The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMichillinda Improvement 1 iliol . • ..., 6 4 cf , z _ , (41,/ , ,,_6( „ of d1fr, 4,ho (.1 t itorm' /� (/(/ iJ DATE: November 13, 1970 TO: Lyman H. Cozad, FROM: Chester N. Howard, City Manager Director of Public Works Subject : Los Angeles County Road Department - Proposed Michillinda Avenue Improvement The undersigned has, on past occasions, advised the Council of subject proposed improvement by the County Road Department. Until recently the County proposal was to construct a 64 foot roadway within the limits of an 80 foot right-of-way. The initial proposal contained no provisions for any other improvements other than limited reconstruction of driveways as needed due to the roadway improvement, and utility poles on the Arcadia side would be relocated approximately four to eight feet closer to Arcadia residences. The County could insist that the City pay a portion of the total improvement costs due to City jurisdiction of a portion of the right-of-way. Attached hereto is a letter from Supervisor Bonelli to the Honorable Edward L. Butterworth explaining the problems inherent in the above mentioned improvement, together with a realistic counter proposal. Included with this material is Mayor Butterworth's reply. The two disadvantages are loss of parking on the Arcadia side and since the abutting properties face the cross street and only 10 residences, the school and park have driveway access to Michillinda, this disadvantage is not con- sidered drastic in view of the benefits. The other disadvantage is that of dedi- cating right-of-way along the Hugo Reid Park and minor right-of-way that must be acquired from Monte Verde north to join the existing State improvement. The benefits accruing to• the City are as follows: (1) City incurs no roadway improvement cost. (2) Sidewalk at no expense to City. (3) East curb will be reconstructed on permanent alignment with no potential of future inconvenience in the event of widening since the widening would have to be to the West. (4) Undergrounding of utilities at no cost to the City. These overhead utilities are within the City limits and the estimated cost of undergrounding is $338,000. It would require seven to eight years for the City to accumulate sufficient undergrounding funds to accomplish this highly desirable project. Due to the above enumerated benefits and in view of the serious problems inherent in a total roadway widening project, it is recommended that the City Council approve the County proposal and instruct staff to proceed with Utility Committee meetings in preparation for setting up an underground utilities district. Respectfully submitted, / CHESTER N. HOWARD, . Director of Public Works APPROVED City M,M- - :er CNH/fn C` - MEMBERS OF THE B'�ARO -' %� '".;,-",''.I.,r 7-7 ERNEST E.OEBS L_. _4t \1 CHAIRMAN . ^r,7 i 7,±t1' FRANK G.BON ELLI , (j /. 1 1\I"-:.:71•-'." l', -T. KENNETH HAHN • i S:_•::1;;7:: / 7.,•,•:;• (��-+( BURTON W.CHACE•• a• �� .mil . ;• RECEIVED WARREN M.OORN 'r tip': > . SEP 16 1970 B OAR D OF. SUPERVISORS- IT i- E R V I S O R S OEFT. CF PUE.IC 150aK3 AN GE art Aa ADtA• FRANK G. BON ELLI COUNTY O F LOS S A N G E L E S SuPERVISJR,FIRST DI STRi'T 856 HALL OF ADMINISTRATION / LOS ANGELES,CALIFORNIA 90012 625-3611 i 448-4866 / 635-5505 September 14, 1970 Honorable Edward L. Butterworth Mayor of the City of Arcadia Post Office Box 60 • Arcadia, California 91006 Dear Mayor Butterworth: MICHILLINDA AVENUE . • For several years, Supervisor Warren Dorn and I have been concerned over traffic conditions on Michillinda Avenue. Upon our instructions the County Road Department has conducted intensive studies for the possible widening of Michillinda Avenue - between Colorado Boulevard and Sunset Avenue/California Boulevard. I know that this street is also of considerable interest to the City of Arcadia and am pleased to report to you - . that a street improvement as well. as beautification of the area by undergrounding the existing utility lines appears feasible. The Road Department's studies and traffic projections do not • support a need for a four lane highway, either at the pre 'ent time or after