Supplemental Material — San Ramon City Council, June 23, 2026

Supervisor Candace Andersen | Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors | District II Alamo | Blackhawk | Canyon | Danville | Diablo | Lafayette | Moraga | Orinda | San Ramon | Tassajara Valley | Walnut Creek • 1982-1986 Contra Costa County purchased track right of way with 3 grants from the California Transportation Commission (CTC) totaling $10.6M.
• “If Contra Costa County does not identify by June 30, 1989, a specific project for constructing a busway or exclusive mass transit guideway that uses the San Ramon Branch corridor, the County shall reimburse the State.”
• The State did not request money back, but required County to maintain 34 foot right of way to eventually build a busway or mass transit. • Several studies were done but creating transit here was too expensive and there was little support from elected officials or the community.

History of the Trail
• 1891-1978 Trains ran down the San Ramon
Branch Line.

Supervisor Candace Andersen | Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors | District II Alamo | Blackhawk | Canyon | Danville | Diablo | Lafayette | Moraga | Orinda | San Ramon | Tassajara Valley | Walnut Creek Iron Horse Trail Evolves as an Active Transportation Corridor • The trail evolved into a popular active transportation corridor, the Iron Horse Regional Trail, managed by East Bay Regional Parks. • Danville & San Ramon had ideas for improving the trail including bridges over Bollinger, Crow Canyon and Sycamore, but they were challenging to build if needed to preserve 34 feet or design for a bus or light rail. • 2008 – SB 375 encouraged active transportation and reduction of Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions.
• 2014-2019 Supervisor Andersen and County
Public Works met with the CTC in Sacramento
to remove “Mass Transit” edict and recognize
it as a valuable active transportation corridor
in line with State goals to reduce GHG
emissions.
• While sympathetic, CTC ultimately told the
County that they needed legislative approval.

Supervisor Candace Andersen | Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors | District II Alamo | Blackhawk | Canyon | Danville | Diablo | Lafayette | Moraga | Orinda | San Ramon | Tassajara Valley | Walnut Creek AB 1025 (2019) Sponsored by then Assemblyman, now Sen. Tim Grayson Formalized the Active Transportation Framework
• AB 1025 removed requirement to build bus track or
mass transit, relinquished right of reimbursement for
CTC Grants; removed requirement for 34-foot preserved
path.
• It required the County to revise the bylaws of the Iron Horse Corridor Management Program Advisory
Committee to:
• Add a seat for a Contra Costa Transportation
Authority (CCTA) Representative.
• Consider proposals to study new emerging mobility
modes and technologies for the trail.
• The timing of this bill allowed San Ramon to move
forward with its Bollinger Canyon Bridge to be built for only Pedestrian/Bicycle use.

The design is now 65% complete.

Importance of Creating Trail Separation
Supervisor Candace Andersen | Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors | District II Alamo | Blackhawk | Canyon | Danville | Diablo | Lafayette | Moraga | Orinda | San Ramon | Tassajara Valley | Walnut Creek Pilot Project Description
Plans are 65% Complete, Cost to Build Estimated at $2 Million • 1.3 miles long from the new Bollinger Canyon Road bridge to the future Crow Canyon Road Bridge.
• The existing trail will be kept for pedestrians; the new trail will be for bikes.
• The walking trail will be on the west side for shade.

Trail Design as enter and exit
Bollinger Canyon Bridge.

Proposed Trail Connection at Executive Parkway
Supervisor Candace Andersen | Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors | District II Alamo | Blackhawk | Canyon | Danville | Diablo | Lafayette | Moraga | Orinda | San Ramon | Tassajara Valley | Walnut Creek Amenities and Wayfinding elements are not included in the pilot design, but there is also a desire for shade structures and rest areas. As San Ramon and Danville transition to more housing near the corridor, both trail connections to neighborhoods and some of these improvements could
potentially be paid for through Developer Impact Fees.

Amenities at Hemme
Station Park include:
• Bike Repair Area
• Restrooms
• Picnic Gazebo
• Play Areas
• Benches
• Informational
panels sharing the
history of this site
along the former
railroad track.

Addressing Pipelines and Utilities
In this phase, there is sufficient width to avoid them.

The current design does
not require C3 Permits.

In the design of future trail segments, it will be important to design safety solutions at each intersection where the
“bicycle expressway” crosses unsignalized intersections.

Supervisor Candace Andersen | Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors | District II Alamo | Blackhawk | Canyon | Danville | Diablo | Lafayette | Moraga | Orinda | San Ramon | Tassajara Valley | Walnut Creek Funding the Construction of this Pilot Program
• Congressman De Saulnier has made a “Congressionally
Directed Spending Request” of $1.5M
• Grant Funding the County will be applying for:
• California State Parks Recreational Trails Program
Grants, coming out later this summer
• One Bay Area Government (OBAG) grant, from MTC,
coming out later this summer
• Other CCTA administered grant funding
• Priority Conservation Areas from the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG). Not sure when it will be
out.

Proposed Unrepresented
Miscellaneous Employees
Salary and Benefits Resolution
Item No. 9.1.

