May-June_TrafficCitations.pdf
Attachment A - CA_AGR_240627_LASD_SuppTrafficEnf_FY24-25_Proposal_F.pdf
Attachment B - CA_AGR_LACo_Sheriff_FY 23-24_SupplementalTrafficEnforcement.pdf
Attachment A - CL_AGN_240725_TC_RHCA_EmailRequest.pdf
Attachment B - CL_AGN_240725_TC_TrafficEngineer_Report.pdf
Email_and_pictures_from_Shrader_240526.pdf
Rolling Hills E&T Report 2018.pdf
2
Next meeting: Thursday, September 26, 2024 at 8:30 a.m. in the City Council Chamber,
Rolling Hills City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California, 90274.
Notice:
Documents pertaining to an agenda item received after the posting of the agenda are available for review in
the City Clerk's office or at the meeting at which the item will be considered.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), if you need special assistance to participate in
this meeting due to your disability, please contact the City Clerk at (310) 377-1521 at least 48 hours prior to the
meeting to enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility and accommodation for
your review of this agenda and attendance at this meeting.
3
Agenda Item No.: 7.A
Mtg. Date: 07/25/2024
TO:HONORABLE CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE TRAFFIC COMMISSION
FROM:CHRISTIAN HORVATH, CITY CLERK / EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT TO
CITY MANAGER
THRU:KARINA BAÑALES, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT:APPROVE AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING FOR THE TRAFFIC COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING OF JULY 25, 2024
DATE:July 25, 2024
BACKGROUND:
None.
DISCUSSION:
None.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve as presented.
ATTACHMENTS:
CL_AGN_230725_TC_AffidavitofPosting.pdf
4
Administrative Report
7.A., File # 2383 Meeting Date: 7/25/2024
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS )
AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING
In compliance with the Brown Act, the following materials have been posted at the locations below.
Legislative Body Traffic Commission
Posting Type Regular Meeting Agenda
Posting Location 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, CA 90274
City Hall Window
City Website: https://www.rolling-hills.org/government/agenda/index.php
https://www.rolling-hills.org/government/city_council/city_council_archive_agendas/index.php
Meeting Date & Time JULY 25, 2024 8:30am
As City Clerk of the City of Rolling Hills, I declare under penalty of perjury, the document noted above was
posted at the date displayed below.
Christian Horvath, City Clerk
Date: July 19, 2024
5
Agenda Item No.: 7.B
Mtg. Date: 07/25/2024
TO:HONORABLE CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE TRAFFIC COMMISSION
FROM:CHRISTIAN HORVATH, CITY CLERK / EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT TO
CITY MANAGER
THRU:KARINA BAÑALES, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT:APPROVE THE FOLLOWING TRAFFIC COMMISSION MINUTES: MAY
30, 2024
DATE:July 25, 2024
BACKGROUND:
None.
DISCUSSION:
None.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve as presented.
ATTACHMENTS:
CL_MIN_240530_TC_F.pdf
6
MINUTES – TRAFFIC COMMISSION MEETING
Thursday, May 30, 2024
Page 1
Minutes
Rolling Hills Traffic Commission
Thursday, Ma y 30, 2024
Regular Meeting 8:30 a.m.
1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER
The Traffic Commission of the City of Rolling Hills met on the above date at 8:33 a.m. Chair Wilson presiding.
2. ROLL CALL
Commissioners Present: Margeta, Virtue, Raine, Chair Wilson
Commissioners Absent: Vice Chair Bobit,
Staff Present: John Signo, Planning & Community Services Director
Christian Horvath, City Clerk / Executive Assistant to the City Manager
Vanessa Munoz, Traffic Engineer
Samantha Crew, Management Analyst
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – Chair Wilson
4. APPROVE ORDER OF THE AGENDA – NONE
5. BLUE FOLDER ITEMS (SUPPLEMENTAL)
Motion by Commissioner Raine, seconded by Commissioner Virtue to receive and file additional materials
for Blue Folder Items 6A and 11A. Motion carried unanimously with the following vote:
AYES: Margeta, Virtue, Raine, Chair Wilson
NOES: None
ABSENT: Bobit
6. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
Public Comment: Carole Hoffman, Arty Beckler (RHCA), Cami Edelbrock
7. CONSENT CALENDAR
7.A. APPROVE AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING FOR THE TRAFFIC COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING OF
MAY 30, 2024
7.B. APPROVE THE FOLLOWING TRAFFIC COMMISSION MINUTES: MARCH 28 , 2024
Motion by Commissioner Virtue, seconded by Commissioner Raine to approve consent calendar. Motion
carried unanimously with the following vote:
AYES: Margeta, Virtue, Raine, Chair Wilson
NOES: None
ABSENT: Bobit
8. EXCLUDED CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS – NONE
9. PRESENTATION
7
MINUTES – TRAFFIC COMMISSION MEETING
Thursday, May 30, 2024
Page 2
9.A. RECEIVE AND FILE A REPORT ON THE "COFFEE WITH A CAPTAIN" EVENT AT CITY HALL
ON APRIL 30, 2024 (VERBAL REPORT)
Presented by Management Analyst Samantha Crew
Motion by Commissioner Virtue, seconded by Commissioner Raine to receive and file the report. Motion
carried unanimously with the following vote:
AYES: Margeta, Virtue, Raine, Chair Wilson
NOES: None
ABSENT: Bobit
9.B. RECEIVE AND FILE A REPORT FROM THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY SHERIFF'S
DEPARTMENT, LOMITA STATION, ON TRAFFIC STATISTICS FOR THE CITY OF ROLLING
HILLS FOR MARCH-APRIL 2024 (VERBAL REPORT)
Presented by Los Angeles Sherriff Deputy Sullivan
No action taken.
10. OLD BUSINESS
10.A. RECEIVE AND FILE A FOLLOW-UP TO THE DISCUSSION ABOUT SIGNAGE AT CREST ROAD
EAST AND EASTFIELD DRIVE LEADING TO CREST ROAD EAST GATE AND FINDING THE
ACTION CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
ACT
Presented by Planning & Community Services Director John Signo
Motion by Commissioner Raine, seconded by Commissioner Virtue to receive and file the report. Motion
carried unanimously with the following vote:
AYES: Margeta, Virtue, Raine, Chair Wilson
NOES: None
ABSENT: Bobit
10.B. RECEIVE AND FILE TRAFFIC CONCERNS AT EASTFIELD GATE ENTERING FROM PALOS
VERDES DRIVE EAST AND FINDING THE ACTION CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
Presentation by Planning & Community Services Director John Signo
Traffic Engineer Vanessa Munoz
Motion by Commissioner Virtue, seconded by Commissioner Margeta to receive and file the report. Motion
carried unanimously with the following vote:
AYES: Margeta, Virtue, Raine, Chair Wilson
NOES: None
ABSENT: Bobit
11. NEW BUSINESS
8
MINUTES – TRAFFIC COMMISSION MEETING
Thursday, May 30, 2024
Page 3
11.A. ZONING CASE NO. 24-016: REQUEST FOR APPROVAL FOR A DRIVEWAY APRON ON
MORGAN LANE TO ACCESS A PROPOSED STABLE AS PART OF A SITE PLAN REVIEW,
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, AND VARIANCE APPLICATION ON A PROPERTY LOCATED AT
1 MORGAN LANE (LOT 170 -1-MS), ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (HU), AND DETERMINING THE
PROJECT EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
Presentation by Planning & Community Services Director John Signo
Traffic Engineer Vanessa Munoz
Motion by Commissioner Raine, seconded by Commissioner Virtue to approve driveway and apron as
presented by staff. Motion carried unanimously with the following vote:
AYES: Margeta, Virtue, Raine, Chair Wilson
NOES: None
ABSENT: Bobit
12. MATTERS FROM MEMBERS OF THE TRAFFIC COMMISSION – NONE
13. MATTERS FROM STAFF
Traffic Engineer Vanessa Munoz mentioned that the Engineering and Traffic Survey for the City will be up
for renewal in March 2025. This is done every seven years to ensure the California vehicle code can be
appropriately utilized for speed violation enforcement.
Chair Wilson requested clarification on whether the City was required to do so or whether the municipal code
could suffice and directed staff to consult with the City Attorney.
14. ADJOURNMENT : 9:34 A.M.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:34 a.m. to a regular meeting of the Traffic Commission scheduled to be
held on Thursday, May 30, 2024, beginning at 8:30 a.m. in the City Council Chamber, Rolling Hills City Hall,
2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California, 90274.
Respectfully submitted,
____________________________________
Christian Horvath, City Clerk
Approved,
____________________________________
Patrick Wilson, Chair
9
Agenda Item No.: 7.C
Mtg. Date: 07/25/2024
TO:HONORABLE CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE TRAFFIC COMMISSION
FROM:JOHN SIGNO, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & COMMUNITY SERVICES
THRU:KARINA BAÑALES, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT:RECEIVE AND FILE TRAFFIC CONCERNS AT EASTFIELD GATE
ENTERING FROM PALOS VERDES DRIVE EAST AND FINDING THE
ACTION CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
DATE:July 25, 2024
BACKGROUND:
On February 23, 2024, City staff received an email from Laurie Brodie regarding safety
concerns at the Eastfield Gate when entering from Palos Verdes Drive East. Ms. Brodie is
requesting a "pull forward" sign on Palos Verdes Drive East at the entrance to Eastfield Drive
due to prolonged queuing at the gate. The email was forwarded to City Council at their March
11, 2024 meeting under public comment in which Mayor Mirsch directed staff to place an item
on an agenda. Since this is a traffic-related issue, it was referred to the Traffic Commission.
In late March 2024, t he Traffic Engineer spoke to Ms. Brodie and offered to meet her at the
location for further discussion. The Traffic Engineer also spoke to the gate attendant at the
Eastfield Gate. According to the attendant, the queuing backup is temporary occurring just
before 7 a.m. and lasts approximately 5 minutes.
On March 28, 2024, the Traffic Commission considered the item and requested that staff
reach out to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes (RPV) staff and the Rolling Hills Community
Association (RHCA) about the issue. It was requested that the Eastfield Gate staff direct cars
to move forward as much as possible.
On May 30, 2024, the Traffic Commission directed staff to follow up with RPV and RHCA.
DISCUSSION:
RHCA Response
According to RHCA, t he Eastfield Gate is very challenging because it was built so close to
10
Palos Verdes Drive East (PVDE). At most, 4 or 5 cars can fit on the "runway" from PVDE to
the gate window. Most vehicles move forward as close as possible, but because of the steeper
grade, people tend to stay back further because of possible rollback of the car. This is
especially true for large trucks. There is also a concern with telling guests to pull closer to the
car in front of them because if there is a rollback and a collision, RHCA could potentially be
held responsible.
One of the biggest issues is vehicles do not stay to the far right when turning right onto
Eastfield Drive. Unfortunately, if the gate attendants had to also be the traffic monitor, queuing
would be even longer. The new identification policy has also slowed traffic, which RHCA is
working on improving. The biggest problem often occurs during rush hour between 7 a.m. and
9 a.m. RHCA is making efforts to communicate issues with guests and workers and does not
advise gate attendants be used as traffic monitors.
RPV Response
During rush hour, vehicles entering through the Eastfield gate queue onto PVDE, which is
located in RPV. Staff reached out to RPV Department of Public Works to discuss the issue.
RPVs traffic engineer assessed the situation for possible solutions but advised no change to
status quo.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive and file.
ATTACHMENTS:
CO_TRC_240725_Email_RPV_TrafficEngineer_240613.pdf
CO_TRC_240404_Email_Grindle_RHCA_EastfieldGate.pdf
CO_TRC_240530_EastfieldGate_Photos.pdf
CO_TRC_240328_Email_Brodie_EastfieldGate_Redacted.pdf
11
1
John Signo
From:Noel Casil <ncasil@rpvca.gov>
Sent:Thursday, June 13, 2024 5:03 PM
To:John Signo
Cc:Ramzi Awwad
Subject:RE: Eastfield Gate on Palos Verdes Drive East
EXTERNAL EMAIL - This email was sent by a person from outside your organization. Exercise caution when clicking links,
opening attachments or taking further action, before validating its authenticity.
Hi John,
Affirmative. Due to limitations in hard mitigation options, maintain status quo,
Optimization of the gate operations may alleviate the situation.
From: John Signo <jsigno@cityofrh.net>
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2024 4:50 PM
To: Noel Casil <ncasil@rpvca.gov>
Cc: Ramzi Awwad <rawwad@rpvca.gov>
Subject: RE: Eastfield Gate on Palos Verdes Drive East
EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open any attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe!!!.
Thank you, Noel.
So it seems it would be best to leave the intersection as is?
Our homeowners association (Rolling Hills Community Association) is looking into procedures for getting vehicles
through the gate quicker, but I have not heard back.
John F. Signo, AICP
Director of Planning and Community Services
12
2
City of Rolling Hills
2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills CA 90274
310.377.1521
jsigno@cityofrh.net
From: Noel Casil <ncasil@rpvca.gov>
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2024 4:44 PM
To: John Signo <jsigno@cityofrh.net>
Cc: Ramzi Awwad <rawwad@rpvca.gov>
Subject: RE: Eastfield Gate on Palos Verdes Drive East
EXTERNAL EMAIL - This email was sent by a person from outside your organization. Exercise caution when clicking links, opening
attachments or taking further action, before validating its authenticity.
