The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutNB 9 STOP CNTL INVEST 10-20-80DATE: OCTOBER 15, 1980 No. 9 10-20-80 lnter-Com TO: DAN BLANKENSHIP, CITY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: BOB LEDENDECKER, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER SUBJECT: STOP CONTROL INVESTIGATION - BRYAN AVE. AT FARMiNGTON RD. At the request of the Marjorie Veeh School PTO, the intersection of Bryan Avenue and FarmingtonRoad has been investigated for a 4-way stop control. This was requested to provide a safer crossing for children. There is a school crosswalk at this location and a crossing guard. This is a 4-way intersection of a secondary arterial with a local street. There is existing stop control on Farmington. Bryan Avenue at the present ti~:~e is closed to through traffic due to construction at Browning Avenue. The posted speed limit on Bryan is 25MPH and there is good visibility in all directions at the intersection. We were unable to do vehicle approach counts on Bryan due to its being closed but were able to use the latest count in the vicinity on our regular count program. This ccunt was taken }n June, 1980. Current approach counts were taken on Farmington Road. In observing the intersection it was apparent that very few of the vehicles on Farmington Road made complete stops at Bryan Avenue. These ranged from slowly rolling through the stop to barely showing at all. Also, a large number of the bicyclists on Bryan ride on the wrong side of the street through this area. Pedestrian traffic crossing Bryan was counted for eleven hours (7:00 AM to 6:00 PM) and a total of 82 crossing were made. There were no crossings 'at all between the hours of 8:30 AM and 2':15 PM. There is an existing crossing guard but the intersection does notr'meet the warrants for a crossing guard, The crossings were as follows: TIME CHILDREN CROSSING ADULT CROSSING TOTAL 7:00 - 8:00 AM 6 0 6 8:00 - 9:00 AM 29 0 29 9:00 AM ~ 2:00 PM 0 0 0 2:00 - 3:00 PM 14 0 14 3:00 - 4:00 PM 13 0 13 4:00 - 5:00 PM 12 3 15 5:00 - 6:00 PM 4 1 5 TOTALS 7-8-- 4 82 October 15, 1980 Dan Blankenship, City Administrator Stop Control Bryan Ave. & Farmington The crossing guard was there for 61 of the crossin§s. As shown on the attached traffic volume shdet the intersection does not meet the warrants for stop control for any hour of the day. At least one resident of property at the intersection indicated that he would be opposed to stops on Bryan Avenue due to the increased qoise and pollution. There have been no recorded accidents at this location since January l, 1977. A stop installation at an unwarranted location such as this will usually increase the accidents and since an installation of this type is quite often ignored, it will gi~e pedestrains a very false sense of security. It cannot be recon~ended that a stop installation be made on Bryan Avenue at Farmington ROad. NORMAN HOWER TRAFFIC ENGINEER NH:dph INTERSECTION OF BRYAN AND FARMINGTON RD. TRAFFIC VOLUMES TOTAL Bryan Ave. Farmin§ton Total N/6 Farmington Farmington S/6 (crossing Bryan Pedestraiens Farmington Intersection Total Total 12:00 -l:O0 AM l:O0 - 2:00 2:00 - 3:00 3:00 - 4:00 4:00 - 5:00 5:00 - 6:00 6:00 - 7:00 7:00 - 8:00 8:00 - 9:00 9:00 - 10:00 !3:00 - 11:00 il:O0 - 12:00 12:00 - l:O0 PM 1-O0 - 2:00 i0 - 3:00 3:00 - 4:00 ~:00 - 5:00 5:00 - 6:00 5:00 - 7:00 7:00 - 8:00 8:00 - 9:00 9:00 - lO:O0 lO:O0 - 11:00 11:00 - 12:00 TOTAL 30 0 2 2 32 l0 1 1 2 12 lO 0 0 0 l0 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 1 1 21 40 2 8 l0 50 250 6 38 44 294 500 19 80 6 105 605 300 12 60 29 lO1 401 250 13 35 0 48 298 280 ll 41 0 52 332 360 lO 32 0 42 402 380 18 35 0 53 433 340 5 33 0 .~° 378 320 13 51 14 78' 398 550 17 58 13 88 638 820 16 59 15 90 9t0 640 29 59 5 93 733 320 16 59 75 455 260 13 35 48 308 210 8 20 28 238 150 5 23 28 178 100 3 12 15 115 50 1 2 3 53 6,250 218 744 82 1,044 7,294 This intersection does not meet the warrants 'for stop control for any hour of the day. ./ The Honorabl~ Dor. ald Sa] Lar,;]]] PtAyor'a 0ffie¢ Centennial & ~9Ai:% Tustin, CA 92680 Marjorie Veeh School PTO 1}532 Dean Street Tustln, CA 92680 October 1, 1980 ' -~:' Dear Mr. Mayor: The Marjor]e Veeh School }:TO is concerned for the safety of the children that need to cross Bryan Avenue between Red Hill and Browning. Before the construction be..qan at the intersection of Bryan and Browning the speed of traffic on Bryan made that street very dan~jerous to cross throughout the day. Children vlsi ti:t~ friends after school had to cross this busy street during rush hour traffic. They tended to run across the street as they felt the ears would .hot stop for them. Bryah b,~twccn Red Hill and Browni:~ is posted at 25 miles per hour and, while a wide street, is striped for two lane traffic. Before the construction began at Bryan and Browning traffic tend~ to flew in four lanes along Byran at ;;0 miles ~er hour. O:~,ce th,: imf:roved intersection at Bryan and Browning is reopened we understand construction will '[edin on irv'',-~, Blvd. This will certainly increase traffic flow on Bryan Street. Our PTO therefore requests the installation of stop signs on Bryan Ave. at the inter:~estion with Farminlton. This would r~uce the spe~ of traffic on ~ryan and ~.:.rH~l,~ th~:. chll~h-e:~ to cross this haza~ous street in greater safety. you ~c. your assista~.ce ~n this rcqu~Tt. Si:~-cerely, President ., l~'~f~:; '; ' ' : .... / - ' , ~-..J~ ' _ t.