HomeMy WebLinkAbout6.2 EstbSpdLmtOnStagecoachAGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: September 9, 1985
SUBJECT:
EXHIBITS ATTACHED:
Establishment of Speed Limit on
Stagecoach Road
1 Ordinance
2 Speed Study by TJKM
RECOMMENDATION:
Open public heari__ag~
Recezve presentation by Staff
Receive public input
Close public hearing
Deliberate
Waive reading and adopt on an
urgency basis
FINANCIAL STATEMENT:
Minor cost for speed limit signs.
DESCRIPTION: On May 13, 1985, the City Council
adopted a resolution regulating vehicular traffic on
Stagecoach Road. The Council also authorized the City
Traffic Engineer to conduct a speed survey on Stagecoach
Road for the purposes of using radar enforcement.
The Speed survey completed by TJKM recommends:
1)
2)
The speed limit on Stagecoach Road in the existing
residential area (from Amador Valley Blvd. to a
point 1500 feet north) remain at 25 mph.
The speed limit on Stagecoach Road from 1500 feet
north of Amador Valley Boulevard to the northern
City limit be 35 mph.
At its meeting of August 26, 1985, the City Council modified
the Ordinance by extending the 25 mph zone to include the
Amador Lakes Mini-Park frontage. This would result in a 25
mph speed limit being established on Stagecoach Road from
Amador Valley Boulevard to a point approximately 1700 feet
north. It would also provide for a 35 mph speed limit on
Stagecoach Road from a point approximately 1700 feet north
of Amador Valley Boulevard to the northerly City limit.
ITEM NO. ~,,J~ COPIES TO:
ORDINANCE NO. -85
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
ESTABLISHING TRAFFIC REGULATIONS
The City Council of the City of Dublin does ordain as follows:
Section 1. TWENTY-FIVE (25) MILES PER HOUR (MPH):
The declared speed limit for the following street segment
shall be established at 25 mph:
a. Stagecoach Road
From Amador Valley Boulevard to 1,700 feet north.
Section 2.
THIRTY-FIVE (35) MILES PER HOUR (MPH):
The declared speed limit for the following street segment
shall be established at 35 mph:
a. Stagecoach Road
From a point 1,700 feet north of Amador Valley
Boulevard to the northern City limit.
Section 3. IMMEDIATE EFFECT
This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon its
enactment because the adoption and immediate effect thereof is
necessary in order to protect vehicular and pedestrian safety.
Section 4. POSTING OF ORDINANCE
The City Clerk of the City of Dublin shall cause this
ordinance to be posted in at least three (3) public places in the
City of Dublin in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government
Code of the State of California.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City
of Dublin on this th day of 1985, by the following
votes:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
Mayor
City Clerk
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
August 12, 1985
Lee Thompson, City Engineer
City of Dublin
Ty Tekawa, Principal Associate
TJKM
SuBjECT: Stagecoach Road Speed Limit
The California Vehicle Code (CVC) requires that certain studies be
conducted and procedures be followed in order to allow the use of radar for
speed enforcement.
Sections 22357, 22348 and 22358 of CVC allows cities to establish various
speed limits on the basis of an engineering and traffic survey to include a
study of prevailing speeds, accident records and conditions not readily
apparent to the driver. Section 40802 provides that engineering and
traffic surveys and resulting speed limits are valid for only a five year
period when radar enforcement is utilized.
TJKM conducted radar speed studies along Stagecoach Road between Amador
Valley Boulevard and the north city limit (copies of the study analysis are
attached). Based on these studies, a review of accident records and a
through field investigation; retention of the 25 mph speed limit is
recommended from Amador Valley Boulevard to 1,500 feet north. The speed
limit northerly from 1,500 feet to the north city limit is recommended to
be 35 mph. The City of San Ramon has recently posted a 25 mph zone between
the city limit line and Alcosta Boulevard. The justification for this
limit was the "residential nature" of Stagecoach Drive in that area.
In preparing these recommendations, TJKM has followed all applicable
provisions and requirements of the California Department of Transportation
and following the enacting of an ordinance based on these recommendations,
the City of Dublin may enforce speed limits'on portions of Stagecoach Road
with the use of radar.
