Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout6.0 Crossing Guard Contract Review 4, CITY OF DUBLIN AGENDA STATEMENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: February 10, 1987 SUBJECT Crossing Guard Contract Evaluation EXHIBITS ATTACHED Street Maintenance Agreement; Letter from Alameda County dated December 29, 1986; Letters from Paul Rankin dated January 2, and January 21, 1987; Memo from TJKM dated January 14, 1987 RECOMMENDATION'ak Authorize Staff to request Alameda County to develop a new contract for Fiscal Year 1987-88 FINANCIAL STATEMENT: Actual 1985-86 Crossing Guard Costs - $12, 384 Budget 1986-87 - $21, 800 DESCRIPTION Since incorporation, the City has contracted with Alameda County for the provision of Crossing Guard Services in the City. The City presently has a two year agreement with the County for Crossing Guard Services which will end on June 30, 1987 . Under this agreement, the County provides crossing guard supervision as well as crossing guards to those locations at which the City has requested Crossing Guard Services . CURRENT SERVICES: With the adoption of Fiscal Year 1986-87 Budget, the City Council allocated $15, 500 for funding two Crossing Guards . In October 1986, the City Council allocated an additional $6, 300 for a third Crossing Guard as a result of the Traffic Engineering Study performed on Silvergate Drive. Presently, Crossing Guards are assigned to the following locations : 1. Amador Valley Boulevard and Burton Street (Frederiksen Elementary) 2 . San Ramon Road and Shannon Avenue (Nielsen Elementary) 3 . Silvergate Drive and Amarillo Road (Nielsen Elementary) The usual hours of coverage for Tuesday through Friday are: Nielsen Frederiksen 7 : 45 a.m. - 9 : 45 a.m. 7 : 45 a.m. - 9 : 45 a.m. 11: 50 a.m. - 1: 20 p.m. 11: 45 a.m. - 1: 15 p.m. 1: 45 p.m. - 3 : 30 p.m. 1: 45 p .m. - 3 : 30 p.m. The schedule for Monday changes slightly. In reviewing this contract, Staff has identified the following evaluation criteria for City Council consideration: 1. Cost Effectiveness 2 . Reliability/Effectiveness with children Cost Effectiveness The Administrative Services/Finance Director has evaluated the cost effectiveness of the City' s contract with the County, by comparing it with other City Crossing Guard programs in which either City Staff or the services of a private company are utilized. As discussed in the following paragraphs, he has concluded that the City' s- contract with the County is presently the more cost effective means of providing the service. COPIES TO: ITEM NO. . 64) During Fiscal Year 1985-86, the City paid a total of $12, 384 for Crossing Guard Services . This included $10, 184 for 1629 hours of Crossing Guard Services and $2, 200 'for the supervision and training services of a Crossing Guard Supervisor. In comparing this cost with other alternatives, Staff looked at the City of San Ramon and Walnut Creek, which utilize the services of a temporary help company and the City of Pleasanton, which uses City Staff. Assuming that the other agencies required the same number of crossing guards and would cover the same periods of the day, the cost for providing services in Fiscal Year 1986-87 is as follows : Contract Service from Alameda County $19, 541 Temporary Help Company 20, 809* City Staff 21, 388* . *In addition to these direct costs, those agencies which provide crossing guard services utilizing City Staff or temporary help, also incur indirect costs with police department supervision and training which is not included in these figures . For Fiscal Year 1987-88, the County proposes to increase the hourly rate it charges the City from $6. 25/hour to $6. 38/hour. This increase results in a total projected cost for Fiscal Year 1987-88 of $19, 901, which is still less than the services utilized by the other cities surveyed. Reliability The County employs a pool of approximately 25 Crossing Guards to service the City of Dublin as well as the unincorporated areas of the County, as well as a Crossing Guard Supervisor to manage the program. Historically, this large pool has assured crossing coverage in the event that a crossing guard assigned to Dublin was absent due to illness, etc. The Principals of those elementary schools served by the Crossing Guards have indicated to Staff that the Crossing Guards have been reliable and they have had no complaints regarding absent Crossing Guards . They have also indicated that the Crossing Guards do their job effectively in working with the children. Outstanding Issues 1. Crossing Guard at Amarillo Road/Silvergate Drive In a letter from the Alameda County Public Works Agency dated December 29, 