Traffic Light Needed - 2
This page documents a series of very brief discussions between the mayor and the city manager concerning the need for a traffic signal at the new intersection of Henry and Doherty Drive.
Items 1 through 5 below are taken from official council meeting minutes. Item 6 was transcribed from the meeting video.
1. Mayor Rose asked about a traffic signal for the intersection of Henry Avenue and Doherty Drive. City Manager Morgan stated that the traffic engineering study recommendation was to wait and see how the intersection operates rather than plan on a traffic signal... (Regular City Council Minutes December 3, 2019 Page 5)
2. Mayor Rose asked about setting aside funds for a traffic signal that would be needed at the Doherty/Henry intersection once the road is built. City Manager Morgan stated that intersection was proposed as a 4-way stop but there would be room for signalization if needed in the future. (Regular City Council Minutes, June 2, 2020, Page 2)
3. Mayor Rose asked about a traffic signal as part of the Doherty Drive extension at Henry Avenue. City Manager Morgan stated the traffic engineer had forecasted that the traffic at the intersection would not warrant a traffic signal. (Regular City Council Minutes, January 19, 2021, Page 3)
4. Mayor Rose … also commented …that a signalized intersection was needed at Doherty Drive/Henry Avenue... (Regular City Council Minutes, February 16, 2021, Page 10)
5. Suggestions were made to…. budget for a traffic signal at Henry Avenue/Doherty Drive intersection…. (Regular City Council Minutes, April 6, 2021, Page 2)
6. The final exchange occurred during the Budget Workshop on 5 April 2022. It was left out of the official minutes of the meeting. Here is a transcription from the meeting video:
Rose: And also, we're looking at a traffic signalization for Henry and Doherty when that road is completed. I know you have to see if it's warranted. Are you putting money into the budget in case that is warranted?
Morgan: No, because we won’t be completed by next budget year and have enough time for it to be open to take the traffic count. So that’s probably a following budget year item.
Rose: And that money - there's enough money in the budget to do it all in one year? Or do you need to save over multiple years for the…
Morgan: Well, I don't think it's the money to do this study, it’s that the study can't be done until the roadway is open, and you could actually do the traffic analysis with it functioning. And so, we could certainly put money in the budget, we would be unlikely to be able to spend it because the roadway won't be open and operating sufficient amount of time to do that.
Rose: I guess we've put money in the budget for Henry [he meant Doherty] and Heritage Oaks Extension for the last four years. So yeah…
Translation into more direct language: Saying we might not be able to spend the money next year is not a good excuse for failing to budget it. For four years now, we have consistently done the opposite with regard to the budget for the overall project - we put it in the budget, and if we couldn’t execute it that year, we carried it over till the next year. We should treat the traffic signal budget in the same way.
Comment: Excluding this item from the budget gives the council and public an inaccurate estimate of the true cost of the project. Using the cost of the new traffic signal at Imagine Way as rough guide, and applying an inflation factor, the cost for the traffic signal would be approximately $838,649.00.
​
Is there any reason for not budgeting the traffic signal, other than hiding the true cost of the project?
​
​
​
​
​