HomeMy WebLinkAboutNB 2 TRAFFIC CONCERNS 12-5-83DATE: NOVEMBER 29, 1983
NEW BUSINESS
NO. 2
12-5-83
lntel*-Com.
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
WILLIAM HUSTON, CITY MANAGER
BOB LEDENDECKER, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER
SYCAMORE AVENUE/CAP. FAX AVENUE TRAFFIC CONCERNS
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Tustin City Council, at. their meeting of December 5, 1983, approve the
suggested red.zoning on both sides of Sycamore Avenue and as shown on the attached
drawing.
BACKGROUND:
At a previous City Council meeting Mr. Massengill, a resident, expressed his
concerns about traffic safety at the intersection of Sycamore and Carfax Avenues.
His major concern was the visibility of eastbound Sycamome Avenue traffic to the
motorist traveling northerly on Carfax Avenue and taking access to Sycamore
Avenue.
Staff has completed a review of this intersection (copy attached), which will be
discussed below.
DISCUSSION:
The attached memo discusses five areas related to the intersection:
1. Four Way Stop Control
2. No Parking or Existing Red Zones
3. Sycamore Avenue Speed Zone
4. Traffic Control Signing
5. Accident History
This intersection did not satisfy the volume warrants for a four way stop centrol
and it is a staff recommendation that stop signs not be installed on Sycamore
Avenue at Carfax Avenue.
Red zones appear to be adequate on Sycamore Avenue easterly of Carfax Avenue. The
southerly side of Sycamore Avenue adjacent to the residence at 1212 Sycamore
Avenue presents a visibility problem when a vehicle is parked at that location.
During staff's review of the intersection, vehicles were parked in front of 1212
Sycamore, which impaired the visibility of motorists gaining access to Sycamore
Avenue from Carfax Avenue.
SYCAMORE AVENUE/CARFAX AVENUE TRAFFIC CONCERNS
NOVEMBER 29, 1983
PAGE 2
A radar speed check of vehicles on November 10, t983 between 8:55 a.m. and 10:45
a.m. indicated the traffic speeds were consistent with the posted speed zone.
Signing was found to be adequate, as compared to accepted practices, and the
accident history was as indicated in the attached memo.
Approximately two years ago, the City Council received some concerns from area
residents regarding the same impaired visibility problems due to vehicles being
parked in front of 1212 Sycamore. At that time, the owner of the property at 1212
Sycamore Avenue was opposed to any red zoning adjacent to his residence. This
residence is a corner lot and it does have parking available along Carfax Avenue
frontage. The resident at 1212 Sycamore Avenue has been sent a copy of this
report and notified of the time and date of the Council meeting.
As an initial step to resolving the visibility problem, it is suggested that the
curb adjacent to 1212 Sycamore be red zoned for a distance of 10 feet westerly of
the curb return and around the'curb return itself. This should provide a minimum
amount of clear area to provide for improved visibility. This will leave
approximately 15 feet of clear area for parking in front of the residence at.1212
Sycamore Avenue. In addition, it is suggested that the northerly curb westerly of
Carfax Avenue (north) be red zoned for a distance of 30 feet westerly of the curb
return. These proposed red zone areas are shown on the attached drawing.
Bob Ledendecker
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
jr
Attachment
12ATE:
NOVEMBER 17, 1983
Inter-Corn
FROM:
SUBJECT:
BOB LEDENDECKER, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER
NORMAN NOWER, TRAFFIC ENGINEER
REVIEW OF SYCAMORE AVENUE AND CARFAX AVENUE INTERSECTION
As requested, the subject intersection has been reviewed for four way stop
control, no parking areas, speed zone, signing and accident's.
FOUR WAY STOP CONTROL - Approach counts were taken and it was found that the
intersection did not meet the warrant requirements by vehicle volumes.alone. This
intersection is a school crossing, controlled by a crossing guard, and a number of
children cross here. We were unable to get an accurate count of pedestrians, due
to schOol holidays, and altered school schedules because of teacher conferences.
Carfax Avenue did not meet the warrant requirement by vehicular volumes alone, and
it is felt it could not meet it with a combination of vehicle and pedestrian
volumes for more than one hour.
NO PARKING ,A~EAS - There. is at present adequate no parking areas for visibility
purposes, as Shown on the attached plan. The possible exception is on the south
side of Sycamore Avenue, west of Carfax Avenue, in front of 1212 Sycamore Avenue,
where a parked vehicle could occasionally obstruct vision to and from the south
end of the crosswalk.
SPEED ZONE - The speed on Sycamore Avenue was checked by radar and found to be
consistant with the existing speed zone of 35 m.p.h. The eastbound
critical speed is 38 m.p.h, and the westbound is 36 m.p.h.
SIGNING - The crosswalk at the intersection is signed for a school crossing with
the normal W66, R2(25) and R72 signs. The eastbound direction of travel is signed
near Newport Avenue for 35 m.p.h., but the westbound 35 m.p.h, sign near Red Hill
Avenue was removed some years ago because of complaints about it being near a
school and replaced with W63 (school), R2 (25) and R72 signs.
ACCIDENTS - There has been one reported accident in the intersection during the
last twelve months. This was a right angle car-bicycle accident that occured
during daylight hours on September 20, 1983. The bicycle rider was an adult.