1986, the County' s Traffic Engineer indicated that the County considered the Crossing Guard at Amarillo Road and Silvergate Drive a low priority location, because it did not meet warrants. Staff and TJKM disagree with the County Traffic Engineers ' s conclusion and have asked for additional information regarding the County' s counts . The County Traffic Engineer indicated that there may be an occasion in the future when the County could not provide a Crossing Guard at this intersection. Staff has requested a notification procedure to handle such an absence, so that other arrangements could be made. If this becomes a problem, it would be Staff ' s recommendation that services other than the County be secured on a permanent basis . 2 . Contract Renewal Since at the end of this year, the contract with the County will expire, it will be necessary to develop and adopt a new contract. It is Staff ' s recommendation that the City Council authorize Staff to request that the County develop a contract for the upcoming fiscal year. • U AGREEMENT — STREET MAINTENANCE • . (n " I THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day 41; , 1985, by and between the COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, hereinafter referred to as "COUNTY", and the CITY OF DUBLIN, hereinafter referred to as "CITY"; RECITALS: a. The CITY is desirous of contracting with COUNTY for the performance of street maintenance and improvement functions within its boundaries by the COUNTY through the Road Commissioner thereof; and b. The COUNTY is agreeable to rendering such services on the terms and conditions herinafter set forth; and c. That such contract is authorized and provided for by the provisions of Article 1, Chapter 1, Part 2, Division 1, Title 5 of the Government Code; NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED as follows: . I. SERVICES TO.BE PERFORMED a. COUNTY agrees by and through its Road Department to perform for CITY any and all functions coming within the jurisdiction of the Road Commissioner relating to the construction, operation and. maintenance of streets, subject to the general terms and conditions hereinafter set forth. b. Said Road Department shall construct, reconstruct, operate, maintain and repair all public streets within CITY with the same power with reference thereto as if said streets were within the unincorporated area of COUNTY, the City Council of CITY exercising the same authority with reference to said work on said streets as the Board of Supervisors would exercise if said streets were • in the unincorporated territory of COUNTY. Nothing herein contained shall be construed as in any way divesting CITY of any of its powers with respect to the supervision, management, and control of streets within its boundaries. c. For the purpose of performing said functions and providing all the services designated in Paragraph Ie of the Agreement, COUNTY shall furnish and supply all necessary labor, supervision, machinery, equipment, and supplies other than those required to be furnished by CITY, necessary to carry. out the instructions of CITY and to construct, operate and maintain CITY streets in -2 accordance with the level of service prescribed by-COUNTY, unless. CITY by • resolution, or CITY's authorized designate, in writing, requests a different level of service. All work; services; and materials shall be of equal workmanship 'and quality as that performed or furnished for COUNTY roads. Both parties agree that they and their officers and agents shall cooperate in the carrying out of said functions and that the Road Commissioner shall have full authority, possession, and necessary control of the work with full assistance when necessary from the police of CITY or sucfl other law enforcement agency as may be rendering police service therein. d. Whenever the COUNTY and CITY mutually agree as to the necessity for any such COUNTY officer or department to maintain administrative headquarters in the CITY, CITY shall furnish at its own_ cost and expense all necessary office space, furniture, and furnishings, office supplies, janitorial service, telephone, light, water, and other utilities.. In all instances where special supplies, stationery, notices, forms and the like must be issued: in the name , of the CITY,. 