Background
• Currently, a total of 142 employees are considered Unrepresented Miscellaneous Employees.
• This includes a large variety of City job classifications from Office Technicians to Assistant City Attorney.
• The current Unrepresented Miscellaneous Employees Salary and Benefits Resolution (Resolution) dates from June 1, 2022, and included salary range increases through Fiscal Year 2025/2026.
• To ensure equity across job classifications and remain competitive in the labor market, City Staff have proposed the updated Resolution presented to Council this evening.
2 Updated Terms in Proposed Resolution
• Salary range increases for two (2) fiscal years: 2026/2027 and 2027/2028
• Salary ranges (top and bottom) increased by three percent (3%) on July 1 of each year of those fiscal years
• Clean-up throughout the document for CalPERS compliance, language clarification, and other non-economic issues
3 Fiscal Impact
• Estimated cost = $1,113,081*, over the next two (2) fiscal years, including projected benefit costs
• *Figures based on the one hundred thirty-five (135) unrepresented miscellaneous employees on staff when projection costs were calculated • Projected FY 2026/2027 costs = $442,009 and cover costs from July 1, 2026, through June 30, 2027
• $263,571 = salary costs; $178,438 = benefit costs
• Projected FY 2027/2028 costs = $671,072 and cover costs from July 1, 2027, through June 30, 2028
• $397,790 = salary costs; $273,282 = benefit costs
4 Questions?
J U N E 2 3 , 2 0 2 6
Resolution No. 2026-095:

Proposed Unrepresented
Executive Employees Salary and
Benefits Agreement
Item No. 9.2.

Background
• Currently, a total of six (6) employees are considered Unrepresented Executive Employees (at-will): the Assistant City Manager and Department Directors hired after November 2024.
• The current Unrepresented Executive Employees Salary and Benefits Agreement (Agreement) dates from November 26, 2024, and included salary range increases through Fiscal Year 2025/2026.
• To ensure equity across job classifications and remain competitive in the labor market, City Staff have proposed the updated Agreement presented to Council this evening.
2 Updated Terms in Proposed Resolution
• Salary range increases for two (2) fiscal years: 2026/2027 and 2027/2028
• Salary ranges (top and bottom) increased by three percent (3%) on July 1 of each year of those fiscal years
• Clean-up throughout the document for CalPERS compliance, language clarification, and other non-economic issues
3 Fiscal Impact
• Estimated cost = $46,467*, over the next two (2) fiscal years, including projected benefit costs
• *Figures based on the five (5) unrepresented executive employees impacted by the proposed salary changes
• Projected FY 2026/2027 costs = $3,562 and cover costs from July 1, 2026, through June 30, 2027
• *$2,124 = salary costs; $1,438 = benefit costs
• Projected FY 2027/2028 costs = $42,905 and cover costs from July 1, 2027, through June 30, 2028
• $25,433 = salary costs; $17,472 = benefit costs
4 Questions?
Presentation to San Ramon City Council
June 23, 2026

SAN RAMON

TRAILS MASTER PLAN
Prepared by:

RECOMMENDED ACTION
The City Council's role is to consider approving and
adopting the San Ramon Trails Master Plan.
1 Item No. 9.3.

PLAN ORIGINS
San Ramon Parks, Trails, Open Space, and
Recreation Master Plan
General Plan 2035 Bicycle Master Plan
2 MASTER PLAN PROCESS
Establish goals based on
community input
Identify opportunities with
site visits and GIS mapping
Develop and refine
recommendations
40 | Recommendations

NEIGHBORHOOD CONNECTIONS

CREATE CONNECTIONS BETWEEN

NEIGHBORHOODS & OPEN SPACE
Residents and community leaders in
San Ramon highly value trails that are
conveniently accessible from their
homes and nearly 90% of residents are
most interested in using trails to stay
active and fit.

With open space and GHAD land
spread through the city limits, there are
opportunities to provide more trails and
improve existing trails.

SCENIC LANDSCAPES

AND OPEN SPACE

RESIDENTIAL

NEIGHBORHOODS

COMMERCIAL AREAS AND

PUBLIC SERVICES
Project A1: Provide a new stacked loop
trail system in the open space between
The Preserve Project and Las Trampas
Regional Preserve to create shorter
loops for community members and
provide regional connectivity to EBRPD’s
Parkland.

A1
These potential projects correspond to map
labels on the following page.

Project A2: Work with HOAs to identify
connector trails between neighborhoods
and open space access points and set
dedicated public easements. (Note:

Not mapped. Exact locations to be
coordinated between City and HOAs
that want to provide trail access for their
members.)
A2
Recommendations | 37
0 8 16 32 mi
1” = 8 miles
LEGEND
Neighborhood & Open
Space Connection A
Enhance Existing Trails
within City Limits D
External Connections &
Regional Context B
Enhance the Iron Horse
Trail within City Limits C
T Proposed Trailhead
EBRPD (Parkland)
Public Park
City Owned Property
Golf Course
EBRPD (Landbank)
GHAD
Dept. of Defense

RECOMMENDATIONS SUMMARY

RECOMMENDATIONS
Proposed Trail
Existing Trail
Iron Horse Trail
A1
B1
B2
B3
B4
B5 B6
B9
B10
B11
B12
T1
T2
T4
T6
T7
T8
T5
T3
B8
D1
D4
D5
D6
D2
D9
D8
D8
D7
D3
D10
C3
C2
C1
B7
36 | Recommendations

RECOMMENDATIONS SUMMARY

RECOMMENDATIONS
Initial recommendations for the San Ramon trail system
were developed based on existing conditions analysis,
previously identified opportunities, and extensive
feedback from stakeholders and community members.

The recommendations presented on the following pages
will be further developed with more detail as they move into design and construction phases.

Based on key findings from the engagement process, the
plan's recommendations are aligned with the five Focus
Areas below.

GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS
In addition to the five Focus Areas, the following are general recommendations to compliment the potential projects and enhance the overall trail system.