Good afternoon John,
We reviewed the situation and below are our findings:
Northbound PVDE vehicles turning left to Eastfield Drive
[Agree. Not much can be done here. The turning lane storage is adequate serving its purpose as refuge and to
facilitate the turns]
Southbound PVDE vehicles turning right onto Eastfield Drive blocking line of sight for vehicles exiting Eastfield
Drive
[Few options. Not enough width for a dedicated SB Right which even if available may further impede sight
visibility because of curvature]
Another thing to look at is the discharge rate at the gate, the faster the entry process the mainline queues
(NBL, SBR) can be cleared if they are just waiting to avoid entering queue spillover onto mainline PV Drive
East.
For exiting traffic, creeping 2‐3 feet past the stop bar may also provide additional visibility but is not to the encouraged.
From: John Signo <jsigno@cityofrh.net>
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2024 4:19 PM
To: Noel Casil <ncasil@rpvca.gov>
13
3
Cc: Ramzi Awwad <rawwad@rpvca.gov>
Subject: RE: Eastfield Gate on Palos Verdes Drive East
EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open any attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe!!!.
Hi Noel,
Any updates?
John F. Signo, AICP
Director of Planning and Community Services
City of Rolling Hills
2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills CA 90274
310.377.1521
jsigno@cityofrh.net
From: John Signo
Sent: Thursday, June 6, 2024 1:59 PM
To: Noel Casil <ncasil@rpvca.gov>
Cc: Ramzi Awwad <rawwad@rpvca.gov>
Subject: RE: Eastfield Gate on Palos Verdes Drive East
Hi Noel,
Just following up. Let me know if you have any questions.
Thanks,
John F. Signo, AICP
Director of Planning and Community Services
City of Rolling Hills
2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills CA 90274
310.377.1521
jsigno@cityofrh.net
From: John Signo
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2024 12:08 PM
To: 'Noel Casil' <ncasil@rpvca.gov>
Cc: Ramzi Awwad <rawwad@rpvca.gov>
Subject: RE: Eastfield Gate on Palos Verdes Drive East
Hi Noel,
It’s both, but I don’t know what you do with northbound PVDE vehicles turning left to Eastfield Drive since those vehicles
have right of way before a vehicle from Eastfield Drive can make a left turn.
For southbound PVDE vehicles turning right onto Eastfield Drive, the complaint is vehicles block line of sight for vehicles
exiting Eastfield Drive. Vehicles make a righthand turn can also cause a hazard if they stop in the travel lane (too far from
the righthand shoulder). Is a turning lane possible?
14
4
John F. Signo, AICP
Director of Planning and Community Services
City of Rolling Hills
2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills CA 90274
310.377.1521
jsigno@cityofrh.net
From: Noel Casil <ncasil@rpvca.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2024 10:28 AM
To: John Signo <jsigno@cityofrh.net>
Cc: Ramzi Awwad <rawwad@rpvca.gov>
Subject: RE: Eastfield Gate on Palos Verdes Drive East
EXTERNAL EMAIL - This email was sent by a person from outside your organization. Exercise caution when clicking links, opening
attachments or taking further action, before validating its authenticity.
Good morning John,
Regarding, “concerns about cars queuing into Palos Verdes Drive East when entering the Eastfield Gate” below.
Could you please elaborate more on the issue? Is it southbound PVDE vehicles turning right or northbound PVDE
turning left to Eastfield Gate?
15
5
16
6
From: John Signo <jsigno@cityofrh.net>
Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2024 2:53 PM
To: Ramzi Awwad <rawwad@rpvca.gov>
Subject: Eastfield Gate on Palos Verdes Drive East
EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open any attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe!!!.
Hi Ramzi,
At the last Traffic Commission meeting, there were concerns about cars queuing into Palos Verdes Drive East when
entering the Eastfield Gate. Is it possible to place signs or provide a queuing lane to improve visibility to make the
intersection safer?
John F. Signo, AICP
Director of Planning and Community Services
City of Rolling Hills
2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills CA 90274
310.377.1521
jsigno@cityofrh.net
17
1
John Signo
From:Mark Grindle <MGrindle@rhca.net>
Sent:Thursday, April 4, 2024 4:08 PM
To:John Signo; Kristen Raig
Subject:Re: Traffic Commission Items
One thing I was going to suggest is that maybe RPV can create a right hand turn lane on the west side of PV Drive. There
is a nice wide sidewalk on the stretch between Eastfield and Bronco.
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
Get Outlook for Android
From: Mark Grindle <MGrindle@rhca.net>
Sent: Thursday, April 4, 2024 4:04:56 PM
To: John Signo <jsigno@cityofrh.net>; Kristen Raig <KRaig@rhca.net>
Subject: Re: Traffic Commission Items
Hello John,
The Eastfield Gate is very challenging because it was built so close to PV Drive East. At most, 4 or 5 cars can fit on the
"runway" from PV Drive to the gate window. Having worked many shifts there, I can say that most vehicles pack in as
close as possible, but because of the steeper grade, people tend to stay back further because of possible rollback of the
car, (and especially the large trucks), in front of them.
The biggest problems are that vehicles don't stay to the far right when turning right onto Eastfield from PV Drive AND,
vehicles turning left and blocking lanes.
Unfortunately, if the gate attendants had to also be the traffic monitor, the lines would be even longer. The new ID
policy has slowed the flow down too, and we are working on that.
I believe that the biggest problem occurs at the rush hours between 7am and 9am. I have an idea on helping resolve
that, that I will speak with Kristen about.
In the meantime, we will make an effort to communicate these issues to our many daily regular guests and workers.
As for overnight parking, I will let Kristen speak to that because I thought that was a City rule.
Thank you for bringing this to our attention.
Mark
I do have
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
Get Outlook for Android
From: John Signo <jsigno@cityofrh.net>
Sent: Thursday, April 4, 2024 3:08:52 PM
18
2
To: Kristen Raig <KRaig@rhca.net>; Mark Grindle <MGrindle@rhca.net>
Subject: Traffic Commission Items
Hi Kristen and Mark,
I’m following up on some Traffic Commission items.
What is RHCA’s policy on street parking along streets that are designated horse trails?
Can you have the Eastfield gate attendants tell drivers who are entering to move up to the gate? We’ve received a
complaint that queuing backs up onto PV Drive East blocking visibility.
Thanks,
John F. Signo, AICP
Director of Planning and Community Services
City of Rolling Hills
2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills CA 90274
310.377.1521
jsigno@cityofrh.net
19
EASTFIELD GATE
20
EASTFIELD GATE
21
22
23
24
Agenda Item No.: 9.A
Mtg. Date: 07/25/2024
TO:HONORABLE CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE TRAFFIC COMMISSION
FROM:CHRISTIAN HORVATH, CITY CLERK / EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT TO
CITY MANAGER
THRU:KARINA BAÑALES, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT:
RECEIVE AND FILE A REPORT FROM THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY
SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, LOMITA STATION, ON TRAFFIC
STATISTICS FOR THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS FOR MAY-JUNE 2024
(VERBAL REPORT)
DATE:July 25, 2024
BACKGROUND:
Supplemental Citations
Supplemental traffic enforcement for May and June included the following:
May 2024
Speeding Violations: 15
Resident Cites: 10
Non-Resident Cites: 5
Other Violations: 0
June 2024
Speeding Violations: 4
Resident Cites: 3
Non-Resident Cites: 1
Other Violations: 0
Regular Citations
For regular enforcement, the Sheriff's Department reported the following from May 1 to June
30, 2024:
18 hazardous citation (speeding, failure to stop at stop sign, any moving violations)
25
18 hazardous violation
1 non-hazardous citation (broken taillight, no license plate, turn signal etc.)
1 non-hazardous violation
TOTAL: 19
Traffic Collisions (year to date): None
DUI Arrests (year to date): None
DISCUSSION:
None.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive and file.
ATTACHMENTS:
CL_AGN_240725_LASD_May_SuppTraffic.pdf
CL_AGN_240725_LASD_June_SuppTraffic.pdf
CL_AGN_240725_LASD_May-June_TrafficCitations.pdf
26
May-24ROLLING HILLS TRAFFIC 24RE011250DATELOCATION VIOLATION SPEEDRESIDENT CITESNON-RESIDENT CITESDEPUTY5/21/2024 Crest Road/St. John's Canyon Road Speed 47 1 0 GalosicCrest Road/St. John's Canyon Road Speed 46 1 0 GalosicCrest Road/St. John's Canyon Road Speed 46 1 0 Galosic5/22/2024 Crest Road/St. John's Canyon Road Speed 45 1 0 SullivanCrest Road/St. John's Canyon Road Speed 45 0 1 Sullivan Crest Road/St. John's Canyon Road Speed 41 1 0 Sullivan Crest Road/St. John's Canyon Road Speed 51 0 1 Sullivan5/28/2024 Crest Road/St. John's Canyon Road Speed 46 1 0 GalosicCrest Road/St. John's Canyon Road Speed 46 1 0 Galosic5/30/2024 Crest Road/St. John's Canyon Road Speed 45 1 0 Sullivan Crest Road/St. John's Canyon Road Speed 45 1 0 Sullivan Crest Road/St. John's Canyon Road Speed 4501Sullivan Crest Road/St. John's Canyon Road Speed 45 0 1 SullivanCrest Road/St. John's Canyon Road Speed 45 1 0 SullivanCrest Road/St. John's Canyon Road Speed 45 0 1 Sullivan Inventory List6/6/202427
Jun-24 ROLLING HILLS TRAFFIC 24RE011354
DATE LOCATION VIOLATION SPEED RESIDENT
CITES
NON-
RESIDENT
CITES
DEPUTY
6/12/2024 Crest Road/St. John's Canyon Road Speed 45 1 0 Galosic
Crest Road/St. John's Canyon Road Speed 46 1 0 Galosic
6/26/2024 Crest Road/St. John's Canyon Road Speed 46 1 0 Galosic
Crest Road/St. John's Canyon Road Speed 49 0 1 Galosic
Inventory List 7/11/2024
28
DATE LOCATION VIOLATION SPEED RESIDENT
CITES
NON-
RESIDENT
CITES
DEPUTY
Inventory List 7/11/2024
29
Citation Summary Report
6/28/2024
Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department
Lomita Sheriff's Station
From 5/1/2024 to 6/30/2024 City: ROLLING HILLS
Category Quantity
Total Number of Citations 19
Total Number of Violations 19
Total Number of Hazardous Citations 18
Total Number of Hazardous Violations 18
Total Number of Non-Hazardous Citations 1
Total Number of Non-Hazardous Violations 1
Total Number of DUI Arrests 0
Total Number of DUI Citations 0
Total Actual DUI 0
Total Number of Parking Citations 0
Total Number of Radar Citations 18
Total Number of Pedestrian Citations 0
Total Number of Pedestrian Violations 0
Total Number of Bicycle Citations 0
Total Number of Bicycle Violations 0
Total Number of Safety Belt Citations 0
Total Number of Safety Belt Violations 0
Total Number of Child Restraint Citations 0
Total Number of Child Restraint Violations 0
Total Number of Financial Responsibility Citations 0
30
Agenda Item No.: 10.A
Mtg. Date: 07/25/2024
TO:HONORABLE CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE TRAFFIC COMMISSION
FROM:JOHN SIGNO, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & COMMUNITY SERVICES
THRU:KARINA BAÑALES, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT:REVIEW AND APPROVE SUPPLEMENTAL TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT
AGREEMENT WITH LOS ANGELES COUNTY SHERIFF'S
DEPARTMENT
DATE:July 25, 2024
BACKGROUND:
The City contracts with the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department (LASD) for public safety
through a regional contract with the cities of Rolling Hills Estates and Rancho Palos Verdes.
Each city pays a proportionate share of the Lomita Sheriff's Station regional contract for its
services, which typically includes hours of general traffic enforcement for Rolling Hills.
Additionally, the City of Rolling Hills has independently contracted with the LASD for additional
Supplemental Traffic Enforcement (STE). The following is a history of the cost of service for
the past several years:
Fiscal Year Amount
2018-19 $25,790
2019-20 $25,790
2020-21 $27,379
2021-22 $27,649
2022-23 $28,694
2023-24 $28,793
At the March 23, 2023 meeting, the Traffic Commission expressed concerns that STE was not
being used for its intended purpose, which was to address speeding violations. This was due
primarily to staffing issues with the LASD and a shortage of deputies able to provide
Lidar/Radar enforcement. Lidar stands for Light Detection and Ranging; radar stands for
Radio Detection and Ranging. Al though no action was taken, Chair Wilson indicated he would
discuss the concern with the City Council.
On April 10, 2023, the City Council discussed the issue and voted to eliminate STE.
31
At the May 25, 2023 Traffic Commission meeting, the LASD indicated there were now several
deputies trained in Lidar/Radar enforcement. The Commission received the report but did not
take action.
At the June 12, 2023 City Council meeting, the Council received a report on the Traffic
Commission and voted, 4-1 (Black dissenting), to reinstate STE for FY23-24 (Attachment B).
DISCUSSION:
Typically, STE is reviewed by the Traffic Commission prior to the next Fiscal Year (FY) and
budget adoption. The Commission is receiving this information later due to the delayed
Municipal Law Enforcement Services Agreement (MLESA) adoption between LA County and
the Contract Cities.