'the same shall be supplied by the CITY at its expense. _ It is expressly understood that 'in. the event a local administrative office is maintained in the CITY for any such COUNTY officer or department, such quarters may be used by the COUNTY officer or, department in connection with the performance of its duties in territory outside of the CITY and adjacent thereto, provided, however, that the performance of such outside, duties shall not be at any additional cost to the CITY. The COUNTY shall reimburse the CITY for the cost of providing such facilities to the extent that such facilities are used for activities outside the City of Dublin. e. For the purposes of performing services hereunder, the work is divided into those general categories listed below and further defined in Appendix A and B. Except as provided in Paragraph Ic, all services shall be provided on at least the same level as provided in unincorporated areas. - Crossing Guard - Emergency Services • • -3- - Ordinary Maintenance and Repair. - Routine Patrol and Inspection - Force Account Construction or Reconstruction - Traffic Signal Maintenance Other services that CITY may identify that fall within the purview and jurisdiction of the Road Commissioner may be performed at the time and under circumstances initially agreeable to the CITY and the Road Commissioner. f. No function or service shall be performed pursuant to this agreement by any COUNTY officer or department unless such function or service has been . requested in writing by the CITY and authorized by the City Manager. CITY shall submit a written service request to the County Road Department Chief, or his designee specifying those functions and services to be performed by the COUNTY. In an emergency situation, services may be requested by CITY and provided by COUNTY.pursuant to verbal agreement between the City Manager and the County Road Department Chief or his designee. All functions and services provided by COUNTY to CITY shall be performed at the times and under circumstances which do not interfere with the performance of regular COUNTY - operations. g. During the term of this agreement, CITY, prior to the start of the fiscal year, shall advise the Road Commissioner of the program for street maintenance, construction, and improvement for the forthcoming fiscal year. h. The Road Department of the COUNTY. of Alameda shall not perform any function hereunder not coming within the scope of the duties of such department in performing services for COUNTY. i. If, pursuant to this agreement, the Road Department prepares plans for any project to be constructed by a private contractor, CITY' shall have the- option of either becoming a part of a COUNTY overall contract for such services, should one be available for advertising on a timely basis, or of entering into a separate contract with such private contractor. If the CITY elects to join in a COUNTY overall contract, CITY work shall be bid as an • • -4- alternate which CITY shall have the right to reject after bids are received. In either case, all plans, profiles, and the specifications therefore, together with the terms of the contract and the accompanying bonds, when prepared by COUNTY shall be submitted to CITY officials as may be by resolution designated by such Council for that purpose. If inspections necessary to ascertain the compliance by the contractor with the plans, profiles, and specifications are made by COUNTY a report thereon shall be submitted-to CITY. It shall be COUNTY'S responsibility to ultimately determine the adequacy of such performance and to finally certify the work as completed. j. The CITY and COUNTY shall mutually agree on any workload data tobe maintained by the COUNTY for the CITY. The COUNTY may provide the CITY with supplemental workload or cost data requested by the CITY subject to availability of information and staff time. The CITY will pay the COUNTY for the full cost of staff time required to provide CITY with supplemental information. II. LIABILITY a. All persons employed in the performance of such services and functions for CITY shall be COUNTY employees, and no CITY employee as such shall be taken over by COUNTY and no person hereunder shall have any CITY pension, civil service, or other status or right. b. CITY shall not be called upon to assume any liability for the direct payment of any salary, wages, or other compensation to any COUNTY personnel performing services hereunder for CITY, or any liability other than that provided for in this agreement. Except as herein otherwise specified, CITY shall not be liable for compensation or indemnity to any COUNTY employee for' injury or sickness arising out of his employment. c. The CITY will assume liability and pay cost of defense and hold the COUNTY harmless from loss, costs or expenses caused by the negligent or • • • • • . • • • -5- wrongful act or omission of CITY officers, agents and employees occurring in the performance of agreements between the parties hereto to the 'extent that such liability