1. CALL TO ORDER
Committee Members Attending: Gordon Kimber, Jim McVay, Steve Simmons, Harvey Riggs, Walt Trembley, Peter Rathman
Committee Members Absent: None
Council Members Attending: None
Planning Commission Liaison: None
Teen Council Liaison: None
Guests Attending: None
Staff Members Attending: Lisa Bobadilla, Leslie Chase, PJ Dhoot
Officer John Goyich
The meeting was called to order by Chair Kimber 6:30 p.m.
2. REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Gordon Kimber introduced Peter Rathman, the newly appointed TAC member, to the committee and City staff.
M/S/C/U (Riggs/McVay) to approve the minutes of the March 20, 2008 meeting.
M/S/C/U (Riggs/Trembley) to approve the minutes of the April 17, 2008 meeting.
M/S/C/U (Riggs/McVay) to approve the minutes of the June 19, 2008 meeting.
3. PUBLIC COMMENT
4. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
4.1 County Connection Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) Status Report
Harvey Riggs reported on the potential CCCTA’s budget cutbacks. At the next CCCTA Board of Directors Meeting, Harvey stated that he will make a presentation relating to the budget shortfall and pending budget cuts.
4.2 Active Residential Traffic Calming Streets Status Report
PJ Dhoot reported on RTC items on the following active RTC streets:
4.3 Review Draft Criteria for Installation of Traffic Control Devices
PJ Dhoot presented background information on traffic control devices which prompted the establishment of the warrant criteria. The Transportation Advisory Committee (TAC) reviewed the comments from Policy Committee and had the following comments on the Warrant Criteria:
(a) There should be a maximum average daily traffic (ADT) volume limit of 20,000 vehicles. Therefore, any street with a volume exceeding 20,000 vehicles would not be eligible for installation of either of these two devices. Roadways with such volumes should be addressed through other traffic control devices.
(b) If a pedestrian enhancement device is installed at a location when the ADT is under 20,000, but five years later the ADT on that roadway rises to 28,000 and after studying the intersection it is found that the device is
not as effective, it should be removed and replaced with a more effective traffic control device.
(c) These devices should not be installed in any location that jeopardizes the characteristic of the roadway by negatively effecting traffic flow through lowered levels of service or by causing traffic diversion.
(d) The criteria must be restrictive so that not every uncontrolled crosswalk within the City of San Ramon passes the Warrant Criteria for installation of either device. In addition, the criteria must be representative of the pedestrian and vehicle volumes experienced along San Ramon’s key intersections.
(e) The funding for the pedestrian enhancement devices should be set up similar to the format that funding for the installation of speed humps are within the Capital Improvement Program. As an example, every fiscal year, a specific amount should be earmarked for the installation of these devices. As locations are warranted, staff would draw from this fund for installation and prioritize according to the funds earmarked for that specific fiscal year.
(f) The critical speed profile should be limited at 15 miles per hour (MPH) over the 85th percentile traveling speed. If any given roadway were to have a speed greater than 15 MPH over the 85th percentile then other mitigation measures should be reviewed.
(g) The ADT profile should begin assigning points with 3,000 vehicles, as an ADT of 1,000 is attainable among local residential streets within San Ramon, whereas these two devices are considered specifically for collector and arterial roadways which carry higher ADT’s.
(h) If the devices are installed within the vicinity of a suggested Safe Route to School, students and staff of the school should be informed on how to use the crosswalk feature and the optimal path to take coming and going to school.
(i) The criteria for visibility should be elaborated and assigned additional points as a great benefit of the two devices is that they will greatly increase pedestrian visibility for motorists.
(J) When reviewing the criteria for accidents, it should not matter whether it resulted in injury or fatality, because an accident itself is significant. An accident should not be given less importance because the victim walked away. Therefore, every accident, regardless of the type of injury and the number of people involved should be counted as one event. The warrant criteria should assign points based on the number of total events at a location. However, zero points should be assigned to one event, because the probability of one event is much higher, versus two or three events at the same location, which should signal a pattern requiring mitigation.
Lisa Bobadilla stated that staff will provide an update at the next meeting to allow TAC an opportunity to review new comments.
4.4 Radar Speed Display Sign Update
PJ Dhoot reported that the Norris Canyon Road and Montevideo Drive Radar Speed Display Signs are on hold pending approval from PG&E to use their light pole(s). The "easement" contract is being reviewed by the City’s Contract Administrator, for approval. Once approved, the Radar Speed Display Signs will be installed at these two locations. Installation is currently anticipated for the end of August.
Lisa Bobadilla stated that staff will provide preliminary results to the TAC at the next meeting which will give an indication as to the effectiveness of the Radar Speed Display Signs. Lisa also reported that four more Radar Speed Display Signs have been approved for Fiscal Year 08-09 fiscal year with anticipated installation by June 2009.
5. COMMITTEE MEMBER ITEMS
5.1. Committee Member Items
Gordon Kimber brought up the left turn from Alcosta Boulevard to Bollinger Canyon Road turning west. The turn lane has been closed for three weeks causing a real obstruction to the passengers. Lisa responded that this is part of the DERWA project. Staff will follow up with Theresa Peterson of Engineering Services to address this issue.
5.2 City Council Liaison Items
5.3 Planning Commission Liaison Items
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:50 p.m. The next regular meeting is scheduled for August 21, 2008 at the Planning Conference Room.
H:\age\tac minutes 71708.doc