Michillinda Avenue is extended northerly under the Foothill Freeway next year. The full improvement of Michillinda Avenue would be extremely costly in terms of land acquisition on the west side of the street and would eliminate most of the front yards with consequent serious impact upon the community. Since the traffic volumes do not justify such drastic action, it is proposed to. construct the easterly curb to its ultimate location • about four feet easterly of its present location, A concrete sidewa-L7. would be constructed as a part of the project, and the Road —re-, ,,y 0_ _ . • • Honorable Edward L. Butterworth Page Two • September 14, 1970 • Department,suggests that it be placed adjacent to the east curb in • order to minimize the disturbance of existing landscaping in the City. All these improvements could be constructed within existing rights of way. The resulting 45-foot roadway width is proposed to be striped for one southbound travel lane, one northbound travel lane and a two-way left turn lane. Parking is to be permitted on the west side of the street where the residences front on Michillinda Avenue but prohibited on the east side where, as you know, all of the homes front on the cross streets. Concerning the undergrounding of utility lines, the County as a part of the foregoing project is willing to request the Southern California Edison Company to reallocate to the City funds now available to the County for undergrounding of utilities at such time as the City forms their underground district. If this proposal is satisfactory to the City, Supervisor Dorn and I shall be pleased to co-sponsor the allocation of funds for this project at the earliest possible date and shall instruct the Road Commissioner to coordinate technical details with the City's staff. This proposal appears to me to constitute a desirable solution to the long standing question of widening Michillinda Avenue. It will certainly improve traffic flow and traffic safety as well as enhance the general appearance of the area. Cordially, / /J Frank G. Bonelli ,Supervisor, First District bl • - cc: Supervisor Warren M. Dorn Road Department • . i. . : • September 30, 1970 Houornblc Frank G. Bonelli Supervisor, First District County of Los Ar:veles 85C Hall of •ctlinistrrtion Los Angeles, California 50012 Subject: tii.chillinda Averue • Deer li Lonelli: Since receiving your letter of September 14, 1970, I have had the opportunity of studying the problems with which your office is confronted due to the pro- posed posed l!ic illir'.eo avenue improvement project. It in recognised th_'t I l ?;,.of- way eccuisit.ion would have e dr ^tic affect on the vest side of this so:•,,':,ey and could po ssibly result in future property redevelopment that weulr ib:_ detri- mental to the best interest;' of ell concerned. The City'; understanding had always been that 2'ichillinda would be i ;?l ` lved In the near future, and for that reason I previously had rcr.ue tee that t.±(_' feasi- bility of us der„ro neing existing utility liner be studied. S`r.ec you: t W is -7.c projections do not su,port the need of as four-lane hi.,, .t"ely, FT.d you fc:c'' that the anticipated future traffic ZGZIi .n S can be handled within the 1 7 i tv of 6 4J+ oot re?'!e'',..'y with provisions ns f o'r pedestrian traffic by the co :!'truaction of sidm° ih, and unf cr r c ur din; of utilities, it tculd therefore appear t' .at the City or 1s rte( I' should be able to live S : L" the parking :vc wiJ ':d :> which TiG'i'=.c hove to be is osa::d on the east side of this street:. Con:e u-ently 1 will in- struct City staff to schedule Une.ru2ou Utility Gcftt s C I :ti: y in C)ret: to c'pLdite the formation of £:n Ut ergro:nd Utility District in confCJ's`i'.'s_ ce with your roco:. .:end ticyn. Pleace accept uy assurance that your proposal for the road,,:ay it prov, is .t one, p rkir , restrictions will he presented to the a iCtZi3 City Council at the• Honorable Fran C. Fonelli -2- September 30, 1970 • earliest possible date. I feel sure that the Council will approve the County's proposal as set forth in your letter. Very truly yours, EDWARD L. BUT1"J RWORTH, Mayor ELD/CiH/fn • • • •