is imposed on the COUNTY by, the provisions of Section 895.2 of the Government Code of the State of California. In addition, when liability arises pursuant to Section 830, et seq., of' the. Government Code, by reason of a_ a dangerous condition of public property of the CITY, the CITY shall assume liability and pay cost of defense and hold the COUNTY harmless from loss, costs or expenses caused by the negligent or wrongful act or omission of CITY officers, agents and employees, whether or not arising in the performance of an agreement between the parties hereto. d. The COUNTY will assume liability and pay cost of defense and hold - the CITY harmless from loss, costs or expenses caused by the negligent or wrongful act or omission. of COUNTY officers, agents and employees occurring in the perf ormanc,e of agreements between the parties hereto to the extent that such lability is imposed on the CITY by the provisions of Section 895.2 of the Government Code of the State of California. In addition, when.•liability ' arises pursuant to Section 830, et seq., of the Government Code, by reason .of a dangerous condition of public property of the COUNTY', the COUNTY shall i assume liability and pay cost of defense and hold the CITY harmless from .loss, costs or expenses caused by the negligent or wrongful act-or omission of COUNTY officers, agents and employees, whether or not arising in the performance of an agreement between the parties hereto. III. INSURANCE Whatever insurance agreement between CITY and COUNTY is in effect during the term of this contract shall apply hereto and is fully incorporated herein by reference. IV. CITY ORDINANCES a. To assist COUNTY in the performance of its duties hereunder and' to safeguard CITY'S streets, it is agreed that CITY will forthwith enact and thereafter maintain during the duration of this contract an ordinance in all • material respects, including the amou?it of: the fees provided identical to. Chapter 1, Title 5. of the Alameda COUNTY Ordinance Code, as amended. b. CITY.further agrees to enact amendments to said Ordinance adopted by the Board of Supervisors, within 30 days after request to do so by'COUNTY. Tne Road Commissioner, acting on behalf of COUNTY, may use his discretion and t need not request CITY to adopt amendments which do not apply to CITY. Regardless of anything to the contrary herein contained, this contract `shall sooner terminate' any time CITY fails to enact and maintain, or to enact amendments to said Ordinance as hereinbefore provided for. V. COST AND BILLING PROCEDURES a. CITY shall pay for the actual cost of such services as are provided under this agreement at rates to be determined by. COUNTY in accordance with the policies and procedures established by the Board of Supervisors. b. The Road Department shall keep reasonably itemized and in detail work or job records covering the cost of all services performed, including - salary, wages and other compensation for labor; supervision and planning; plus , overhead, the reasonable rental value of all COUNTY owned machinery and equipment, rental paid for all rented machinery or equipment, together with the cost of an operator thereof when furnished with said machinery or equipment, the cost of all machinery and supplies furnished by the COUNTY, reasonable handling charges, and all additional items of expense incidental to the performance of such function or service: c. The COUNTY shall deliver to CITY within thirty (30) days after the close of each calendar month an itemized invoice which covers all services' performed during said month, and. CITY shall pay COUNTY therefore within thirty (30) days after date of said invoice. If such payment is not received by COUNTY at the office which is described on said invoice within thirty (30) days after the date of delivery of said invoice, COUNTY is entitled to recover interest thereof. Said - interest shall be at the rate of one (1) percent per calendar month or any . • • • -sseaboad uT NaOM go uoT4TsodsTp oq se qua-ma-15p Tengnw o4 goaCgns 'uoz4eutwaa4 oq aozad papTAoad aq aozgou 'ua 4TaM -AAp-06 P a.Tnbaa TTIs saoinaes ITV. 'L86 L .'08 eunt buTpua poTaad P ao3 una TTeus guawaaabe sigq 'uTaaaq papznoad se. pageuiwaaq .xauoos ssaTun. pt 'S86L ' L ATnf ;o egPp 9AT40egga UP aneq TTegs goeaquoo sTul ' - NoIJvNIWE:EL (INV NoISv2 n a 'IA •AINIDOD UT saT4T0 aaggo 'oq pTpd aae spun; e)TT aaggo se sesodand • awes am. act pup aauuew awes 814.11T 'ALMOD.Aq ALII,o oq pd ,eq uodnaaagq TTegs ssaoxe Lions Aue 'aauoTssTwuroo peog Aq-suoTgoung Lions go eoupuuogaad eqq • ao3 AIN0c0 '64 AIM 30 uoigebzTgo Aue go sseoxe ut- sz gpTgM '2ILID 04 peuoT4aodde . ao pageooTTP aoanbs Aue wol; spun; Aue ;o.uoT tod peaagwnoueun. pue pepuedxeun . Aue pueq uo seq 2Jf1Oo '4uawaaa6P, sTqq. go uoT euTwae4 aqq Lie ';y -p . 