Recommendation G1: Provide more dirt-to-dirt trail connections. Current loops identified on public maps bring users onto the streets, providing a convoluted experience.

Recommendation G2: Evaluate opportunities to reduce user conflict and limit damage to trail surfaces due to cattle grazing. Management of open spaces should consider grazing's impact on public trails, while also respecting grazing as a vital function of the area's landscape.

Recommendation G3: Use easements to provide connections through linear corridors, utility corridors, HOAs, etc. Providing thoughtful easements and land management partnerships.

Recommendation G4: Amend GHAD land conservation easements to allow new trail alignments that show environmental benefits, such as reduced erosion.

Recommendation G5: Implement a citywide wayfinding signage plan for the trail system.

Recommendation G6: Develop a hierarchy of trailheads (access points, parking areas, parks) and associated amenities. Ensure that trailheads directly interfacing with roadways are designed to provide appropriate safety treatments.

Recommendation G7: The City should and foster a partner with a “friends of group” for nonprofit support of trail constuction, maintenance, and education by developing a collaborative volunteer agreement (see "Appendix D: "Friends of" Group Purpose and Opportunities" on page A-22).

CREATE CONNECTIONS BETWEEN

NEIGHBORHOODS & OPEN SPACE

ENHANCE THE IRON HORSE TRAIL WITHIN

CITY LIMITS

COLLABORATE WITH PARTNERS FOR

REGIONAL CONNECTIVITY

PROVIDE NEW AND ENHANCED

TRAILHEADS & NAVIGATION

ENHANCE EXISTING TRAILS

WITHIN CITY LIMITS
Recommendations | 35
Recommendations
Preliminary recommendations were developed based on
conversations with stakeholders, feedback from community surveys, industry best practices, and professional expertise. In November 2025, the plan’s preliminary recommendations were reviewed and confirmed by the City’s Parks & Community Services Commission.

Preliminary
Recommendations
Additional
Stakeholder and
Public Outreach
Recommendation
Refinement
Existing Conditions
Analysis
Initial Stakeholder
and Public Input
The Master Plan's recommendations are a combination of
community input, environmental conditions, and professional expertise. 3 MASTER PLAN PROCESS
Community Engagement Timeline
City
Council
April May June July August September October November December January February March June 2025 2026
External Agency & Community
Partner Meetings
PCSC Presentation (11/13)
Engagement Events &
Online Survey #1
Public Information
Session (9/11)
PCSC Presentation (5/14)
Stakeholder Meeting (1/14)
Public
Review
Internal
Review
Online
Survey #2
Administrative Draft Released
Stakeholder Meeting (9/11)
April May
PCSC Presentation (3/18) PCSC Adoption
Parks and Community Services Commission Presentations Public Engagement Opportunities Stakeholder Engagement Opportunities Engagement efforts focused on defining the
community's shared vision for the trail system.
◀
Signage was placed in
key locations to promote
the second online survey.

Community members gave
input by interacting with boards
at in-person community events.
▶
4 Access to the San Ramon trail system adds value
to my home and community.

WHAT WE HEARD
Survey responses establish strong support for development of the trail system.

A well thought out trail system contributes to
health and safety in San Ramon.

Trails improve the overall quality of life in San
Ramon.

What improvements do you think are most needed
for the trail system?
Please describe which type of trails interest you
the most.

Natural surface, 4-6 feet wide multi-use trails
Having access to trails is important
to San Ramon residents:

Creating connections is a primary
goal for community members:

Residents would like more multi-use
natural surface trails:

Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Neutral
Agree
Disagree Neutral Ag re e
5 Agree
Top Responses
Connections through the City’s open space lands
Connections to external open space lands
Expand connections from existing parks
Connections from neighborhoods to trails and open space I would like to see more of all types of trails.

Top Responses

WHAT WE HEARD
Survey responses directly guided the Master Plan's focus areas and final recommendations.

CREATE CONNECTIONS BETWEEN NEIGHBORHOODS & OPEN SPACE

ENHANCE THE IRON HORSE TRAIL WITHIN CITY LIMITS

COLLABORATE WITH PARTNERS FOR REGIONAL CONNECTIVITY

PROVIDE NEW AND ENHANCED TRAILHEADS & NAVIGATION

ENHANCE EXISTING TRAILS WITHIN CITY LIMITS
MASTER PLAN FOCUS AREAS:
6 A CONNECTED,

CITYWIDE NETWORK

FOR ALL
• Distributes projects
throughout the city to
help more residents
reach trails, parks,
schools, jobs, and open
space.
• Provides more equitable
access to nature.
• Expands recreation and
active transportation
choices.
• Connects San Ramon
to the broader regional
trail and open space
network.
0 8 16 32 mi
1” = 8 miles
A1
B1
B2
B3
B4
B5 B6
B7
B9
B10
B11
B12
C3
C2
C1
T1
T2
T4
T6
T7
T8
T5
T3
B8
D1
D4
D5
D6
D2
D9
D8
D8
D7
D3

MASTER PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS
D10
7 COLLABORATE WITH

PARTNERS FOR REGIONAL

CONNECTIVITY

ID PROJECT DESCRIPTION
B1 + Trail from The Preserve to
Las Trampas North
B2 + Access point at the Las
Trampas West (future)
B3 + Access point at San Ramon
Valley Blvd.
+ Trail from San Ramon Valley
Blvd. to Las Trampas
B7 + Trail from Tassajara Ridge
Trail to Dublin (through Camp
Parks easement)
B8 + Trail from Old Ranch Park to
Dublin open space (through
Dougherty Hills Open Space)

