HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-09-08 - AGENDA REPORTS - TRAFSIG EVALUATION (2)CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
AGENDA REPORT
NEW BUSINESS City Manager Appro 1:
Item to be presented by: Bahman Janka
DATE: September 8, 1998
SUBJECT: 1998-1999 TRAFFIC SIGNAL PRIORITY EVALUATION REPORT
DEPARTMENT: Transportation & Engineering Services
RECOMMENDED ACTION
That City Council accept the staff report and approve recommended revisions in the Traffic
Signal Priority Rating System; approve the ranked list of candidate traffic signal locations;
and select the intersection. of Haskell Canyon Road and Grovepark Drive to be signalized
from the City's current Signal Priority List.
BACKGROUND
In October 1995, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 95-116 establishing the City of
Santa Clarita Traffic Signal Priority Rating System. The system provides the City a
rational way of ranking competing candidate locations for traffic signalization by assigning
points based upon various traffic data. The system, combined with the thoughtful
allocation of limited funds, provide maximum safety to the community by installing traffic
signals only at the most critical intersections as determined by the rating system.
Traffic Signal Priority Rating System Recommended Revisions. Two changes are proposed
to the approved rating system to better reflect other factors affecting traffic operations:
1. Under Selection of Candidate Locations: To exclude from further evaluation those
warranted traffic signal locations from the previous years, if based upon engineering
judgment, a traffic signal may be inappropriate at that location. Caltrans' Traffic
Manual Guidelines for traffic signal warrants state. that "the decision to install a signal
should not be based solely upon warrants. Delay, congestion, approach conditions,
driver confusion, future land use, or other evidence of the need of right-of-way
assignment must be shown."
2. In Category 8, Special Conditions: A maximum of five points will be awarded to
locations showing high traffic congestion as evidenced by observed delays and long
queues during peak hours, or any unaccounted/unusual traffic conditions.
Appfloffl Agenda itenli t JJ
1998-1999 TRAFFIC SIGNAL PRIORITY EVALUATION
September 8, 1998 — Page 2
The recent traffic signal priority evaluation reflects the above changes. The complete copy
of the revised Traffic Signal Priority System is shown in Exhibit "A."
Evaluation Results. Staff evaluated eleven locations for traffic signal warrants this year.
Five of these locations were carried from last year's list. Two locations from last year's list
were dropped for reasons specified in this report. The first location, Whites Canyon
Road/Ashboro Drive, was dropped because it was only an alternate location for the last
year's number one ranked Whites Canyon Road/Steinway Street, which is being signalized
this month. The other intersection, Soledad Canyon Road/Oak Avenue, was excluded
because it is too close to the busy intersection of Soledad Canyon Road/Ruether Avenue. A
traffic signal here may create more congestion in the area. Moreover, potential restriction
of certain traffic movements at Oak Avenue may eliminate the need for the traffic signal.
Of the eleven locations evaluated, ten locations satisfied a traffic signal warrant(s) and are
ranked and shown below. Exhibit "B" shows the detailed description of relevant traffic
operating conditions for each location, including a tabulated evaluation summary showing
the points assigned by category.
Ranking Summary of Candidate. Traffic Signal Locations for FY 1998-1999:
Rank
Location
Points.
1
Haskell Canyon Road/Grovepark Drive
59
2
Rye Canyon Road/Avenue Crocker
54
3
Sierra Highway/American Beauty Drive
52
4
Copper Hill Drive/Seco Canyon Road
51
5
Rye Canyon Road/Avenue Scott
44
6
Bouquet Canyon Road/Wellston Drive
43
7
Soledad Canyon Road/Flowerpark Drive
42
8
Plum Canyon Road/Rodgers Drive
40
9
Calgrove Boulevard/Wiley Canyon Road -Valley Oak Court
38
10
Bouquet Canyon Road/Sutters Pointe
29
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
Other action as determined by Council.
FISCAL IMPACT
Funds for this expenditure, in the amount of $140,000.00, have been budgeted in the
FY 1998-1999 CIP Budget Account No. C0015-052.
