HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report - July 1, 1981 (46)CITY COUNCIL NiEETING
July 1, 1981
y • �.•:: � �Y�'r ��• .' t. _ .. .. r �'-. ' �-•• :.:. •ell i
s•T _ •');� •1
z - !y •``•(,'�/�/�/'�jV-1j�//�J/�\J f t a _ {r• ^=� �� ., . .. ,.i�a- :.1..'_�t"• R'`t 'a
•\� \ .Ir �"� � •s- � ..� L-: lj.y 1'- •i •- . » - � . ,iia. � i�r�:�: "�ryy+�3.�',v:
Z.,a. h - lar -_: •'�}�.,'�„-..��''
."' .--.. _ - •• , .s � -. ti .. w, . �.. . _ ?'talo.. � `� ti
v �� - - ,:,•..:.`Y �.-...>,ai � Ti/;•iC':r� ,'..r�»a..��Yfr.•: T++- �^ � '�v ► vr- srY..
.. i1' .r''�c.,�. r -7"-.c...:. i;•-.��� .......� --s�em•,�.�T _'�,�� tom. 2. .� •�:.�+"+4-�.F,Ma J"-��.
.T ti ^�.` fix. ��a :.ws ==•-•' . '••':.^.R :3 :':....-2r"'t�Y�'•!, �� '-]�
i}�w. .cY:irt.'.r�.at ,^,.iJ,�r..ii.:�nwl ..._r^'i C• �.-•v+�..�►moi►�•:fy`a�
..+r... TMS � •A=iJ
AGREEMENTS WITH Agenda item "p" - "Grade Crossing Protection at
STATE RE CROSSING Sacramento, Main and Stockton Streets" was
PROTECTION introduced by Public Works Director Ronsko.
APPROVED Mr. Edward P. Thurban, Jr., of the Public Uti-
lities Commission and lair. Howard husky of the
RES. NO. 81-84 Southern Pacific Transportation Company were in
the audience and addressed the Council concerning
the matter and responded to questions as were
Posed by the Council.
Following discussion, on motion of Councilman
Pinkerton, Murphy second, Council adopted Reso-
lution No. 81-84 approving agreements with the
State on Railroad Crossing Protection - Sacramento
Street, Main Street, Stockton Street, and authorized
the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the docu-
ments on behalf of the City.
CITY COUNCIL.
JAMES A_ McCARTY. Mayor
ROBERT G. MURPHY, Maya Pro Tem
RICHARD L. HUGHES
WALTER KATNICH
JAMES W. PiNKERTON. Jr.
CITY OF LOffi
CiTY HALL, 221 WEST PINE STREET
POST OFFICE BOX 320
LODi. CALIFORNIA 95241
(209) 334-5634
June 23, 198)
Mr. Edward P. Thurban, Jr.
Public Utilities Commission
California State Building
San Francisco, Ca. 94102
Dear Mr. Thurban:
SUBJECT: Grade Crossing Protection at Sacramento, Main and
Stockton Streets
HENRY A. CLAVES, Jr.
City Manager
ALICE M. REIMCHE
City C"
RONALD M. STEIN
City Attorney
The City Council at their last meeting on Wednesday, June 17, decided
not to act on the agreement for the subject crossing until they had a
chance to discuss with PUC and/or S.P. staff items relating to design
criteria, cost, priorities, cost benefit, accident severity, etc. At-
tached for your information is a copy of my Council Communication which
they received prior to their last meeting.
It is therefore requested that a PUC representative be present' at the
next regular Council meeting of Wednesday, July 1, 1981, to answer
questions that the Council• may have. You may want to .1nielte.a Southern
Pacific representative. The Council specifically wants to talk to the
PUC since it is your agency which approves SP's proposals and es-
tablishes protection priorities.
if you have any questions concerning this request, please call me.
Sincerely
• (Jack\L. Ronsko %
Publ Works Director
c ":' City Manager
City Clerk_---
JLR/eeh
Attachment
CITY OF LODI
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
TO: City Council
FROM: City Manager
DATE: June 12, 1981
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
SUBJECT: Agreements with State on Railroad Crossing Protection -
Sacramento Street, Main -Street, Stockton Street
RECOMMENDED ACTION: That the City Council review and discuss this supplemental
material which they had requested and take the appropriate action.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The attached Council Communication dated May 29, 1981,
was submitted to the City Council recommending approval of supplements to the
agreement with the State of California for grade crossing protection at the three
subject locations. The City Council at their last regular meeting of June 3. 1981,
Indicated concern over the cost of these installations and asked staff to bring
back for their review supplemental data related to actual City commitment, past
accident records, etc.
COMMITMENT:- The District 10 staff of the California Department of Transportation
haveinn icated to us that the City has no firm commitments until the subject
agreements are actually signed. However, they also pointed out that based on our
attached letter of November 19, 1980, indicating a 10% funding of the crossing
protections was available, considerable effort had been expended by both the
State of California and Southern Pacific Railroad.
ACCIDENTS - Listed below are. the accident records of the three subject crossings:
SACRAMENTO STREET DE 103.6 (Woodbridge Branch)
January 1980 Property damage
August 1976 "
of
October 1975 of "
June 1974 to go
October 1972 "10
November 1972 of
December 1972 ►'it
APPROVED: FILE NO.