CREATE CONNECTIONS

BETWEEN

NEIGHBORHOODS & OPEN
SPACE

ID PROJECT DESCRIPTION
A1 + Stacked loop trails in the
Preserve open space
A2 + Trail connections through
participating HOA properties
that connect neighborhoods
to the on- and off-street trail
network

ENHANCE EXISTING TRAILS

WITHIN CITY LIMITS

ID PROJECT DESCRIPTION
D7 + Trail from Alcosta Senior
and Community Center to Old
Ranch Park

PROVIDE NEW AND

ENHANCED TRAILHEADS &

NAVIGATION

ID PROJECT DESCRIPTION
T4 + Old Ranch Park & Alcosta
Community & Senior Center
Trailheads
T5 + Forest Home Farms
Trailhead

ENHANCE THE IRON HORSE

TRAIL WITHIN CITY LIMITS

ID PROJECT DESCRIPTION
C2 ⟫ Wayfinding signage at
existing and new Iron Horse
Trail access points

RECOMMENDATIONS OVERVIEW
8 Maintenance and Open Space Impact Reduction | 39

CEQA COMPLIANCE
Related to CEQA (California Environmental
Quality Act), the projects outlined in this trails
master plan are considered discretionary
activities conducted by a public agency.

However, as of 2025, several new and existing
exemptions can bypass this requirement.

It is recommended that a CEQA expert within
city staff or external consultant review each
specific project before implementing any
project.

KEY 2025 CHANGES (AB 130 & SB 131)
A significant new CEQA exemption was
created for public parks and non-motorized
recreational trails, covering planning,
construction, and maintenance, particularly
if they receive Proposition 4 funds. These
reforms aim to streamline environmental
review for infrastructure, including trails,
aligning with housing and climate goals. Under
the CEQA Guidelines Section 15304, the Class
4 categorical exemption applies to "minor
public or private alterations in the condition
of land, water, and/or vegetation" that do not
involve the removal of healthy, mature, scenic
trees. Examples of trail-related projects that
typically fall under this class in 2025 include:
• New Trails in Existing Rights-of-Way: The
creation of bicycle or hiking trails within
existing public rights-of-way such as a road
or utility corridor.
• Grading for a trail on land with a slope
of less than 10%, provided it is not in a
sensitive area like a wetland or officially
designated scenic area.
• Minor alterations to existing trails, such
as adding wayfinding signage, installing
benches or bike racks, or upgrading
pedestrian lighting.
• Vegetation management for public access
including and-tool removal of non-native
vegetation or thinning of small trees,
typically less than 8 inches in diameter,
to clear or maintain a trail viewshed or
pathway.
• Filling previously excavated land with
compatible soil to level a trail surface or
minor trenching for trail-related drainage/
utilities where the surface is restored.
• Bicycle lane creation including designation
or creation of new bicycle lanes on existing
paved surfaces.

WHEN CEQA IS REQUIRED
The city might be required to prepare a full
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) if there is
"substantial evidence" that a trail project may
result in a significant environmental impact
that cannot be fully mitigated. While most
projects will be handled through exemptions
as noted above or through Mitigated Negative
Declarations (MNDs), the following types of
projects typically trigger a full EIR:

Projects with Significant Unavoidable
Impacts
An EIR is mandatory when a project has
environmental effects that cannot be reduced
to "less than significant" levels through
standard mitigation.

Large-Scale or Regional "Program" Projects
A city may prepare a Program EIR for a
comprehensive citywide trail master plan
rather than individual project-level reviews.

Projects in Highly Sensitive or Hazardous
Areas including high wildfire risk zones
with new trails in high-fire-threat areas that
could increase ignition risks or interfere with
evacuation routes. Trails proposed on land
with known significant archaeological sites or
areas of high cultural value to Native American
tribes that cannot be avoided. Trails on steep,
unstable slopes where construction might
trigger significant erosion, landslides, or
downstream flooding.

Projects Facing Strong Public or Agency
Controversy
If there is a "fair argument" supported by
substantial evidence—even if conflicting
evidence exists—that the trail will have a
significant impact, a full EIR is legally required
to ensure transparency and public disclosure. 38 | Maintenance and Open Space Impact Reduction

TRAIL USE MITIGATION STRATEGIES
There are potential impacts of trail use in
open spaces, that include disruption to natural
resources, flora and fauna habitat, cattle
grazing impacts, along with noise and visual
concerns. The following strategies can help
remedy these impacts.

POTENTIAL IMPACTS
Habitat and Wildlife
Habitat fragmentation, displacement, reduced
feeding and breeding due to stress, and altered
movement patterns for wildlife. These impacts
are higher in sensitive riparian zones.

Soil and Water
Erosion from heavy use in steep fall line routed
trails and from users creating shortcuts or
unauthorized trails. This leads to a degraded
user experience and increased sediment runoff
into waterways.

Vegetation
Loss of native plants, spread of invasive weeds
especially on unauthorized trails and areas
with disturbed soil, and impacts from trampling
of native vegetation.

Cattle Grazing
Since many of the open space areas have
cattle graving, it should be noted that
overgrazing damages riparian areas, increases
stream bank erosion, and nutrient loads,
and can introduce invasive weeds. However,
managed grazing can control fuels and weeds
while maintaining the character in San Ramon.

User Conflicts
Although it was not major topic during the
public engagement for this plan, conflicts
between hikers, bikers, equestrians, and dogs
are common in some popular trail systems
that are not actively managed.