1998-1999 TRAFFIC SIGNAL PRIORITY EVALUATION
September 8, 1998 — Page 3
ATTACHMENTS
Ranking Summary
Vicinity Map
Exhibit "A" - FY 1998-1999 Traffic Signal Priority Evaluation Results
Exhibit "B" - Updated Traffic Signal Priority Rating System
MS:NMB:IkI
..dI%.ig,ty98as
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA TRAFFIC SIGNAL PRIORITY LIST -1998
Ranking Summary
RANK
INTERSECTION
NAME
(MAJOR AT MINOR)
CORRECTABLE
ACCIDENTS
(Receml2mos.)
SIGNAL
WARRANTS
MET
Urban
Or
Rural
8 Hour App. Volume
MAXIE
MAXIS
MAXI5
MAX10
MAX20
MAX10
MAXS
MAX10
(1100) PIS.
MaIwuHlghesr
Minor
AOpoaoha
igheat
Minor
appmach
TOTAL
VOLUME
INTER.
RUPTION
PEDES.
TRIANS
PRO&
RESSION
ACCO
DENTS
APPROACH
SPEED
STREET
GEOMETRY
SPECIAL
CONDITIONS
TOTAL
1st
Haskell Canyon at Grove Park-Ridgegrove Drive
0
1,2,4,8,9,&
11
Rural
8705
2766
15
5
15
10
0
6
3
5
59
2nd
Rye Canyon Road at Avenue Crocker
3
1, 2, 8, 9,11
Rural
9348
3039
15
6
10
5
8
6
2
2
54
3rd
JSIerra Highway at American Beauty
4
2, 9,11
Rural
11198
654
7
13
5
10
9
6
1
1
52
4th
Copperhill Drive at Seco Canyon Road
0
1, 2, 8, 9,11JRural
10430
3673
15
6
5
10
0
8
4
3
51.
5th
Rye Canyon Road at Avenue Scott
1
1, 2, 8, 9,11,
12643
5610
15
6
0
10
1
8
2
2
44
6th
Bouquet Canyon Drlve/Wellstone Drive
0
2,8,9,-& 11
16045
868
9
15
0
7
0
8
3
1
43
7th
Soledad Canyon Road at Flower Park
1
1, 2, 8, 9 ,11
9641
2540
15
7
0
10
1
8
1
0
42
8th
Plum Canyon Road/Rodgers Road
0
2, 8, 9, & 11
6870
1036
6
5
15
6
0
4
3
1
40
9th
Calgrove Blvd/Wiley Canyon Road
1
9, & 11
6883
2739
15
2
0
10
1
6
4
0
38
10th
Bouquet Canyon Drive/Sutters Pointe Drive
1
9, & 11
.18530
493
5
0
10
3
1
8
1
1
'29
SIGNAL WARRANTS
1. Minimum Vehicular Volume: The volume of intersecting traffic is the principal reason for considering traffic signals.
2. Interruption of Continuous Traffic: Traffic volume on major street is so heavy minor street suffers excessive delay
or hazard when entering or crossing the major street
4. School Crossings: When it is necessary to create a gap in traffic to provide safe pedestrian crossing on a'Suggested Route to Schoor
6. Accident Experience: Five (5) or more correctable accidents in a 12 -month period. -
8. Combination Warrants: Warrants 1 and 2 are 80% satisfied.
9. Four hour volume; Four hour equivalent to warrant #2 (8 hour warrant)
11. Peak hour volume: One hour equivalent to warrant 92 (8 hour warrant)
R - Critical speed of =lot street >40 mph
U Critical speed of major street c 40 mph
a:1Ra1tra1fie�51gptyae.xls
TRAFFIC SIGNAL PRIORITY LIST:
(RANKING SUMMARY)
(D- HASKELL/GROVEPARK
Q- RYE CYN/AVE.CROCKER
- SIERRA HW /AMERICAN BEAUTY
4 - COPPERHILL/SECO
5 - RYE CYN/AYE SCOTT
6 - BOUQUET/WELLSTON
7 - SOLEDAD/FLOWER PARK
8 - PLUM CYN/RODGERS
9 - CALGROVE/WILEY
®- BOUQUET/SUTTERS POINTE
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
1998 TRAFFIC SIGNAL PRIORITY
VICINITY MAP
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
FY 1998-1999 Traffic Signal Priority Rating Evaluation Results
Review of the observed delays and other conditions at the intersections confirm the ranking
as stated in this report. A thorough field observation was made at each of the top ranked
intersections to account for other not -so -readily apparent traffic conditions, such as driver
behavior, approach conditions, delays, and queuing.
