HomeMy WebLinkAbout7.1 DB@HansenTrafficIssuesCITY CLERK
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 3, 1997
SUBJECT:
Dublin Boulevard & Hansen Drive Traffic Issues
Report Prepared by: Lee S. Thompson, Public Works Director
EXHIBITS ATTACHED:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
Report from TJKM
Resolution
Copy of 5/20/97 staff report with resolution for No Parking
Zone
Sketch Plan
Copy of Capital Improvement Project Work Forms
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive TJKM's presentation and consider installation of an
all-way stop and/or elimination of parking on the north side
of Dublin Boulevard east of Hansen Drive.
If the City Council determines that stop signs should be
installed on Dublin Boulevard, adopt the resolution (Exhibit
2) which has been prepared for this purpose.
If Council decides to eliminate parking along Dublin
Boulevard east of Hansen Drive, adopt the resolution
included in the May 20th Staff Report (Exhibit 3).
Direct Staff to begin design immediately on a traffic signal at
this intersection.
Provide an}' other appropriate direction.
FIN.~NCIAL STATEMENT:
Cost of installing signs and striping for an all-way stop is estimated
at $1.500.
The cost of curb painting for the removal of parking is estimated to
be $t 50. Sufficient funds have been budgeted in the Street
Maintenance Operating Budget to fund this cost.
g:'mgenmisc~dubhstop
COPIES TO:
Briarhill Homeo~xaners Assoc.; Oleg Dubney;
Bay Tree Tenants; TJKM; De Silva-Gates, Hexcel
Cost of a traffic signal together with attendant street widening
improvements is estimated to be $340,000. Sufficient traffic impact
funds have been collected to date to fund this cost.
DESCRIPTION: At its March 4, 1997 meeting, the City Council received a request
from the Briarhilt Homeowners Association that a traffic signal be installed at the intersection of Dublin
Boulevard and Hansen Drive. At Council's May 20, 1997 meeting, the City Council received a report
regarding a signal warrant study that had been performed by TJKM. Th/s report fo,and that a signal is, in
fact. warranted at that intersection. A copy of the staff report for that meeting is attached as Exhibit 3.
After receiving public comments, the City Council directed Staff to include the traffic signal as a capital
improvement project for review in the upcoming Five Year Capital Improvement Program, and that the
following additional steps be taken:
1 ) Return to the City Council at the June 3rd meeting with proposed design and impacts of installing
an all-way stop at this intersection.
2) Trim or remove shrubbery at the northwest corner in order to improve visibility (this work has
been completed).
3) Install additional right-mm arrows for the westbound to northbound direction (a striping work
order has been transmitted to the City's striping contractor).
4) Provide a recommendation regarding installation of rumble strips on Dublin Boulevard
approachin_g the intersection from the west to slow traffic in advance of the stop sign.
In addition, the Ci'ry Council did not approve the proposed No Parking Zone that was recommended for
the north side of Dublin Boulevard east of Hansen Drive.
TJKM, the City's traffic engineering consultant, has prepared a memo to address the Council's concerns
(Exhibit 1 ). TJKM has also prepared a map to be presented to the Council that shows the proposed
roadway geometrics for the alt-way stop intersection.
The impacts of installing an all-way stop are as follows:
I The side traffic on Hansen Drive would be able to enter Dublin Boulevard without long delays.
2) The need for removal of parking on Dublin Boulevard due to sight distance restriction would be
reduced.
This intersection would become a five-way stop due to the two driveways on the south side of the
intersection (DeSilva-Gates and Hexcel). Although the amount of traffic exiting these driveways
is relatively small, it does complicate the assignment of right-of-way.
4)
It is expected that there will be an increase in rear-end accidents on Dublin Boulevard, especially
on the eastbound (downhill) direction.
Page '~
5)
It is anticipated that at the two peak traffic periods for the Valley Christian School, traffic will
back up to Donlon Wa), on the east and to Silvergate Drive to the west. This would not only cause
frustration on the part of the Dublin Boulevard motorists but also tend to block the commercial
driveways to those offices and businesses on the north side of Dublin Boulevard.