The LASD has provided deputy rates for FY24-25 (Attachment A). The proposal includes 275
hours divided into three phases, as follows, totaling a not-to-exceed $32,837.75:
Phase 1: 132 hours from July 1, 2024, to November 30, 2024
Phase 2: 16 hours from December 1, 2024, to December 30, 2024
Phase 3: 127 hours from January 1, 2025, to June 30, 2025
The LASD maintains a visible deployment strategy while conducting traffic enforcement as a
means of encouraging safe driving and to issue warnings if/when appropriate. The Traffic
Commission has stressed the importance of enforcing speed limits and staff has emphasized
this with LASD's supplemental traffic enforcement division. As of last year, the LASD Lomita
Station has 17 deputies trained at Lidar/Radar, but not all are dedicated to traffic enforcement
or the Palos Verdes Peninsula area. Typically, about two deputies handle traffic enforcement
between the three contract Peninsula cities. Moving forward, the LASD indicated a priority will
be given to deputies trained in Lidar/Radar who can issue speeding citations when signing up
for STE.
STE utilizes deputies on overtime after completing a regular shift. As such, many deputies will
only work approximately 4 hours performing STE at any given time based on availability and
signing up for overtime hours.
FISCAL IMPACT:
STE is invoiced separately from the regional contract with the LASD and allocated from the
City's COPS fund, which covers supplemental public safety activities. The COPS fund has
$170,000 for FY24/25. A portion of this is used to offset 30% of each month's regular service
contract towards other supplemental services. The remainder is allocated for STE.
The total proposed 275 hours for STE at $119.41 per hour of service is $32,837.75.
The following was spent on STE in the past three fiscal years:
FY21/22 - $10,292
FY22/23 - $12,185
FY23/24 - $11,541
RECOMMENDATION:
Consider and approve as presented.
32
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A - CA_AGR_240627_LASD_SuppTrafficEnf_FY24-25_Proposal_F.pdf
Attachment B - CA_AGR_LACo_Sheriff_FY 23-24_SupplementalTrafficEnforcement.pdf
33
ROLLING HILLS TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT FISCAL YEAR 2024-2025
The program will begin July 1, 2024. The supplemental traffic enforcement will run from
July 1, 2024 through June 30, 2025. The primary focus of this direct traffic enforcement
will be Monday thru Friday. Location will be random to increase our visibility and the
effectiveness of the enforcement. Only those Sheriff Personnel that are trained in
Lidar/Radar enforcement shall be utilized in the city as part of the supplemental traffic
enforcement program. The breakdown is as follows:
PHASE 1
The first phase will start July 1, 2024 and continue through November 30, 2024. This
will be a total of 132 hours. 60 hours from phase 1 will correspond with the first two
weeks of the 2024/20 25 school year, which tentatively begins on August 26, 2024.
The cost of the initial phase is $15,762.12 (132 hours X $119.41 per hour).
PHASE 2
A Second phase will begin on December 1, 2024 and will continue through December
30, 2024. The program will consist of 16 hours of traffic enforcement. The breakdown
is as follows:
8 hours per week for 2 weeks for a total of 16 hours. The cost of this phase for
the month of December will be $1,910.56 (16 hours X $119.41 per hour).
PHASE 3
A third phase will commence on January 1, 2025 and will conclude on June 30, 2025.
The remaining 127 hours of traffic enforcement will be utilized throughout this time
period. The breakdown is as follows:
127 hours spread over a 6 month time period. The cost of this phase is
$15,165.07 (127 hours X $119.41).
The traffic office will work closely with city staff and residents to increase the overall
effectiveness of the entire program. High visibility and compliance with traffic regulations
will be the main goal of this operation. This will result in a safer environment for
everyone traveling through the city of Rolling Hills.
If a shift is missed, it can be made up during the phase in which it was missed. This will
ensure maximum coverage throughout the operation.
TOTAL COST FOR ALL 3 PHASES: $32,837.75 (275 hours X $119.41)
34
ROLLING HILLS TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT FISCAL YEAR 2023-2024
The program will begin July 1, 2023. The supplemental traffic enforcement will run from
July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024. The primary focus of this direct traffic enforcement
will be Monday thru Friday. Location will be random to increase our visibility and the
effectiveness of the enforcement. The breakdown is as follows:
PHASE 1
The first phase will start July 1, 2023 and continue through November 30, 2023. This
will be a total of 132 hours. 60 hours from phase 1 will correspond with the first two
weeks of the 2023/2024 school year, which tentatively begins on August 26, 2023.
The cost of the initial phase is $13,820.40 (132 hours X $104.70 per hour).
PHASE 2
A Second phase will begin on December 1, 2023 and will continue through December
30, 2023. The program will consist of 16 hours of traffic enforcement. The breakdown
is as follows:
8 hours per week for 2 weeks for a total of 16 hours. The cost of this phase for
the month of December will be $1,675.20 (16 hours X $104.70 per hour).
PHASE 3
A third phase will commence on January 1, 2024 and will conclude on June 30, 2024.
The remaining 127 hours of traffic enforcement will be utilized throughout this time
period. The breakdown is as follows:
127 hours spread over a 6 month time period. The cost of this phase is
$13,296.90 (127 hours X $104.70).
The traffic office will work closely with city staff and residents to increase the overall
effectiveness of the entire program. High visibility and compliance with traffic regulations
will be the main goal of this operation. This will result in a safer environment for
everyone traveling through the city of Rolling Hills.
If a shift is missed, it can be made up during the phase in which it was missed. This will
ensure maximum coverage throughout the operation.
TOTAL COST FOR ALL 3 PHASES: $28,792.50 (275 hours X $104.70)
35
Agenda Item No.: 11.A
Mtg. Date: 07/25/2024
TO:HONORABLE CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE TRAFFIC COMMISSION
FROM:KARINA BAÑALES, CITY MANAGER
THRU:KARINA BAÑALES, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT:CONSIDERATION TO PLACE A TEMPORARY SIGN AT PORTUGUESE
BEND ROAD AND RANCHERO ROAD
DATE:July 25, 2024
BACKGROUND:
The Rolling Hills Community Association (RHCA) is requesting a traffic sign along the
southbound lane of Portuguese Bend Road, just north of Ranchero Road. Using the
appropriate language, the sign should warn drivers to slow down due to a bump, drop-off, or
uneven pavement ahead (Attachment A).
Staff requested that Traffic Engineer Vanessa Munoz review the RHCA's request and
determine whether a sign is necessary, and if so, provide direction on sign type, language,
and location. Today, staff is seeking the Traffic Commission's direction on RHCA's request.
DISCUSSION:
On July 16, 2024, Traffic Engineer Munoz submitted a memorandum to the City regarding
placement of a temporary sign just north of the Portuguese Bend Road South and Ranchero
Road intersection (Attachment B).
Engineer Munoz indicated in the attached memorandum that a customized warning sign with
high visibility yellow reflective sheeting reading "Slide Area Uneven Pavement Slow Down,"
along with a high visibility yellow reflective "10 mph" warning sign (W13-1P), should be placed
100 feet north of Ranchero Road facing southbound traffic on Portuguese Bend Road South.
Care should be taken to ensure that no trees obstruct the sign installation. The new sign
combination should be installed with a 7-foot clearance from the bottom of the lowest sign.
See enclosed Exhibit “A” for reference. The old post and 10 mph (W13-1P) sign should be
removed, as it is old, faded, and likely no longer visible at nighttime due to worn reflective
sheeting.
The Traffic Commission may consider placing a sign per recommendations near the
Portuguese Bend Road South/Ranchero Road intersection and direct staff to coordinate with
the Los Angeles Public Works Department for its installation. The Traffic Commission may
36
also suggest or recommend alternative options, such as not placing a sign at all.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The City has a contract with the Los Angeles County Public Works Department for
maintenance and installation of traffic signs. Funds are paid out of the general fund.
RECOMMENDATION:
Discuss and provide direction.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A - CL_AGN_240725_TC_RHCA_EmailRequest.pdf
Attachment B - CL_AGN_240725_TC_TrafficEngineer_Report.pdf
37
1
Karina Banales
From:Kristen Raig <KRaig@rhca.net>
Sent:Tuesday, July 9, 2024 3:23 PM
To:Karina Banales
Subject:RHCA Request for road sign in Flying Triangle
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Flagged
EXTERNAL EMAIL - This email was sent by a person from outside your organization. Exercise caution when clicking links,
opening attachments or taking further action, before validating its authenticity.
Hi Karina,
Thanks for going over this earlier today.
RHCA is asking for a traffic sign along the southbound lane of Portuguese Bend Road, just north of Ranchero Road to
warn drivers to drive slowly because there is a bump / drop off / uneven pavement ahead – whatever is the appropriate
language.
Below is the Google Earth view I promised. The area in red is where the road is separaƟng and dropping. We are seeing
up to a 2” drop a week right now. The yellow line is our suggesƟon for the locaƟon of the sign, but we leave it to
Vanessa and her team to select the appropriate place.
The issue we are trying to address is that the road is dropping, so there can be a severe bump and there is limited to no
visibility of the cars coming up the hill (northbound) on Portuguese Bend Road on the other side of the area in red.
We are mostly concerned about drivers who are not familiar with the area – amazon, rideshare or postmates, especially
at night. We don’t want them going off the “ski jump” ledge and end up in a ditch along side the road.
Thanks so much.
38
2
Kristen Raig,
Manager, Rolling Hills Community Association
1 Portuguese Bend Road
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
ph: (310) 544-6222
kraig@rhca.net
www.rhca.org
39
Memorandum
TO: Karina Banales, City Manager
FROM: Vanessa Munoz PE, TE, City Traffic Engineer
DATE: July 16, 2024
SUBJECT: Portuguese Bend Road South at Ranchero Road Sign
This memorandum is in response to the request by the city to review and provide input to
a sign installation for southbound traffic north of the intersection of Portuguese Bend Road
South and Ranchero Road. The objective of the sign is to notify drivers in advance of
approaching the intersection about the roadway uneven pavement and deep grades due
to the active fault in the area.
A customized warning sign with a high visibility yellow reflectivity sheeting reading “slide
area uneven pavement slow down” together with a high visibility yellow reflective sheeting
warning sign (W13-1P) “10 mph” shall be placed 100-feet north of Ranchero Road facing
southbound traffic on Portuguese Bend Road South, making sure no trees obstruct the
sign installation. The new sign combination shall be installed with a 7-foot clearance from
bottom of lowest sign. See enclosed Exhibit “A” as reference. The old post and 10mph
(W13-1P) sign should be removed, as the sign is old and faded and most likely the
reflective sheeting has worn off and won’t be visible at nighttime.
.
40
Portuguese Bend Rd at Ranchero Rd Sign Installation (#105238)City of Rolling HillsEXHIBIT APortuguese Bend Road South at Ranchero RdSign InstallationLegend:Existing Sign as notedProposed Sign and Post as notedRANCHERO RD
PORTUGUESE BEND RD SOUTH***Note: Exact sign locations shall bedetermined and verified in the field toeliminate visibility obstruction.PORTUGUESE BEND RD SOUTHDETAIL "A"Proposed Sign AssemblyN.T.S.41
Agenda Item No.: 12.A
Mtg. Date: 07/25/2024
TO:HONORABLE CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE TRAFFIC COMMISSION
FROM:JOHN SIGNO, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & COMMUNITY SERVICES
THRU:KARINA BAÑALES, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT:DISCUSS SPEED LIMIT AND ROAD CONDITIONS SIGNS
THROUGHOUT THE CITY AND TRAFFIC CONDITIONS AND SIGNAGE
SPECIFIC TO PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD AND SADDLEBACK ROAD
SOUTHERN INTERSECTION
DATE:July 25, 2024
BACKGROUND:
This matter was brought to the attention of the Traffic Commission by a resident at the May 30,
2024 meeting. Due to the sinkhole that developed on Saddleback Road near the northern
intersection of Portuguese Bend Road, vehicles have been detoured to the southern
intersection, creating more traffic at that intersection. It was suggested that temporary signs or
other treatment be installed at the intersection to improve safety.
Additionally, the Rolling Hills Community Association (RHCA) requests consideration of speed
limit and road condition signs elsewhere in the City.
DISCUSSION:
The Rolling Hills Community Association (RHCA) began repairing the sinkhole on Saddleback
Road that developed due to excessive rainfall earlier this year. The sinkhole led to a road
closure in early March, and RHCA has been evaluating it ever since. RHCA is in the process
of repairing the road. Construction started May 30 and is expected to last until the end of July.
Although RHCA maintains the roads, the City has a contract with the Los Angeles County
Department of Public Works (LACPW) for installation of road signs, striping, and other minor
repairs.
Staff is seeking direction from the Traffic Commission on whether temporary signs or
treatments are necessary, considering the road is under repair and will be reopened soon.
Also, the Traffic Commission should consider if speed limit and road condition signs are
necessary elsewhere in the City as requested by RHCA.
FISCAL IMPACT:
42
Installation of temporary signs or treatment would be done by LACPW. Cost will be
determined and paid under the City's General Fund.
RECOMMENDATION:
Provide direction to staff.
ATTACHMENTS:
Email_and_pictures_from_Shrader_240526.pdf
43
1
John Signo
From:Daniel Shrader <daniel.shrader@gmail.com>
Sent:Sunday, May 26, 2024 7:35 AM
To:John Signo
Subject:Re: Portuguese Bend at Saddleback & Poppy Trail
EXTERNAL EMAIL - This email was sent by a person from outside your organization. Exercise caution when clicking links,
opening attachments or taking further action, before validating its authenticity.
I attended the Community Association Meeting regarding the Saddleback Road Sinkhole Mitigation Meeting. During the
meeting I suggested a sign described below. Although, it was recognised as a good idea by both the commissioners and
those in attendance, I was kindly directed to the City Traffic Commission. This is an attempt to place this request in the
proper venue for their consideration.