MITIGATION STRATEGIES
Sustainable Deign
Build durable trails using national standards as
noted in this document with proper drainage
and gentle slopes. Limit trail density in
sensitive areas and GHAD land.

Habitat Protection
Close and restore unauthorized trails. Limit
recreational access to sensitive habitats.

Weed and Fire Management
Use conservation grazing and mechanized
fuels reduction projects to reduce weeds and
fuel loads, balancing with ecological health.

Monitoring and Adaptive Management
Regularly assess trail conditions, user trends
and management effectiveness yearly to adapt
management strategies.

User Management and Education
Promote trail stewardship making sure trail
users stay on designated trails. Enforce leash
laws and other regulations. Educate users on
impacts to the natural environment. Use Leave
No Trace messaging at trailheads, staging
areas, and access points.

Maintenance and Open Space Impact Reduction | 37

TRAIL CONSTRUCTION & MAINTENANCE STANDARDS

BACKCOUNTRY TRAIL

TREAD AND TRAFFIC FLOW
• Tread continuous and obvious
• Single lane, with allowances constructed for passing where required by traffic volumes in areas with no reasonable passing opportunities available
• Native or imported materials

OBSTACLES
• Obstacles may be common, but not substantial or intended to provide challenge
• Vegetation cleared outside of trailway

CONSTRUCTED FEATURES AND TRAIL ELEMENTS
• Structures may be common and substantial; constructed of imported or native materials
• Natural or constructed fords
• Bridges as needed for resource protection and appropriate access CLASS 3 TRAIL DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS
Tread Width
Wilderness
12–24″
Exception: may be 36–48″ at steep
side slopes
Non-Wilderness
(Single Lane) 18–36″
Non-Wilderness
(Double Lane) 36–60″
Structures 18″
Surface
Type
Native, with some on site borrowed
or imported material where needed
for stabilization and occasional
grading
Protrusions ≤ 3″
May be common, not continuous
Obstacles 10″
Grade
Target Grade 3–12%
Short-Pitch Maximum 25%
Maximum Pitch
Density 10–20% of trail
Cross Slope
Target Cross Slope 5–10%
Maximum Cross
Slope 15%
Clearing
Height 7–8′
Width 36–60″
Shoulder Clearance 12–18″
Turn Radius 3–6′
36 | Maintenance and Open Space Impact Reduction

TRAIL CONSTRUCTION & MAINTENANCE STANDARDS

OPEN SPACE TRAIL

TREAD AND TRAFFIC FLOW
• Tread wide and relatively smooth with few irregularities • Single lane, with allowances constructed for passing where required by traffic volumes in areas with no reasonable passing opportunities available
• Double lane where traffic volumes are high and passing is frequent • Native or imported materials
• May be hardened

OBSTACLES
• Obstacles infrequent and insubstantial
• Vegetation cleared outside of trailway

CONSTRUCTED FEATURES AND TRAIL ELEMENTS
• Structures frequent and substantial; typically constructed of imported materials
• Constructed or natural fords
• Bridges as needed for resource protection and user convenience • Trailside amenities may be present
CLASS 4 TRAIL DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS
Tread Width
Wilderness
18–24″
Exception: may be 36–48″ at steep
side slopes
Non-Wilderness
(Single Lane) 24–60″
Non-Wilderness
(Double Lane) 48–72″
Structures 36″
Surface
Type
Native with improved sections of
borrow or imported material, and
routine grading. Minor roughness
Protrusions ≤ 3″
Uncommon, not continuous
Obstacles 8″
Grade
Target Grade 2–10%
Short-Pitch Maximum 15%
Maximum Pitch
Density 5–20% of trail
Cross Slope
Target Cross Slope 3–7%
Maximum Cross
Slope 10%
Clearing
Height 8–10′
Width 48–72″
Shoulder Clearance 12–18″
Turn Radius 4–8′
Maintenance and Open Space Impact Reduction | 35

TRAIL CONSTRUCTION & MAINTENANCE STANDARDS

OUTDOOR RECREATION ACCESS ROUTE (ORAR)

TREAD AND TRAFFIC FLOW
• Tread wide, firm, stable, and
generally uniform
• Single lane, with frequent
turnouts where traffic volumes
are low to moderate
• Double lane where traffic
volumes are moderate to high
• Commonly hardened with
asphalt or other imported
material

OBSTACLES
• Obstacles not present
• Grades typically < 8%

CONSTRUCTED FEATURES AND

TRAIL ELEMENTS
• Structures frequent or
continuous; typically constructed
of imported materials
• May include bridges,
boardwalks, curbs, handrails,
trailside amenities, and similar
features

ORAR STATUS
• ORAR status ensures that the
trail segment meets federal
accessibility standards,
providing access for people with
mobility impairments.

CLASS 5 TRAIL DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS
Tread Width
Wilderness N/A
Non-Wilderness
(Single Lane) 36–72"
Non-Wilderness
(Double Lane) 72–120"
Structures 36"
Surface
Type
Likely imported material, and
routine grading
Uniform, firm, and stable
Protrusions No protrusions
Obstacles No obstacles
Grade
Target Grade 2%–5%
Short-Pitch Maximum 5%
FSTAG: 5%–12%
Maximum Pitch
Density 0%–5% of trail
Cross Slope
Target Cross Slope 2%–3% or crowned
Maximum Cross
Slope 3%
Clearing
Height 8–10′
Width 60–72″
Shoulder Clearance 12–24″
Turn Radius 6–8′
34 | Maintenance and Open Space Impact Reduction

TRAIL DESIGN GUIDELINES
For the purposes of this plan it is recommended that San Ramon use the national trail standards set forth by the United State Forest Service (USFS). Although there is no land managed by the USFS, their trail design standards are accepted at the high levels of trail design and maintenance around the country.