Based on the results of the signal priority evaluation and observed field conditions, the
intersection of Haskell Canyon Road and Grovepark Drive-Ridgegrove Drive acquired the
most points and ranked No. 1 in the traffic signal priority list.
In October 1995, the -City Council adopted Resolution No. 95-116, establishing the City of
Santa Clarita Traffic Signal Priority Rating System. The traffic signal priority evaluation
was used in the establishment of the Traffic Signal Priority List. The list will be used as a
basis for allocating capital improvement funding for FY 1998-1999.
The Traffic Engineering Division received numerous requests over the past year for traffic
signal installations. Staff evaluated several intersections and prioritized ten (10) locations
that meet at least one traffic signal warrant.
DISCUSSION
The City of Santa Clarita uses selected traffic signal warrants established in the State of
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Traffic Manual; warrant 1 - minimum
vehicle volume, warrant 2 - interruption of continuous traffic, warrant 4 - school crossing,
warrant 6 - accident experience, warrant 8 - combination of warrants 1 and 2, warrant 9 -
four hour volume, and warrant 11- peak hour volume.
Ten of the intersections evaluated for traffic signal installation satisfied at least one of the
selected traffic signal warrants. Each of the ten locations were reviewed and assigned
points to determine the ranking in the Traffic Signal Priority List. Staffs observation and
review of these intersections is discussed below:
Exhibit "A"
Page 2
Haskell Canyon Road/Grovepark Drive-Ridgegrove Drive - Ranked No. 1
(59 points). Haskell Canyon Road is a two-lane facility and one of the City's major road
connections between Bouquet Canyon Road and Copper Hill Drive. The posted speed limit
is 45 mph. Haskell Canyon Road is fully widened on the north leg of the intersection, while
it is only half -wide in the south leg. Grovepark Drive is a residential type collector street
primarily serving a number of schools in the area. It is part of the "Suggested -Route -To -
School" and an adult crossing guard guides the crossing during school sessions. The
intersection is currently controlled by a four-way stop sign. Intersection delays of 60
seconds or greater are typical during peak hours. Field observations showed queues of
more than 15 cars during school hours.
The evaluation showed that five signal warrants were satisfied, warrant Nos. 1, 2, 8, 9, and
11. There were no reported traffic accidents within a recent 12 -month period.
Rye Canyon Road/Avenue. Crocker - Ranked No. 2 (54 points). This is a tee -
intersection with Avenue Crocker terminating at its connection with Rye Canyon Road.
Rye Canyon Road is an east/west major arterial within the Valencia Industrial Center, has
two travel lanes in each direction, and divided by a raised median. The posted speed limit
along this stretch of Rye Canyon Road is 45 mph. Avenue Crocker is a north/south local
road that has one travel lane in each direction and is divided by centerline striping. The
intersection is controlled by a one-way stop sign installation, which requires the traffic on
Avenue Crocker to stop before entering the intersection. The traffic congestion is primarily
limited to two 10-15 minute intervals when employees arrive or leave businesses in the
area.
The evaluation showed that five signal warrants were satisfied, warrant Nos. 1, 2, 8, 9, and
11. There were three reported traffic accidents within a recent 12 -month period, all of
which were susceptible to correction by a traffic signal.