Staff'and TJKM do not recommend the installation of rumble strips. They would have the effect of
slowing eastbound downhill traffic; however, these devices create a considerable amount of noise, which
would disturb residents along the north side of Dublin Boulevard between Silvergate Drive and Hansen
Drive. In the past, the City has installed rumble strips which have ultimately been removed because of
noise complaints.
A representative of TJKM will be available to discuss the impacts of the proposed all-way stop at this
intersection (potentially a five-way stop allowing for the two driveways on the south side of the
intersection).
Staff is recommending:
1 ) That the CiD' Council receive TJKM's presentation and consider installation of an all-way stop
and/or elimination of par 'king on the north side of Dublin Boulevard east of Hansen Drive.
2) If the Ciu' Council determines that stop signs should be installed on Dublin Boulevard, that the
City Council adopt the resolution (Exhibit 2) which has been prepared for this purpose.
3) If the City Council decides to eliminate par'king along Dublin Boulevard east of Hansen Drive,
that the CiU' Council adopt the resolution included in the May 20th Staff Report (Exhibit 3).
4) That the CiD' Council direct Staff to begin design immediately on a traffic signal at this
intersection.
5) That the Ciu' Council provide any other appropriate direction.
Page 3
Transportation Consultants
MEMO
May 29, 1997
Project No.: 157-001 Tack 59
To:
Mr. Mehran Sepe,hri
From:
Subject:
Christopher S. Kinzel
Dublin Boulevard/Hansen Drive, Potential for All-way STOP si~mu control
As you know, TJKM has recently evaluated the need for traffic signalization at the above-
mentioned intersection, and has determined that signal warrants are met. The City council has
requested further evaluation of all-way STOP control as an interim measure is installed.
As you know, TJKM has previously analyzed the need for all-way STOP control at the
intersection and had found that warrants were not met. The wan'ants consist of three compon~ts:
(1) traffic volumes, (2) sight distance, and (3) accident experience. Since the date of our previous
analysis, two changes have occurred that have affected conditions at the intm'section: (1) the
resu-iping of Dublin Boulevard to provide a second continuous westbound lane as well as a bike-
plus-parking lane between San Ramon Road and Hansen Drive, and (2) the opening of the of~ce
building on the northeast comer of the intersection. Therefore, some analysis of these changes'
impacts on the need for all-way STOP control is appropriate.
Trnffic Volumes
Since the time of our previous analysis, ~:affic volumes at the intersection have not changed
substantially. Traffic volumes approaching the intersection on Hansen Drive are not high enough
to warrant STOP sign control on Dublin Boulevard; the warrant requires that these volumes be
one-third of the total volumes entering the intersection during the heaviest eight-hour period. (All-
way STOP sign control should generally be implemented at intersections where flow is relatively
balanced among all approaches.) However, the Hansen Drive volumes are high enough to warrant
signalization, l~cause signal warfares m-e based on fixe, d thresholds of side-street u-affic.
Sight Distance
The presence of parked cars in front of the new office building on Dublin Boulevard has decreased
visibility for vehicles mining from Hanson Drive onto Dublin Boulevard. This would cause the
City's visibility warrants for all-way STOP control to be met u~ess parking prohibitions were
enacl~d (as previously recommended).
Accident Experience
Since the beginniug of 1997, there have been two accidents at the intersection that would be
correctable by the installation of ail-way STOP or signal control. The City's all-way STOP
warrants require throe accidents over a twelve-month period; at the current rate, such a pattern
could be. construed, although twelve months' worth of data under the current configuration arc
ciend Drive, Suite 101, ¥1e EXHIB T .,[ --
-Phone (510)463-0611 ,Fax (510)46'
Mr. Metu~an Scl>chh Page 2 - May 29, 1997
unavailable.