The USFS categorizes trails by their level of development and intended user experience. Classifications range from minimally developed backcountry routes to fully constructed and highly accessible trails.

These classes communicate the expected design approach, intended use, and long-term maintenance needs for each trail. The three trail types listed on the following pages are for unpaved off-street trails only, for on street trails, please see the 2025 Bicycle Master Plan. Example photos on are from the recently completed Cotoni-Coast Dairies trail system in Davenport, CA.

TRAIL CONSTRUCTION & MAINTENANCE STANDARDS
Outdoor
Recreation
Access Route
Trail
Open Space
Trail
Backcountry
Trail
Recommendations | 23

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS

RECOMMENDATIONS MATRIX

ID PROJECT DESCRIPTION PRIORITY TIME FRAME

CAPITAL

IMPROVEMENT
BUDGET

IMPLICATIONS

OPERATIONAL

AND STAFFING

IMPLICATIONS
B10 Improve trail connections and access point from Morgan Drive to EBRPD’s Bishop Ranch Regional Open Space. Medium Mid-term $50,000–$75,000
per 1 mile of
unpaved trail
$1,000 per mile of
dirt trail yearly
D4 Provide a connection from Iron Horse Trail to Dougherty Hills utilizing existing utility corridors. Low Long-term
$50,000–$75,000
per 1 mile of
unpaved trail
$1,000 per mile of
dirt trail yearly
T7 New trailhead at Cobblestone Neighborhood Park providing a connections to the Pleasanton Ridge to Las Trampas Trail. Low Mid-term $100,000–$300,000
depending on desired
amenities
Yes, minimal time
for maintenance
B11 Improve trail connection and access point from Paddock Drive to EBRPD open space & Red Hawk Trail (low priority by EBRPD). Low Long-term Unknown at this time - B12 Improve trail connection and access point from Cobblestone Park/ Thomas Ranch to EBRPD open space (low priority by EBRPD). Low Long-term Unknown at this time - D2 Provide a trail along Alamo Creek, utilizing shade from existing vegetation and highlighting the riparian corridor. Potential to work with the adjacent high school for cross country meets.

Low Long-term
$50,000–$75,000
per 1 mile of
unpaved trail
$1,000 per mile of
dirt trail yearly
B5 Provide a trail connection to EBRPD Sycamore Valley Open Space from Crow Canyon Road through the San Ramon Service Center. Low Long-term $50,000–$75,000
per 1 mile of
unpaved trail
$1,000 per mile of
dirt trail yearly
D9 Provide a connection from the future Crow Canyon Staging Area to the West Alamo Creek Trail. Low Long-term
$50,000–$75,000
per 1 mile of
unpaved trail
$1,000 per mile of
dirt trail yearly
D1 Provide a stacked loop trail system in the Dougherty Hills Open Space connecting to neighborhoods along Alcosta Blvd. to the west and Dougherty Road and Rancho San Ramon Park to the east.

Low Long-term
$50,000–$75,000
per 1 mile of unpaved
trail
$1,000 per mile of
dirt trail yearly
D3 Provide stacked loop trails through Tassajara Ridge better connecting the neighborhoods on the east side of the city to open space.

Low Mid-term
$50,000–$75,000
per 1 mile of unpaved
trail
$1,000 per mile of
dirt trail yearly
Short-term: 0-5 years
Mid-term: 6-10 years
Long-term: 11–20 years
22 | Recommendations

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS

RECOMMENDATIONS MATRIX

ID PROJECT DESCRIPTION PRIORITY TIME FRAME

CAPITAL

IMPROVEMENT
BUDGET

IMPLICATIONS

OPERATIONAL

AND STAFFING

IMPLICATIONS
T3 Improve trailhead at north end of Dougherty Hills Open Space that connects to West Alamo Creek Trail. Medium Mid-term $20,000+ depending on desired amenities
Yes, minimal time
for maintenance
C1 Provide shade along the Iron Horse Trail with a combination of tree planting and shade structures. Trees will take time to mature and provide benefits into the future while shade structures will cost more and provide immediate shade.

Medium7 Ongoing
$250,000–$750,000
per mile (varies
depending on trees
or structures)
Yes, minimal time
for maintenance
A2 Work with HOAs to identify connector trails between neighborhoods and open space access points and set dedicated public easements. (Note: Not mapped. Exact locations to be coordinated between City and HOAs that want to provide trail access for their members.) Medium Ongoing N/A < $25,000
(staff time)
B9 Provide a trail connection and access point from Westside Drive near Centennial Park to EBRPD open space through easements around the Laborers property (low priority by EBRPD).

Medium Long-term8
$50,000–$75,000
per 1 mile of
unpaved trail
$1,000 per mile of
dirt trail yearly
D8 Explore using flood plain service roads along Alamo Creek and West Alamo Creek as trails during the dry months. Medium Short-term N/A N/A T2 New Crow Canyon Staging Area trail to provide connections into Sycamore Valley Open Space and West Alamo Creek Trail. Medium Short-term $100,000–$300,000
depending on desired
amenities
Yes, minimal time
for maintenance
B8 Provide a trail connection from Old Ranch Park to Dublin open space through Dougherty Hills. The trail alignment should use the open space and not be located within the viewshed of existing residences.