Prevailinq Speed~:
Radar speed surveys were conducted on Stagecoach Road on May 22
August 2, 1985, summaries of the radar survey for the location
enclosed. The results are further summarized as follows:
Location on Number of Average
Date 'Staqecoach Road Direction Vehicles Speed
5/22 2,500 feet North of North 50 29 35
Amador Valley Blvd. South 50 29 39
and
are
85th
Percentile
Lee Thompson -2-
August 12, 1985
Location on Number of Average 85th
Date Staqecoach Road Direction Vehicles Speed Percentile
8/02 700 feet North of North 54 38 45
Amador Valley Blvd. South 52 34 41
8/02 500 feet South of North 54 37 45
Southlake Drive South 58 37 45
8/02 Stagecoach Road @ North 70 36 44
Craydon Circle South 64 36 46
'(San Ramon)
The 85th percentile speed is that speed at or below which 85 percent of the
observed vehicles are travelling. It is a well recognized fact among
traffic engineers that most drivers are able to drive at reasonable speeds
without the benefit of any speed limits, speed signs, or enforcement. The
behavior of traffic is a good indication of the appropriate speed zone
which should apply on a particular highway section. It is generally felt
that at least 85 percent of the drivers operate at speeds which are
reasonable and prudent for the conditions prevailing in each situation.
Therefore, the 85th percentile speed of a spot speed survey is the primary
indicator of a speed limit which might be imposed subject to the secondary
factors of accident experience, traffic volumes, road features or other
special situations.
The 85th percentile speeds on May 22nd were 35 mph for northbound traffic
and 39 mph for southbound traffic. The surveys taken on August 2nd showed
85th percentile speeds northbound at about 45 mph. The southbound 85th
percentile speeds varied from 41 to 46 miles per hour depending on the
section of roadway on which the survey was taken. The May 22nd speeds were
probably lower because some construction was still in progress on
Stagecoach Road. The August 2nd survey was taken when construction was
complete. Note that although San Ramon has posted it's section of
Stagecoach Road at 25 mph average speed and 85th percentile speed are about
35 mph and 45 mph respectively.
Accident Records:
We are not aware of any accident problems along the portion of Stagecoach
Road north of the existing single family residences.
Conditions Not Readily Apparent to the Driver:
From Amador Valley Boulevard to 1,500 feet north, there is an island
dividing Stagecoach Road from a frontage road along single family
residences. There are openings in this island for access from the frontage
road onto Stagecoach Road which are not readily apparent to the driver.
There is also a crest of a vertical curve in this same area.
Lee Thompson -3-
August 12, 1985
Recommendations:
Although 85th percentile speeds recorded within the section of roadway from~
Amador Valley Boulevard to 1,500 feet north were 45 mph northbound and 41
mph southbound, it is recommended that the speed limit remain at 25 mph as
posted. The conditions referred to in the previous paragraph dictate a
limit less than the recorded 85th percentile speed.
The 85th percentile speeds in the area from 1,500 feet north of Amado'r
Valley Boulevard to the north city limit varied from 35 to 45 miles per
hour. The lower speeds were logged during the May 22, 1985 survey. The
higher speeds occurred during the survey taken on August 2nd. The speed
study analysis sheets show that the 85th percentile speeds in this area are
not within the 10 mph pace (except one, which is at the high end of the
pace). The 10 mph pace is the range within which the highest percentage of
the observed traffic drives. That pace was 34 to 43 for northbound traffic
and 29 to 38 for Southbound traffic. TJKM recommends a speed of 35 mph in
this section.
To summarize our recommendations, the speed limit from Amador Valley
Boulevard to 1,500 feet north should remain at 25 mph and the speed limit
from 1,500 feet north of Amador Valley Boulevard to the north city limit
should be 35 mph. It is recommended that the City Council enact these
speed limits by ordinance. These speed limits will be effective and
enforceable only after posting of appropriate speed limit signs.
nlc
Attachments
15701
SPOT SP~ED STUDY AI~ALYSIS
FOR T~dE CITY OF DUBLIN
LOCATION
STAGECOACH RD. 700 FEET
DIRECTION
DAY OF T~'~E WEEK
DAT~
TIME OF T!~E DAY
~'OSTED SPE£D LI~!T
VE~IC~ES OBSERVED
NORT~BUND
FRIDAY
8-;-'-85
24:~5 - 15:15
54
NORT~ OH' A~ADOR VA~EY B~-.