Other Considerations
Queueing
During the a.m. peak hoar, school traffic travelling westbound on Dublin Boulevard currently
forms long queues behind the STOP sign at Silvergate Drive, often extending all the way back to
Hansen Drive. If a STOP sign were installed on Dublin Boulevard at Hansen Drive, these queues
would stretch an identical distance east of Hansen Drive, reaching beyond Donlon Way, within
500 feet of San Ramon Road. Such queues could increase the potential for rear-end accidents for
vehicles travelling westbound on Dublin Boulevard from San Ramon Road, and could reduce
safety at the Dublin Boulevard~rDon!on Way intersection with vehicles btocking the intersection.
The second westbound lane on Dublin Boulevard in this vicinity, could encourage violations in
which motorists could attempt to bypass queued traffic and "cut" to the front of tine.
Rumble Sa'i. os
"Rumble snips," collections of raised pavcment markers that create an uneven sensation and a
noise when driven over, have been suggested as a potential measure to reduce downhill eastbound
speeds on Dublin Boulevard approaching I-Iansen Drive to allow more favorable gaps for vehicles
tuming from Hansen Drive. When installed adjacent to residential areas, these devices result in
complaints from local residents about excessive noise. Whenever the City has implemented stroh
devices in residential areas, they have eventually been removed due ,o citizen complaints. Because
of the proximity to residential homes, rumble strips are not recommended on Dublin Boulevard in
this area.
Conclusion
Installation of all-way STOP conu:ol at the intersection could create more problems than it would
solve. It is recommended that the sight distance improvements previously recommended be
enacted, and that traffic signals be installed as soon as funding becomes available.
4234 Hacienda Drive, Suite 101, Pleasanton, California 94588-2721
'Phone (510)463-0611 ·Fax (510)~,63-3690 ·e-mail tjkm~tjkm.com
RESOLUTION NO. - 97
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
APPROVAL OF STOP SIGNS ON DUBLIN BOULEVARD
AT THE INTERSECTION OF HANSEN DRIVE
The City Council of the City of Dublin hereby resolves as follows:
Section 1' Pursuant to City of Dublin Mtmicipal Code Section 6.04.070, and in the interest of
public safety, stop signs shall be erected on Dublin Boulevard at the intersection of Hansen Drive.
Section 2. Said stop signs shall be added to Section 6.16.010 of the City of Dublin Traffic Code.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 3rd da)' of June, 1997.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
Mayor
City Clerk
gSagenmisc\resodubh
EXH!B T__L
CITY CLERK
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE' May 20, 1997
SI YBJECT:
Traffic Stud)' Results - Dublin Boulevard/Hansen Drive Intersect:.~n
Report Prepared by: Lee S. Thompson, Public Works Director
EXHIBITS ATTACHED:
1)
3)
Traffic Signal Wan-ants / Study Results
Resolution for No Par'king Zone
Location Map
RECOMMENDATION:
1)
Direct Staffto develop a CaFi[,.l Improvement Project to
construct a traffic signal at this intersection for review' of
funding in the upcoming 5-Year Capital Improvement
Program. The signal project could be constructed either
ahead of or with the "Dublin Boulevard Improvements -
Silvergate to Hansen" project.
Adopt Resolution establishing No Par'king Zone on Dublin
Boulevard east of Hansen Drive.
FINANCIAL STATEMENT:
The estimated cost to construct thc traffic signal, plus rel~ed
improvements of the roadway approach, would be approximately
$340,000.
DESCRIPTION: At the March 4, 1997, City Council meeting, the City Council
received a request from the Briarhill Homeowners Association that a traffic sig-nal be installed at the
intersection of Dublin Boulevard and Hansen Drive. The City Council dh'ected Staff to proceed will, a
traffic signal warrant stud),.
The signal warrant study has been completed, and this intersection does currently meet three of the
warrants for installation of a signal.
Staff has also reviewed the intersection to determine whether interim improvements would help the
existing situation, wdth the following results:
g:\agenmisc\dubhans2
COPIES TO:
Briarhill Homeowners Assoc.