0sgoaCoad TegTdea aeITUJTS aaggo pup 'uotgeooTaa 'uoTgon.zgsuooaa 'uoT4onagsuoo • TTe '0•4 pe turrT eq qou TTpgs qnq 'apnTouT TTegs uTaaaq pesn se ;,goa Coad oT;Toedsi, spa0M et -aaq;eaxagg aurT4 a geuoseaa e UTT-14Tm peed aq.TTTM gsoo lions pup '3oaaag4 UOfleTdwoo alp. Lie goaCoad DT;Toads Aue 30.4soo aazpua aL ao3 map TTTq Aew A NOCO 'Aaeaquoo aI Og anogeuTaaaq LUTLI4Aue buTpue4sg4TM4oN -pawzogaad a a seoinaas aqq uoTIM uT tquow eqq go App gsei auq woa3 pageTnoTeo goaaagq'uoT4aod . . -L- -$- . ATTEST: CI i DUBLIN BY: Qcs:-D BY: %•���...1 �. City Cl rkJ -yor APPRO AS 'Ib FORM: • , . . / ii,e42,e5/:(,/, __ . • By: , City Attorney . ATTEST: • William Mehrwein If'„ •• Clerk of the Board of Supervisors CO OF ALAMEDA 6.- 57e.,....4z...,By: �J'- ..�_. By: 2,,,,,,e„,: Deputy Chairman, Board of Supervisors APPROVED AS TO FORM: Richard Moore, COUNTY Counsel BY•lam( Deputy I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors was duly authorized to execute this document on behalf of the County of Alameda by a majority vote of the Board on NOV 1.9 1985 ; and that a copy has been delivered to the Chairman as provided by Government Code Section 25103. Date: NOV 191985 • WILLIAM MEHRWEIN, Clerk, Board of Super- . visors, uny of Alameda, State of California By AlfAlf/2 71 // , /_ Dee.uty • • APPENDIX A STREET MAINTENANCE SERVICES These descriptions are intended to be general in nature. The specific level of service performed will be dependent upon the request of CITY made pursuant to a Service Request. EMERGENCY SERVICES When notified of a potential hazard on a city street or when such potential hazard is discovered by an employee of the Road Department, the Department will promptly respond to isolate or eliminate the problems within the CITY street. The potential hazard may be flooding caused by storm conditions, a hole in the street, a spilled load from a vehicle, a damaged traffic sign or other circumstances or conditions requiring prompt attention to mitigate the potential hazard. ORDINARY MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR Daily activities to keep in a safe condition, clean and presentable, to preserve and protect the street, drainage facilities, traffic control, warning regulatory and/or directional devices and other appurtenant structures. To. . include but not be limited to such activities as pothole patching, crack sealing, catch basin cleaning, signing and pavement marking replacement, tree . trimming and/or removal, and minor repairs of curbs, gutters and sidewalks. • ROUTINE PATROL AND INSPECTION . Routine patrol by a knowledgeable employee to identify warn pavement, poor drainage, displaced sidewalk and/or gutters, missing, damaged, or defaced signs, and other conditions requiring maintenance or further investigation for reconstruction; repair or replacement. . . -10- May also include such other activities as responding to citizen complaints or inquiries and reviewing activities of CITY contractors within CITY streets. FORCE ACCOUNT CONSTRUCTION AND/OR RECONSTRUCTION Sucn work shall encompass all work, not in the opinion of the Road Commissioner considered as ordinary maintenance and repair and that work excluded by the definition of "Maintenance" in Section 27 of the Streets and Highway Code of the State of California. . CROSSING GUARDS Furnishing adult crossing guards for the conduct of.children across major thoroughfares on their passage -to and from school. • -11- APPENDIX B TRAFFIC SIGNAL MAINTENANCE Road Department shall provide for the maintenance of certain approved • traffic signal systems at intersections (intersections as defined in Section 364 of the Vehicle Code) which are under the jurisdiction of the CITY and to arrange herein for the particular maintenance functions to be performed and to specify the cost of such maintenance, as follows: 1 . Services A. Road Department will furnish and perform all routine maintenance and inspection services necessary to keep the facilities covered by the terms of this agreement in satisfactory working condition. Such services shall include the following: patrolling; emergency service; relamping; painting of standards and heads; necessary minor repairs and adjustments; and replacement of controller equipment, detectors, poles, heads and lamps. Install::Z.ion of additional facilities is not a routine maintenance function under the provisions of this paragraph. B. Road Department shall perform all extraordinary maintenance services which shall include replacement and/or addition of major equipment due to obsolescence, wear, or inadequacy and, repair due to extensive damage from any cause. C. Road Department shall perform all necessary vandalism and collision repairs. 