The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutOB 2 TRAFFIC SIG STUDY 05-01-89TO: WILLIAM HUSTON, CITY MANAGER FROM: PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT/ENGINEERING DIVISION SUB4ECT:' BRYAN AVENUE AND FARMINGTON ROAD TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT STUDY RECOMMENDATION: That a traffic signal installation at the intersection of Bryan Avenue and Farmington Road not be approved due to the Department of Transportation State Traffic Manual Warrants not being satisfied. BACKGROUND: At a previous City Council meeting, staff was requested to perform an engineering study of Bryan Avenue and Farmington Road with respect to a warrant analysis for the possible installation of a traffic signal. DISCUSSION: · Bryan Avenue at the intersection of Farmington Road is a four-lane -- arterial which is under stop sign control. Also, there is one existing school crosswalk Which crosses Bryan Avenue on the west side of the residential street and has one lane of travel in each direction. The speed limits on each are 40 miles per hour (mph) for Bryan Avenue and 25 miles per hour (mph) for Farmington Road. Traffic volume counts were made for Bryan Avenue and Farmington Road. The intent was to check each street for compliance to the minimum vehicular volumes required by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) State Traffic Manual for the installation of traffic signals. In addition, a review was made of the accident data for roughly a four-year period (1985-1989) for the subject intersection. The results indicated 'that there were no correctable right-angle type accidents at this location. The State of California Department of Transportation has adopted eleven nationally recognized guidelines (warrants) which are used in determining the need for traffic signal control. Each of these traffic signal warrants were evaluated for the subject location. The important considerations are vehicular volumes, accident history, vehicular speeds, and'spacing to adjacent traffic signals. Traffic counters were placed at the subject intersection for a 24-hour period starting at 6:0'0 A.M. The results of these traffic counts, as well as the -subsequent warrant evaluation (attached) reveals that a signal is not warranted at Bryan and Farmington. BRYAN AVENUE AND FARMINGTON ROAD SIGNAL W~T STUDY APRIL 21, 1989 PAGE 2. ' . Staff will continue t'o evaluate this intersection on an annual basis to monitor any changes in State warrants as the Tustin Ranch development progresses. Bob Led~ndecker Director of Public Works/City Engineer BL:mv cc: Jerry Crabillo Attach: California State Traffic Signal Warrant Worksheets Traffic Manual ! IIIII II '1 n FFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTIriG I 9-5 12-1986 DIST Major St: Minor St: CO " Figure 9-1A " 'RAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS RTE PM CHK DATE Critical Approach Speed ';~'$ '/' mph Critical Approach Speed mph Critical speed of major street i, r2ffic.~ 40 mph ................... In built up area of isolated con,,',unity of~__10,000 pop. ' ........ ... WARRANT 1 - Minimum V¢hicular Volume o, RURAL (R) !-I URBAN (U) I OO% SATISFIED YES NO 80% SATISFIED MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS (80~ SHOWN IN B,~CKETS) APPROACHLANES I 2urmore__ ~7'8 b'~ //~",/0/~-~ //3-,~'/~'-~'/~'0 A'~ Both Apprch~. 500 350 C..b '"' ~ MajorStreet (400) (~ (4a~),___, //// /~ ~/ ~?~ ~ //~C /~/ ~ Highest Appmh. 