Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout7.5 SanRamonRoadPlanLine CITY OF DUBLIN AGENDA STATEMENT MEETING DATE' April 25, 1983 SUBJECT EXHIBITS ATTACHED · San Ramon Road Plan Line · Report from City Traffic Engineer dated 4/18/83; Schematic Street Plan Line Drawings RECOMMENDATION : See Below ~~ FINANCIAL STATEMENT' Preliminary estimated cost of entire project, excluding landscaping outside of roadway and undergrounding of utilities--S2.2 million. Cost would be somewhat offset by developer contributions- Project could be undertaken in phases. DESCRIPTION : The City Council, at its meeting of January 24, 1983, authorized the City Engineer and City Traffic Engineer to undertake a comprehensive traffic study of San Ramon Road, which would result in the development of an ultimate plan line for that road. This study has been completed and is attached for City Council consideration. Also attached are the plan line drawings, which pictorially represent the lane configuration as it is plotted against the topography of the San Ramon corridor. The Traffic Engineer and Planning Director reviewed those areas which are yet to be developed in the City, and which will generate additional traffic on San Ramon Road. As a result of this review, it was concluded that the capacity of San Ramon Road will be inadequate, resulting in traffic jams and undesirable traffic congestion as these areas are developed in the future. In order to meet the present and future capacity needs, and improve traffic safety along San Ramon Road, a number of recommendations have been made by the engineering staff. Some of these recommendations can be undertaken immediately, while others involve costly long-term capital improvements- In order to facilitate the decision-making process with respect to this study, Staff has attempted to identify those issues and alternatives which appear to be important. COPIES TO: Chamber of Commerce Mr. Ben Maghsoudi Property Owners w/in Specific Plan area ISSUE #1 - Street Width A. Should San Ramon Road be improved to provide the additional lanes and accompanying traffic capacity as recommended? B. If not, are there particular sections of the improvement plan which are acceptable to the City Council: 1-580 to Dublin Blvd. Dublin Blvd. to Amador Valley Blvd. Amador Valley Blvd. to Silvergate Drive Silvergate Drive to Alcosta Blvd. C. What alternative considerations, if any, should be addressed by Staff? D. What is the role of the center medians in the future improvement of San Ramon Road (i.e. traffic safety, beautification)? ISSUE #2 - Intersection Configuration and Signals A. Should the intersections be improved as recommended? B. If not, which intersection's improvements are acceptable to the City Council: Dublin Blvd. Amador Valley Blvd. Silvergate Drive Vomac Rd. Alcosta Blvd. C. What alternative considerations, if any, should be addressed by Staff? ISSUE #3 - Access The Traffic Engineer has recommended against the development of the frontage road as proposed by the County of Alameda, because such a road would utilize right-of-way in such a manner that the capacity of San Ramon Road could not be increased. In order to accommodate safe access of vehicles onto San Ramon Road, the Traffic Engineer has recommended: 1) consolidating existing driveways to fewer and wider driveways; 2) constructing an auxiliary southbound lane near driveways, for purposes of acceleration and deceleration of vehicles exiting or entering driveways; and 3) extending Amador Valley Blvd. across San Ramon Road, to facilitate better access to San Ramon Road for future commercial and residential areas which are presently undeveloped. A. Do the access improvements recommended adequately address those issues which have been raised earlier? B. If so, are they acceptable as part of the overall improvement plan of San Ramon Road? C. Are there other considerations which should be addressed by Staff? ISSUE #4 - Specific Plan Designation--Dublin Blvd. to Martin Creek A. The access issue, which is identified above, leads one to another issue: Should the City deal with access problems as they arise on a parcel-by-parcel basis, or should the City take the approach of encouraging the development, which occurs in this area, to deal with access on a more comprehensive basis? One method of accomplishing a more comprehensive approach would involve the development of a "Specific Plan" for the area. A specific plan is a document that sets forth local policy objectives and special development requirements for a given area. The Specific Plan can be used as an overlay to existing conventional zoning, or in conjunction- with a Special Planned Development designation. The Specific Plan can include regulations on land use, building locations, density, circulation, etc. A Specific Plan could be utilized to accomplish the following: 1. Special access problems could be alleviated by designing future road locations. 2. The combination of smaller lots to accomplish larger scale integrated development could be encouraged. 3 Bring about coordinated development among multiple property owners. In the absencaie of a Specific Plan, the parcels may develop individually, with smaller, less coordinated and less efficient development patterns. Each parcel may have an individual access to the acceleration/deceleration lane. A Specific Plan could encourage the extension of Amador Valley Blvd. to serve the area west of San Ramon Road. Access to the parcels could then be provided from the Amador Valley Blvd. extension. This would allow direct access to the north and to the east to traffic leaving the area. To assure that conflicting development does not occur prior to the adoption of the Specific Plan~ the Council consideration would need to be given to the adoption of an interim zoning ordinance. The interim zoning ordinance would~ in effect, prohibit any uses which may be in conflict with the contemplated Specific Plan. B. Is the City Council interested in the development of a Specific Plan for the area in question? C. If so, what should be the parameters of the area? D. Should this issue be addressed as part of the General Plan process or separately? E. Does the City Council want Staff to prepare a Specific Plan overlay zone, which would include access requirements for those properties within the designated area, for consideration and hearing by the Planning Commission? F. Does the City Council want Staff to prepare an interim zoning ordinance, which would prohibit uses in conflict with the contemplated Specific Plan, for Council consideration? ISSUE #5 - Project Priority Is the City Council in agreement with the short-term priorities identified by the Traffic Engineer: 1. Amador Valley Blvd. Intersection Improvements 2. Alcosta Blvd. Intersection widening and signalization 3. Silvergate Drive Intersection widening and signalization. B. Does the City Council have different priorities with respect to San Ramon Road? C. Should these projects be included in the City' improvement program? s capital ISSUE #6 - Public Hearing Format Since a number of property owners, the Chamber of Commerce, and others have expressed an interest in the development of San Ramon Road, a public hearing should be used to facilitate public input on this study. The City Council should consider when that hearing should occur, and what issues should be addressed. RECOMMENDATION It is Staff's recommendation that the City Council take the following action: 1. Review the traffic study and schematic street plan line drawing as a basi~ for future improvements to San Ramon Road. 2. Review the issues discussed and determine if additional issues need to be addressed by Staff prior to a public hearing. 3. Set a public hearing date for consideration of the San Ramon Plan Line. 4. Refer to the Planning Commission for public hearing the issue of a "Specific Plan" designation~ and direct Staff to prepare the necessary documents to facilitate such consideration. 5. Direct Staff to prepare, for Council consideration~ an interim zoning ordinance to prohibit uses in conflict with the contemplated Specific Plan. 6. Direct Staff to prepare a policy regarding the installation of "non-traffic" direction signs.