Oleg Dubney "
Bay Tree Tenants
The sight distance from Hansen Drive to the west could be improved by removal of some of the
plant material on the north side of Dublin Boulevard just west of the intersection. This will be cut
back by the City's Maintenance Staff for better sight distance up the hill.
Two additional right turn arrows will be installed in the westbound Dublin Boulevard right turn
trap lane to better warn motorists approaching Hansen Drive.
Installation of 210 feet of No Parking Zone on the north side of Dublin Boulevard, east of Hansen
Drive would improve visibility. Allowing for space that is already taken by driveways, this would
eliminate approximately five par'king spaces in front of 11700 Dublin Boulevard (Dubney
building) and approximately four spaces in front of the Bay Tree office complex at 11740-11750
Dublin Boulevard. This area will eventually be a dedicated right-mm lane once the second
westbound lane is extended to Silvergate Drive.
Staff recommends that the CiD' Council direct Staff to proceed with the preparation of the traffic signal
project as a Capital Improvement project for review in the upcoming 5-Year Capital Improvement
Program. Staff further recommends that the CiD' Council adopt the resolution establishing a 210q%ot
No Parking Zone on the north side of Dublin Boulevard east of Hansen Drive.
Page 2
Trar~sport~tlon Consultants
MEMO
May 13, 1997
Project No.: 157-001 Task 59
To:
From:
Subject:
Mr. MeN'an Sepekr/
Christopher S.K.inzel ~
Dubli~ Boulevarrb~Iansen Drive Signal Warrant Analysis
TJKM has evaluated the need for traffic signal control at the intersection of Dublin Boulevard and
Hansen Drive under e.-dstJng conditions. Attached are the warrant evaluafons band on Caltrans'
Tra, tfic Manual. Table I pre~nts a summary of those warrants.
Table I: Traffic Signal Warrants -
Dublin Boulevard/Hansen Drive
Number, Name Met?
1 Minimum Vehicular Volume No
2 Interruption of Continuous Traffic No
3 Minimum Pedestrian Volume No
4 School Crossings No
5 Pro~essive Movement No
6 Accident Ex-p~-icnee No
7 Systems Warrant Yes
8 Combination of Warrants No
9 Four-Hour Volume Warrant yes
10 peak Hour Delay No
l I I Peak Hour Volumes Yes
As the table indicates, three of the warrants are ~rrently met. During the a.m. peak hour, minor
movements at the intersection currently operate at unacceptable levels of service. Therefore,
TJKM re, commends that the intersection be si_m-mlized.
Ultimalely, the section of Dublin Boulevard between Hans~"n Drive and Silvergate Drive will be
widened to four lanes. However, the interim condition will remain two lanes. There are some
consequences of the interim signal, izarion that will -ced to be addressed in conjunction with the
signal installation:
'~" da Drive, Suite 101 Pleasan',
4~.~4 Hacien
e*~ ...... ,c ~ t~ ~ r. ~ .r~ 1 ~ ~ ~.~,, (
Mr. Mehran Sepehfi Page 2 April 16, i997
ReconfiguratJon of the ra,o dr/veways on the south side of the intersection to provide
single access point.
Location of signal heads to maximize visibili~. (For example, a near-side pole for
eastbound traffic could be problematic.)
Provision of adequate storage leech for eastbound-to-northbound left tums.
· "Snappy" timing (or queue detection) to ensure that eastbound a.m. (amd Sunday)
through traffic does not back up to Silvec~ate Dr/ye.
TJKM has also investigated sight d/stance at the intersection. Due to sight distance obstructions
on both sides of the intersection, it is recommended that, at least until the intersection is
signalized, the following improvements be implemented:
(1) Trimming of bushes along the north side of Dublin Boulevard west of the intersect/on to
provide 440 feet of sight tiistance between vehicles pulled for~ard on the southbound
approach and vehicles traveling easr~
(2)
Painting of re,4 rnrb alnng the, nnrth side. nf Dnhlin Bnnl~ard r, ast {~f Iht: inm-,~:crion
approximately 210 feet,, to the second driveway east of Hansen Drive) to provide
~140 feet of sight distance between vehicles pulled fom-ard on the southbound
a?proach and vehicles traveling west.
