Ripon City Council Minutes

TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 20, 2007 - 7:00 P.M.

WORKSHOP:               5:45 P.M.          COUNCIL CHAMBERS

                                       South San Joaquin Irrigation District

Representatives from SSJID gave an update about their efforts to take infrastructure and control of utility service from PG&E, stating that this may end up in court, but they expect to win.

REGULAR MEETING:

The meeting was called to order as indicated at 7:00 p.m. with Vice Mayor Winn leading in the Pledge Allegiance to the Flag.

INVOCATION: Tom Terpstra gave the invocation.

ROLL CALL: Council Members Elden R. Nutt, Dean Uecker, Mike Restuccia, Vice-Mayor Chuck Winn, Mayor Curt Pernice

OTHERS PRESENT: City Administrator Leon Compton, City Engineer Kevin Werner, City Attorney Tom Terpstra, City Clerk Lynette Van Laar, Deputy City Clerk Jeanne D. Hall, Information Systems Technician Dan Brannon, Director of Public Works Ted Johnston, Police Chief Richard Bull, Recreation Director Kye Stevens, Danielle Pierce, Gert Isaia, Max Pierce, Izaak Hidalgo, Jeremy Fondse, Savonne-Sierra Duarte, Chad Ratto, Dennis Bitters, Nelson Chavez, Tommy Howard, Edgar Gonzalez, Jackie Costa, JoEllen Varian, Navid Fardanesh, Graciela Munuz, Dwanae Hairston, Kayla Carlson, Zuzke Wilderood, Teresa Bartsch, Sarah Grimmett, Jake McDonald, Lisa Suender, Alex Rodriguez, Alicia Silva, Nikki Guppert, Katie Merkling, Shirley Ann Williams, Lindsey Hansen, Robert Sikma, Kevin Hawes, Rachel Gibson, Michele Cook, Ginger Eskes, Amber Foerstering, Zachary Wildman, Cameron Marxmiller, Cotton Wright, Raquel Madrigal, Karen Messner, Lilly DePedrini, Jamie Surratt, Justin Costa.

PUBLIC DISCUSSION: No one from the public wished to speak at this time.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES: MOTION: MOVED, SECONDED (UECKER, NUTT) AND CARRIED BY A VOTE OF 4-0 (RESTUCCIA, ABSTAINING) TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR RIPON CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 6, 2007.

APPROVAL OF AGENDA AS POSTED (OR AMENDED):

Council Member Nutt requested that Item 4C be pulled from the Consent Calendar for discussion.

Council Member Uecker requested that Item 3A be pulled from the Consent Calendar for discussion.

MOTION: MOVED, SECONDED (RESTUCCIA, WINN) AND CARRIED BY A VOTE OF 5-0 TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS AMENDED.

CONSENT CALENDAR, continued:

CONSENT CALENDAR, continued:

MOTION: MOVED, SECONDED (UECKER, RESTUCCIA) AND CARRIED BY A VOTE OF 5-0 TO APPROVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR.

Discussion on Item 3A.

Uecker said there are three people who are very interested in this program – do we have to make sure no one else gets in there and takes the money.

Mayor Pernice said we cannot hold the money for certain individuals.

City Attorney Terpstra said that the applications would go to those who qualify on a first come/first served basis.

Pernice said the Council does not know who the applicants are, anyway.

Uecker said that we know who the Realtors are because they were here at the meeting.

MOTION: MOVED, SECONDED (UECKER, NUTT) AND CARRIED BY A VOTE OF 5-0 TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. 07-73

Discussion on Item 4C.

Council Member Nutt asked if the two water lines are separated.

City Engineer Werner, said that a spool has to be physically taken out and switched over to change from potable to non-potable. There can be no mixing of the two water lines.

MOTION: MOVED, SECONDED (NUTT, RESTUCCIA) AND CARRIED BY A VOTE OF 5-0 TO APPROVE THE PROPOSAL FROM DON PEDRO PUMP

Mayor Pernice said that this issue was brought back by Council Member Restuccia. Pernice said the Council had a Closed Session meeting to accept some right-of-way along Jack Tone Road, and at that time they asked for a report to be prepared.

Pernice asked for the report at this time.