The intersection does not meet the warrants for four way stop control at any
time. During peak volume periods, morning and evening on Sycamore Avenue, it will
undoubtedly require a wait to inter onto Sycamore safely.
Norman Hower
Traffic Engineer
jr
Attachment
APPROACH VOLUMES
INTERSECTION OF
SYCAMORE AVENUE AND CARFAX AVENUE~
SYCAMORE CARFAX
EAST WEST NORTH SOUTH INTERSECTION
TIME BOUND BOUND TOTAL BOUND BQUND TOTAL TOTAL
12:00- 1:00 AM 37 '36 73 3 1 4 77
1:00- 2:00 24 8 32 2 1 3 35
2:00- 3:00 14 11 25 2 3 5 30
3:00- 4:00 10 6 16 1 0 1 17
4:00- 5:00 14 12 26 0 3 3 29
5:00- 6:00 35 35 70 11 14 25 95
6:00- 7:00 273 169 442 34 43 77 519
7:00- 8:00 769 324 1093 33 40 73 1166
8:00- 9:00 734 303 1037 22 18 40 1077
9:00-10:00 327 190 517 18 31 49 566
10:00-11:00 183 184 367 28 20 48 415
11:00-12:00 PM 221 287 508 9 29 38 546
12:00- 1:00 333 240 573 17 28 45 618
1:00- 2:00 323 412 735 22 19 41 776
2:00- 3:00 354 447 801 12 17 29 830
3:00- 4:00 308 621 929 33 27 60 989
4:00- 5:00 290 708 998 18 20 38 1036
5:00- 6:00 350 583 933 30 19 49 982
6:00- 7:00 264 257 521 31 29 60 581
7:00- 8:00 195 190 385 22 18 40 425
8:00- 9:00 145 121 266 15 16 31 297
9:00-10:00 162 97 259 11 23 34 293
10:00-11:00 124 69 193 9 14 23 216
11~:00~12:0~ 73 53 ~26 8 9 17 143
TOTALS ~5,562 5,363 10,925 391 442 833 11,758
This intersection does not meet the volume warrants for four-way stop
control.
STANDARD WARRANTS FOR 4-WAY STOP CONTROL
IN USE BY: U.S. Department of Transportation
State of California
Any of the following conditions may warrant a four-way stop sign
installation:
Where traffic signals are warranted and the need is
urgent, the four-way stop can be used as an interim
measure until a traffic signal can be installed.
An accident problem, as indicated by five or more reported
accidents of a type susceptible of correction by a four-way
stop installation in a 12-month period. Types of accidents
susceptible of correction include right angle and left
turn collisions.
3. Minimum volume warrant:
The total vehicular volume entering the intersection
from all approaches-must average at least 500 vehicles
per hour for any eight hours of an average day, and
The combined vehicular and pedestrian volume from
the minor street or highway must average at least
200 units per hour for the same eight hours with an
· average delay to minor street vehicular traffic of
at least 30 seconds per vehicle during the maximum
hour.
When the 85-percentile approach speed of the major
street traffic exceeds 40 miles per hour, the
minimum vehicular volume warrant is 70 percent of
the above requirements.
At a "T" interse6tion (3-way) a minimum vehicular volume of 75 percent
may be used. (Total vehicular volume of 375, minor street volume of'
150,)
FOI~M TC- 9
TRAFFIC COUNTING MANUAL
CONDUCTED
TYPE OF COUNT: [] DIRECTIONAL
DIRECTION: F/Z~'~' 4~',:"-/?/~"'
DAY
~-~
~-~
3-4
4-5
~ ·
~ /~ ~37
MACHINE COUNT
,,~UMMA RY
'"-I 2-WAY
CHECKED BY ..... DATE
DATE
A.N
P.M
~ORM TC-9
TRAFFIC COUNTING
DATE
DAY
12-1
I-2
2-3
3-4
~-1o
~-~
~-~
"-~
9-10
1~11
11-12
MANUAL
TYPE OF' COUNT: ~DIRECTIONAL
I/-/0- ~
J~ ACHINE; COUNT
SUMMARY
r'-J 2-WAY
CHECKED BY ..... DA'TE
DATE BEGUN ///'"'.~--CC:~-'~
A.N
P.M
TRAFFIC COUNTING MANUAL
TYPE OF COUNT= ~ DIRECTION,AL
DAY
'2-:3
3-4 b
~-~
A.M, 5-~ ~,~
~-~o /~
='~ ~7
P,M.
~'~ i~l
1~!1
Il-12
TOTAL
CHECKED BY ..... DATE
A.N
P.M
FORU TC-9
TRAFFIC COUNTING MANUAL
/~IACHINE
COUN'T'
SU/MMA RY CHECKED BY ..... DATE
TYPE OF COUNT: .,~ DIRECTIONAL [~ 2-WAY DATE BEGUN
DIRECTION: ~'~ ~/"~,~ ' ~'/-~/[/-~
~,TE //-m-- P ~
DAY .
12-1
1-2
2-3
3-4
4-5
5-6
6-7
7-8
8-9
9-10 ,~/
1-2 ,/~'~
~-~ /?
4-~
~-~.
6-7
7-~
B"~
1~il
!I-12
/
3/?
A./V
P.M