Sierra Highway/American Beauty Drive - Ranked No..3 (52 points). This is a tee -
intersection with American Beauty Drive terminating at its connection with Sierra
Highway. Sierra Highway is a north/south major roadway with two travel lanes in each
direction and a two-way left -turn center lane. The posted speed limit on this roadway is
45 mph.. American Beauty Drive is an east/west local and private street with one travel
lane in each direction.
A number of driveways from a condominium complex have access to the intersection of
Sierra Highway/American Beauty Drive. Most of the traffic exiting American Beauty Drive
make a left -turn- onto southbound Sierra Highway. Occasional delays of 15 seconds or
greater were observed during peak hours.
The result of the evaluation of the intersection showed that three signal warrants were
satisfied, warrant Nos. 2, 9, and 11. There were four reported traffic accidents at this
Exhibit "A"
Page 3
intersection within a recent 12 -month period, all of which were susceptible to correction by
a traffic signal.
Copper Hill Drive/Seco Canyon Road — Ranked No. 4 (51 points). Seco Canyon Road
is a major four -lane undivided north/south arterial that connects Bouquet Canyon Road and
Copper Hill Drive. The posted speed limit along Seco Canyon Road is 45 mph. Copper Hill
Drive is a two- to four -lane undivided arterial that connects Haskell Canyon Road and
McBean Parkway. This intersection serves primarily the residents of the Mountainview
subdivision. The intersection is currently controlled by a four-way stop sign which requires
all traffic to stop before entering the intersection.
Delays between five and forty seconds were observed during peak hours. The traffic
patterns are such that in the morning it is predominantly southbound and westbound,
while in the afternoon it is predominantly eastbound and northbound. The longest queue
observed was 10-12 cars for eastbound left -turns in the afternoon. There are two vacant lots
on the southeast and southwest corners of the. intersection. Staff anticipates. that the
current intersection levels of service would decline as these areas are developed. However,
there are developer contributions expected to pay for the traffic signal in years.
The evaluation showed that five signal warrants were satisfied, warrant Nos. 1, 2, 8, 9, and
11. There were no reported traffic accidents within a recent 12 -month period.
Rye Canyon Road/Avenue Scott - Ranked No. 5 (44 points). This is technically a tee -
intersection with Avenue Scott terminating at its connection with Rye Canyon Road. Just
directly across the terminus of Avenue Scott is a private driveway that operates as the
fourth approach of the intersection. Rye Canyon Road is an east/west major arterial, within
the Valencia Industrial Center, that has two travel lanes in each direction and divided by a
raised median. However, it terminates a few hundred feet east of the intersection. The
posted speed limit along this stretch of Rye Canyon Road is .45 mph. Avenue Scott is a
north/south local road that has two travel lanes in each direction and is divided by a raised
median. The intersection is controlled by a three-way stop sign installation which requires
all traffic to stop before entering the intersection. This all -way stop control was installed
within the past 18 months.
The evaluation showed that five signal warrants were satisfied, warrant Nos. 1, 2, 8, 9, and
11. There were no reported traffic accidents .within a recent 12 -month period.
Bouquet Canyon Road/Wellston Drive — Ranked No. 6 (43 points). Bouquet Canyon
Road is a major divided north/south arterial. There are two travel lanes with a bike lane in
each direction of Bouquet Canyon Road. The posted speed limit is 50 mph. Wellston Drive
is a two-way local street intersecting Bouquet Canyon Road halfway between the two
signals of Plum Canyon Road and Urbandale Drive. The intersection is controlled by a one-
Exhibit "A"
Page 4
way stop sign installation which requires the traffic on Wellston Drive to stop before
entering the intersection.
The evaluation showed that four signal warrants were satisfied, warrant Nos. 2, 8, 9, and
11. There were no reported traffic accidents within a recent 12 -month period.
Soledad Canyon Road/Flowerpark Drive — Ranked No. 7 (42 points). This is a tee -
intersection with Flowerpark Drive terminating at its connection with Soledad Canyon
Road. Soledad Canyon Road is the City s major divided east/west arterial with two to three
travel lanes in each direction. The posted speed limit is 50 mph. Flowerpark Drive is a
local street with one lane in each direction. The intersection is controlled by a one-way stop
sign installation which requires the traffic on Flowerpark Drive to stop before entering the
intersection.