City Engineer Werner presented the PowerPoint Presentation stating that the Council approved the design on October 10, 2006. He showed the original design which offset the roundabout toward the east side of Jack Tone Road since the City does not own enough property on the west side. The plan was that once the west side of Jack Tone Road developed, the roundabout would be removed and replaced in a centered location. There have been several discussions about this offset roundabout and the eventual need to replace it. Staff looked into acquiring land on the west side of Jack Tone Road to be able to install the roundabout as it should be as part of the Ripon Crossing development. The land owners are open to discussions about dedicating the needed land. The City would enter into a reimbursement agreement with the developer for the additional cost of the larger roundabout. With the positive feedback, the City was moving forward with the design of the larger roundabout.

             Werner said staff looked at the traffic volume that was predicted for this area. When the General Plan was developed, there was a traffic model that was prepared that predicted traffic volume at build out. The Plan shows 330,000 square feet of commercial development on the west side of Jack Tone Road. This is part of the assumptions put in the traffic model (done in 2003) showing 9,000 vehicles per day. In the year 2040, the prediction is at 24,000 vehicles per day. The single-lane roundabout would handle about 20,000 vehicles per day. We would need a two-lane roundabout by 2030. We want to design the roundabout that we need now, but also have the sufficient right-of-way to add the second lane when needed.

             Werner said staff used a consultant to advise us on the new single-lane roundabout. The roundabout that is now proposed is slightly larger than the one designed by Ripon Crossing, and it was designed so that trucks can go around the roundabout. The design has a radius of 60 feet and is centered in the crossway.

             Werner said that engineering staff set up a roundabout in Mistlin Park with paint and traffic cones to test it. The roundabout needs to be comfortable for drivers, that speeds are controlled, and that emergency vehicles and trucks could safely get around the roundabout. We tested passenger vehicles, a fire truck, and a semi-truck. The passenger vehicles had no problems with this roundabout. The fire truck road up on the truck apron, and Fire Chief Bitters said that could be a problem for their trucks at higher

DISCUSSION ITEMS, continued:

rates of speed. Their speed in this example was between 10 to 15 miles per hour. The semi-trucks have the hardest time. These trucks were tracking on the truck apron about 5 to 7 feet and their speed was about 5 to 7 miles per hour. The radius was too tight. So they tested a larger roundabout – increased from a 60-foot to a 70-foot radius. It fits within the right-of-way discussed with the current land owners. It also allows for a two-lane roundabout in the future. The results for the larger roundabout show that the fire trucks do not track on the truck apron. The truck apron is made of pavers with a 2" or 3" separation from the pavement. The trucks tracked on the apron by 2 feet to 5 feet, which is a huge improvement from the first roundabout. The truck speed was from 5 mph to 10 miles per hour. The truck apron is for the trucks to use. Trucks could make the full circle using the truck apron, and could travel straight through the intersection with only tracking a couple of feet onto the apron. The recommendation that comes from this field testing is that the radius should be increased from 60 feet to 70 feet. This 70-foot radius exceeds the maximum recommendation from the Institute of Traffic Engineers by 10%. Also, a smooth ramp on the truck apron is preferred. Werner showed a diagram based on recommendations from the consultant and from results of the field testing. Werner said that the new design is 45 feet outside our current right-of-way.

             City Engineer Werner said that the developer from Ripon Crossing submitted a letter by e-mail this afternoon because he could not be here tonight. Werner read a part of the letter to the Council: “... our position is as follows: Pursuant to the signed DA we will build the smaller, interim roundabout. If the City desires that we build the larger roundabout, and the City is willing to pay for the incremental additional cost of the larger roundabout, we will construct the larger roundabout even though that is not a requirement of the DA. We are opposed to a change to a traffic signal, and the DA does not contemplate the construction of a traffic signal.”

Council Member Nutt said he was at the demonstration at the Park, and the truck did not stay in the lane in either test site.

Werner said the trucks did track on the apron in both tests, but that is the intent of the truck apron.

Nutt said that in all the research he has done, the roundabout should be designed so that vehicles can stay in their lane.

Werner said the truck apron is there for the trucks to track up on.

Mayor Pernice said that the lane could be made bigger and just leave out the apron, but the apron is there for the trucks and emergency vehicles to use – it is perfectly legal and perfectly acceptable – that is the intent of the design.

Werner said that without the apron, cars would cut the roundabout and drive too fast through the intersection. The roundabout works as it was designed for.