Two pictures, hopefully worth no more than 1,000 words...
44
4
In the first picture, southbound Portuguese Bend Road. In the second picture, North bound Portuguese Bend Road. In
both directions, opposing traffic is obscured by the curve and the vegetation on the west side of the road just south of
Poppy Trail Road. As a result, neither the vehicle attempting to make a left from Portuguese Bend Road on to the
intermediary road to Saddleback Road nor the Northbound vehicle traveling down hill on Portuguese Bend Road can see
the other party. The posted speed limit is 30 mph. There are areas recommending curves at 25 mph. I am not an expert
but I would recommend a temporary sign and speed limit on the Northbound Portuguese about 50 yards north of the
intersection as follows:
"Be Alert!, Temporary detour cross traffic, 20 mph."
Thank you for your consideration,
Daniel N. Shrader
54 Saddleback Road
On Fri, May 24, 2024, 10:00 AM Daniel Shrader <daniel.shrader@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear John,
I am unfamiliar with the reference 9.B. Is it possible you could forward the document or a link? I would like the sign
idea considered in the proper venue at the appropriate time by those that have the authority to effect the idea.
Thank you,
Daniel
On Fri, May 24, 2024, 8:37 AM John Signo <jsigno@cityofrh.net> wrote:
Hi Mr. Shrader,
It’s not our policy to show videos from the public, but the commissioners are all residents and familiar with the roads.
We can share photos and emails and you are welcome to provide oral comments. Would you like the photos and
email shared during the Sheriff’s Department presentation on Item 9.B?
John F. Signo, AICP
Director of Planning and Community Services
City of Rolling Hills
2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills CA 90274
310.377.1521
jsigno@cityofrh.net
45
5
From: Daniel Shrader <daniel.shrader@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2024 5:05 PM
To: John Signo <jsigno@cityofrh.net>
Cc: Debra Shrader <teach2play@gmail.com>
Subject: Portuguese Bend at Saddleback & Poppy Trail
EXTERNAL EMAIL - This email was sent by a person from outside your organization. Exercise caution when clicking links, opening
attachments or taking further action, before validating its authenticity.
Dear John,
The videos seem These videos were taken at the posted speed limits. I set the cruise control...
The files were a bit too large to include directly into the email. Consequently these Google links have the video files.
What I am proposing is a temporary slow or cautionary sign to warn traffic in both directions. A temporary yellow
blinking cross traffic sign during the sinkhole repair would be a starting idea.
Portuguese Bend Road Northbound at Saddleback & Poppy Trail: https://photos.app.goo.gl/ES6utHri7nyzUsnZA
Portuguese Bend Road Southbound at Saddleback & Poppy Trail:
https://photos.app.goo.gl/Sxh2VBUyQ6FrHqZC6
Thank you again,
Daniel Shrader
46
47
Agenda Item No.: 13.A
Mtg. Date: 07/25/2024
TO:HONORABLE CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE TRAFFIC COMMISSION
FROM:JOHN SIGNO, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & COMMUNITY SERVICES
THRU:KARINA BAÑALES, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT:UPDATE ON REQUIREMENTS FOR ENGINEERING AND TRAFFIC
SURVEY
DATE:July 25, 2024
BACKGROUND:
At the May 30, 2024, Traffic Commission meeting, Traffic Engineer Munoz indicated that the
City is due for an Engineering and Traffic (E&T) Survey. These surveys are conducted every
seven years and are used to justify and update the posted speed limits along eight street
segments in the City of Rolling Hills.
The last two E&T surveys were conducted in 2011 and 2018, respectively, with the latter
attached. The E&T Survey is carried out in accordance with applicable provisions of the
California Vehicle Code (CVC) and follows procedures outlined in the California Manual on
Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). The E&T Survey is intended to satisfy CVC
requirements to enable the continued use of radar for traffic speed enforcement.
The Traffic Commission directed staff and the City Traffic Engineer to research the topic and
provide a report at the next meeting.
Based on the research, staff will seek direction from the Traffic Commission on whether the
City should continue using the 2018 E&T Survey or consider conducting a new survey.
DISCUSSION:
Traffic Engineer Munoz contacted the LA County Sheriff's Department regarding the CVC the
station uses to enforce the speed limit in the City. She asked about enforcement on private
streets and the use of radar to issue citations. In her conversation with the Sheriff's
Department, she indicated that an E&T Survey is needed for enforcement.
Staff also reached out to the City Attorney's office about the issue and were advised that the
city does not need an E&T Survey because of the private roads.
48
Setting speed limits . Speed limits on private roads are generally not set or enforced by
government authorities like they are on public roads. Private roads are typically owned
and maintained by individuals, homeowners' associations, businesses, or other private
entities. The speed limits on private roads are usually determined by the owner of the
road or the organization that manages it. In most cases, the property's owner or
governing body will set the speed limit on a private road.
Local street exemption for E&T Survey. The speed limit for local streets is exempt from
the radar study and, therefore, does not require an E&T Survey (CVC § 40802(b)(1)).
Local streets primarily provide access to abutting residential property that meets the
following three conditions: (1) roadway width of not more than 40 feet, (2) not more than
one-half mile of un-interrupted length, and (3) not more than one traffic lane in each
direction.
Speed limit enforcement. Law enforcement officers can enforce speed limits on private
roads that primarily provide access to non-commercial buildings in unincorporated areas
of the City if certain procedures are followed by the road owners and the City.
CVC § 21107.5 addresses the necessary procedures setting up enforcement on
private roads open for public use which connect with highways such that the public
cannot determine that the roads are not highways.
CVC § 21107.7 discusses the required procedures for enactment of enforcement
on privately-owned and maintained roads not generally held open for public
vehicular travel (which by reason of their proximity to or connection with highways
are best served by enforcement of the CVC). CVC enforcement in the
unincorporated areas of the City is the responsibility of the California Highway
Patrol (“CHP”). Approval of the resolution by the City Council does not constitute a
commitment by the CHP or Sheriff’s Department to provide enforcement patrols on
a regular basis.
While an E&T Survey is not necessary for private roads, speed limits cannot be reduced or
set, and the Sheriff's Department cannot enforce speeds without support from an E&T Survey.
If the current speed limits remain unchanged and the Sheriff agrees to enforce them without
the survey, then it is not needed. However, it is advisable for cities to review speed limits every
seven years.
Since the City already has the 2018 E&T Survey on file, it will continue being used for
enforcement purposes.
49
Updated Engineering and Traffic Survey
If the Traffic Commission considers recommending an updated E&T Survey, Willdan can
conduct the survey at a cost of $6,400.
Conclusion
Based on the provided information, the City has the current 2018 E&T Survey and does not
require a new study if the current one is still valid and enforced by the Sheriffs. However, if the
Traffic Commission decides to change speed limits in the future, it is recommended that these
changes align with a new E&T survey. Therefore, staff seeks direction from the Traffic
Commission on whether to continue using the 2018 E&T Survey or recommend that the City
Council conduct a new E&T Survey.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
RECOMMENDATION:
Provide direction to staff.
ATTACHMENTS:
Rolling Hills E&T Report 2018.pdf
50
Engineering and Traffic
Survey
March 2018
Prepared by:
FOR THE CITY OF
ROLLING HILLS
51
March 14, 2018
Mr. Raymond R. Cruz
City Manager
City of Rolling Hills
No. 2 Portuguese Bend Road
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
Subject: 2018 Engineering and Traffic Survey
Dear Mr. Cruz:
As requested, Willdan has completed an Engineering and Traffic (E&T) Survey to justify
and update the posted speed limits along 8 street segments in the City of Rolling Hills.
These segments were last surveyed in 2011, and require an update to comply with the 7-
year limitation set forth in the California Vehicle Code (CVC).
We are pleased to submit the enclosed Report that describes the E&T survey procedures
and contains recommendations for posted speed limits on the City’s arterial and collector
street system. A summary of these recommendations is included in the Analysis.
Supporting documentation for each speed zone recommendation is provided in the
Appendices.
The Report was conducted in accordance with app licable provisions of the CVC, following
procedures outlined in the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (California
MUTCD) dated April 2017, and as required by Section 627 of the CVC. The Report is
intended to satisfy the requirements of Section 40802 of the CVC to enable the continued
use of radar for traffic speed enforcement.
We appreciate the opportunity to serve the City of Rolling Hills and the assistance and
cooperation afforded to us during the course of this study.
Very truly yours,
WILLDAN
Vanessa Munoz, P.E., T.E.
Traffic Engineer
Enclosure
52
2018 Engineering and Traffic Survey
City of Rolling Hills
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................... 1-2
Elements of the Engineering and Traffic Survey ........................................ 2-3
SURVEY CONDITIONS ............................................................................... 4
Survey Locations ........................................................................................ 4
Data Collection ........................................................................................... 4
Speed Data ............................................................................................ 4
Collision Data ......................................................................................... 5
Field Review Data .................................................................................. 5
ANALYSIS ................................................................................................... 6
Criteria ........................................................................................................ 6
Results and Recommendations ................................................................. 6-7
Table 1-Street Segments With Recommended Speed Changes ............... 8
Table 2-Summary of Recommendations .................................................... 9
Segments with Special Conditions ............................................................. 10-11
LEGISLATIVE REFERENCES .................................................................... 12
Applicable Sections of California Vehicle Code ......................................... 12-17
APPENDIX A - Street Segment Data
APPENDIX B - Radar Speed Distribution Forms
- Raw Radar Speed Distribution Forms
APPENDIX C - Survey Equipment Used
53
2018 Engineering and Traffic Survey
1 City of Rolling Hills
INTRODUCTION
This Engineering and Traffic (E&T) Survey is intended to be the basis for the
establishment, revision, and enforcement of speed limits for selected streets within the City
of Rolling Hills. This E&T Survey presents recommended speed limits for 8 street
segments in the City of Rolling Hills. E&T Surveys are required by the State of California to
establish intermediate speed limits on local streets and to enforce those limits using radar
or other speed measuring devices. These surveys must be updated e very 5 or 7 years to
ensure the speeds reflect current conditions as dictated by the California Vehicle Code
(CVC). The CVC also requires that the surveys be conducted based on the methodology
required by The California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control D evices (California MUTCD)
dated April 2017.
The survey was requested by the City for the proper posting of speed limits and to enable
the Sheriff’s Department to utilize radar or other electronic speed measuring devices for
speed enforcement. CVC Sections 40801 and 40802 require E&T Surveys that verify the
prima facie speed limit before enforcement by such a device is legal. The law further
specifies that these surveys be conducted every 5 years. The surveys can be extended to
7 years provided the City’s police officer(s) have completed a 24 -hour radar operator
course [CVC 40802(c)(2)(B)(i)(I)]. Additionally, some surveys may be extended to 10 years
if a traffic engineer certifies that no changes in roadway or traffic conditions have occurred
[CVC 40802 (c)(2)(B)(i)(II)]. These provisions assure that posted speed limits are kept
reasonably current.
The E&T Surveys for the City were conducted in accordance with procedures outlined in
the California MUTCD dated April 2017 and as required by Section 627 of the CVC. The
Code further describes three elements of an engineering and traffic survey:
1. Measurement of prevailing speed;
2. Accident history; and
3. Roadway characteristics not readily apparent to the motorist.
Posted speed limits are established primarily to protect the general public from the reckless
and unpredictable behavior of dangerous drivers. They provide law enforcement with a
clearly understood method to identify and apprehend violators of the basic speed law (CVC
Section 22350). This law states that "No person shall drive a vehicle on a highway at a
speed greater than is reasonable or prudent having due regard for weather, visibility, the
traffic on, and the surface and width of the highway, and in no event at a speed which
endangers the safety of persons or property." The posted speed limit gives motorists a
clear warning of the basic speed that is reasonable and prudent under typical driving
conditions.
54
2018 Engineering and Traffic Survey
2 City of Rolling Hills
The basic fundamentals for establishing speed limits recognize that the majority o f drivers
behave in a safe and reasonable manner, and therefore, the normally careful and
competent actions of a reasonable driver should be considered legal. Speed limits
established on these fundamentals conform to the consensus that those who drive the
highway determine what speed is reasonable and safe, not on the judgment of one or a
few individuals. A radar speed study is usually used to record the prevailing speed of
reasonable drivers.
Speed limits are also established to advise drivers of condi tions which may not be readily
apparent to a reasonable driver. For this reason, accident history, roadway conditions,
traffic characteristics, and land use must also be analyzed before determining speed limits.
Speed limit changes are usually made in coordination with physical changes in roadway
conditions or roadside developments. Unusually short zones of less than one -half mile in
length should be avoided to reduce driver confusion.
Additionally, it is generally accepted that speed limits cannot be s uccessfully enforced
without voluntary compliance by a majority of drivers. Consequently, only the driver whose
behavior is clearly out of line with the normal flow of traffic is usually targeted for
enforcement.
ELEMENTS OF THE ENGINEERING AND TRAFFIC SURVEY
The California MUTCD dated April 2017 specifies the methodology to be used for
completing E&T Surveys. This methodology includes an evaluation of current vehicle
speeds, accident history and conditions not readily apparent to motorists. The basic
elements of the Engineering and Traffic Survey are discussed in more detail as follows:
Speed Sampling
Existing vehicle speeds are surveyed by a certified radar operator with a calibrated radar
unit in an unmarked vehicle. Speed samples are taken for ea ch segment representing a
statistically significant sample of current traffic. This data is then evaluated to identify the
distribution of speeds. A key element in the evaluation is the identification of the 85th
percentile speed. The 85th percentile speed is the speed at or below which 85 percent of
the traffic travels. This threshold represents what is historically found to be a safe and
reasonable speed for most drivers based on common roadway conditions. Therefore, a
speed limit is established at the nearest 5-mile per hour (mph) increment to the 85th
percentile speed, except as shown in the two options below.