4234 Hacienda Drive, Suite 10], Pleasanton, California. 94585-2721
9-6
TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING
III III I _
Figure 9-1
TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS
DIST PM
Minor S::
O0 RTE
Cfiti=al speed of major street traffic ~' 40 mph - - -
In bui~ up area of isolated communlt7 of < 10,000 pop.
WARRANT 1 - Minimum Vehicular Volume
CALC DATE
CHK DATE .
O~caf Approach Speed
Cfltical Approach Speed
or
[]
RURAL
URE~aN (U)
100% SATISFIED YES [] NO
· 80% SATISFIED YES [] NO
Traffic Manual
MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS
(80% SHOWN IN BRACKETS)
~NES
mph
mph
t)
Hour
WARRANT 2. Interruption of Continuous Traffic
80% SATISFIED YES ]~ NO
MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS
(80% SHOWN IN BRACKETS)
APPROACH 2 or mom ~o,~~'[~ -- ~ ' '%
SATISFIED YES [] NO ,~
[]
WARRANT 3- Minimum Pedestrian Volume 100% SATISFIED YES ~ NO ~
REQUIREMENT FULFILLED
Pedestrian volume crossing the major street is 100 or more
for each of any four hours or is 190 or more during any one Yes F-] No
hour; AND
There are less than 60 gaps per hour in lbo major street traf~
fic stream of adequate length for pedestrians to cross; ~ Yes ~] No
The nearest traffic signal along the major street is greater Yes ,J~ No
than 300 feet; AN]~
The new traffic signal will not seriously disrupt progressive Yes [] No
traffic fJow on the major street.
The satisfaction of a warrant Is not necessarily justification for a signal. Delay, congestion, confusion or other
evidence of the need for right-el-way esslgnmerlt must be shown.
Traffic Manual
I
TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING
9-5
4-1~'2
When the 85th percentile speed of major street
m~ffic exceeds 40 miles per hour, or when thc
intersection lies within a built-up area of an
isolated community having a population of less
than 10,000, the peak hour volume warrant is
satisfied when the plotted point, referred to
above, falls above the curve in Figure 9-9 for the
existing combination of approach lanes.
9-01.3 Guldellnes for Left-Turn Phases
Since sepa.r'ate signal phases for protected left
turns will reduce the green time available for
other phases, alternate means of handling left
turn conflicts should be considered first.
The most likely possibilities m-e:
1. - Prohibition of left turns. This can be done
only if there are convenient alternate
means of making the movement. Typical
alternate means are:
A series of right and/or left tums
around a block to permit getting to the
desired destination; or
Making the left mm at an adjacent
unsig'nalized intersection during gaps
in the opposing through traffic.
Geometric changes to eliminate the left
turn. An effective change would be a
complete separation or a compline or
partial "clover leaf" at grade. Any of
these, while eliminating left turns, requires
additional cost and right of way.
Provide protected-permissive or pennis-.
sire-protected left tm-n operation. The
protected left turn interval may be
prohibited fluring certain periods of the
day to allow only permissive intcrva!s for
left mm movement in order to increase the
green time available for other phases.
Refer to Section 9-03.8 for thc
requirements of protected-permissive-or
permi,t~iy~-prot~cmd led mm nperation.
Protected left turn phases should be considered
where such alternatives cannot be utilized, and
one or more of thc following conditions exist:
Accidents. Five or more left turn
accidents for a particular left turn
movement during a recent 12-month
period.
Delay. Left-turn delay of one or more
vehicles which were waiting at the
beginning of the green interval and are
still remaining in the left turn lane gter at
least 80% of the total number of cycles for
one hour.
