The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutNB 1 TRAFFIC SIGN 04-05-82m 1902 Inter-Corn TO: FROH: SUBJECT: WILLIAM HUSTON, CITY MANAGER B~8 L~DE~DECKER, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER R~QUEST FOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL INSTALLATION OF WA~N/3T AVENUE ASI) OXFO~ AV~gUE That the Tustin City Council, at their meeting of April 5, 1982, direct staff to install two additional stop signs at the intersection of Walnut and Oxford Avenues and defer any traffic signal installation at the subject intersection until such time the required warrants are satisfied for said installation. BACKGROUND: In February, staff received a request from Mrs. Barbara Dearing and other residents of the neighborhood for the City to install a traffic signal at the intersection of Walnut and Oxford Avenues. The subject intersection is a T-type intersection and is presently controlled by a three-way stop. Walnut Avenue is a secondary arterial highway with a pavement width of 64 feet between curbs and is currently striped for two travel lanes in each direction. The third leg of the intersection is Oxford Ave. and is a collector street with two lanes in either direction and serves as one of the two access roads into the Tustin Meadows residential development. Staff has observed motorists on a routine basis pass through the intersection without stopping and, in most instances, without slowing down. DISCUSSION: A warrant study for the installation of a traffic signal at this intersection has been c~,Fleted with none of'the warrants being met. Warrant No. 2, Interruption of Continuous Traffic, was almost satisfied. Under Warrant No. 6, Accident Experience, there was only one reported right angle type acident within the period of 3-1-81 through 3-1-82. Right angle type accidents are the only type considered, in that they could possibly have been prevented by the installation of a traffic signal. The total reported accidents at this intersection during the period of 3-1-81 and 3-1-82 was three. They were: one rearend type collision, one vehicle/bicycle collision, and the one previously mentioned right angle type collision. It appears that motorists are not seeing the existing stop signs which are presently located in back of the northerly and southerly curbs for westerly bound and easterly bound traffic respectively. The attached drawing proposes the installation of two additional stop signs in a 4' x 6' raised asphalt island located within the center area of the roadway. These siqns will provide adequate visibility for all m~torists. R~QUEST FOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL INSTBr.r~%TIC~ OF WAI/~UT AVENUE A~) (KFO~D AVD~JE MAg/~ 19, 1982 PAGE TWO Staff does not rec~,u,~nd the installation of traffic signals at the subject intersection until such time the required warrants are satisfied as outlined in the CalTrans Traffic Manual. The estimated cost for typical traffic signal installation at this intersection w~uld be $48,000.00 - $51,000.00. The estimated cost for the two additional stop signs with asphalt islands and striping modifications is $450.00 which can be accc~plished with funding frcm the 1981-82 Maintenance Division operating budget. BOB LEDE~ECKER DIRECTOR OF PU~IC CIT~ ENGINEER db Attachments RECE VE D FEB lgSZ TUSTINBy PUB,~..~/VORKS DEPT. February 17, 1982 Dear Mr. Ledendecker, As a homeowner living near Walnut and Oxford Avenues, I am w~iting to you regarding the. inadequate t~affic controls at this intersection'. In the early morning and late afternoon ~alnut Avenue carries a steady stream of traffic in and out of the residential areas and toward the Irvine Industrial Complex. During these same hours, school-aged children are in the area going tea nearby grade school ~_d city park. This intersection is currently controlled only by a three-way stop which for some reason fails to catch the attention of many drivers. To cite a recent example, on the afternoon of February 15th, I watched the aftermath efa rear end collision at this inter- section. My husband, a neighbor, and I du~ing the 20 minutes that Officer Shanahan spent at the scene, observed.three vehicles pass through the intersection without s~pping. I have since learned