Options:
1. The posted speed may be reduced by 5 mph from the nearest 5 mph increment of
the 85th-percentile speed, in compliance with CVC Section 627 and 22358.5.
2. For cases in which the nearest 5 mph increment of the 85 th-percentile speed would
require a rounding up, then the speed limit may be rounded down to the nearest 5
mph increment below the 85th percentile speed, if no further reduction is used.
Refer to CVC Section 21400(b).
55
2018 Engineering and Traffic Survey
3 City of Rolling Hills
If the speed limit to be posted has had the 5 mph reduction applied, then an E&T Survey
shall document in writing the conditions and justification for the lower speed limit. The
reasons for the lower speed limit shall be in compliance with CVC Section 627 and 22358.5
The following examples are provided to explain the application of these speed limit criteria:
A. Using Option 1 above and first step is to round down: If the 85th percentile speed in
a speed survey for a location was 37 mph, then the speed limit would be
established at 35 mph since it is the closest 5 mph increment to the 37 mph speed.
As indicated by the option, this 35 mph established speed limit could be reduced by
5 mph to 30 mph if conditions and justification for using this lower speed limit are
documented in the E&T Survey.
B. Using Option 1 above and first step is to round up: If the 85 th percentile speed in a
speed survey for a location was 33 mph, then the speed limit would be established
at 35 mph since it is the closest 5 mph increment to the 33 mph speed. As
indicated by the option, this 35 mph speed limit could be reduced by 5 mph to 30
mph if the conditions and justification for using this lower speed limit are
documented in the E&T Survey.
C. Using Option 2 above and first step is to round up: If the 85 th percentile speed in a
speed survey for a location was 33 mph, instead of rounding up to 35 mph, the
speed limit can be established at 30 mph, but no further reduction can be applied.
Collision History
Reported collisions are reviewed for each street segment to determine if there is a higher
than average rate of collisions. A segment that has an above -average collision rate
typically suggests conditions that are not readily apparent to moto rists.
A summary of the collision rates for the 8 surveyed street segments is provided in Table 2.
Conditions Not Readily Apparent To Motorists
Each street segment is field inspected to identify roadway conditions that may not be
readily apparent to motorists. A determination is made whether any conditions are
significant and warrant the recommendation of the speed limit 5 mph or more below the
basic speed limit. It is important to note that the California MUTCD dated April 2017
recommends exercising great care when establishing speed limits 5 mph or more below
the basic speed limit.
56
2018 Engineering and Traffic Survey
4 City of Rolling Hills
SURVEY CONDITIONS
SURVEY LOCATIONS
The procedures described below describe the criteria and methods used to survey selected
streets within the City of Rolling Hills. The specific location of the radar speed survey for
each street segment was selected after considering the following:
1. Minimum stop sign and traffic signal influence.
2. Minimum visibility restrictions.
3. Non-congested traffic flow away from intersections and driveways.
4. Minimum influence from curves or other roadway conditions that would affect
the normal operation of a vehicle.
DATA COLLECTION
Data of existing conditions was obtained including prevailing speed of vehicles, traffic
collisions, visibility restrictions, and roadway conditions within the community. Speed data
and field reviews were conducted at 8 locations during the month of November 2017.
Speed Data
Radar speed measurements were conducted at 8 locations during the month of November
2017. The radar speed distribution forms are in Appendix B. All surveys were conducted
in good weather conditions, during off -peak hours on weekdays. The radar unit was
operated from an unmarked vehicle to minimize any influence on driver behavior .
Typically, a minimum sample size of 100 vehicles or the total samples during a maximum
period of 2 hours were obtained for each segment. Traffic speeds in both directions were
recorded for individual segments.
57
2018 Engineering and Traffic Survey
5 City of Rolling Hills
Collision Data
Collision data was obtained from Los Angeles County’s Sheriff’s Department’s Collision
Summary Report. For this study, collision data was used from the latest 4 years of reported
accidents from January 1, 2013 to December 31, 2016. The collision rates for the 8
segments are expressed in accidents per million vehicle miles (A/MVM). To calculate these
rates, 24-hour traffic volumes were collected for each street segment. This information was
then entered into the following formula to determine the collision rate:
xlxvyear
daystx
AxR
365
000,000,1
A = Number of midblock collisions over time period
R = Collision Rate (accidents/million vehicle miles)
t = Time Period Covered (in years)
l = Length of Segment (miles)
v = Traffic Volume (average daily traffic)
The segment collision rate was then compared to the average statewide collision rate. The
average statewide collision rates were obtained from 2014 Collision Data on California
State Highways published by Caltrans.
Field Review Data
A field review was conducted for each of the selected street segments in the City with
consideration for the following factors:
1. Street width and alignment (design speed);
2. Pedestrian activity and traffic flow characteristics;
3. Number of lanes and other channelization and striping patterns;
4. Frequency of intersections, driveways, and on -street parking;
5. Location of stop signs and other regulatory traffic control devices;
6. Visibility obstructions;
7. Land use and proximity to schools;
8. Pedestrian and bicycle usage;
9. Uniformity with existing speed zones and those in adjacent jurisdictions; and
10. Any other unusual condition not readily apparent to the driver.
58
2018 Engineering and Traffic Survey
6 City of Rolling Hills
ANALYSIS
CRITERIA
Survey data was compiled and analyzed to determine the recommended speed limit in
accordance with several criteria contained in the California MUTCD dated April 2017.
Some of the criteria used are:
A. The critical speed or 85th percentile speed is that speed at or below which 85
percent of the traffic is moving. This speed is the baseline value in determining
what the majority of drivers believe is safe and reasonable. Speed limits set higher
than the critical speed are not considered reasonable and safe. Speed limits set
lower than the critical speed make a large number of reasonable drivers "unlawful,"
and do not facilitate the orderly flow of traffic. The “basic speed limit” is the nearest
5 mph increment to the 85th percentile speed.
B. The 10 mile per hour (mph) pace speed is the 10 mph increment that contains the
highest percentage of vehicles. It is a measure of the dispersion of speeds across
the range of the samples surveyed. An accepted practice is to keep the speed limit
within the 10 mph pace while considering the critical speed and other factors that
might require a speed lower than the critical speed.
C. The collision rate for each street segment is compared to average collision rates
that can be reasonably expected to occur on streets and highways in other
jurisdictions, in proportion to the volume of traffic per lane mile. These average
collision rates have been developed by the State of California and are considered
reasonable for use in the City of Rolling Hills.
RESULTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The E&T Survey Forms, presented in Appendix A, illustrate results of a thorough
evaluation of the available data and recommend a speed limit for each street segment
surveyed. A complete summary of all recommendations is shown in Table 2 . In each
case, the recommended speed limit was consistent with the prevailing behavior as
demonstrated by the radar speed measurements. Typically, a speed limit in the upper
range of the 10-mile pace was selected unless a collision rate significantly higher than
expected was discovered or roadway conditions not readily apparent to the driver were
identified. Any segments with recommended speed limits 5 mph or more below the basic
speed limit are fully explained later in this report.
The Legislature, in adopting Section 22358.5 of the CVC, has made it clear that physical
conditions, such as width, curvature, grade and surface conditions, or any other condition
readily apparent to a driver, in the absence of other factors, would not be the basis for
special downward speed zoning. In these cases, the basic speed law (CVC Section
22350) is sufficient to regulate such conditions.
The recommendations contained in this Report are intended to establish prima facie speed
limits. They are not intended to be absolute for all prevailing conditions. All prima facie
59
2018 Engineering and Traffic Survey
7 City of Rolling Hills
speed violations are actually violations of the basic speed law (CVC Section 22350). This
statute states that a person shall not drive a vehicle at a speed greater than is safe having
regard for traffic, roadway, and weather conditions. A prima facie limit is intended to
establish a maximum safe speed under normal co nditions.
Table 1 identifies the street segments with recommended changes in posted speed limits
and Table 2 summarizes the recommendations for all surveyed segments.
60
TABLE 1
STREET SEGMENTS WITH RECOMMENDED SPEED CHANGES
Street From To Existing New ChangeNo.
Eastfield Drive Chuckwagon Road Palos Verdes Drive East 530254+
Saddleback Road Poppy Trail Portuguese Bend Road 530257+
2018 Engineering and Traffic Survey
City of Rolling Hills
NP= Not Posted
PL= Post Limit
8
61
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Street From To ADT
Dist.
(mi.)
Collision
Rate***
Exp.
85%
Speed
10 mi.
Pace
% in
PaceAct.
Posted
Speed
Limit
Rec.
Speed
Limit CommentsNo.
Crest Road
West
West City Limit Portuguese Bend
Road
1,938 371.14 27-360.001.03 74 *30301%
Crest Road East Portuguese Bend
Road
Eastfield Drive 1,825 371.14 28-370.501 75 *30302%
Eastfield Drive Crest Road East Chuckwagon
Road
1,008 321.41 23-320.001 82 *25253%
Eastfield Drive Chuckwagon Road Palos Verdes
Drive East
1,364 331.41 25-342.680.75 79 California MUTCD Option 230254%
Portuguese
Bend Road
Crest Road E/W Poppy Trail 1,728 351.41 25-340.531 76 *30305%
Portuguese
Bend Road
Poppy Trail Saddleback Road 1,978 361.41 27-360.000.65 81 *30306%
Saddleback
Road
Poppy Trail Portuguese Bend
Road
408 331.41 23-320.001.34 73 California MUTCD Option 230257%
Southfield Drive Crest Road East Packsaddle Road 314 291.41 20-290.000.47 82 California MUTCD Option 225258%
2018 Engineering and Traffic Survey
City of Rolling Hills
* See "Segments with Special Conditions" Section for Comments
** 25 mph when children are present
9
*** Accident rate units: Collisions per One Million Vehicle Miles
ADT = Average Daily Traffic
Exp.= Expected Collision Rate
Act.= Actual Collision Rate
62
2018 Engineering and Traffic Survey
10 City of Rolling Hills 10
SEGMENTS WITH SPECIAL CONDITIONS
The following segments surveyed had recommended spe ed limits that were 5 miles per
hour (mph) or more below the critical speed due to conditions not readily apparent to the
driver. Each segment is discussed below.
Segment #1 – Crest Road West – West City Limit to Portuguese Bend Road
This segment is currently posted at 30 mph and has 1 through lane in each direction with
an ADT of 1,938 vehicles per day. The adjacent land use is rural residential and
equestrian nature in a flat to rolling terrain. The critical speed is 37 mph and would
normally justify a 35 mph posted speed limit. However, due to vertical and horizontal
curves, various hidden driveways, and equestrian traffic that may not be apparent to
unfamiliar drivers, a lower speed limit is prudent. It is recommended that the speed limit
remain at 30 mph for the above reasons.
Segment #2 – Crest Road East –Portuguese Bend Road to Eastfield Drive
This segment is currently posted at 30 mph and has 1 through lane in each direction with
an ADT of 1,825 vehicles per day. The adjacent land use is rural residential and
equestrian nature in a flat to rolling terrain. The critical speed is 37 mph and would
normally justify a 35 mph posted speed limit. However, due to vertical and horizontal
curves, various hidden driveways, and equestrian traffic that may not be apparent to
unfamiliar drivers, a lower speed limit is prudent. It is recommended that the speed limit
remain at 30 mph for the above reasons.
Segment #3 – Eastfield Drive – Crest Road to Chuckwagon Road
This segment is currently posted at 25 mph and has 1 through lane in each direction with
an ADT of 1,008 vehicles per day. The adjacent land use is rural residential and
equestrian in a mountainous terrain. The critical speed is 32 mph and would normally
justify a 30 mph posted speed limit. However, due to vertical and horizontal curves,
various hidden driveways, and equestrian traffic that may not be apparent to unfamiliar
drivers, a lower speed limit is prudent. It is recommended that the speed limit remain at 25
mph for the above reasons.
Segment #5 – Portuguese Bend Road – Crest Road E/W to Poppy Trail
This segment is currently posted at 30 mph and has 1 through lane in each direction with
an ADT of 1,728 vehicles per day. The adjacent land use is rural residential and
equestrian nature in a mountainous terrain. The critical speed is 35 mph and would
normally justify a 35 mph posted speed limit. However, due to vertical and horizontal
curves, various hidden driveways, and equestrian traffic that may not be apparent to
unfamiliar drivers, a lower speed limit is prudent. It is recommended that the speed lim it
remain at 30 mph for the above reasons.
63
2018 Engineering and Traffic Survey
11 City of Rolling Hills 10
Segment #6 – Portuguese Bend Road – Poppy Trail to Saddleback Road
This segment is currently posted at 30 mph and has 1 through lane in each direction with
an ADT of 1,978 vehicles per day. The adjacent land use is rural residential and
equestrian nature in a mountainous terrain. The critical speed is 36 mph and would
normally justify a 35 mph posted speed limit. However, due to vertical and horizontal
curves, various hidden driveways, and equestrian traffic that may not be apparent to
unfamiliar drivers, a lower speed limit is prudent. It is recommended that the speed limit
remain at 30 mph for the above reasons.