DEVELOPMENT RESIDEN~IAL
50t~ PERC~NTI~ Sk'~D 38
85c~ PERCENTILE SPEED ~ 45
10 MP~ PAC~ S~'EED 34 'FO 43
PERCENT !N PACE SPEED 64
RANGE Or S.-'EEDS 29 T'O 50
SKEWNESS INDEX i. 18
CUMULATIVE S;-'E~D CoRVE
PERCNT.
O? TOT. i00%
0 ~0 20 30 40
Sk'EED
~ i
t~--I--
~ I
I
I
I ~ I
I ~
I · I
~--~ ,,i-
l · I
~ I I
50 60
(MP,~)
--t
1
i
I
t
1
--1
l
I
--!
I
I
I
70
SPOT -~ ~,=,=-r~ A,x4AL. YS
W .... STUDY iS
FOR TPE CI?Y OF DUBLIN
uOCATION
S'TAG~ZCOAC;~ RD. 7'D0
DIRECTION
DAY OF THE WEEK
DAT~
TIME OF TME DAY
POSTED S¢'EED ~i~IT
VEHICLES OBSERVED
SOUTHBOUND
FRIDAY
8-2-85
14:i5 - 15:!5
25
5~
NORT~ OK AMADOR VA=~Y B~_.
DEVELOPMENT RESIDEN'~IAL
50~n ~RC~'FI~E Si-'E~O 34
85~h PERCENTilE S~EED 41
i0 MP'M PACE S~'~D 2~ 70 38
PERCENT !N PACE SPE~D 69
RANGE Or S~-'~DS 21 TO 4/
SKEWNESS INDEX 1.25
CUMULATIVE
SPEED NUM- PERCNT.
( ,'q P :--t )B S. R 0 F 7 0 ]-.
21 i 1.92
28 0 e. 00
'-'~ :" 0
27 ", I. 92
28 ~ i. 9:-'
29 4 7.69
30 3 5.77
3i 5 9. 6~
32 4 7. 69
33 ~ '.'. 92
34 '7 ! 3. 46
3.=; 4 7. 69
36 2 3. 8'.5
37 5 9. 62
38 i i. '92
39 i i. 92
40 i i. 92
... .3 5. 77
42 I ~'. 92
43 2 3. 85
44 i i. 92
45 i ~. 92
46 i i.
47 i i ~ 92
48 0 !Z!. O!D
49 ~il 0. 00
50 0 0. ~10
5 i 0 D. 00
52 0 0. Z~O
53 ~Z~ 0. 00
54 0 0. 00
55 0 0. 0 ~
56 0 0. 00
57 0 0.00
58 0 0. O~Z~
59 0 0.00
60 0 0.00
CLIMUL.
:' R C ,'q T.
!.92
', 4..-1
3. 85 90%
3.85
5. 77
7. ~9 80%
15. 38
2i. 15
30. 7'7
"J ,'-3. 46 '70%
40. 38
6!. 54
G5. 38 60%
75. ~!~ 0
.' 6.
'78. 85
8-0 '77
86.
88. 46
94. ~_~':' TM
96. i5
98. e8
00. 00
0 iZ~. 00 30 %
00. 00
O~Z~. 00
00. 00
00. 00
00. 00
00. 00 i 0%
00. 00
00. 00
00. 00
e~l. 00 0%
SF'E~ZD CURVE
100%
0 ~0 20 30 40
50 60
(~F'N)
SPOT S~Z'E£D STUDY A:~ALYSiS
FOR THE CITY OF DUB~i~
LOCATION
STAGECOACH RD. 500 SuUTM
DIRECTION
DAY OF T~E
DATE
TImE Oh' T~E DAY
POSTED SPEED LIMIT
VEMICL~S OBSeRVeD
NORTMBOUND
?~IDAY
Ii:35 - i2:30
~5
54
Or' S~dUT~dLA¼E D~.
D~VE~OPMENT
50~n PERCENTI~E SPEED
8~n PERCENTI~_~ S~EED
i0 MPH PACE SPEED
PERCENT IN PACE S>-'EED
RANGE 0~ SPEEDS
SKEWNESS I~DEX
R~S!DEN~AL
37
~45
31 ;'O 40
62
24 fO 55
1. t8
CUMULATIVE
S;Z, EED Num- ?ERCNT. CUMUL.