Medium Short-term9
$50,000–$75,000
per 1 mile of
unpaved trail
$1,000 per mile of
dirt trail yearly
D6 Add a connection from Morgan Drive to connect to Memorial Park using HOA green space. Medium Mid-term
$50,000–$75,000
per 1 mile of
unpaved trail
$1,000 per mile of
dirt trail yearly
7 Increasing shade along the Iron Horse Trail was identified as a high-priority project in the Parks, Trails, Open Space, and Recreation Master Plan. 8 Coordinate with EBRPD timeline for public access.
9 To expand on projects T4 and D7.

Short-term: 0-5 years
Mid-term: 6-10 years
Long-term: 11–20 years
Recommendations | 21

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS

RECOMMENDATIONS MATRIX

ID PROJECT DESCRIPTION PRIORITY TIME FRAME

CAPITAL

IMPROVEMENT
BUDGET

IMPLICATIONS

OPERATIONAL

AND STAFFING

IMPLICATIONS
B3 Provide a trail connection and access point to Las Trampas through The Preserve Project’s open space near San Ramon Valley Blvd. to provide trail access from an urban part of the city.

High Short-term
$50,000–$75,000
per 1 mile of
unpaved trail
$1,000 per mile of
dirt trail yearly
A1 Provide a new stacked loop trail system in the open space between The Preserve Project and Las Trampas Regional Preserve to create shorter loops for community members and provide regional connectivity to EBRPD’s Parkland.

Medium Short-term3
$50,000–$75,000
per 1 mile of
unpaved trail
$1,000 per mile of
dirt trail yearly
B4 Provide a trail connection and access point along San Ramon Creek at Fostoria Way and Camino Ramon into the Town of Danville. This will provide a connection to the future Borel Agricultural Park by EBRPD.

Medium Mid-term4
$50,000–$75,000
per 1 mile of
unpaved trail
$1,000 per mile of
dirt trail yearly
T6 Improve trailhead at Paddock Drive to the Redtail Hawk Trail. Medium Mid-term Yes, minimal time for maintenance
B6 Improve trail connections from Red Willow Park in San Ramon to Diablo Vista Park in Danville. Medium Mid-term
$50,000–$75,000
per 1 mile of
unpaved trail
No
T1 Improve trailhead located along Faria Preserve Parkway to serve the proposed stacked loop system in The Preserve Project’s open space. Medium Short-term5 $5,000–$15,000 Yes, minimal time for maintenance
D5 Provide bike and pedestrian connections to the existing bike park at Memorial Park and/or locate a bike park in a more accessible location to youth.

Medium Mid-term
$50,000–$75,000
per 1 mile of
unpaved trail
Yes, minimal time
for maintenance
C3 Widen the trail and stripe to create separate lanes for fast and slow traffic, in line with recommendations from the County’s corridor study.

Medium Short-term6
See Iron Horse Trail
Active Transportation
Corridor Study
No
3 Coordinate with EBRPD's plans on extending the Las Trampas trail system south. 4 Coordinate with EBRPD's timeline for anticipated opening of Borel Park. 5 Concurrent with projects A1 and B3.
6 Identified in Contra Costa County's 2020 Active Transportation Corridor Study. Improvements throughout Segment 14 (from Fostoria to Montevideo) were highly ranked.

Short-term: 0-5 years
Mid-term: 6-10 years
Long-term: 11–20 years
20 | Recommendations

RECOMMENDATIONS MATRIX

ID PROJECT DESCRIPTION PRIORITY TIME FRAME

CAPITAL

IMPROVEMENT
BUDGET

IMPLICATIONS

OPERATIONAL

AND STAFFING

IMPLICATIONS
C2 Improve connections from parks and access points with clear wayfinding signage and enhanced trails linking parks, schools, neighborhoods, and commercial areas.

High Ongoing $500–$5,000
per sign & kiosk < $25,000/yr
T4 New trailhead at Old Ranch Park to service future trails and city owned open space between the park and the senior center. High Short-term $100,000–$300,000
depending on desired
amenities
Yes, minimal time
for maintenance
T5 New trailhead at Forest Home Farms to provide east-west connection with future enhancement of 680 underpass and a connection to the Starkweather Trail.

High Mid-term1
$100,000–$300,000
depending on desired
amenities
Yes, minimal time
for maintenance
D7 Provide a trail from Alcosta Senior and Community Center to Old Ranch Park. High Short-term
$50,000–$75,000
per 1 mile of
unpaved trail
$1,000 per mile of
dirt trail yearly
B1 Provide a trail connection and access point to Las Trampas Regional Preserve from The Preserve Project. A new trail is being constructed by EBRPD in 2026 extending south from the Las Trampas Ridge Trail that the City can partner on.

High Short-term
$50,000–$75,000
per 1 mile of
unpaved trail
$1,000 per mile of
dirt trail yearly
B2 Provide an access point to future west side EBRPD open space off Bollinger Canyon Road from The Preserve Project. High Mid-term2 $10,000+ for each
new access point
w/o parking
$1,000 per mile of
dirt trail yearly
T8 New trailhead at San Ramon Transit Center connecting to the Iron Horse Trail for multimodal connection. High Short-term
$50,000–$300,000
depending on desired
amenities
Yes, minimal time
for maintenance
B7 Connect Tassajara Ridge Trail to Dublin through Camp Parks. EBRPD is currently working on an agreement with Camp Parks to have a trail easement that San Ramon can support.