64
2018 Engineering and Traffic Survey
12 City of Rolling Hills 10
LEGISLATIVE REFERENCES
APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF CALIFORNIA VEHICLE CODE
SECTION 1. Section 627 of the Vehicle Code:
Section 627.
(a) “Engineering and traffic survey,” as used in this code, means a survey of highway and traffic
conditions in accordance with methods determined by the Department of Transportation for
use by state and local authorities.
(b) An engineering and traffic survey shall include, among other requirements deemed
necessary by the department, consideration of all of the following:
(1) Prevailing speeds as determined by traffic engineering measurements.
(2) Accident records.
(3) Highway, traffic, and roadside conditions not readily apparent to the driver.
(c) When conducting an engineering and traffic survey, loca l authorities, in addition to the
factors set forth in paragraphs (1) to (3), inclusive, of subdivision (b) may consider all of the
following:
(1) Residential density, if any of the following conditions exist on the particular portion of
highway and the property contiguous thereto, other than a business district:
a. Upon one side of the highway, within a distance of a quarter of a mile, the
contiguous property fronting thereon is occupied by 13 or more separate
dwelling houses of business structures.
b. Upon both sides of the highway, collectively, within a distance of a quarter of
a mile, the contiguous property fronting thereon is occupied by 16 or more
separate dwelling houses or business structures.
c. The portion of highway is longer than one-quarter of a mile but has the ratio
of separate dwelling houses or business structures to the length of the
highway described in either subparagraph (A) or (B).
(2) Pedestrian and bicyclist safety.
Section 21400.
(b) The Department of Transportation shall revise the California M anual on Uniform Traffic
Control Devices, as it read on January 1, 2012, to require the Department of Transportation
or a local authority to round speed limits to the nearest five miles per hour of the 85th
percentile of the free-flowing traffic. However, in cases in which the speed limit needs to be
rounded up to the nearest five miles per hour increment of the 85th -percentile speed, the
Department of Transportation or a local authority may decide to instead round down the
speed limit to the lower five miles per hour increment, but then the Department of
Transportation or a local authority shall not reduce the speed limit any further for any reason.
Basic Speed Law
22350. No person shall drive a vehicle upon a highway at a speed greater than is reasonabl e or
prudent having due regard for weather, visibility, the traffic on, and the surface and width of, the
highway, and in no event at a speed which endangers the safety of persons or property.
65
2018 Engineering and Traffic Survey
13 City of Rolling Hills 10
Speed Law Violations
Section 22351.
(a) The speed of any vehicle upon a highway not in excess of the limits specified in Section
22352 or established as authorized in this code is lawful unless clearly proved to be in
violation of the basic speed law.
(b) The speed of any vehicle upon a highway in excess of the p rima facie speed limits in Section
22352 or established as authorized in this code is prima facie unlawful unless the defendant
establishes by competent evidence that the speed in excess of said limits did not constitute a
violation of the basic speed law at the time, place and under the conditions then existing.
Prima Facie Speed Limits
Section 22352.
The prima facie limits are as follows and shall be applicable unles s changed as authorized in this
code and, if so changed, only when signs have been er ected giving notice thereof:
(a) Fifteen miles per hour:
(1) When traversing a railway grade crossing, if during the last 100 feet of the
approach to the crossing the driver does not have a clear and unobstructed view of
the crossing and of any traffic on the railway for a distance of 400 feet in both
directions along such railway. This subdivi sion does not apply in the case of any
railway grade crossing where a human flagman is on duty or a clearly visible
electrical or mechanical railway crossing s ignal device is installed but does not then
indicate the immediate approach of a railway train or car.
(2) When traversing any intersection of highways, if during the last 100 feet of the
driver’s approach to the intersection, the driver does not have a clear and
unobstructed view of the intersection and of any traffic upon all of the highways
entering the intersection for a distance of 100 feet along all those highways, except at
an intersection protected by stop signs or yield right-of-way signs or controlled by
official traffic control signals.
(3) On any alley.
(b) Twenty-five miles per hour:
(1) On any highway other than a state highway, in any business or residence district
unless a different speed is determined by local authority under procedures set forth in
this code.
(2) When approaching or passing a school building or the grounds thereof,
contiguous to a highway and posted with a standard "SCHOOL" warning sign, while
children are going to or leaving the school either during school hours or during the
noon recess period. The prima facie limit shall also apply when approaching or
passing any school grounds which are not separated from the highway by a fence,
gate or other physical barrier while the grounds are in use by children and the
highway is posted with a standard "SCHOOL" warning sign. For purposes of this
subparagraph, standard "SCHOOL" warning signs may be placed at any distance up
to 500 feet away from school grounds.
66
2018 Engineering and Traffic Survey
14 City of Rolling Hills 10
(3) When passing a senior center or other facility prim arily used by senior citizens,
contiguous to a street other than a state highway and posted with a standard
"SENIOR" warning sign. A local authority may erect a sign pursuant to this paragraph
when the local agency makes a determination that the proposed s igning should be
implemented. A local authority may request grant funding from the Pedestrian Safety
Account pursuant to Section 894.7 of the Streets and Highways Code, or any other
grant funding available to it, and use that grant funding to pay for the e rection of
those signs, or may utilize any other funds available to it to pay for the erection of
those signs, including, but not limited to, donations from private sources.
Increase of Local Speed Limits to 65 Miles Per Hour
Section 22357.
(a) Whenever a local authority determines upon the basis of an engineer ing and traffic survey
that a speed greater than 25 miles per hour would facilitate the orderly movement of
vehicular traffic and would be reasonable and safe upon any street other than a state
highway otherwise subject to a prima facie limit of 25 miles per hour, the local authority may
by ordinance determine and declare a prima facie speed limit of 30, 35, 40, 45, 50, 55 or 60
miles per hour or a maximum speed limit of 65 miles per hour, whicheve r is found most
appropriate to facilitate the orderly movement of traffic and is reasonable and safe. The
declared prima facie or maximum speed limit shall be effective when appropriate signs
giving notice thereof are erected upon the street and shall not thereafter be revised except
upon the basis of an engineering and traffic survey. This section does not apply to any 25
mile per hour prima facie limit, which is applicable when passing a school building or the
grounds thereof or when passing a senior ce nter or other facility primarily used by senior
citizens.
(b) This section shall become operative on the date specified in subdivision (c) of Section
22366.
Downward Speed Zoning
Section 22358.5.
It is the intent of the Legislature that physical conditions such as width, curvature, grade and surface
conditions, or any other condition readily apparent to a driver, in the absence of other factors, would
not require special downward speed zoning, as the basic rule of Section 22350 is sufficient
regulation as to such conditions.
Boundary Line Streets
Section 22359.
With respect to boundary line streets and highways where portions thereof are within different
jurisdictions, no ordinance adopted under Sections 22357 and 22358 shall be effective as to any
such portion until all authorities having jurisdiction of the portions of the street concerned have
approved the same. This section shall not apply in the case of boundary line streets consisting of
separate roadways within different jurisdictions.
Speed Trap Prohibition
Section 40801.
67
2018 Engineering and Traffic Survey
15 City of Rolling Hills 10
No peace officer or other person shall use a speedtrap in arresting, or participating or assisting in
the arrest of, any person for any alleged violation of this code nor shall any speed trap be used in
securing evidence as to the speed of any vehicle for the purpose of an arrest or prosecution under
this code.
Speed Trap
Section 40802.
(a) A "speed trap" is either of the following:
(1) A particular section of a highway measured as to distance and with boundaries
marked, designated, or otherwise determined in order that the speed of a vehicle
may be calculated by securing the time it takes the vehicle to travel the known
distance.
(2) A particular section of a highway with a prima facie speed limit that is provided b y this
code or by local ordinance under subparagraph (A) of paragraph (2) of subdivision
(a) of Section 22352, or established under Section 22354, 22357, 22358, or 22358.3,
if that prima facie speed limit is not justified by an engineering and traffic surv ey
conducted within five years prior to the date of the alleged violation, and enforcement
of the speed limit involves the use of radar or any other electronic device that
measures the speed of moving object. This paragraph does not apply to a local
street, road, or school zone.
(b)(1) For purposes of this section, a local street or road is one that is functionally classified as
“local” on the “California Road System Maps,” that are approved by the Federal Highway
Administration and maintained by the Department of Transportation. When a street or road
does not appear on the “California Road System Maps,” it may be defined as a “local street
or road” if it primarily provides access to abutting residential property and meets the following
three conditions:
(A) Roadway width of not more than 40 feet.
(B) Not more than one-half of a mile of uninterrupted length. Interruptions shall include
official traffic control signals as defined in Section 445.
(C) Not more than one traffic lane in each direction.
(2) For purposes of this section “school zone” means that area approaching or passing a school
building or the grounds thereof that is contiguous to a highway and on which is posted a
standard “SCHOOL” warning sign, while children are going to or leaving the school either
during school hours or during the noon recess period. “School zone” also includes the area
approaching or passing any school grounds that are not separated from the highway by a
fence, gate, or other physical barrier while the grounds are i n use by children if that highway
is posted with a standard “SCHOOL” warning sign.
(c)(1) When all the following criteria are met, paragraph (2) of this subdivision shall be applicable
and subdivision (a) shall not be applicable:
(A) When radar is used, the arresting officer has successfully completed a radar operator
course of not less than 24 hours on the use of police traffic radar, and the course
was approved and certified by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and
Training.
68
2018 Engineering and Traffic Survey
16 City of Rolling Hills 10
(B) When laser or any other electronic device is used to measure the speed of moving
objects, the arresting officer has successfully completed the training required in
subparagraph (A) and an additional training course of not less than two hours
approved and certified by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training.
(C)(i) The prosecution proved that the arresting officer complied with subparagraphs (A)
and (B) and that an engineering and traffic survey has been conducted in
accordance with subparagraph (B) of para graph (2). The prosecution proved that,
prior to the officer issuing the notice to appear, the arresting officer established that
the radar, laser, or other electronic device conformed to the requirements of
subparagraph (D).
(ii) The prosecution proved the speed of the accused was unsafe for the conditions
present at the time of alleged violation unless the citation was for a violation of
Section 22349, 22356, or 22406.
(D) The radar, laser, or other electronic device used to measure the speed of the
accused meets or exceeds the minimal operational standards of the National Traffic
Highway Safety Administration, and has been calibrated within the three years prior
to the date of the alleged violation by an independent certified laser or radar repai r
and testing or calibration facility.
(2) A “speed trap” is either of the following:
(A) A particular section of a highway measured as to distance and with boundaries
marked, designated, or otherwise determined in order that the speed of a vehicle
may be calculated by securing the time it takes the vehicle to travel the known
distance.
(B)(i) A particular section of a highway or state highway with a prima facie speed limit that
is provided by this code or by local ordinance under subparagraph (A) of paragraph
(2) of subdivision (a) of Section 22352, or established under Section 22354, 22357,
22358, or 22358.3, if that prima facie speed limit is not justified by an engineering
and traffic survey conducted within one of the following time periods, prior to the date
of the alleged violation, and enforcement of speed limit involves the use of radar or
any other electronic device that measures the speed of moving objects:
(I) Except as specified in subclause (II), seven years.
(II) If an engineering and traffic survey was conducted more than seven years
prior to the date of the alleged violation, and a registered engineer evaluates
the section of the highway and determines that no significant changes in
roadway or traffic conditions have occurred including, but not limited to,
changes in adjoining property or land use, roadway width, or traffic volume,
10 years.
(ii) This subparagraph does not apply to a local street, road, or school zone.
Speed Trap Evidence
Section 40803.
(a) No evidence as to the speed of a vehicle upon a highway shall be admitted in any court upon
the trial of any person in any prosecution under this code upon a charge involving the speed
69
2018 Engineering and Traffic Survey
17 City of Rolling Hills 10
of a vehicle when the evidence is based upon or obtained from or by the maintenance or use
of a speed trap.
(b) In any prosecution under this code of a charge involving the speed of a vehicle, where
enforcement involves the use of radar or other electronic devices which measure the speed
of moving objects, the prosecution shall establish, a s part of its prima facie case, that the
evidence or testimony presented is not based upon a speed trap as defined in paragraph (2)
of subdivision (a) of Section 40802.
(c) When a traffic and engineering survey is required pursuant to paragraph (2) of sub division
(a) of Section 40802, evidence that a traffic and engineering survey has been conducted
within five years of the date of the alleged violation or evidence that the offense was
committed on a local street or road as defined in paragraph (2) of subd ivision (a) of Section
40802 shall constitute a prima facie case that the evidence or testimony is not based upon a
speed trap as defined in paragraph (2) subdivision (a) of Section 40802.