~-/ ~ I ~.,., (, . 1. /, - / , 1026 SCHOOL AREA PEDESTRIAN SAFETY Traffic Manual ~-1979 -- As noted in Section 10-03.4, an adequate crossing gap in approaching traffic should occur randomly at ;tn art rage rate of at least once each minute during the school crc~ssing periods, 10,-07.4 Special Condillons A School Safety P;ttro] shall not bt? assigned where inadequate stopping sight distance prevads, unless fl:c~hing yellow beacons are mst:died for operation during School Cr~ssiug hours. Adult Crossing Guard 10-08 10-.68.1 General Aclult Crossing Guards are a supplementM tech- nique and not a traffic control device. They may be ~signed ~CX'C &SI5) at designated school crossings, to assist elementary school pedestrians at specified hours when going to or from school. The following suggested policy for their assignment applies only to CFOSShlg$ serving elementar~ ~chool pedestri~s on the "Suggested Route to School." An Adult Crossing Guard should be considered 1. Special problems exist wh{ch make it necessary to assist t'lenlc:itarv school pedestri~ms in cross- ed,tntersection with frequent turning move- merits and high vehicular speeds; or A chanze m the school eros~ing location is immi- neat but prevailing conditions require school crossing supen4sion for a limited time and it is infeagible to install another form of eon~ol for a tempc:rary period 1~.2 Warrants for Ad~It Crossing Guards Adult Cros~icg Guards normaliy are ~signed where officia! supers~sion of element~y sch~l pedestria~ is desirable wh~le they cross a public ~ighway on the "Suggested Route to ~'hool", ~id at le~t 40 clemently school pedestri~s for each of ~y ~'o hours d~ly use the crossing w~le going to or from sch~l. Adtdt crossing gu~ may be w~- r~ted under the follo~ng conditions: 1. At uncontro~ed cross~gs where there ~ no ~- termite controlled crossin~ within 6t'X)feet; and a. In urban areas where the vehicular traffic volume exceeds &~ in each of any tx~o d,dly hours during which 40 or mere school pede- st~ans cross while going to or from school: or b. In rural areas where thc vehicular traffic vol- ume exceeds 3t~ in each of any two d.dty hours durin~ x~hich 30 or more school pede- strips cross while going to or from school. Whenexcr the c~itical approach speed (,x- eeeds 40 mph, ti~c warrants for rural areas should t:c applied. 2. At stop Man eontroIled crossings: a. Where the vehicuL~ traffic x oitmle oll undi- vided highwa} s of ik)ur or mc:re lanes exceeds ~) per hour during any period when the school pedestrians are go, in~ to or from school. 3. At traffic ,ignal~ontr~>lled crossings: a. Where :he aumber of vchicu!,ir turning movements through ti~e school crosswalk ex- ceeds X~ per iiour while :;chool pedestrians are going to or &om school. b. Where there are circumstances not nor- mally present at a signalized intersection, such ~ crosswalks more than a~ feet long with no intermediate refuge, or ~ abner malty ~gh proportion of large commerci~ ve~cles. Pedestrian Separation Structures eliminate vehic- ular-pedestrian conflicts but are necessarily limited to selected locations where the safety benefits clearly balance the public investment. Separation structures are supplemental techniques for providing school pedestrian safety and are not tr'~e control devices. 11t-09.2 Warrants Pedestrian Separation Structures should be consid- Pedestrian Separation Structures 10-09 General ered where the following conditions are full'died. 1. The prevailing conditions that require a school pedestrian crossing retest be sufficiently perma- nent to jtkgtify the separation structure; and 2. The location must be on the "Suggested Route to School" at an uncontrolled intersection or midbloek location along a freeway, expressway or major arterial street where the width, traffic speed and volume make it undesirable for pede- strians to cross; and 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. bIinimum 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 b o ?he 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" intersection (3-way) a minimum vehicular volume of 75 percent may be used. (Total vehicular volume of 375, minor street volume of 150.)