Pernice said that if we do away with the roundabout, the alternative would be a traffic light, but we have not found a way to deal with trucks that accidentally come down Jack Tone Road [toward Main Street]. The truckers that he has talked to say they have to drive through town, or turn left on Canal Boulevard and go through the Wilma Avenue roundabout. There are some proposed changes to the Jack Tone Interchange, but at the very least, we need to get the consultants that helped us to design it in the first

DISCUSSION ITEMS, continued:

place to run the traffic models. Pernice asked that if we do away with the Jack Tone/Canal roundabout, what is our obligation to Village Properties? What would the cost to the City be?

City Attorney Terpstra said that the City has a development agreement with Village Properties. It can be amended, but it does require both parties to amend it, so if the Council decides to not do the roundabout, we would have to go back to the developer and negotiate a change. Terpstra said that in reading their letter, the developer is resisting a change, so Council would have to go back to the table to renegotiate. The worst case scenario is that the developer says ‘no’ and the funding commitment they have made to the roundabout would go by the wayside and the City would pay the cost of whatever you decide to do there.

Mayor Pernice asked of we would be liable for the loss in revenues. He said this might cost them a lot more time resulting in lost revenues.

Terpstra said the developers are concerned about the time consideration. They have users that are interested in getting going as soon as possible. Terpstra said he did not know if the City would be liable for those lost revenues. It will take a while to negotiate the change and then to implement the change. The City Council is empowered to make a change, but you risk having to pay the entire cost of the signal.

Pernice asked what that cost would be.

City Engineer Werner said he would guess at $200,000 to $300,000 for the intersection.

Council Member Nutt said that he understands everything, but it is the Council’s responsibility to put in something that is safe for the community. He said that this is his primary responsibility. He said he has always been against a roundabout at that location. He said he has done research that backs up his opinion that if you can’t put a roundabout in the size it is supposed to be, where vehicles stay in their lane, and you can’t safely accommodate pedestrians and bicyclists, than don’t put in a roundabout. Roundabouts work well in low-volume residential streets. Roundabouts are not recommended for any high-volume intersection, except at highway and freeway interchanges.

Pernice said that roundabouts have statistically proven to be safer than signaled intersections. This is not just about cost, but it is also about safety.

Vice Mayor Winn thanked Nutt for providing information that he got off the internet about the problems Santa Barbara has been having with roundabouts. He did his own research and looked for articles against roundabouts, but they all came back to the same article. The Institute for Traffic Safety did a study on roundabouts and their conclusions were that overall, vehicular accidents declined 39%, and accidents resulting in injuries fell 76%, and accidents resulting in death fell 90%. That is from the people who insure us. The study was done in California, Colorado, Florida, Kansas, Maine, Maryland, South Carolina, and Vermont. A comment in the study stated that”... accidents of all types in the United States have fallen 40% at sites where roundabouts replaced other types of intersections. We do not know of any other type of highway improvement that has such an high success rate. Considering that U. S. engineers are relatively new to roundabout design, it is to their credit that the failure rate is only a few percent. This is exemplified by U.S. public opinion that is typically 80% against the roundabout before it is built and 80% in favor after construction. The lesson to be learned is not that roundabouts are bad, but that

DISCUSSION ITEMS, continued:

design faults can lead to failure while good design produces roundabouts that are safer than any other type of intersection.”

             Vice Mayor Winn said he appreciates Council Member Nutt bringing in the issue of pedestrian safety because there are tons of information about design features to assist all pedestrians – elderly, handicapped, visually impaired – and how to design roundabouts to assist them. Another comment in the study pertaining to pedestrians – “ there are wrong ways and right ways to design the roundabouts. A properly designed roundabout is safer for pedestrians because those on foot only need to cross a single direction of traffic at a time and do not have to be concerned about vehicles turning from an another direction.” The key is that it needs to be designed properly. We have two roundabouts that were designed incorrectly and they will be fixed. Winn said that his concern is for residents that live down Canal Boulevard and the families in homes adjacent to Canal where trucks get caught in that neighborhood because they are trying to find their way out. We can change the signs, but there will always be trucks that miss the signs because of fog, or whatever reason. With a roundabout at Canal and Jack Tone, he said he sees the opportunity for trucks to make a full U-turn in a roundabout and head back to the interchange where they belong. This would be a benefit to the truckers and the residents who live in the neighborhood. Intersection accidents make up 50% of all collisions in the United States. He said he does not want to jeopardize safety in the community, and roundabouts are safer than signals.