2. Cost and Repairs . A. Labor, equipment and material costs for routine maintenance, including relamping, shall be assessed directly against the installation involved. Such costs shall be the actual costs for labor, parts and equipment used and/or actually expended in each particular instance. • • • • -12- B. Extraordinary maintenance costs and costs for vandalism and collision repairs shall be assessed directly against the installations involved. Such costs shall be the actual costs of labor, parts and equipment used and/or actually expended in each particular instance. In order to insure budget control, the Road Commissioner shall approve all extraordinary repairs prior to the beginning of work, and, except for emergency situations, will . consult the CITY before proceeding. C. The CITY shall bear the cost of electrical energy used by the installations under its jurisdiction. 3. Installations Covered A. The number and location of all signal installations covered by the terms of this agreement are as follows: 1. Amador Valley Blvd. - Village Parkway 2. Amador Valley Blvd. - Donohue Drive 3. Amador Valley Blvd. - Regional Street 4. Amador Valley Blvd. - Stagecoach Road 5. Dublin Blvd. - Dougherty Road 6. Dublin Blvd. - Village Parkway 7. Dublin Blvd. - Amador Plaza Road $. Dublin Blvd. - Golden Gate Drive 9. Dublin Blvd. - Clark Avenue 10. Dublin Blvd. - Regional Street 11. Dublin Blvd. - Dublin Court 12. San Ramon Road - Amador Valley Blvd. 13. San Ramon Road - Shannon Ave. 14. San Ramon Road - Flasher, North The above locations may be amended, as is deemed necessary or desirable in the opinion of the CITY and the COUNTY Director of Public Works,. to adjust the number and/or location of signal installations to be so covered. Qo �s COUNTY OF ALAMEDA. PUBLIC WORKS AGENCY }t.;.,kG 399 Elmhurst Street • Hayward, CA 94544-1395 , sriO ,- (415) 881-6470 DEC 3 01S ter 9eSOUroes ' . :1 December 29, 1986 Mr. Paul S. Rankin P. 0. Box 2340 Dublin, CA 94568 Dear Mr. Rankin: Subject: . Adult..Crossing Guard - Amarillo Road and Silvergate Drive In accordance with the City of Dublin's letter. of October. 28,. 1986, an adult crossing guard was assigned on November 3, 1986 for the intersection of Amarillo Road and Silvergate Drive. Subsequent to and in concert with the. placement of the crossing guard, .a foilowup Adult Crossing Guard Survey was conducted for school-age children crossing at this interseciton in December 1986. The original survey for the Adult Crossing Guard was Conducted by TJKM, Consultant Traffic Engineer during September and October 1986. The results of their survey indicate that a crossing guard would be warranted during selected crossing periods. On three separate occasions in December, school-age children 'pedes- trian counts were taken. Based upon the State of California's Traffic Manual criteria, and the recommended Crossing Guard warrants for the City of Dublin, the results of our survey indicate that Alameda County Traffic Operations would not be justified in recommending an adult crossing guard at this location. How ever, because of the City of Dublin's request, a, cr.ossing guard will be continued at this location. Although the City of Dublin is willing to accept all costs associated. with the placement of an Adult Crossing. Guard, Alameda County has found that on random occasions, staffing constraints (illness, 'etc.) have made it difficult to provide adult crossing guards at all designated locations.. If a temporary shortage of Adult Crossing Guards were to occur in the future, this location would. be considered as one of our low priority staffing locations. -Thus the crossing may experience times when no guard is present; however, this would only occur on a temporary basis. Three specific elements contribute to the placement of an adult cros- sing guard: vehicle traffic volumes, number of school-age children crossing and critical- speed (driving speed of 85 percent of the motorists during non-peak hour periods) . Other contributory factors such as vehicle gaps and proximate. distance to the school also influence this decision-making process. Mr. Paul S. Rankin Page 2 December 29, 1986 During our field observations, we noted that a number of traffic improvements need to be implemented to better provide for the overall safety of school-age children and motorists alike. Listed below are a few of the locations at which we recommend additional striping and signing modifications: LOCATION ACTION REQUIRED' Allegre Drive and Amarillo Road Install ;yellow crosswalk crossing Amarillo Road, Amarillo Court and Amarillo Road/Shadow Drive Install yellow crosswalk - crossing Amarillo Court and Shadow Drive Amarillo Road and Luna Court Install yellow crosswalk ' crossing Luna Court Amarillo Road and Estrella Court Install yellow crosswalk crossing Estrella Court Castle Drive and Shadow Drive - Install yellow crosswalk crossing Castle Drive Castilian Road and Silvergate Drive Install yellow crosswalk crossing Castilian Road+ Silvergate Drive and Ladera Drive/ Install yellow crosswalk - Peppertree Road crossing Silvergate Drive- - (easterly side of inter- section) Silvergate Drive N/0 & S/O Hansen drive Install W66 & W66A adjacent to existing pavement message In addition, it is further requested that motorists parking in the Passenger Loading Zone along Silvergate Drive be properly notified, that this designated zone is not for unattended vehicle parking. Enforcement of this Passenger Loading. Zone is important to reduce the number of double parked- vehicles and to prevent school-age children from walking between parked vehicles. Mr. Paul S. Rankin Page 3 December 29, 1986 If you have any question related to this study, please contact me at 881-6482. Very truly yours, . . /a041 ROBERT N. PRESTON TRAFFIC ENGINEER . RNP:emr cc: . Richard Cochran, School Superintendent . Diane Griffiths, Principa, .Nielsen Elementary School Ann Faris, Crossing Guard Superintendent Lee Thompson, Dublin City Engineer BP5A15-17 • Jam({ OF A/,; o NOV 2 0198- • OFFICE OF THE DATE:November" 19, 1985 CL[RK. •OARo OP SUPERVISORS - City of Dublin City Clerk P. 0. Box 2340 Dublin, CA 94568 RE: CONTRACT.# C-85-577 :FILE #2013 Gentlemen.: ' The Board of Supervisors, County of Alameda, State of California approved and executed the above. numbered Contract on the above date. [ x] We retained' the original Contract for the Board's file and forwarded copies to the Auditor-Controller and the applicable county department. [ . ] . We retained the original Contract for the Board's file and forwarded one 'copy to the Auditor-Controller. All remaining . copies are herewith returned to your Department for distribution. [ ] We retained . the original Contract ,and are returning all remaining copies to you for distribution.- [ ] We are returning all copies of the unsigned Contract to you. When the Contract is fully executed, please send the original to the Clerk, Board of Supervisors and one copy to the . Alameda. County Auditor-Controller. • Very truly yours, WILLIAM MEHRWEIN, Clerk WM/yfc/ cm Enclosure(s) cc: ' County Auditor-Controller ' • Department/Public Works 0959B 1221 0 AK 3 • SUITE 536•OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA 6{6.13•(6151 574-6756 • • January 2, 1987 Mr. Robert Preston, Traffic Engineer County of Alameda Public Works Agency 399 Elmhurst Street Hayward, CA 94544-1395 • Dear Mr. Preston: I , would like to thank you for providing the City with the results of a crossing guard survey at Amarillo Road and Silvergate Drive. It is my understanding that your review was conducted independent of the City' s request for services. Your letter indicates that pedestrian counts were conducted in the month of December. We would appreciate any data which you collected including the dates the counts were taken. Given the colder weather and the holidays, there may have been fewer children walking to school . Also, the City and school may need to provide additional information to parents advising them of this service. • We would also request information on the number and location of other low priority intersections. As. a prudent risk management measure, we would appreciate discussing the notification procedure when the guard will be absent. Any projections on the potential frequency of this situation would also be helpful . We look forward to the opportunity to further discuss the matters outlined above. Sincerely, Paul Z. Rankin PSR:kk Assistant to the City Manager • cc : Chris Kinzel, TJK'1 Richard Cochran, Superintendent City Engineer • January 21, 1987 • • Mr. Robert Preston, Traffic Engineer County of Alameda Public Works Agency 399 Elmhurst Street Hayward , CA 94544-1395 Dear Mr. Preston: • The purpose of this correspondence is to follow—up on my letter dated January 2, 1987 . As . of this date , a response to my inquiries has not been received . The City of Dublin is undertaking an extensive review of all contract services. This includes service levels and cost analysis for each service area. • Clarification of the comments made in your letter dated December 29, 1986 are an important part of