150 ~10~ 2UO 140 Hour * NOTE: Heavier left turn moveme,'~t from Major Street include.d when LT-phasing .is proposed , WARRANT 2- Inter. ruption~of Continuous Traffic 100% SATISFIED YES I'1 NO 80% SATISFIED YES r"l NO MINIMUM REQU.,tEMENTS (8096 SHOWN IN BI1ACKETS) Both Apprchs. 750 525 900 Major Street (600) (4~_0) (720)(~) Highest Apprch. 75 ~2) 100 70 Minor Street* (60) (80) (56) Hour *NOTE: Heavier left turn moveme,,; from Major Street included when LT-phasing is proposed r-I WARRANT 3- Minimum P6~.estrianVolume lOO% SATISFIED YES r-I NO D ~ 80% SATISFIED YES r'l NO I"! MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS (80~ SHOWN IN BRACKETS) U R B°th Apprchs' No Median 60'~-' 420 / / / / / / / Major Street (4.90) (836) , Raised lOCh 700 Volume 4' Median (8(,,) (560) Ped's On Highest Volume 15''~ 105 X-WalkXing Major Street (12~.~ (84) ,, Hour IF MIDBLOCK ~!GNAL PROPOSED r"i MIN. REQUIREMENT [.'NT DISTANCE TO NEAREST ESTABLISHED CRWLK. FULFILLED · N/E ~ ft S/W ft Yes 1"] No I-I 150 Feet The satisfaction of a warrant is nor..ecessarily justification for a signal. Delay, congestion, confusion or other evidence of the need for right of waY assignment must be shown. - 12-1986 I I WARRANT 4- School Cros;]ngs .FFIC SIGNALS AND UGH. Figure g-1 B Traffic Manual TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS Not Applicable See School Crossings Warrant Sheet I-I WARRANT 5- Progressive [1ovement SATISFIED YES I'1 NO D · MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS DISTANCE TO NEAREST SIGNAL > 1000 ft N~, S fl, E fl, W h ON ONE WAY ISOLATED ST. OR ~*i'. WITH ONE WAY TRAFFIC SIGNIFICANCE AND ADJACENT SIGNALS ARE SO FAR APART THAT NECESSARY PLATOONING & SPEED CONTROL WOULD BE LOST ON 2'WAY ST. WHERE ADJACENT ,SIGNALS DO NOT PROVIDE NECESSARY PLATOONING & SPEED CONTROL. PROPOSED SIGNALS COULD CONSTITUTE A PROGRESSIVE SIGNAL SYSTEM FULFILLED YES ri NO D WARRANT6- Accident Ex.~.9rlence SATISFIED YES r"! NO i REQUIREMENT i. WARRANT !V" FULFILLED i ONE WARRANT ~W.A. RRA~T 1- MINIMUM VEHICULAR VOLUME SATISFIED WARRAIflT 2 - INTERRUPTION OF CONTINUOUS TRAFFIC on 80~ WARR,',I~'r3- MINIMUM PEDESTRIAN VOLUME YES Fl NO ' SIGNAL WILL NOT SERIOUSLY DISRUPT PROGRESSIVE TRAFFIC FLOW D r'-I ,/ ADEQUATE TRIAL OF LESS RES'IiR:CTIVE REMEDIES HAS FAILED TO REDUCE ACC. FREQ. Fl ACC WITHIN A 12 MON. PERIOD SUSCEPTIBLE OF CORR. & INVOLVING INJURY OR )* $200 DAMAGE m m m m m II m m ,~ m e · /m m II m II m · MINIMUM REQUIREMENT NUMBER OF ACCIDENTS 5 OR MORE* Fl * NOTE: Left turn accidents can be included when LT-phasing is proposed WARRANT 7- Systems Wa.*,ant SATISFIED YES !-! MINIMUM VOLUME REQUIREMENT ENTERING VOLUMES - ALL APPROACHES V~ FULFILLED DURING P(PICAL WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR 800 VEH/HR VEH/HR DURING EACH OF ANY 5 HRS OF A SATURDAY AND/OR SUNDAY ' VEH/HR YES .Fl NO I"-I CHARACTERI~'TICS OF MAJOR ROUTES MAJOR STI MINOR ST HWY SYSTEM SERVING AS PRINCIPLE NETWORK FOR THROUGH TRAFFIC ,,,f/~ CONNECTS AREAS OF PRINCIPLE TRAFFIC GENERATION .~'./_~.~ 5 m II m m m m mm II m m m m II m m m II m II m m m m mm m m II II m II m m II II m II m II m . mm m m m II m m .R.U .,A.~.O., S.U.~.U R.~.~,. ,.W.Y.O.U ~.S~D.E.O[..E N.~5 nj N.~: O.R.~.,A.V.E R.S,.,? .~ .C,?.. .~/..~... HAS SURFACE STREET FWY OR EXPWAY RAMP TERMINALS //v//./ mm II m m m II m mm m m m m II m III m m~. II II II II m m m m m II II m'm m m m II II m II III mm/mill APPEARS AS MAJOR ROUTE ON .:~l'~ OFFICIAL PLAN ,~) ANY MAJOR ROUTE CHARACTERISTICS MET, BOTH STS. The satisfaction of a warrant is not necessarily justification for a signal. Delay, congest'ion, confusion or other evidence of the need for right of Way assignment must be shown. TS*IOB Traffic Manual ~i,:~:FIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTninG I ,' Figure 9-1C I iTRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS ~ of Warrants 'SATISFIED YES !"