Volume. At new intersections where only
estimated volumes arc available, thc fol-
lowing criteria may be used. For a pre-
timed signal or a background-cycle-
controlled actuated signal, a left mm vol-
ume of more than two vehicles per ap-
proach per cycle for a peak hour;, or for a
traffic-actuated signal, 50 or more left
turning vehicles per hour in one direction
with the product of the turning and con-
flicting through traffic during the peak
hour of 100,000 or more.
Miscellaneous. Other factors that might
be considered, include but are not limited
to: impaired sight distance due to
horizontal or vertical curvature, or where
them is a large percentage of buses and
trucks.
9-0'~.4 Removal of Existing
Changes in traffic patterns may result in a
situation where a traffic signal is no longer
,justified. When this occurs, consideration should
be given to removing the traffic signal and
replacing it with appropriate alternative traffic
control devices.
Traffic Manual
TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING
9-7
Figure 9-2
TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS
WARRANT 4 - School Crossings
WARRANT 5 - Progressive Movement
Not Applicable []
See School Crossings Warrant Sheet []
SATISFIED YES [] NO []
FULFILLED
Mi N, MUM P:_OUIR E MF--. N TS_..~~ DISTANCE TO NEAREST ~
ON ONE WAY ISOLATED STREETS OR STREETS WITH ONE WAY TRAFFIC SIGNIFICANCE AND ADJACENT
SIGNALS ARB SO FAR APART THAT NECESSARY PLATOONING & SPEED CONTROL WOULD BE LOST _ _ _
ON 2-WAY STREETS WHERE ADJACENT SIGNALS DO NOT PROVIDE NECESSARY PLATOONING AND
SPEED CONTROL PROPOSED SIGNALS COULD CONSTITUTE A PROGRESSIVE SIGNAL SYSTEM
WARRANT 6 - Accident Experience
i. t WARR~,NT
L REQUIREMENTS
ONE WARRA WARRANT -M NIMU VS CUL*,R VOLUME
S^'ns ED ...................
8,0% WARRANT 2-INq'ERRUPTION OF OONTINLIOUS TRAFFIO
SIGNAL WILL NOT SERIOUSLY DISRLIUPT PROGRESSIVE TRAFF1C FLOW
ADEQUA i b $ H~AL OF LES,5 RESTRICTIVE REMEDIES HA~ FAILED TO REDUCE A~f;Ir)FNT FREQUENCY
ACC. WITHIN A 12 MONTH PERIOD SUSCEPTIBLE OF CORR. & INVOLVING INJURY OR >_ $500 DAMAGE '
- MINIMUM REDUIREMENT NUMBER OF ACCIDENTS
$ OR MORE
SATISFIED YES [] NO [~
Nog
/D
WARRANT 7 - Systems Warraf~t
SATISFIED YES [~ NO []
MINIMUM VOLUME
REQUIREMENT
10DO VEN/HR
ENTERING VOLUMES- ALL APPROACHES
CHARACTERISTICS OF MAJOR ROUTES
DURING TYPICAL WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR ! ! ~o ~ VEH/HR
OR VEH/I'{R
DURING EACH OF ANY 5 HRS. OF A SAT. AND/OR SUN.~ -
MAJOR ST, M1NOR ST.
HWY. SYSTEM SERVING AS PRINCIPLE NETWORK FOR THROUGH TRAFFIC
RURAL OR SUBURBAN HWY OUTSIDE OF. ENTERING, OR TRAVERSING A C1TY
......... ~OtJTE ON AN OFF1CIAL PLAN
APPEARS AS MAJOR
FULFILLED
YES J~' NO []
The ~atislactlon of a warrant is not necessarily Justification tar ~ signal. Delay, congestion, confusion or other
evidence of the need tot right-of-waY assignmnent must be shown.
9-8 TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING Traffic Manual
1-1991 I I LII II I ! I I
Figure 9-3
TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS
WARRANT 8 - Combination of Warrants
SATISFIED YES [] NO ~
REQUIREMENT' " .. WARRANT ..... ..,,/ j" FULFILLED.