( I~,PH ) BER O!=' ?OT.
~4 i i. 85 i. 85
26 0 0. 00 i. 85
27 0 0.00 i. 85
28 I l. 85 3. 70
29 0 0.00 3. 70
30 ;=' 3. ?'0 7.4 i
3~ 4 7 41 14.81
Jo. 7.41 ,-,-. 22
33 3 5.56 27. 78
34 4 7.4 ] 35. 19
35 c., 3.7~i~ 38. 89
36 5 9.26 48. 15
37 4 7.4 i 55.56
38 5 9. 26 64.81
39 0 0.00 64. 81
40 3 5.56 70. 37
41 0 0. 00 70. 3'7
42 1 1. 85 72. ~.~-'="='
43 ~ 3.70 75.93
44 3 5.56 81. 48
45 4 7.41 88. 89
46 ='-' ~. 7092. ~_
47 2 3.7~ 96. 30
48 0 0.00 96.30
49 i i. 85 98. i 5
50 0 0.00 98. i5
51 0 0. E~O 98. 15
5~ 0 0.00 98. 15
53 0 0.00 98. 15
54 0 0.00 98. 15
~'= * ! 85 i00. 00
56 ~Zt 0.00 100.00
57 0 0.00 !00. 00
58 0 0.00 z00.00
59 0 0.00 i00. 00
60 0 0.00 i00. 00
61 0 0.00 100.00
62 0 0.00 i00.00
63 0 0.00 i00. 00
SPEED CURVE
100%
80%
'70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
~1
0 20 20 30 40
S~EED
50 60
(MPM)
70
SPOT Sk'EED STUDY A:~ALYSIS
FOR THE CITY OF DbBulN
LOCATION
STAG~COAC~ RD. 500
DIRECTION
DAY OF T~E WEEK
DATE
TiME OF Tide DAY
POSTED S?E~D ~!MiT
VEMICLES OBSERVED
SOUTHBOUND
FRIDAY
8-2-85
ii:35 - 12:30
25
~8
SOUTh, Oh SOUT,~LAKE DR.
DEVE: OPMENT RES I DEN-~I AL
50¢.n P,'.--RCEN]'IL.E Si-'EED 37
!
85~h PERCENTIuE SPEED 45
10 ~P'H PACE S?EED 34 TO 43
PERCENT IN PACE SPEED 62
RANGE 0~ S:-'EEDS ~5 TO 5i
SKEWNESS INDEX i. ii
S~Z, EED NUM-
A H ) B E R
25
26 0
2'7 0
28 3
29 3
30 i
31 ~
'=' '2
33
34 /4-
35 5
36 7
37 3
38 4
39 3
40
41 4
42
50
51
52
53 0
54 0
55 0
56 0
57 0
58 0
59 0
60
6i 0
62 0
63 0
64 0
CUMULATIVE
SP'EED CURVE
100%
t
0 10 20 30 40
S?E~D
1
I
I
50 60
(mPH)
1
I
I
SPOT SOEED STUDY A:~ALYSIS
FOR TME CITY OF DOBLiN
%OCATION STAGECOACN RD. ~ CRAYDON CiR.
D!VE~OF'MENT
DTRECTION NOR]'~BOUND 5~h PERCENTILE SPEED
DAY 0~ Ti=E WE:~. F~IDAY 85~ PERC~NTi=~ Sk'EED
DATE 8-2-85 10 MF'~ PACE SPEED
TI~E 0~ T~E DAY 9:55 - ii:30 ¢,~RC~NT IN PACE SPEED
POS]-ED SPEED Li ~ z ~
m~, 25 RANGE OF SPEEDS
VEHICLES OBSERVED 70 SKEWNESS INDEX
R!SiDEN~IA~
!
44
30 TO 39
6i
28 i-O ~9
i.25
CUMULATIVE
SPEED CURVE
0 10 20 30 40
50 60
70
SPOT S'.-'~=2D STUDY ANALYSIS
FOR T~dE CITY OF DuBLiN
uOCATION STAG~COAC=i RD. ~ CRAYDO~N CiR.