Council Member Restuccia said he likes roundabouts, but not at this location. He said that consultants get paid a lot of money and don’t do much. He asked Chief of Police Bull if there have been any accidents in the City’s roundabouts and were there any injuries.

Chief Bull said there have been accidents in the roundabouts at N. Ripon at River, and on Wilma Avenue. Serious injuries have happened at N. Ripon. Most accidents at Wilma are property damage only.

Restuccia said the west side of Jack Tone will get developed, and he has a real concern with how pedestrians will get across safely. He said the Public Safety people do not find roundabouts to be safe. He said he can read everything, but he has to make a decision on how he feels. He said he does not feel a roundabout belongs at Jack Tone and Canal.

Council Member Nutt read some comments from his research. The ADA [Americans with Disabilities Act] said that “no government may alter or modify an existing public facility so that it results in a condition less safe or convenient for those with a disability.” Nutt also read that “Signal light intersections provide protected intersection right-of-ways using “cross,” “walk,” and “don’t walk” lights. Removing these protections leaves a pedestrian to fend for themselves. To removes these could be a violation of the ADA.” Nutt said his reports came from cities in Massachusetts and Utah, and Santa Barbara and Golita. Roundabouts are not unsafe in all places. Roundabouts are safe in residential areas and intersections that do not require controls. Nutt said that roundabouts are not designed to slow speed down. He said his primary concern is for pedestrians. He said that there is a signal light at the top of the overpass. The signal lights can back traffic up and there could be traffic in the roundabout at a standstill.

Mayor Pernice asked what caused the wrecks in our roundabouts.

Chief Bull said that at Wilma, the confusion is caused by the two lanes and vehicles cross in front of each other. A majority of the accidents were single vehicle accidents, and a majority of those accidents were DUI related.

DISCUSSION ITEMS, continued:

Mayor Pernice said the point is that the collisions that have happened, happened in a poorly designed roundabouts. He said he didn’t think anyone would want to remove the Wilma roundabout because it would be too difficult to get through there, especially when the Frontage Road comes through. This is where we have had the bulk of the collisions, but the design flaws will be fixed. The accidents would be worse if Wilma was a 4-way intersection. We have learned that one design does not fit all intersections – we have to design each intersection.

Council Member Uecker said he is an insurance agent, but we have highly trained safety people in our own community and every one of them that he has talked to are against the roundabout. He said he saw the demonstration at Mistlin Park, and it just did not work. He said he cannot go against the public safety people.

MOTION: Council Member Uecker made a motion to eliminate the roundabout and put a turn signal at the top of the interchange and Council Member Restuccia seconded the motion.

Discussion before the vote:

Mayor Pernice said that if Council is going to abandon the roundabout, we need to be aware that we may have to spend $200,000 to $300,000. He said he has not heard from the Public Safety people that this is a bad place for a roundabout, but maybe he has not asked the right questions. He said he sat in the Development Agreement meeting where we put the roundabout in. This will take about $300,000 of traffic money. If we change anything at the top of Jack Tone, we need to have people look at it who understands traffic.

Council Member Restuccia, said he wants to clarify that the motion was to eliminate the roundabout and also study the intersection for a traffic light. He said he appreciates the money factor, but if we made a mistake, we should spend whatever it takes to correct it. He said his opinion is that a lighted intersection is correct and he would rather spend the few dollars now than to spend it later to fix it.

Council Member Nutt said he does not put a dollar sign on public safety. He said he has been against this roundabout since the beginning, along with the one on River Road. He said that it is a shame to spend the extra money there, but it would be more of a shame if we didn’t spend it and someone got hurt.

Vice Mayor Winn said he did not ask the Fire Chief or the Police Chief for their opinion, so he has to believe what Council Member Uecker says they said. As a Council Member, Winn said he has to vote for what he thinks is right and he is more concerned about injuries to the public with a signalized intersection than he would be with a roundabout. He said he hopes Council Member Nutt is right, but he will be disappointed if someone is seriously injured or killed in an intersection because we chose not to put in a roundabout.

MOTION: MOVED, SECONDED (UECKER, RESTUCCIA) AND CARRIED BY A VOTE OF 3-2 (WINN, PERNICE - NO) TO RENEGOTIATE THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT TO ELIMINATE THE ROUNDABOUT AND STUDY THE INTERSECTION FOR A TRAFFIC LIGHT, AND PUT A TURN SIGNAL AT THE TOP OF THE INTERCHANGE.