The evaluation showed that five signal warrants were satisfied, warrant Nos. 1, 2, 8, 9, and
11. There was one reported traffic accident within a recent 12 -month period.
The observed traffic patterns showed that the heaviest traffic movements at this
intersection are complimentary, i.e., heavy eastbound left -turning traffic versus heavy
southbound right -turning traffic. This is also a tee -intersection and therefore, has less
potential conflict points than a typical four-way approach intersection.
Plum Canyon Road/Rodgers Drive — Ranked No. 8 (40 points). Plum Canyon Road is
a newly opened arterial that connects to Whites Canyon Road. It is posted at 40 mph.
Rodgers Drive is a two-lane collector -type residential street. It serves primarily residential
areas and the new Plum Canyon Elementary School. It is proposed to become part of the
"Suggested -Route -To -School" and an adult crossing guard guides the crossing during school
sessions. The intersection is currently controlled by a two-way stop sign which requires
traffic from Rodgers Drive to stop before entering the intersection.
The evaluation showed that five signal warrants were satisfied, warrant Nos. 1, 2, 8, 9, and
11. There were no reported traffic accidents within a recent 12 -month period.
Calgrove Boulevard/Wiley Canyon Road -Valley Oak Court - Ranked No. 9
(38 points). Calgrove Boulevard is an east/west secondary road that has two travel lanes
in each direction and a two-way left -turn. The posted speed limit along this stretch of
Calgrove Boulevard is 45 mph. Wiley Canyon Road is a north/south arterial with one travel
lane in each direction. Wiley Canyon Road has a, posted speed limit of 35 mph. Valley Oak
Court is a north/south local road that, has one travel lane in each direction and a posted
speed limit of 25 mph.
The evaluation showed that three signal warrants were satisfied, warrant Nos. 1, 9, and 11.
There were no reported traffic accidents within a recent 12 -month period.
Exhibit "A"
Page 5
Bouquet Canyon Road/Sutters Pointe Drive - Ranked No. 10 (29 points). This is a
tee -intersection with Sutters Pointe Drive terminating at its connection with Bouquet
Canyon Road. Bouquet Canyon Road is a north/south major arterial that has two travel
lanes and a bike lane in each direction. There is an existing raised median island along
Bouquet Canyon Road. The posted speed limit is 50 mph. Sutter Pointe Drive is an
east/west local street with one travel lane in each direction. A driveway of a commercial
center is aligned with Sutters Pointe Drive. The volume of traffic exiting the driveway is
lower than the traffic volume on Sutters Pointe Drive.
Sutters Pointe Drive is the only access to the housing development on the east side of
Bouquet Canyon Road. There are many left -turning vehicles from Sutters Pointe Drive to
southbound Bouquet Canyon Road. Occasionally, motorists cross half of Bouquet Canyon
Road and wait in the median area before completing the left -turns.
The result of the evaluation of the intersection showed that three signal warrants were
satisfied, warrant Nos. 2, 9, and 11. There was one reported traffic accident at this
intersection within a recent 12 -month period, which was susceptible to correction by a
traffic signal.
MS:NMB:Ikl
w"n;Iksigptyea.doc
EXHIBIT "B"
City of Santa Clarita
Traffic Signal Priority Rating System
(Shown in italics are the updates/ revisions as ofAugust 1998)
SELECTION OF CANDIDATE INTERSECTIONS
Intersections will be selected for a signal warrant review from the following list:
1. There was a citizen request for it.
2. It is an intersection which is conditioned to be signalized by developers, and
substantial adjacent land uses have been built and occupied.
3. Locations included in the signal priority list for the previous year which (i) met at least
one traffic signal warrant; and (ii) "based on engineering judgment will not adversely
impact adjacent areas when signalized."
4. Locations that have experienced five or more accidents during the recent 12 -month
period which are susceptible to correction by installation of traffic signals.