D~_VE=OPMENT
DIRECTION SOUTHBOUND 50tn PERCENTILE SPEED
DAY OF T~E w~ =~n~ · o,= ~r ~ - ~,~-
.... AY 85tn , ~Ru~,~TI~ ~_=D
DATE 8-2-85 ~0 MPM %"ACE S~'EED
~ME, ~ O? T~-~E DAY '~:55~ - .~1:30 C'CRC~N"F IN PACE ="'"~=~=_~_D
PUS~zD SPEED ' ~
-,M~T 25 RANGE OF SPEEDS
VEPtICLES OBSERVED S4 S:<~w,NESS iNDEX
R~,S i DE~T! AL
; 36
32 FO 40
29 ;0. 52
1. 44
CUmLLATiVE SPEED
SPEED :',.Iu M- ;"'-.Z R C,".4 T.
( ~!t'",H ) B:::' R OF 'FO"F. ~' RC~"F. 200%
29 : 1.56 i. 56
30 1 1..~-, 3. '!.~
3 t 4 6. P5 ':3. 3.9
3.'-2 "J-' 3,.,'~ 3 _, ,....." '=' 50 90%
33 5 7. 8i 20. 31
34 3 4. 69 25. 00
3";5 :. 5 '=, '3. 44 ~8. 44-
36 i i. 56 50. 00 80%
37 3 4. 69 54. 69
38 4 6. 25 60. 94
39 i 1. 56 6~. 50
40 5 '7.81 70.31 70]:
42 ,='~" ..:,~. 13 73. 44
42 i 1 ~ 56 75. 00
43 3 4. 69 79. 69
44 0 0. 00 79. 69 60%
45 2 3. ]3 82. 8i
46 2 ~'. 13 85. ~4
47 ~ 4. 69 90. 63
~.8 i i. 56 92. 19 50%
49 2 3. 13 95. 3
5 0 '=' ~
,._ ~. 1 ..~ 98 · 44
51 ~D 0. 00 98. 44
~c_ I ~ 56 ~00. 00 40%
~ 0 0. 00 100. 00
54 0 0. 00 ~00. 00
55 0 0. 00 100. 00
56. 0 0. ~0 ! 00.00 30%
57 0 0. 00 ! 00. 00
58 0 0. 00 100. 00
59 0 0. 00 i00. 00
60 0 0. 00 100. 00 20%
61 0 0. O,Z~ !00. 00
6~ 0 0. 00 100. 00
63 0 0. 00 i00. 00
64 0 0. 00 i00. 00 i0%
65 0 0.00 100. 00
66 0 0. 00 !00. 00
67 0 0. 00 i00. 00
68 0 0. 00 100. 00 0%
CURVE
I
I
0 ~0 20 30
Sk'EED
40 50
60
SPOT SPEED STUDY ANALYSIS
FOR THE CITY OF DUBLIN
LOCATION
STAGECOACH
DIRECTION
DAY OF THE WEEK
DATE
TIME OF THE DAY
POSTED SPEED LIMIT
VEHICLES OBSERVED
RD. 2500 FEET NORTH OF AMADOR VALLEY RD.
DEVELOPMENT RES I D. /OP~EN
NORTHBOUND 50th PERCENTILE SPEED
WEDNESDAY 85th PERCENTILE SPEED 35
5-22-85 10 MPH PACE SPEED 26 TO 35
11:40-12:50PM PERCENT IN PACE SPEED 72
~5 RANGE OF S~'EEDS 21 TO 47
55 SKEWNESS INDEX 1 ' 41
CUMULATIVE
SPEED NUM- PERCNT.
(MPH) BER OF TOT.
~':'1 ~ 5. 45
~':"=' 0 0.00
~'='~ 0 0.00
24 2 ~ ~.64
25
~ ~ =.64
26 6 10.91
27 5 9.09
28 5 9.09
29 8 14.55
~ ~=.64
31 ? 5.
~ 45
~'~' ~ ~ 45
7 ~ 5.45
34 1 1.82
35 4 7.27
36 1 1.82
37 2 ~ ~.64
38 1 1.82
39 0 0.00
40 0 0.00
4i 1 1.82
42 1 1.82
43 1 1.82
44 0 0.00
45 ~Z~ 0.00
46 0 0.00
47 I 1.82
48 0 0.00
49 0 0.00
50 0 0.00
51 0 0.00
52 0 0.00
53 0 0.00
54 0 0.00
55 0 0.00
56 0 0.00
57 0 0.00
58 0 0.00
59 0 0.00
60 0 0.00
CUMUL.