TWO WARRANTS 1, MINIMUM VEHICULAR VOLUME
SATISFIED t
80% 2. INTERRUPTION OF CONTINUOUS TRAFFIC YES [] NO ~]
WARRANT 9 - Four Hour Volume SATISFIED~ YES [] NO ~
Approach Lanes One more . {O~\O I'
Refer to Figure 9-6 (URBAN AREAS) or Figure 9-7 (RURAL AREAS) to determine if this warrant is satisfic~;I.
WARRANT 10 - Peak Hour Delay SATISFIED
(ALL PARTS MUST BE SATISFIED)
1. The total delay experienced for traffic on one minor street approach controlled by a
STOP sign equals or exceeds four vehicle-hours for a one-lane approach and five
'vehicle-hours for a two-lane approach; _,_AN.D.
YEs [] NO JD8'
2. The volume on the same minor street approach equals or exceeds 1D0 vph
one moving lane of traffic or 150 vph for two moving lanes; AN~
YES [~ NO r-~.
The total entering volume serviced during the hour equals or exceeds 800 vph
ior intersections with tour or more approaches or 650 vph for intersections wi~
three approaches.
YES [~ NO []
WARRANT 11 - Peak Hour Volume SATISFIED YES [~ NO ~
Approach Lanes One more e ur
Io
'* Reler lo Figure 9-8 (URBAN AREAS) or Figure 9-9 (RURAL AREAS) to delurmine if this warrant is satisfied.
The satisfaction of a warrant is not necessarily justification for a signal Delay, congestion, confusion or other evidence
of the need for right-of-way assignment must be shown.
tt
9-12
TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING
Figure 9-7
FOUR HOUR VOLUME WARRANT
(Rural Areas)
Traffic Manual
400
3o0
2OO
100
------2 OR MORE LANES (MAJOR) 2 OR MORE LANES (MINOR)
~ ~~------ 2 OR MORE LANES (MAJOR) & 1 LANE (IV~NOR)
OR 1 LANE (MAJOR) & 2 OR MORE LANES (MINOR)
· ,
I LANE (MAJOR) & 1 LANE (MINOR)'---'-'-'" ~ ~ ~
200 300 41)0 500 600 700 800 900 1000
MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH
NOTE:
80 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET
APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 60 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER
THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE.
Traffic Manual
TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING
II
Figure 9-6
FOUR HOUR VOLUME WARRANT
(Urban Areas)
500
400
3O0
2OO
100
0
300
~%~,.. ~---- ---;,2 OR MORE LANES (MAJOR) & 2 OR MORE LANES (MINOR)
"' il 1
,-,'~ ~~ %~1 I I
~2 OR MORE LANES (MAJOR) & I LANE (MINOR)
~.. OR 1 LANE (MAJOR} & 2 MORE LANES (MINOR)
400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400
MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHE. S - VPH
NOTE:
11S VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET
APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANE~ AND 813 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER
THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WiTH ONE LANE..
9-14
TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING
Figure 9-9
PEAK HOUR VOLUME WARRANT
(Rural Areas)
Traffic Manual
Ill
0
:::::,,,
-'r'
5O0
4O0
300
20O
100
---- 2 OR MORE LANES (MAJOR} & 2 OR MORE LANES (MINOR)
~~. ~ 2 OR MORE LANES (MAJOR) & 1 LANE (M~NOR)
'~- ~ OR 1 LANE (MAJOR) & 2 OR MORE LANES (MINOR)
LANE (MAJOR) & 1 LANE (MINOR}--
300 400 500 600 700 800 g00 1000 1100 1200 1300
MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH
NOTE:
100 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET
APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 75 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER
THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WiTH ONE LANE.