High Short-term
$50,000–$75,000
per 1 mile of
unpaved trail
$1,000 per mile of
dirt trail yearly
1 To be coordinated with 680 underpass recommendation in the Bike Master Plan Update. 2 Dependent on when EBRPD land bank open space will be open to public.

Table 3: Prioritization Matrix—Proposed Projects
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Short-term: 0-5 years
Mid-term: 6-10 years
Long-term: 11–20 years
Recommendations | 19

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS

RECOMMENDATIONS MATRIX

ID PROJECT DESCRIPTION PRIORITY TIME FRAME

CAPITAL

IMPROVEMENT
BUDGET

IMPLICATIONS

OPERATIONAL

AND STAFFING

IMPLICATIONS
G3 Use easements to provide connections through linear corridors, utility corridors, HOAs, etc. Providing thoughtful easements and land management partnerships.

Medium Ongoing - -
G4 Amend GHAD land conservation easements to allow new trail alignments that show environmental benefits, such as reduced erosion.

Medium Short-term - -
G5 Implement a citywide wayfinding signage plan for the trail system. Low Short-term - - G2 Recognize that cow paths have developed in open space areas, while they provide more gentle alignments, the trail surface is rough with holes from cow hooves and littered with manure. Management of the open spaces should recognize grazing can have impacts to public trails.

Low Ongoing - -
G7 The City should partner with a “friends of group” for nonprofit support of maintenance and education by developing a volunteer agreement and incentives.

Low Ongoing - -
G6 Develop a hierarchy of trailheads (access points, parking areas, parks) and associated amenities. Ensuring trailheads that directly interface with roadways are designed to provide appropriate safety treatments.

Low Short-term - -
G1 Provide more dirt-to-dirt trail connections. Current loops identified on public maps bring users onto the streets, providing a convoluted experience.

Low Long-term - -
Table 2: Prioritization Matrix—General Recommendations
Short-term: 0-5 years
Mid-term: 6-10 years
Long-term: 11–20 years
18 | Recommendations

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS

PROJECT PRIORITIZATION AND PHASING
The phasing plan identifies which potential projects should be considered and incorporated into a short-term (5 year), mid-term (10 year) and long-term (20 year) capital improvement program.

The Recommendations Matrix on the following pages lists the priority (high, medium, or low) and time frame (short-, mid-, or long-term) for each potential project.

PRIORITIZATION CRITERIA
Recommended projects were evaluated based on the following criteria...

CAPITAL AND FUTURE INVESTMENT (30%)
Considers whether funding or known funding sources for the potential project have been identified. Estimates the long-term financial implications of potential projects.

EASE OF IMPLEMENTATION (30%)
Examines the complexity of implementation when considering land ownership, potential easement acquisition, and ability to implement independently (without close collaboration or dependencies on other organizations).

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT (20%)
Assesses whether the project supports and advances the city’s long-term goals, adopted plans, and policy direction. Considers other criteria associated with the Trails Master Plan purpose.

STAKEHOLDER PRIORITIES (10%)
Assesses whether the potential project supports stakeholder priorities.

COMMUNITY DEMAND (10%)
Assesses whether the potential project supports community recreation preferences.

The Trails Master Plan acts as a playbook for the next
steps that include securing funding, final design, and
environmental considerations, and more—needed to
advance trail projects.

Capital Improvement Prioritization Matrix
Includes high-level capital and ongoing maintenance
cost estimates. Lists projects by priority based on
specific criteria.

Funding Opportunities
Describes potential opportunities to fund future projects.

Trail Construction and Maintenance Standards
Provides standards for trail construction, ADA
requirements,
Trail Use Mitigation Strategies
Describes strategies for mitigating impacts associated
with future use.

CEQA Compliance
Explains when Environmental Impact Reports are
required and recent changes to CEQA process.

Intersection Safety Considerations Appendix
Additional safety considerations for projects that interact with the road network.

IMPLEMENTATION PLAYBOOK
9 NEXT STEPS FOR SAN RAMON TRAILS
Old Ranch Park (B8, D7, T4) • Connect Old Ranch Park to Alcosta Senior & Community Center and Dougherty Hills Open
Space Trail.

Forest Home Farms (T5) • Provide a trailhead and trail access at the Forest Home Farms Historic Park.

Faria Preserve (A1, B1, B2, B3) • Connect northwest San Ramon to Las Trampas Regional Wilderness and provide
loop trails in the open space.

Iron Horse Trail (C2) • Create additional access points and opportunities for shade along Iron Horse Trail.

Tassajara Ridge (B7) • Connect to external open space via and improve existing trails at Tassajara Ridge.

HOA Land Connections (A2, not mapped) • Begin conversations with homeowner associations to find potential partners to
support major east-west connections.

LEGEND
Neighborhood & Open
Space Connection
A
Enhance Existing Trails
within City Limits
D
External Connections &
Regional Context
B
Enhance the Iron Horse
Trail within City Limits
CT Proposed Trailhead
EBRPD (Parkland)
Public Park
City Owned Property
Golf Course
EBRPD (Landbank)
GHAD
Dept. of Defense
Proposed Trail
Existing Trail
Iron Horse Trail
A1
B1
B2
B3
B7
C2
T4 T5
D7 B8
08 16 32 mi
1” = 8 miles
10 The City Council’s role is to consider approving
and adopting the San Ramon Trails Master Plan.

SAN RAMON

TRAILS MASTER PLAN
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?
Prepared by:
1 RECOMMENDED ACTION

San Ramon City CouncilJune 23, 2026

San Ramon City Council
June 23, 2026