PRCNT.
5.45
5.45
5.45
9.09 90%
12.73
23.64
32.73
41.82 80%
56.36
60.00
65.45
70.91 70%
76.36
78.18
85.45
87.27 60%
90.91
92.73
92.73
92.73 50%
94.55
96.36
98.18
98.18 40~
98.18
98.18
100.00
100.00 30%
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00 20%
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00 10%
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00 0%
SPEED CURVE
100%
I I
0 10 20
30 40 50
SPEED (MPH)
60
SPOT SPEED STUDY ANALYSIS
FOR THE CITY OF DUBLIN
LOCATION
STAGECOACH RD. 2500
DIRECTION
DAY OF THE WEEK
DATE
TIME OF THE DAY
POSTED SPEED LIMIT
VEHICLES OBSERVED
SOUTHBOUND
WEDNESDAY
5-22-85
11:40-12:50PM
25
50
FEET NORTH OF AMADOR VALLEY RD.
DEVELOPMENT RESID./OPEN
50th PERCENTILE SPEED ,29
85th PERCENTILE SPEED 39
10 MPH PACE SPEED 25 TO 34
PERCENT IN PACE SPEED 64
RANGE 0~ SPEEDS 20 TO 48
SKEWNESS INDEX 1~24
CUMULATIVE
SPEED NUM- PERCNT.
(MPH) BER OF TOT.
20 1 '-2'. 00
21
~ 6.00
'="-' 1 '=' 00
23 0 0.00
24 '~.' 4.00
25 ~ 6. 00
26 ~ 6.00
27 ~ 6.00
28 7 14.00
29 5 10. 00
30 3 6.00
31 1 '=' 00
32
~- 4.00
~ ~ 6. 00
34 '=' 4. 00
35 0 0. 00
36 '-F' 4.00'
37 0 0. 00
38 1 '=~'. 00
39 1 '='. 00
40 '=' 4. 00
41 1 2.00
42 1 2 00
43 1 2 00
44 1 '-'. 00
45 o 0.00
46 0 0.00
47 0 0.00
48 1 '--'. 00
49 0 0. 00
50 0 0. 00
51 0 0. 00
52 0 0. 00
53 0 0. 00
54 0 0. 00
~ 0 0. 00
56 0 0.00
57 0 0. 00
58 0 0. 00
59 0 0.00
CUMUL.
PRCNT.
2.00
8.00
10.00
10.00
14.00
20.00
26.00
32.00
46.00
56.00
62.00
64.00
68.00
74.00
78.00
78.00
82.00
82.00
84.00
86.00
90.00
92.00
94.00
96.00
98.00
98.00
98.00
98.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
SPEED CURVE
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
0 10 20
1
I
I
30 40 50
SPEED (MPH)
60
C ty of San Ramo
2222 Camino Rarnon
San Rarnon, California 94583
(415) 866-1400
August 22, 1985
Mayor Peter Snyder
City of Dublin
P.O. Box 234
Dublin, CA 94568 ~.
Dear .~r:
Thank you for sending us the Notice of Public Hearing on Stagecoach
Road, in which you propose to change the speed limit from 25 to
35 MPH in front of the Amador Lakes project. As you know, Stagecoach
Road continues north through the City of San Ramon to Alcosta
Boulevard. The area in San Ramon, which is over 2,000 feet in
length, is adjacent to single family homes of the Sunny Glen retire-
ment community. The City of San Ramon intends to maintain this
25 MPH speed limit because of the residential nature and curvilinear
alignment of the street. We feel that if you increase the speed
limit from 25 MPH to 35 MPH the impact on San Ramon will be very
detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of those residents
in San Ramon. The increased sound and exposure to speeding traffic
is not acceptable.
Because of an increasing number of speeding complaints from residents
near Stagecoach Road to the City of San Ramon, we urge you to
maintain the 25 ~?H speed limit. Thank you for your assistance.
Very truly yours,
Mary L~u Oliver
Mayor
cc: Sunny Glen Retirement Community
Austin O'Hara
Phil Flores
City Council
Attachment
ESTABLISHMENT OF SPEED LIMIT ON STAGECOACH ROAD
Mayor Snyder opened the public hearing.