that the following morning a~other accident took place at this same intersection which involved a young bicyclist. ' //~ From my conversation on the 15th wi~H Officer ~hanahan, I learned that this intersection is a c~ntinuing source of traffic problems. This officer suggested that interested residents could do far more to bring about a change than suggestions by the Tustin Police. I believe that the heavy traffic volume carried by Walnut, along with the poor safety record of this intersection should be sufficient to warrant the upgrading of this installation to a traffic light. I am asking several of my neighbors to join me in requesting such a modification to make ours a safer neighborhood. I appreciate your attention to this matter. Sincerely, ~ ~ 'Mrs. Barbara Dearing 14491 Oxford Ave. ~' Tustin, Ca. 92680 O~r interested residents 12-197~ TRAFFIC Figure 9-1A TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS CAI. C ,4~, //./'~l~..~ ./~_--,*?~... DATE ~ .~_.- ~.M CHK DATE OIST CO RTE PM Major St: ~J,~ ~J/)~'.';~' Critical Approach Speed :~S" mph Minor St: <D ~' ~o/~ c~ Critical Approach Speed ~ ~ mph Critical speed of major street traffic.~ 40 mph ............. [] In built up area of isolated community of < 10,000 pop ......... I'~ RURAL (R) ~ URBAN (U) WARRANT 1 -- Minimum Vehicular Volume - - REQUIREMENTS 100% SATISFIED Yes I"1 No MINIMUM (~O% SHOWN IN BI~).CKETS) 80% SATISFIED Yes I-] NO UIR UlR ~jmSff~t (~0) (~) (~) (336) Hi~t ~h 1~ 105 ~ 1~ / 7 / ain~S~t* (1~) 184) (~ 1113) ~/3 · /~ /~e /~0 /~3 1~ /7/ · NOTE: Heavier of left turn ~nt fr~ ~j~ Strut i~1~ wMn LT-phasi~ is prop~ ~ WARRANT 2 - Interruption of Continuous Traffic MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS 100% SATISFIED Yes (80% SHOWN IN BRACKETS) U t R U I R 00% SATISFIED Yes, ~th A~m~. 7~ ~5 ~ H*o~t~ch 75 ~ ~m 70 ~/~ /~ /go /g~ /~ /~ Mi~ Strut * 1~) 142) 1~) (56) · NOTE: Heavier of left turn movement from Major Street Included when LT-phaaing is proposed WARRANT 3 - Minimum Pedestrian Volume Both Appmhs. No Median Ma jot Street Volume Raised 4' Mad(an Ped'B On Highest Volume X-Walk Xing Majo~ Street MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS (10% SHOWN IN BRACKETS) u R 6OO 420 (480) (336) (800) (560) ~50 105 (~20) 1a4) 100% SATISFIED 80% SATISFIED Yes [] No ~ Yes [] No ~ IF MIDBLOCK SIGNAL PROPOSED MIN. REQUIREMENT 150 Feet /..////// DiSTAHCETONEAHESTESTADLISHEDCRWLK.I FULFILLED N/E ft S/W ft -Yes. I-I No WARRANT 4 -- School Crossings TS*IOA NOt Applicable See School Crossings Warrant Sheet aALS AND LIGHTING Figure ~IB' TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS WARRANT 5 - Progressive _Movement Satisfied Yes I-I MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS DISTANCE TO NEAREST SIGNAL > 1000ft N ~ ,S - ft, E ~'~5'o ft, W/~.~ft ON ~SOLATED ONE WAY ST. OR ST. WITH ONE WAY TRAFFIC SIGNIFICANCE ADJACENT SIGNALS ON ~-WAY ST. WHERE ADJACENT SIGNALS DO NOT PROVIDE NECESSARY PLATOONING & SPEED CONTROL. PROPOSED SIGNALS COULD CONSTITUTE A PROGRESSIVE SIGNAL SYSTEM WARRANT 6 - Accident Experience Satisfied REOUIREMENT WARRANT ONE WARRANT WARRANT t--MINIMUM VEHICULAR VOLUME SATISFIED WARRANT 2 --INTENRUPT[~ON_QF _CO~NTI..N~UOU5 TFC WARRANT S - MINIMUM PEDESTRIAN VOLUME SIGNAL WILL NOT SERIOUSLY DISRUPT PROGRESSIVE TRAFFIC ~.OW FULFILLED ~/~ FULFILLED Yes ~ [] a/ MINIMUM REQUIREMENT NUMBER OF ACCIDENTS $ OR MORE * / NOTE: I_eft turn accidents can be included when I_T-pha.sing ia proposed WARRANT 7 -- Systems Warrant MINIMUM VOLUME REQUIREMENT SOO VEH/HR DURING EACH OF ANy S HRS OF A SATURDAY AND/OR SUNDAY VEH/NR CHARACTERISTICS OF MAJOR ROUTES MAJOR ST MINORST PART OF NWY SYSTEM SERVING AS PRINCIPLE NETWORK FOR THROUGH TFC ~ CONNECTS AREAS OF PRINCIPLE TRAFFIC GENERATION ~ R~INAL OR SUBURBAN HWY OUTSIDE OF. ENTERING, OR TRAVERSING A CITY ~ Satisfied Yes [] ENTERING VOLUMES - ALL APPROACHES /'~* '~- ~' VEH/NR ANY MAJOR ROUTE CHARACTERISTICS MET, BOTH STS, FULFILLED ESE'~.o [] [] WARRANT 8 -- Combination of Warrants (U~ed if no one warrant eatlsflegl 100~) Satisfied Yes [] b/ FULFILLED ~,.,~. YES0 NO 12-1S71 The satisfaction of a warrant is not necessarily justification tot signals. Delay, congestion, confusion or other evidence of the rieed for right of way assignment must be shown..