Traffic Manual
TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING
~ II I II . I
Figure 9-8
PEAK HOUR VOLUME WARRANT
(Urban Areas)
6O0
>, 500
~ 400
< ~OO
o 200
=: 100
0
400
~ 2 OR MORE LANES (MAJOR) & 2 OR MORE LANES (MINOR)
Z/ .... I J ,1 I. I 1
-2 OR MORE LANES (MAJOR) & I LANE (MINOR)
~ ~ OR ltLANE ;MAJOR) & 2 OR M.O,,E LANES
LANE (MAJOR) & 1 LAN]~ (MINOR) ~
500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800
MAJOR STREET- TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH
NOTE:
150 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET
APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 100 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER
THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE,
RESOLUTION NO. - 97
A RESOLUTION OF TI:rE CITY COUNC/1.
OF TFtE CITY OF DUBLIN
ESTABLISHING NO PARK~G ZONE
ON TI~E NORTltERLY CI_.;RBL~ OF DUBLIN BOULEVA3:~
EASTERLY OF ttANSEN DRi~rE
The City Council of the City of Dublin hereby resolves as follows:
Section 1: Pursuant to City of Dublin Municipal Code Section 6.04.250, and in the interest of
public safety, a No Par-king Zone is established on the northerly curbline of DubLin Boulevard, from the
easterly curbline of Hansen Drive, easterly a distance of210 feet.
Section 2. Said No ?arkSng Zone shall be added 'to Section 6.28.010 of the City of Dublin Traffic
Code.
PASSED, .&PPROVED ANrD _~)OPTED tkis 20th da), of May, 1-°97.
.AYES:
NOES:
ABSENWS:
ABSTALN:
ATYEST:
Mayor
gS,~_~misckrm;odubh
City Clerk
-EXH!BIT
PROJECT NUMBER
9601
1996-2001 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Dublin Boulevard Improvements
Sitvergate Drive to Hanson Drive
ACTIVITY
STREETS
DESCRIPTION - LOCATION
This project would widen Dublin Boulevard
between Silvergate Ddve and Hansen Drive from
two to four lanes and has realigned the Dublin
Boulevard/Silvergate intersection into a standard
"Tee" intersecJon. This widening would take
place on the sauth side of the street wf~ere there
is sufficient fight-of-way to make these
improvements. In addition, the pro~e~ wouid
repair the existing roadway section, as the
roadway fill is undergoing creeping soil instability..
Traffic signals will be installed at the intersections
of Dublin Boulevard and Silvergate Drive and at
Dublin Boulevard and Hanson Drive.
COMMENT__S
The addition of new residential proje~s proposed Io be constructed to the west Df this interse~ion along
Dublin Boulevard will require the widening of Dubiin Boulevard from two to four lanes between Siivergate
Ddve and Hansen Drive. Those new projects will pay their share of the prolog. !n 1992, the first phase of
the work reationed the Dubiin BoulevardlSitvergate Drive interse¢on through restfiping and pavement
modifications. It is anticipated that the addition of major new traffic will magnify the pavement distress,
requiring repairs simultaneous with the widening. The developers of the Nansen, Donlon and Schaefer
projects are obligated to share the costs of this proje~ based on their proportionate generatiDn of traffic.
The sum of S455,992 has been colle~ed to date from developer fees, $111,129 of which was used to
construct Phase I of this project- in 1997-98, a traffic signal at the interse~ion of Dublin Boulevard and
Hanson Drive will be installed and part of Dubiin Boulevard west of Nansen Drive will be widened. The
private driveway south of the interse~---tion will be modified to aiign with Hanson Drive due to the
signalization.
ESTIMATE-D COSTS
Prelim. Engineenng
Design & Inspemion
)rofessional Servia. es
-~ignt of Way
Improvements
!Machinery/Equipment
I Miscellaneous
Fund
20,000 Phase
162,5-41 3D0
Phase
,633,475 300
2.4~3i 205
,818,429 ITOTA LS
]TOTAL
Prior Years
111,129
111,129
FiNANCINGfY~_ARS SCHEDULE .___._._----
1996-97 1997-95 1995-99 1999-2000 20OD-01 To~als_~._
34~.8D0
11~.129
345,$D0
1254D54 1,6D9,85-4
'27,~4'3 97
1,361,500
1,818,4291