5.. Selected locations by the Traffic Engineering staff. This may include locations which
were studied in the previous year, but did not meet any traffic signal warrants.
WARRANT ANALYSIS
The State of California Traffic Manual has established 11 types of signal warrants to be
studied to assess if the minimum criteria for installing a traffic signal are met. At least one
signal warrant must be satisfied before a traffic signal can be installed at an intersection.
Only seven of the 11 traffic signal warrants, which are most suitable for the Santa Clarita
roadway and traffic volume conditions, will be used to evaluate whether a candidate
location meets the established criteria. These warrants are the following:
Those intersections that meet at least one traffic signal warrant will be assigned priority
points and ranked in the signal priority list.
Revision 1: August 1998
Warrants
Title
1.
1
Minimum Vehicular Volume
2.
2
Interruption of Continuous Traffic
3.
4
School Crossings
4.
6
Accident Experience
5.
8
Combination of Warrants (80% of warrants 1 and 2)
6.
9
Four-hour Volume
7.
11
Peak -hour Volume
Those intersections that meet at least one traffic signal warrant will be assigned priority
points and ranked in the signal priority list.
Revision 1: August 1998
Exhibit "B"
Page 2
PRIORITY POINT ASSIGNMENTS
Priority points are assigned on the basis of the following categories:
1. Cateaory No. 1— Total Vehicular Volume
Points are _ dependent upon the major and minor street volumes entering the
intersection. Points are also dependent upon the intersection capacity. The volumes
are based on the eight highest hour counts. The attached Figure 1 assigns points to
this category. A maximum of 15 points may be assigned to this category.
2. Cateyory No. 2 — Interruption of Continuous Traffic
Vehicles on through streets, if uncontrolled, tend to travel through. minor street
intersections at speeds that might make it difficult for vehicles and pedestrians from
the side street to cross or enter the principal traffic stream. The total of the highest
minor street vehicles plus pedestrians crossing or entering the major street must
exceed 600 in eight hours to receive any points. A maximum of 15 points may be
assigned to this category.
Major Street Volumes
(8 Hours) Points
0
- 3,299
0
3,300
- 3,899
1
3,900
- 4,499
2
4,500
- 5,099
3
5,100
- 5,699
4
5,100
- 6,299
5
6,300
- 6,899
6
6,900
- 7,499
7
7,500
- 8,099
8
8,100
- 8,699
9
8,700
- 9,299
10
9,300
- 9,899
11
9,900
- 10,499
12
10,500
- 11,099
13
11,100
- 11,699
14
11,700
- Over
15
Revision 1: August 1998
Exhibit `B"
Page 3
3. Category No. 3 _ Pedestrian Volume
This is a judgment criterion; points are assigned based upon the knowledge of
pedestrian activity at the intersection and area characteristics, etc. A maximum of 15
points may be assigned to this category according to the guideline shown in the
following table:
Condition
Points
None Very low pedestrian volumes or locations in industrial 0
or rural areas with no sidewalks.
Light Residential or business area with light pedestrian traffic. 5
Medium School crossing or business area with intermittent 10
pedestrian crossings throughout the day, or intersections
in the vicinity of schools or parks where school-age
pedestrian traffic has been observed.
Heavy Intersection with continuous pedestrian traffic at all hours 15
of the day, including intersections where adult crossing
guards are posted or where criteria for adult crossing guard
warrants are met (posted or not posted), and intersections
adjacent to City parks, and where a severe or visible
pedestrian injury accident has occurred in the previous year.
Revision 1: August 1998
Exhibit "B"
Page 4
4. Category No. 4 — Progressive Traffic Movement (Proximity to the nearest traffic signal)
Generally, it is difficult to attain progressive traffic movement when signals are spaced
too closely together. In addition, if an existing signal is located in close proximity to
the candidate intersection, that signal is likely to provide breaks in traffic that reduce
the need for a signal at the candidate intersection. Points for progressive traffic
movement are selected according to the distance to the nearest traffic signal as shown
in the following table:
Table 3
5. Cateeory No. 5 — Accident Experience
Only those types of accidents susceptible to correction by traffic signals are considered.