70
2018 Engineering and Traffic Survey
City of Rolling Hills
APPENDIX A
Street Segment Data
71
ENGINEERING AND TRAFFIC SURVEY
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS 1
STREET Crest Road West
FROM West City Limit TO Portuguese Bend Road
Average Daily Traffic 1,938 Date Counted 11/8/2017
Date of Speed Survey 11/8/2017
Time of Speed Survey 10:25AM
50th Percentile Speed (Mean Speed)32
85th Percentile Speed 37
10 mph Pace Speed 27-36
Percentage of Vehicles in Pace 74
Posted Speed Limit 30
Number of Years Studied 3
Total Collisions 0
Statewide Average Collision Rate 1.14
Collisions per Million Vehicle Miles 0.00
Number of Lanes 2, DYCL, BROKEN YCL
Type of Traffic Control STOP @ WEST CITY LIMIT, PORTUGUESE BEND RD
Crosswalks?NONE
Pedestrian Traffic OCCASIONAL, EQUINE
Truck Traffic LIGHT
On-Street Parking OFF-STREET ON SHOULDERS
Length of Segment 1.030
Vertical Curve?SLIGHTLY ROLLING
Horizontal Curve?SLIGHTLY WINDING CURVE
Visibility LIMITED AT CURVES
Roadway Conditions GOOD
Sidewalks?DIRT SHOULDERS, ROLLED CURB
Driveways?YES, SOME HIDDEN
Lighting NONE
Width 21
Adjacent Land Use RURAL RESIDENTIAL, EQUESTRIAN
Field Study By NS Checked By VM
CERTIFICATION DATE
Number of Survey Samples 215
SPEED FACTORS
mph
mph
COLLISION HISTORY
TRAFFIC FACTORS
ROADWAY FACTORS
CERTIFICATION: I, Vanessa Munoz, do hereby certify that this Engineering and Traffic Survey within
the City of Rolling Hills was performed under my supervision and is accurate and complete. I am duly
registered in the State of California as a Professional Engineer (Traffic).
Vanessa Munoz Date State Registration Number
TE 2341
Collisions/MVM
years
feet
miles
Recommended Speed Limit 30
VERT & HORIZ CURVES,
EQUESTRIAN, HIDDEN DWYS
mph
Speed Justification
mph
Average Speed 32 mph
Collisions/MVM
72
ENGINEERING AND TRAFFIC SURVEY
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS 2
STREET Crest Road East
FROM Portuguese Bend Road TO Eastfield Drive
Average Daily Traffic 1,825 Date Counted 11/8/2017
Date of Speed Survey 11/30/2017
Time of Speed Survey 9:07AM
50th Percentile Speed (Mean Speed)32
85th Percentile Speed 37
10 mph Pace Speed 28-37
Percentage of Vehicles in Pace 75
Posted Speed Limit 30
Number of Years Studied 3
Total Collisions 1
Statewide Average Collision Rate 1.14
Collisions per Million Vehicle Miles 0.50
Number of Lanes 2, DYCL, BROKEN YCL
Type of Traffic Control STOP @ PORTUGUESE BEND RD, SOUTHFIELD DR, EASTFIELD
Crosswalks?@ CABALLEROS RD; HORSE XING @ GEORGEFF RD
Pedestrian Traffic OCCASIONAL, EQUINE
Truck Traffic LIGHT
On-Street Parking OFF-STREET ON SHOULDERS
Length of Segment 1.000
Vertical Curve?SLIGHTLY ROLLING
Horizontal Curve?MODERATLY WINDING CURVE
Visibility LIMITED AT CURVES
Roadway Conditions GOOD
Sidewalks?DIRT SHOULDERS, ROLLED CURB
Driveways?YES, SOME HIDDEN
Lighting NONE
Width 22
Adjacent Land Use RURAL RESIDENTIAL, EQUESTRIAN
Field Study By NS Checked By VM
CERTIFICATION DATE
Number of Survey Samples 208
SPEED FACTORS
mph
mph
COLLISION HISTORY
TRAFFIC FACTORS
ROADWAY FACTORS
CERTIFICATION: I, Vanessa Munoz, do hereby certify that this Engineering and Traffic Survey within
the City of Rolling Hills was performed under my supervision and is accurate and complete. I am duly
registered in the State of California as a Professional Engineer (Traffic).
Vanessa Munoz Date State Registration Number
TE 2341
Collisions/MVM
years
feet
miles
Recommended Speed Limit 30
VERT & HORIZ CURVES,
EQUESTRIAN, HIDDEN DWYS
mph
Speed Justification
mph
Average Speed 32 mph
Collisions/MVM
73
ENGINEERING AND TRAFFIC SURVEY
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS 3
STREET Eastfield Drive
FROM Crest Road East TO Chuckwagon Road
Average Daily Traffic 1,008 Date Counted 11/8/2017
Date of Speed Survey 11/9/2017
Time of Speed Survey 11:15AM
50th Percentile Speed (Mean Speed)28
85th Percentile Speed 32
10 mph Pace Speed 23-32
Percentage of Vehicles in Pace 82
Posted Speed Limit 25
Number of Years Studied 3
Total Collisions 0
Statewide Average Collision Rate 1.41
Collisions per Million Vehicle Miles 0.00
Number of Lanes 2, DYCL
Type of Traffic Control STOP @ CREST RD, OPEN BRAND RD, HACKAMORE RD, CHUC
Crosswalks?@ OPEN BRAND; HORSE XING N/O HACKAMORE RD
Pedestrian Traffic OCCASIONAL, EQUINE
Truck Traffic LIGHT
On-Street Parking OFF-STREET ON SHOULDERS
Length of Segment 1.000
Vertical Curve?DOWNHILL N/B, MOUNTAINOUS
Horizontal Curve?TIGHTLY WINDING CURVES
Visibility BLIND CURVES, HIDDEN DRIVEWAYS
Roadway Conditions GOOD
Sidewalks?DIRT SHOULDERS, ROLLED CURB
Driveways?YES, SOME HIDDEN
Lighting NONE
Width 21
Adjacent Land Use RURAL RESIDENTIAL, EQUESTRIAN
Field Study By NS Checked By VM
CERTIFICATION DATE
Number of Survey Samples 149
SPEED FACTORS
mph
mph
COLLISION HISTORY
TRAFFIC FACTORS
ROADWAY FACTORS
CERTIFICATION: I, Vanessa Munoz, do hereby certify that this Engineering and Traffic Survey within
the City of Rolling Hills was performed under my supervision and is accurate and complete. I am duly
registered in the State of California as a Professional Engineer (Traffic).
Vanessa Munoz Date State Registration Number
TE 2341
Collisions/MVM
years
feet
miles
Recommended Speed Limit 25
VERT & HORIZ CURVES,
EQUESTRIAN, HIDDEN DWYS
mph
Speed Justification
mph
Average Speed 28 mph
Collisions/MVM
74
ENGINEERING AND TRAFFIC SURVEY
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS 4
STREET Eastfield Drive
FROM Chuckwagon Road TO Palos Verdes Drive East
Average Daily Traffic 1,364 Date Counted 11/8/2017
Date of Speed Survey 11/9/2017
Time of Speed Survey 1:21PM
50th Percentile Speed (Mean Speed)28
85th Percentile Speed 33
10 mph Pace Speed 25-34
Percentage of Vehicles in Pace 79
Posted Speed Limit 25
Number of Years Studied 3
Total Collisions 3
Statewide Average Collision Rate 1.41
Collisions per Million Vehicle Miles 2.68
Number of Lanes 2, DYCL
Type of Traffic Control STOP @ CHUCKWAGON RD, OUTRIDER RD, PVDE
Crosswalks?HORSE XING SOUTH OF OUTRIDER RD
Pedestrian Traffic OCCASIONAL, EQUINE
Truck Traffic LIGHT
On-Street Parking OFF-STREET ON SHOULDERS
Length of Segment 0.750
Vertical Curve?DOWNHILL N/B, MOUNTAINOUS
Horizontal Curve?TIGHTLY WINDING CURVES
Visibility BLIND CURVES, HIDDEN DRIVEWAYS
Roadway Conditions GOOD
Sidewalks?DIRT SHOULDERS, ROLLED CURB
Driveways?YES, SOME HIDDEN
Lighting NONE
Width 21
Adjacent Land Use RURAL RESIDENTIAL, EQUESTRIAN
Field Study By NS Checked By VM
CERTIFICATION DATE
Number of Survey Samples 141
SPEED FACTORS
mph
mph
COLLISION HISTORY
TRAFFIC FACTORS
ROADWAY FACTORS
CERTIFICATION: I, Vanessa Munoz, do hereby certify that this Engineering and Traffic Survey within
the City of Rolling Hills was performed under my supervision and is accurate and complete. I am duly
registered in the State of California as a Professional Engineer (Traffic).
Vanessa Munoz Date State Registration Number
TE 2341
Collisions/MVM
years
feet
miles
Recommended Speed Limit 30
CALIFORNIA MUTCD OPTION 2
mph
Speed Justification
mph
Average Speed 28 mph
Collisions/MVM
75
ENGINEERING AND TRAFFIC SURVEY
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS 5
STREET Portuguese Bend Road
FROM Crest Road E/W TO Poppy Trail
Average Daily Traffic 1,728 Date Counted 11/8/2017
Date of Speed Survey 11/8/2017
Time of Speed Survey 2:10PM
50th Percentile Speed (Mean Speed)30
85th Percentile Speed 35
10 mph Pace Speed 25-34
Percentage of Vehicles in Pace 76
Posted Speed Limit 30
Number of Years Studied 3
Total Collisions 1
Statewide Average Collision Rate 1.41
Collisions per Million Vehicle Miles 0.53
Number of Lanes 2, DYCL
Type of Traffic Control STOP @ CREST RD
Crosswalks?HORSE XING: S/O POPPY TR, PHESANT LN, N/O WAGON
Pedestrian Traffic OCCASIONAL, EQUINE
Truck Traffic LIGHT
On-Street Parking OFF-STREET ON SHOULDERS
Length of Segment 1.000
Vertical Curve?STEEP DOWNHILL N/B, MTN.
Horizontal Curve?TIGHTLY WINDING CURVES
Visibility BLIND CURVES, HIDDEN DRIVEWAYS
Roadway Conditions GOOD
Sidewalks?DIRT SHOULDERS, ROLLED CURB
Driveways?YES, SOME HIDDEN
Lighting NONE
Width 24
Adjacent Land Use RURAL RESIDENTIAL, EQUESTRIAN
Field Study By NS Checked By VM
CERTIFICATION DATE
Number of Survey Samples 212
SPEED FACTORS
mph
mph
COLLISION HISTORY
TRAFFIC FACTORS
ROADWAY FACTORS
CERTIFICATION: I, Vanessa Munoz, do hereby certify that this Engineering and Traffic Survey within
the City of Rolling Hills was performed under my supervision and is accurate and complete. I am duly
registered in the State of California as a Professional Engineer (Traffic).
Vanessa Munoz Date State Registration Number
TE 2341
Collisions/MVM
years
feet
miles
Recommended Speed Limit 30
VERT & HORIZ CURVES,
EQUESTRIAN, HIDDEN DWYS
mph
Speed Justification
mph
Average Speed 30 mph
Collisions/MVM
76
ENGINEERING AND TRAFFIC SURVEY
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS 6
STREET Portuguese Bend Road
FROM Poppy Trail TO Saddleback Road
Average Daily Traffic 1,978 Date Counted 11/8/2017
Date of Speed Survey 11/9/2017
Time of Speed Survey 9:06AM
50th Percentile Speed (Mean Speed)32
85th Percentile Speed 36
10 mph Pace Speed 27-36
Percentage of Vehicles in Pace 81
Posted Speed Limit 30
Number of Years Studied 3
Total Collisions 0
Statewide Average Collision Rate 1.41
Collisions per Million Vehicle Miles 0.00
Number of Lanes 2, DYCL
Type of Traffic Control STOP @ SADDLEBACK RD
Crosswalks?NONE
Pedestrian Traffic OCCASIONAL, EQUINE
Truck Traffic LIGHT
On-Street Parking OFF-STREET ON SHOULDERS
Length of Segment 0.650
Vertical Curve?STEEP DOWNHILL N/B, MTN.
Horizontal Curve?MODERATELY WINDING CURVES
Visibility BLIND CURVES, HIDDEN DRIVEWAYS
Roadway Conditions GOOD
Sidewalks?DIRT SHOULDERS, ROLLED CURB
Driveways?YES, SOME HIDDEN
Lighting NONE
Width 24
Adjacent Land Use RURAL RESIDENTIAL, EQUESTRIAN
Field Study By NS Checked By VM
CERTIFICATION DATE
Number of Survey Samples 190
SPEED FACTORS
mph
mph
COLLISION HISTORY
TRAFFIC FACTORS
ROADWAY FACTORS
CERTIFICATION: I, Vanessa Munoz, do hereby certify that this Engineering and Traffic Survey within
the City of Rolling Hills was performed under my supervision and is accurate and complete. I am duly
registered in the State of California as a Professional Engineer (Traffic).
Vanessa Munoz Date State Registration Number
TE 2341
Collisions/MVM
years
feet
miles
Recommended Speed Limit 30
VERT & HORIZ CURVES,
EQUESTRIAN, HIDDEN DWYS
mph
Speed Justification
mph
Average Speed 32 mph
Collisions/MVM
77
ENGINEERING AND TRAFFIC SURVEY
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS 7
STREET Saddleback Road
FROM Poppy Trail TO Portuguese Bend Road
Average Daily Traffic 408 Date Counted 11/8/2017
Date of Speed Survey 11/9/2017
Time of Speed Survey 7:00AM
50th Percentile Speed (Mean Speed)27
85th Percentile Speed 33
10 mph Pace Speed 23-32
Percentage of Vehicles in Pace 73
Posted Speed Limit 25
Number of Years Studied 3
Total Collisions 0
Statewide Average Collision Rate 1.41
Collisions per Million Vehicle Miles 0.00
Number of Lanes 2, DYCL, BROKEN YCL
Type of Traffic Control STOP @ PORTUGUESE BEND RD (BOTH ENDS)
Crosswalks?HORSE XING WEST OF POPPY TR
Pedestrian Traffic OCCASIONAL, EQUINE
Truck Traffic LIGHT
On-Street Parking OFF-STREET ON SHOULDERS
Length of Segment 1.340
Vertical Curve?STEEP DOWNHILL W/B, MTN.
