The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutItem 7.2 San Ramon Rd/Alcosta Traffic Signal (2) CITY OF DUBLIN AGENDA STATEMENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: September 10, 1984 SUBJECT San Ramon Road/Alcosta Boulevard Traffic Signal EXHIBITS ATTACHED Letter from James Robinson, City Manager , San Ramon, dated September 6 , 1984 ; Letter from DKS Associates dated July 23 , 1984 RECOMMENDATION Consider report and direct Staff to prepare a response FINANCIAL STATEMENT: Estimated total project cost - $130 , 000 Annual signal maintenance and operation costs approxi- mately $5 , 600 per year DESCRIPTION At the regular City Council meeting on July 9 , 1984 , the City Council selected a subcommittee to negotiate with representatives from San Ramon on the distribution of costs associated with the installation of a traffic signal at San Ramon Road and Alcosta Boulevard. The subcommittee met in July and discussed the positions of both cities . However , a mutually acceptable resolution was not reached between the representatives . Therefore, the matter continues to be unresolved. The City of San Ramon has requested that the Dublin City Council reconsider the proposal to share construction costs equally and San Ramon would assume 750 of the ongoing operational costs , with Dublin having responsibility for the remaining 250 . The City of Dublin is currently holding a deposit from Tract 4668 in the amount of $25 , 000 , which is to be used for this project . Therefore, if the San Ramon proposal were accepted, the City of Dublin ' s construction costs would be as follows : 50% of Construction Costs $ 65 ,000 Less Developer Deposit 25 ,000 Cost to be Incurred by General Fund $ 40 ,000 The City would also incur 250 of the continued operating costs . It is recommended that the City Council consider the proposal and direct Staff to prepare a response . ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- COPIES TO: ITEM NO. .� At of San Ramon 2222 Camino Ramon San Ramon, California 94583 (415) 838-2424 September 6 , 1984 Rich Ambrose, City Manager City of Dublin 6500 Dublin Blvd Dublin, CA 94568 Dear Rich: As you are aware both the City of San Ramon and City of Dublin Council and Staff have met to discuss the proposed signal improvements at Alcosta and San Ramon Valley Boulevard. However, a resolution determining the level of participation by each city to fund the signal has not been reached. Originally the City of San Ramon recommended that the cost of the signal improvements be shared equally between the two cities with San Ramon contributing 75% for maintenance and utility costs to operate the signal. This recommendation was based on the assumption that both San Ramon and Dublin benefited equally from the proposed signal improvements . A traffic study was later conducted by Contra Costa County and it was determined that traffic flow accounted for a 60/40 split between Dublin and San Ramon respectively. In addition, further review in the form of a consultant study by D.K.S. Associates, traffic engineers , was conducted on behalf of the City of San Ramon to review the total needs of Alcosta Boulevard including traffic signal improvements at Alcosta and San Ramon Valley Blvd. It. was the consultant ' s conclusion that the signal improvements mutually benefited both cities who shared the intersection equally. The City of san Ramon is well aware of the stated need to complete the necessary signal improvements at Alcosta/San Ramon Valley Blvd. We are also aware that the proposed signalization of the I-680 off ramps will contribute to the necessity to resolve this issue as soon as possible. Both the Cities of Dublin and San Ramon will benefit from this Caltrans funded project and we will want to insure that these signals are appropriately tied into the Alcosta/San Ramon Blvd Signal. The City Council is anxious to create an agreement with the City of Dublin to complete these signal improvements . Based on the County' s study and our consultant study, the City Council would request that Dublin reevaluate our City' s proposal to share equally the cost of the signal improvements with San Ramon contributing 75% of the maintenance and utility costs . The City Council feels . this is an equitable formula for both cities and would request that the Dublin City Council react favorably to this proposal at its regular meeting of Monday, September 10 , 1984 . If you have any questions regarding this request please don ' t hesitate to call. Your continued cooperation is appreciated. Sincere/ , i Ames H. Robinson City Manager JHr/jm Traffic Transportation Engineering associates Principals: Charles E.De Leuw,Jr.,P.E. William H.Dietrich,P.E. July 23, 1984 Larry R. Grove,PE. y Michael A.Kennedy,PE. Hans W.Korve,PE. Richard T.Sauve,P.E. Mr. Jim Robinson, City Manager Dan.iel T.Smith,Jr,PE. City of San Ramon . 2222 Camino Ramon San Ramon, CA 94583 Subject: Alcosta Boulevard/San Ramon Boulevard Signal Dear Jim: Per your request, DKS Associates has evaluated proposed signal placement at the intersection of Alcosta Boulevard and San Ramon Valley Boulevard. Traffic volumes have grown in the last few years at Alcosta/San Ramon and exceed the guidelines (warrants) for signalization. The goal of providing a signal at Alcosta/San Ramon is to improve orderly traffic movement, minimize delay and reduce accident frequency. The following sections identify the need for signalization and the benefits accrued. SIGNAL NEED Signals are installed based on need using warrants stated in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. Signal warrants for this intersection were analyzed in Bob Faraone 's staff report of June 26, 1934. The intersection meets the minimum vehicular volume warrant for signalization . as established by Caltrans. The majority of traffic (about 60%) using this intersection has either an origin or destination in Dublin. On the critical westbound approach, traffic to and from Dublin accounts for 65% of total traffic. The intersection of Alcosta and San Ramon is the northern gateway to Dublin and its commercial/retail centers which generate a significant sales tax revenue base for the city. To better reflect the need for signalization and its cause, assume that San Ramon Boulevard did not extend south to Dublin. The remaining tee intersection would not meet any of the prescribed signal warrants and could be adequately controlled by stop signs. SIGNAL BENEFITS The benefits of signalization are more orderly movement of traffic and potential reductions in delay. Since the predominant use of the intersection is to and from Dublin, Dublin business and residents are the 1419 Broadway, Suire 700, Oakland, California 94612-2069 • 4151763-2061 associates Page 2 Alcosta/San Ramon Signal primary benificiaries. Even with nearby development, the primary need for signalization would be for Dublin-oriented traffic. The Dublin general plan includes a ramp modification for the I-680/Alcosta interchange which would relocate the southbound off and on ramps at San Ramon Valley Boulevard. This would increase the amount of Dublin traffic using the Alcosta/San Ramon intersection since the northeastern area of Dublin east of I-680 would have to pass through the intersection to access the new freeway ramps. FUNDING Caltrans uses jurisdictional lines to allocate signalization costs for shared intersections primarily at freeway ramps where the signal would not be needed without the freeway and all jurisdictions benefit from freeway access. This is not the case at Alcosta/San Ramon where a common roadway intersection (as opposed to a ramp intersection.) falls within two jurisdictions and the city of Dublin is much more depenedent on the intersection to provide access. According to jurisdictional lines, three legs of the intersection are in San Ramon and one leg is in Dublin. However, this is a unique situation where the city of Dublin generates more than half the traffic which creates a need for signalization and its City-wide access relies on this intersection. In addition, the Alcosta/San Ramon intersection is the northern gateway to Dublin 's commercial/retail district providing the only direct freeway access from I-680. Therefore, cost allocation by jurisdictional lines is not appropriate or in the best interest of either city. The most appropriate and fair means of sharing costs would be to divide the installation and maintenance cost evenly between the two cities. Should you have any questions regarding the need for signalization at Alcosta/San Ramon, please feel free to contact me. ncerel.,� 1 ,r ` /R nsf S. McCourt, P.E. v Proje Manager rsml/ramonl