this review. • Your letter also made specific traffic sign and marking recommendations to the City. In May of 1935, the City commissioned a School Safety and Crossing Guard Study. The results were shared with school officials to designate 'safe ' routes to school . The City's traffic engineers have reviewed your comments and I have enclosed their findings. I would appreciate a response to my letter at the earliest possible date. This will provide the necessary background for a more thorough discussion of the crossing guard services. Sincerely, ' Paul S. Rankin .Assistant to the City Manager • PS R: slh • cc : City Engineer'' Richard Cochran , Superintendent • Chris Kinzel , Traffic Engineer • c • i �, Y^ l.. , 4d`ice. ....i' •T---Y " t ..-. _ :- '� I t ' 4637 Chabot !)'r Suite 214 _�..Pleasanton Ca. 94566 YK , (415)4630611 ' • Y MEMORANDUM DATE: . January 14, 1987 Jarr i 87 TO: Lee Thompson AUBLic W: FROM: Michelle DeRobertis ARKS SUBJECT: Response to Recommendations of Robert Preston, Alameda County - As you requested, we have reviewed the recommendations on yellow school crosswalk placement and school signing for the Neilsen School area made by Robert Preston of the County of Alameda in his letter..dated December 29, 1986. As you know, we conducted a School Safety and Crossing Guard Study,for the City of Dublin in May, 1985. At this time we made recommendations for the school . signing and pavement markings in the area. In October, 1986, in a study after the extension of Silvergate Drive was completed, we recommended some"supplemental changes in conjunction with the provision of an adult crossing guard at_Silvergate Drive and Amarillo Road-'and the installation of a four-way STOP at-Silvergate Drive and Peppertree Road. The Caltrans Traffic Manual states that school crosswalks "should only be marked where warranted by student-vehicular traffic conflicts or where students could not otherwise recognize the proper place to cross.". Based on these directions, we feel that installing crosswalks crossing minor local streets which are controlled by STOP signs to, be unnecessary and redundant. For these reasons, we did not recommend crosswalks across minor side streets, -i.e. Allegre Drive, Amarillo Court, Shadow Drive, Luna Court, Estrella Court and Castle Drive. Regarding Mr. Preston's recommendation for a yellow school crosswalk on Castilian Road at Silvergate Drive, the California'Vehicle Code (CVC) section 21368 states that a crosswalk on a roadway not contiguous to the school grounds "may be...yellow if...there are no intervening crosswalks other than those contiguous to the school grounds and it appears that the facts and circumstances require special ' painting or marking of the crosswalks." Since there are yellow crosswalks at the intersection of Silvergate Drive at Amarillo road, painting a yellow crosswalk at this location would not conform to ' the CVC. Regarding Mr. Preston's recommendation for a crosswalk crossing Silvergate Drive at Peppertree Road, this intersection was analyzed when we conducted the School Safety and Crossing Guard Study in May, 1985, and again in October, 1986, when we recommended four-way STOP sign installation. We did not then and do not now, recommend a 'crosswalk crossing at Silvergate Drive at Peppertree_Road. School children are directed to the adult crossing guard at Amarillo Road. . Pedestrians of other ages have the benefit of the four-way STOP sign installation to cross in the existing unmarked crosswalks. PLEASANTON•SACRAMENTO•FRESNO•CONCORD fi .• Mr. Thompson -2- January 14, 1987 • Regarding Mr. Preston's recommendation for signing at the pavement legend on Silvergate Drive north of and south of Hansen Drive, we believe he is referring to the pavement legend on Hansen Drive east of and west of Amarillo Road. We concur that the existing pavement legend reading "SLOW SCHOOL XING" is lacking the optional parallel school crosswalk warning signs. >It is recommended that these signs (W66 and W66A) be installed within 50 feet in advance of the crosswalk for both eastbound and westbound traffic. Finally, regarding the passenger loading zone on Silvergate Drive, we believe that Mr. Preston is referring to the passenger loading zone on Amarillo Road directly in front of Neilsen School. We concur with Mr. Preston's statement that parents or other motorists parking in this zone be properly notified that unattended vehicle parking is prohibited. Further recommendations regarding the parking situation on Amarillo Road will be presented in our study of the Neilsen School area in response to the letter and petition submitted by Ms. Linda Carter. rah 157-026M.2MD