! NO ~ . WARRANT 8- Combinati¢. REQUIREMENT ! WARRANT v' FULFILLED · ~ TWO WARRANTS 1- MIHI~UM VEHIGULAFI VOLUME , SATISFIED 2- INTERRUPTION OF CONTINUOUS TRAFFIC 80~ 3- MINI:,4UM PEDESTRIAN VOLUME YES I'-I ' NO WARRANT 9- Four Hour Vulume SATISFIED* YES I-I t " 2 or Approach Lanes One more ~o~' 4o~" ~ ~ ~' ~ Hour Both Approaches , Major Street Highest Approaches , Minor *Refer to Fig. 9-2A (URBAN AREAS) or Figure 9-2B (RURAL AREAS) to determine if this warrant is satisfied. I WARRANT 10- Peak Hour l~elay SATISFIED 1. The total delay experienced f(,, ~raffic on one minor street ;~pproach controlled by a STOP sign equals orexceeds four vehicle-hours for a one-lane approach and five vehicle-hours for a two-lane approach; and .i 0-7 1Z-198~ YES r"l NO r"l YES I-1 NO I-! 2. The volume on the same minor ~treet approach equals or exceeds 100 vph for one moving lane of traffic or 150 vph for two moving lanes; and YES I""1 NO I-! 3. The total entering volume serViced during the hour equals or exceeds 800 vph for intersections with four or more approaches or 650 vph for intersections with three approaches. YES I-!-NO I"1 WARRANT 1 1 - Peak Hour ~olume 2 or !!Approach Lanes One more Hour ,,, , Both Approaches , Major Street : , Highest Approaches , Minor Street SATISFIED* YES r"! NO !-I *Refer to Fig. 9-2C (URBAN AREA~) or Figure 9-2D (RURAL AREAS) to determine if this warrant is satisfied. The satisfaction of a warrant is not necessarily justification for a signal. Delay, congestion, confusion or other evidence of the need for right of w~.y assignment must be shown. TS-lOC MAJOR MINOR ST.:- ST.:- Critical In Built ~ORT TRAFFIC STUDIES NEWPORT BEACH, CA TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS BRYAN AVE FARMINGTON RD Speed Of Major Street Traffic Up Area Of Isolated Community Critical approach Critical Approach >= 40 MPH ........... Of < 10,000 Pop .... X Speed Speed RURAL URBAN (R) (U) AJOR PPRO. Minimum (O) i (R) ', (U) 2 (R) ', 500 '~ 350 ', 600 ',(420)', 400 ', 280 ', 480 ~,(336)', 7-8 1111 8-9 1058 9-10 661 2--3 670 3-4 987 4-5 1146 5-6 1361 6-7 639 WARRANT i Vehicular Volume ' (U) I (R) ~, (U) 2 (R) I ' 200' 140' MINOR ', 150 ~,(105), , , .APPRO. I, 125 ', (84)', 160 I 112 ', 7-8 39 8-9 27 9-10 24 2-3 22 3-4 21 4-5 30 5 -6 25 6-7 28 00% SATISFIED NO 80% SATISFIED NO ' (U) I AJOR ',750 PPRO ' 600 ' I Inter rup't i on i (R) ', (U) 2 (R)' ~ ~, 525 ', 900 ~,(630)', ', 420 ', 720 ',(504)~ 7-8 1111 8-9 1058 9-10 661 2-3 670 3-4 987 4-5 1146 5-6 1361 6-7 63'9 WARRANT 2 of Continuous MINOR APPRO. Traffic ' (U) 2 (P) , ' (U) i (R) , ~.. I ', 75 ', (53)', 100~, 70~, ' 80', 56' ,' 60 ', (42), , 7-8 39 8-9 27 9-10 24 2-3 22 3-4 21 4-5 30 5-6 25 6-7 28 00% SATISFIED NO 80% SATISFIED NO HOUR INTERSECTION VOLt, NEWPORT TRAFFIC STUDIES NEWPORT BEACH, CA NORTH-SOUTH LEGS.: - FARMI'NGTON RD EAST-WEST LEGS: ~ BRYAN AVE DATE: 03/28/89 TIME 12:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 NORTH LEG. 2 0 0 1 3 7 30 39 27 24 16 25 23 31 22 21 30 22 28 20 17 8 6 3 405 SOUTH LEG 2 3 1 0 0 5 17 22 21 14 12 11 17 17 22 17 14 25 2O 34 14 1 4 2 295 'EAST LEG 10 4 1. 2 4 24 240 885 884 504 397 430 315 212 413 665 746' 768' 303 128 88 54 33 11 7121 WEST _ LEG 10 7 2 2 6 76 374 226- 174 157 144 172 248 251 257 322 400 593 TOTAL 24 14 4 5 13 112 661 1172 1106 699 569 63E~ 6 0 511, '714 1025 4314 21 58 116 158 1408 336 68'7 204 386 2 '? 7 179 101 37 12135 1190 -- , C) CO} LIF}C:~ D) C)';Y C:F DAY ?07PL F~ta P.D.