Horizontal Curve?TIGHTLY WINDING CURVES
Visibility BLIND CURVES, HIDDEN DRIVEWAYS
Roadway Conditions FAIR
Sidewalks?DIRT SHOULDERS, ROLLED CURB
Driveways?YES, SOME HIDDEN
Lighting NONE
Width 24
Adjacent Land Use RURAL RESIDENTIAL, EQUESTRIAN
Field Study By NS Checked By VM
CERTIFICATION DATE
Number of Survey Samples 63
SPEED FACTORS
mph
mph
COLLISION HISTORY
TRAFFIC FACTORS
ROADWAY FACTORS
CERTIFICATION: I, Vanessa Munoz, do hereby certify that this Engineering and Traffic Survey within
the City of Rolling Hills was performed under my supervision and is accurate and complete. I am duly
registered in the State of California as a Professional Engineer (Traffic).
Vanessa Munoz Date State Registration Number
TE 2341
Collisions/MVM
years
feet
miles
Recommended Speed Limit 30
CALIFORNIA MUTCD OPTION 2
mph
Speed Justification
mph
Average Speed 27 mph
Collisions/MVM
78
ENGINEERING AND TRAFFIC SURVEY
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS 8
STREET Southfield Drive
FROM Crest Road East TO Packsaddle Road
Average Daily Traffic 314 Date Counted 11/8/2017
Date of Speed Survey 11/8/2017
Time of Speed Survey 4:00PM
50th Percentile Speed (Mean Speed)24
85th Percentile Speed 29
10 mph Pace Speed 20-29
Percentage of Vehicles in Pace 82
Posted Speed Limit 25
Number of Years Studied 3
Total Collisions 0
Statewide Average Collision Rate 1.41
Collisions per Million Vehicle Miles 0.00
Number of Lanes 2, DYCL
Type of Traffic Control STOP @ PACKSADDLE RD, RINGBIT RD, CREST RD
Crosswalks?NONE
Pedestrian Traffic OCCASIONAL, EQUINE
Truck Traffic LIGHT
On-Street Parking OFF-STREET ON SHOULDER, WEST SIDE
Length of Segment 0.470
Vertical Curve?STEEP DOWNHILL S/B, MTN.
Horizontal Curve?MODERATELY WINDING CURVES
Visibility BLIND CURVES, HIDDEN DRIVEWAYS
Roadway Conditions FAIR
Sidewalks?DIRT SHOULDERS, ROLLED CURB
Driveways?YES, SOME HIDDEN
Lighting NONE
Width 24
Adjacent Land Use RURAL RESIDENTIAL, EQUESTRIAN
Field Study By NS Checked By VM
CERTIFICATION DATE
Number of Survey Samples 44
SPEED FACTORS
mph
mph
COLLISION HISTORY
TRAFFIC FACTORS
ROADWAY FACTORS
CERTIFICATION: I, Vanessa Munoz, do hereby certify that this Engineering and Traffic Survey within
the City of Rolling Hills was performed under my supervision and is accurate and complete. I am duly
registered in the State of California as a Professional Engineer (Traffic).
Vanessa Munoz Date State Registration Number
TE 2341
Collisions/MVM
years
feet
miles
Recommended Speed Limit 25
CALIFORNIA MUTCD OPTION 2
mph
Speed Justification
mph
Average Speed 24 mph
Collisions/MVM
79
2018 Engineering and Traffic Survey
City of Rolling Hills
APPENDIX B
Radar Speed Distribution Forms
80
Spot Speed Study
Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services
Eastbound & Westbound
DATE:Location:
TIME:Posted Speed:30 MPH Clear/Dry
Speed
mph ALL Vehicles
<=10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22 1
23 1
24 1
25 8
26 6
27 16
28 12
29 16
30 17
31 19
32 19
33 13
34 20
35 13
36 15
37 16
38 9
39 5
40 4
41
42 2
43
44 1
45
46 1
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
>=70
Class Count Range
50th
Percentile
85th
Percentile
10 MPH
Pace # in Pace
Percent in
Pace % / # Below Pace % / # Above Pace
ALL 215 22 - 46 32 mph 37 mph 27 - 36 160 74%7% / 17 18% / 38
SPEED PARAMETERS
Crest Rd W Bet. W City Limit & Portuguese Bend Rd
City of Rolling Hills
Eastbound & Westbound Spot Speeds
10:25-12:05
11/8/2017
Project #: 17-5707-001
0 5 10 15 20 25
70
68
66
64
62
60
58
56
54
52
50
48
46
44
42
40
38
36
34
32
30
28
26
24
22
20
18
16
14
12
10
Speed -MPHNumber of Vehicles
81
Spot Speed Study
Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services
Eastbound & Westbound
DATE:Location:
TIME:Posted Speed:30 MPH Clear/Dry
Speed
mph ALL Vehicles
<=10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20 2
21
22
23 2
24 3
25 3
26 9
27 6
28 17
29 11
30 19
31 21
32 17
33 19
34 16
35 14
36 14
37 9
38 6
39 6
40 7
41 3
42 1
43 2
44 1
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
>=70
Class Count Range
50th
Percentile
85th
Percentile
10 MPH
Pace # in Pace
Percent in
Pace % / # Below Pace % / # Above Pace
ALL 208 20 - 44 32 mph 37 mph 28 - 37 157 75%12% / 25 13% / 26
SPEED PARAMETERS
Crest Rd E Bet. Portuguese Bend Rd & Eastfield Dr
City of Rolling Hills Estates
Eastbound & Westbound Spot Speeds
09:07-10:48
11/30/2017
Project #: 17-5785-002
0 5 10 15 20 25
70
68
66
64
62
60
58
56
54
52
50
48
46
44
42
40
38
36
34
32
30
28
26
24
22
20
18
16
14
12
10
Speed -MPHNumber of Vehicles
82
Spot Speed Study
Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services
Eastbound & Westbound
DATE:Location:
TIME:Posted Speed:25 MPH Clear/Dry
Speed
mph ALL Vehicles
<=10
11
12
13
14
15
16 1
17 1
18 3
19
20 3
21 1
22 2
23 10
24 10
25 14
26 13
27 14
28 12
29 13
30 15
31 10
32 11
33 1
34 6
35 5
36 2
37 2
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
>=70
Class Count Range
50th
Percentile
85th
Percentile
10 MPH
Pace # in Pace
Percent in
Pace % / # Below Pace % / # Above Pace
ALL 149 16 - 37 28 mph 32 mph 23 - 32 122 82%7% / 11 11% / 16
SPEED PARAMETERS
Eastfield Dr Bet. Crest Rd E & Chuckwagon Rd
City of Rolling Hills
Eastbound & Westbound Spot Speeds
11:15-13:15
11/9/2017
Project #: 17-5707-003
0 5 10 15 20
70
68
66
64
62
60
58
56
54
52
50
48
46
44
42
40
38
36
34
32
30
28
26
24
22
20
18
16
14
12
10
Speed -MPHNumber of Vehicles
83
Spot Speed Study
Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services
Northbound & Southbound
DATE:Location:
TIME:Posted Speed:25 MPH Clear/Dry
Speed
mph ALL Vehicles
<=10
11
12
13
14
15 1
16
17
18
19 2
20 4
21 1
22 1
23 4
24 4
25 13
26 15
27 17
28 13
29 13
30 12
31 7
32 9
33 7
34 5
35 3
36 6
37 1
38 2
39
40
41
42 1
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
>=70
Class Count Range
50th
Percentile
85th
Percentile
10 MPH
Pace # in Pace
Percent in
Pace % / # Below Pace % / # Above Pace
ALL 141 15 - 42 28 mph 33 mph 25 - 34 111 79%12% / 17 10% / 13
SPEED PARAMETERS
Eastfield Dr Bet. Chuckwagon Rd & Palos Verdes Dr E
City of Rolling Hills
Northbound & Southbound Spot Speeds
13:21-15:21
11/9/2017
Project #: 17-5707-004
0 5 10 15 20
70
68
66
64
62
60
58
56
54
52
50
48
46
44
42
40
38
36
34
32
30
28
26
24
22
20
18
16
14
12
10
Speed -MPHNumber of Vehicles
84
Spot Speed Study
Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services
Northbound & Southbound
DATE:Location:
TIME:Posted Speed:30 MPH Clear/Dry
Speed
mph ALL Vehicles
<=10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23 2
24 8
25 13
26 15
27 16
28 18
29 18
30 17
31 17
32 16
33 17
34 14
35 10
36 10
37 9
38 5
39 2
40 2
41 2
42
43
44 1
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
>=70
Class Count Range
50th
Percentile
85th
Percentile
10 MPH
Pace # in Pace
Percent in
Pace % / # Below Pace % / # Above Pace
ALL 212 23 - 44 30 mph 35 mph 25 - 34 161 76%4% / 10 20% / 41
SPEED PARAMETERS
Portuguese Bend Rd Bet. Creest Rd & Poppy Trail
City of Rolling Hills
Northbound & Southbound Spot Speeds
14:10-15:55
11/8/2017
Project #: 17-5707-005
0 5 10 15 20
70
68
66
64
62
60
58
56
54
52
50
48
46
44
42
40
38
36
34
32
30
28
26
24
22
20
18
16
14
12
10
Speed -MPHNumber of Vehicles
85
Spot Speed Study
Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services
Northbound & Southbound
DATE:Location:
TIME:Posted Speed:30 MPH Clear/Dry
Speed
mph ALL Vehicles
<=10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22 2
23
24 1
25 3
26 4
27 10
28 11
29 12
30 19
31 21
32 18
33 21
34 18
35 12
36 12
37 5
38 3
39 4
40 4
41 3
42 2
43
44 1
45 2
46
47
48 1
49 1
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
>=70
Class Count Range
50th
Percentile
85th
Percentile
10 MPH
Pace # in Pace
Percent in
Pace % / # Below Pace % / # Above Pace
ALL 190 22 - 49 32 mph 36 mph 27 - 36 154 81%5% / 10 14% / 26
SPEED PARAMETERS
Portuguese Bend Rd Bet. Poppy Trail & Saddleback Rd
City of Rolling Hills
Northbound & Southbound Spot Speeds
09:06-11:06
11/9/2017
Project #: 17-5707-006
0 5 10 15 20 25
70
68
66
64
62
60
58
56
54
52
50
48
46
44
42
40
38
36
34
32
30
28
26
24
22
20
18
16
14
12
10
Speed -MPHNumber of Vehicles
86
Spot Speed Study
Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services
Northbound & Southbound
DATE:Location:
TIME:Posted Speed:25 MPH Clear/Dry
Speed
mph ALL Vehicles
<=10
11
12
13 1
14
15 1
16
17
18
19
20 2
21 3
22
23 5
24 5
25 7
26 5
27 3
28 6
29 2
30 5
31 7
32 1
33 4
34 3
35
36
37
38
39 1
40 1
41 1
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
>=70
Class Count Range
50th
Percentile
85th
Percentile
10 MPH
Pace # in Pace
Percent in
Pace % / # Below Pace % / # Above Pace
ALL 63 13 - 41 27 mph 33 mph 23 - 32 46 73%11% / 7 16% / 10
SPEED PARAMETERS
Saddleback Rd Bet. Poppy Trail & Portuguese Bend Rd
City of Rolling Hills
Northbound & Southbound Spot Speeds
07:00-09:00
11/9/2017
Project #: 17-5707-007
0 5 10
70
68
66
64
62
60
58
56
54
52
50
48
46
44
42
40
38
36
34
32
30
28
26
24
22
20
18
16
14
12
10
Speed -MPHNumber of Vehicles
87
Spot Speed Study
Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services
Northbound & Southbound
DATE:Location:
TIME:Posted Speed:25 Clear/Dry
Speed
mph ALL Vehicles
<=10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17 1
18 1
19
20 5
21 5
22 4
23 5
24 3
25 2
26 2
27 5
28 2
29 3
30 1
31 3
32
33
34
35
36 1
37 1
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
>=70
Class Count Range
50th
Percentile
85th
Percentile
10 MPH
Pace # in Pace
Percent in
Pace % / # Below Pace % / # Above Pace
ALL 44 17 - 37 24 mph 29 mph 20 - 29 36 82%4% / 2 14% / 6
SPEED PARAMETERS
Southfield Dr Bet. Crest Rd E & Packsaddle Rd
City of Rolling Hills
Northbound & Southbound Spot Speeds
16:00-18:00
11/8/2017
Project #: 17-5707-008
0 5 10
70
68
66
64
62
60
58
56
54
52
50
48
46
44
42
40
38
36
34
32
30
28
26
24
22
20
18
16
14
12
10
Speed -MPHNumber of Vehicles
88
2018 Engineering and Traffic Survey
City of Rolling Hills
Raw Radar Speed Distribution Forms
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
2018 Engineering and Traffic Survey
City of Rolling Hills
APPENDIX C
Survey Equipment Used
98
2018 Engineering and Traffic Survey
City of Rolling Hills
SURVEY EQUIPMENT USED
The radar equipment used to collect speed measurements for this survey was a K-55
Model Hand-Held Traffic Radar manufactured by MPH Industries of Owensboro, KY. The
calibration of the units was checked before each series of measurements were taken.
Tests of the unit were conducted in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications.
The K-55 Traffic Radar was last calibrated on March 14, 2016 by PB Electronics Inc.
99
100
101
102
103