DISCUSSION ITEMS, continued:

Council Member Restuccia said that maybe he does not read the whole development agreement to find that the roundabout was buried in the back. He said that his point is that he likes roundabouts, but if we are going to do a roundabout, it should be at the front of the development agreement and bolded so the Council Members know what they are voting on because he is not going to read the whole thing. This is really simple.

Council Member Nutt said he hopes he is right, but when an accident happens at a signal light, it is due to other things and that is a possibility in any intersection – including a roundabout.

Vice Mayor Winn said that every Council Member has voted for every roundabout in every development agreement. The roundabouts are prominently displayed in every design. The design goes before the Development Agreement Committee, then it goes to the Planning Commission, then it goes before the Council in a workshop, when it comes to the City Council twice before being approved. The drawings are always big and are prominently displayed, so why is anyone indicating that we need to be more open about the design. What more information do you need?

Council Member Nutt said he has always expressed his concerns about this roundabout.

Mayor Pernice agreed that Council Member Nutt has always been consistently against this roundabout, but we still all voted for the development agreement.

Council Member Restuccia said he knows the roundabout was not snuck in, and he is as guilty as anyone for not reading the development agreement, but an executive summary would be helpful. It is just that, now roundabouts are a big issue.

Pernice agrees that it has become a big issue.

Pernice asked Council if this could be just a discussion item with no action.

Council Members concurred.

REPORTS

City Administrator: No Report

City Attorney: No Report

City Engineer: No Report

Planning Director: No Report

Chief of Police: No Report

Recreation Director: No Report

Director of Public Works: No Report

City Council: Nutt said there was a good turn out for the dedication of the Veterans’ Wall and museum. He said the museum will be open from 10:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. on Saturdays.

Restuccia said he went to a session in Chicago where government discussed worldwide infrastructures. He said that the United States is a 3^rd rate country when it comes to infrastructure and no one knows how improvements will be funded.

Winn also said there was a great turn out at the dedication ceremony. Winn said he met with the Parks and Recreation Commission about facility fees, and he will have a report at a future meeting.

There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:10 p.m.

REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY

There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:11 p.m.

Ripon Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes

TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 20, 2007

AFTER COUNCIL MEETING

ROLL CALL: Directors Elden R. Nutt, Dean Uecker, Michael P. Restuccia, Vice-Chairman Chuck Winn, Chairman Curt Pernice.

OTHERS PRESENT: Executive Director Leon Compton, City Engineer Kevin Werner, City Attorney Tom Terpstra, City Clerk Lynette Van Laar, Deputy City Clerk Jeanne D. Hall, Information Systems Technician Dan Brannon, Director of Public Works Ted Johnston, Police Chief Richard Bull, Recreation Director Kye Stevens, Danielle Pierce, Gert Isaia, Max Pierce, Izaak Hidalgo, Jeremy Fondse, Savonne-Sierra Duarte, Chad Ratto, Dennis Bitters, Nelson Chavez, Tommy Howard, Edgar Gonzalez, Jackie Costa, JoEllen Varian, Navid Fardanesh, Graciela Munuz, Dwanae Hairston, Kayla Carlson, Zuzke Wilderood, Teresa Bartsch, Sarah Grimmett, Jake McDonald, Lisa Suender, Alex Rodriguez, Alicia Silva, Nikki Guppert, Katie Merkling, Shirley Ann Williams, Lindsey Hansen, Robert Sikma, Kevin Hawes, Rachel Gibson, Michele Cook, Ginger Eskes, Amber Foerstering, Zachary Wildman, Cameron Marxmiller, Cotton Wright, Raquel Madrigal, Karen Messner, Lilly DePedrini, Jamie Surratt, Justin Costa.

PUBLIC DISCUSSION: No one from the public wished to speak at this time.

APPROVE THE MINUTES: MOTION: MOVED, SECONDED (UECKER, NUTT) AND CARRIED BY A VOTE OF 4-0 (RESTUCCIA ABSTAINING) TO APPROVE OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING OF NOVEMBER 6, 2007.

CONSENT CALENDAR

CONSENT CALENDAR, continued:

CONSENT CALENDAR, continued:

MOTION: MOVED, SECONDED (RESTUCCIA, NUTT) AND CARRIED BY A VOTE OF 5-0 TO APPROVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR.

There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:11 p.m.