HENRY A. GLAVES, City Manager
Council Communicatic
June 12, 1981
Page 2
August 1970
1960 — 1970
Property damage
(2) Property damage
(1) Injury
MAIN STREET OF 103.7 (Victor Branch)
June 1977 Property damage
May 1975 of to
October 1973 of If
1960 - 1970 (4) Property damage
STOCKTON STREET DF 103.75 (Victor Branch)
November 1978 Property damage
January 1977 so as
July 1975 is It
December 1973 is to
October 1972 is
May 1971 91
March 1970 ''
1960 - 1970 (3) Property damage
(2) Injuries
FUNDING - In talking to the State Department of Transportation, they indicated
that Federal Safety funds will be more limited or might even be eliminated in
the future. If the City does not take advantage of the existing Federal Fur' -ding,
the cost of the protection would then be 50% City and 50% Southern Pacific.
LIABILITY - It should be pointed out that the City may have increased liability
If an accident could have been prevented by the proposed protection since the
crossings are on the PUC priority list and 90% Federal funds were available.
I would like to point out to the Council that the letter dated November 19, 1980,
was sent to the State based on the 1980-81 Capital Improvement Program approved
by the City Council. It Is suggested that more time be taken in the review of
the Capital improvement Programs prior to adoption in order that City staff time
is not way4d qty projects which may not really be -desired by the City -Counei 1.
L. Ronsko
c Works Director
:kw
• CITY OF LOCA!
. • PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
TO: City Council
FROM: City Manager
DATE: May 29, 1981 '
SUBJECT: Agreements with State on Railroad Crossing Protection
RECOMMENDED ACTION: That the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the
City Manager and City Clerk to execute Program Supplement Nos. 13, 14, and 1-5
to the Local Agency -State Agreement No. 5154.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: These agreements cover the installation of railroad
grade crossing protection at Stockton Street, Sacramento Street, and Main
Street. The improvements will be made by the Southern Pacific Railroad Co.
and Include the installation of cantilevered flashing light signals to replace
the existing crossbucks. Federal funds cover 90% of the installation and the
City's 10% matching funds have been budgeted in the 1980-81 Capital Improve-
ment program under the Transportation Development Act fund. Following is a
breakdowrf of estimated imp.rovement costs:
Total Project Federal Local
Location Cost Funding (90$)_ Share 10$
Main Street $69,250 $62,325 $ 6,925
Sacramento Street $68,250 $61,425 $ 6,825
Stockton Street $86,250 $77,625 $182625
TOTAL TDA FUNDS $22.075
dJac L. Ronsko
Publ c Works Director
JLR/eeh
APPROVED:
. GLAVES, City Manager
FILE NO.
ttovcmber 19, 19SO
Department of Transportation
P. 0. Box 2043
Stockton, CA 95201
Attention: Mr. Terry Fields
Gent laden :
SUBJECT: Railroad Grade Crossing Protection
In reply to your attached correspondence dated October 7, 1980, we are forward-
ing to you the requested traffic counts on Turner Road, California and
Lockeford Streets.
The City touncil at their regular meeting of "ovenber 5. 1960, formally approved
the City's Capital Improvement Budget which Included railroad crossing grade
protection on the Southern Pacific tracks at the following locations:
Turner Road at Hills Avenue Sacrartento Street
Lana Drive Main Street
HW Lane Stockton Street
California Street
The City of Lodi is ready to participate in all of the above grade crossing
protection projects basad on the City receiving federal funding and our share
y. not exceeding 101:.
U% have not yet received the response to our attached letter of May 20, 1980,
as it relates to requested federal funding on the Loma Drive (SPRR uoddbridge
Branch) grade crossing.
'{ale will bei 'forwarding to the City Council for their approval and execution the
,Program Supplements No's 13, 14, and 15 to the Local Agency - State Agreement
No. 5154 covering the grade crossing protection at Main, Stockton and Sacran+ento,
Stroets.- However, it 1s requested that the State review these estimates since
they appear high for protection which does not include automatic gates.
• t t.
Department of Transportation
November 19, 1980
Page 2
i
It is requested that the State initiate the processing on the grade crossings at j
Turner and Mills, Loma Drive, Ham Lane and California Street in order that thesy
can also be protected as soon as possible. We will be forwarding to you ADT counts
on Lorca Drive and Ham Lane.
If you have any questions or desire additional information, please contact me.
Sincerely,
�
Jack L. Ronsko
Public Works Director
Enclosures
JLR: jd
RESOLUTION NO. 81-84
RESOLUTION APPROVING AGREEMENTS WITH THE STATE
OF CALIFORNIA FOR GRADE CROSSING PROTECTION AT
SACRAMENTO, MAIN AND STOCKTON STREETS
RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Lodi
does hereby approve Program Supplement No. 13 to Local .
Agency -State Agreement No. 5154 (RRP-0077(024), North Main
Street at SPTC Crossing No. DF103.7 and RRP-0077(027),
Sacramento Street at SPTC Crossing No. DE103.6) and Program
Supplement No. 14.to Local Agency -State Agreement No. 5154
RRP-y314(0'03), North Stockton Street at SPTC Crossing No.
DF -103.-75.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Clerk
are hereby authorized to execute the heretofore mentioned
agreements on behalf of the City of Lodi.
Dated: July 1, 1981
I hereby certify that Resolution No. 81-84 was passed
and adopted by the City Council of the City of Lodi
at a regular meeting held July 1, 1981 by the following
vote:
Ayes: Councilmen Murphy, Hughes, Pinkerton
and McCarty
Noes: Councilmen - None
Absent: Councilmen - Katnich
TME IMS' vR .�OCVUEhT :S [ Kt1T) TO
at
A COORLCT CCS y OF THE 01W
TMtS CFF{CE. . .
DOREEN GAUGEL
CEPU,T,T Cay uEjK Cm Of LODI
w,sco�.
AL f4.
`'p� lREIMH1 E/Jft
City Clerk
81-84
0