On May 13, 1985, the City Council adopted a resolution regulating vehicular
traffic on Stagecoach Road. The Council also authorized the City Traffic
Engineer to conduct a speed survey on Stagecoach Road for the purposes of
using radar enforcement.
The speed survey has been completed by TJKM and recommends that the speed
limit on Stagecoach Road in the existing residential area (from Amador Valley
Boulevard to a point 1500 feet north) remain at 25 mph and that the speed
limit on Stagecoach Road from 1500 feet north of Amador Valley Boulevard to
the northern City limit be 35 mph.
City Manager Ambrose read a letter from the Mayor of San Ramon urging that
the 25 mph speed limit be maintained with no 35 mph zone.
Ty Tikawa from TJKM explained how the speed survey was conducted as well as
the 85th percentile rationale. Mayor Snyder asked if traffic was surveyed
north or south bound. Mr. Tikawa responded that both directions were
surveyed.
A 35 mph speed limit was arrived at because no houses front this portion of
Stagecoach Road and no streets intersect.
City Manager Ambrose reported that you cannot use radar if you set a speed
limit lower than a speed survey calls for.
Cm. Hegarty felt it would be advisable to review the speeds in a couple of
years when more buildout has occurred.
City Manager Ambrose reported that it must be resurveyed at the end of a 5
year period anyway.
Cm. Moffatt indicated he would be more in favor of keeping a continuous 25
mph zone and not utilizing radar.
Cm. Moffatt questioned if San Ramon uses radar.
do.
It was reported that they
Mr. Tikawa reported that in compiling the speed survey, they use existing
conditions which may not be apparent to drivers.
Mayor Snyder closed the public hearing.
Cm. Hegarty repeated that although he would like to see the 25 mph limit all
the way through, he would rather have the 35 mph zone set in order to use
radar enforcement.
Cm. Moffatt questioned the location of the proposed park site and felt it
would be a good idea to continue the 25 mph zone to the end of the park site.
CM-4-184
Regular Meeting August 26, 1985
On motion of Cm. Hegarty, seconded by Mayor Snyder, and by majority vote (Cm.
Jeffery and Cm. Vonheeder absent), the Council waived the reading and
INTRODUCED an ordinance establishing traffic regulations on Stagecoach Road.
The 25 mph section is to be extended to include the park site. Voting NO on
this motion was Cm. Moffatt.
CITY COUNCIL SALARY
Mayor Snyder opened the public hearing.
On February 16, 1982, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 6, which
established the salary of members of the City Council at $150 per month in
accordance with the population schedule set forth by Section 36516 of the
Government Code.
On June 25, 1984, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 15-84 which amended
Ordinance No. 6 by increasing City Council salaries to $165 per month in
accordance with Section 36516 of the Government Code.
On January 1, 1985, AB 2281 became law, providing for an increase in the
salary schedule for City Councils in General Law Cities in accordance with
their population.
The City of Dublin's population falls within the 35,000 and under population
bracket which permits Councilmembers to receive $300 per month. AB 2281 did
not change the waiting period for such a salary increase to become effective
after the next regularly scheduled election. Based on this law, the city
Council adopted Ordinance No. 7-85 which increased the salary of City
Councilmembers to $300, effective December 16, 1986. Since that time, AB
387 was signed by the Governor and became effective on June 26, 1985. This
law provides that City Council salaries may be increased in accordance with
AB 2281 and would become effective within 30 days.
No public comments were made.
Mayor Snyder closed the public hearing.
On motion of Cm. Hegarty, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by unanimous vote (Cm.
Jeffery and Cm. Vonheeder absent), the Council waived the reading and
INTRODUCED an ordinance amending Ordinance No. 6 and repealing Ordinances No.
15-84 and No. 7-85 and providing for an increase of the salary for members of
the City Council.
CLOSED SESSION
At 8:15 p.m., the Council recessed to a closed executive session to discuss
pending litigation in accordance with Government Code Section 54956.9 (a);
and employee salary negotiations in accordance with Government Code Section
54957.6. At 9:42 p.m., the Council returned from closed session and the
public meeting was reconvened.
CM- 4-185
Regular Meeting August 26, 1985