A maximum of 20 points may be assigned to this category. Points are assigned based
on Equivalent Property Damage Accidents (EPD) using the equation:
Aepd = P + 6I + 9F, where
Aepd = The number of equivalent property damage accidents;
P = The number of property damage only accidents;
I = The number of severe or visible injury accidents; and
F = The number of fatal accidents.
These weights are based upon the relative costs of each type of accident as estimated
by the National Safety Council. Accidents for the preceding year are utilized for the
calculation.
Revision 1: August 1998
Distance
Points
Less than 500 feet
0
500
- 549 feet
1
550
- 699 feet
2
700
- 849 feet
3
850
- 999 feet
4
1,000
- 1,149 feet
5
1,150
- 1,299 feet
6
1,300
- 1,449 feet
7
1,450
- 1,599 feet
8
1,600
- 1,749 feet
9
1,750
- Over
10
5. Cateeory No. 5 — Accident Experience
Only those types of accidents susceptible to correction by traffic signals are considered.
A maximum of 20 points may be assigned to this category. Points are assigned based
on Equivalent Property Damage Accidents (EPD) using the equation:
Aepd = P + 6I + 9F, where
Aepd = The number of equivalent property damage accidents;
P = The number of property damage only accidents;
I = The number of severe or visible injury accidents; and
F = The number of fatal accidents.
These weights are based upon the relative costs of each type of accident as estimated
by the National Safety Council. Accidents for the preceding year are utilized for the
calculation.
Revision 1: August 1998
Exhibit "B"
Page 5
6. CategoryNo. 6 — Approach Sneed
Points are awarded based on the critical speed (85th percentile speed) as measured on
the higher -speed street. Points are awarded in this category because of the difficulty
that motorists may have judging gaps in traffic on high-speed streets.
Table 4
85% Speed Points
39 and under
0
40-42
2
43-45
4
46-49
6
50-54
8
55 — Over
10
7. Category No. 7 — Street Geometrics
Points will be given to type of intersection and road type classification. Roadways are
typically classified as Local (L), Collector (C), and Arterial (A). For the purpose of this
category, local and collector streets will be rated identical. The idea for this point
assignment is to put high priority to major roadway intersections.
Intersection Crossing Streets'
Tvne Type Points
4 way
LULL 0
3 way
AA/L 1
3 way
AA/A 2
4 way
AA/LL 3
4 way
AA/AL 4
4 way
AAAA 5
Revision 1: August 1998
Exhibit `B"
Page 6
8. Category No. 8 - Special Conditions
This category considers extenuating circumstances that are not covered in the previous
seven categories. These may include: the proximity of schools, churches, public
buildings, and other traffic and pedestrian generators; the existence of a vertical or
horizontal curve; and restricted sight distance caused by intersection geometry; and
high traffic congestion as evidenced by observed delays and long queues duringpeak
hours, or any unaccounted/ unusual traffic conditions. This category, requires
engineering judgment based on physical inspection of the site. A maximum of 10
points will be allowed as shown in the table below:
Points
Observed delays and queues during peak hours and/or other unusual conditions 0-5
Near church or senior center 5
Blind intersections caused by vertical or horizontal curves 5
Skewed intersection (less than 75 degrees) 5
Near schools,_ parks or public buildings which did not receive additional 10
points in category 3
MS:NMB:Ikl
..d1 gptr9s.aoo
Revision 1: August 1998
1NARRAJT = I (TCrTAL VOLUME "(
S
A
.1.MkIlm
MIKE►
"himMEMOS
MmilffimEd
NEW
.�,
•
I. � N II
�• ��. . gI ....
• J .. - rs
...1. %II • t1
iI1
.. �I.. :w.•
1..
n•
'
•• .. �..
:� . :...•
r.1
,. .... .� ••
sou RCE: (WITH H16HF-5T MIUDP,ST. APPREALH AND 1
iKANS?D�i�AT I,J�.} '€ L'aiH twa� sr. AP�ACH>:s� W,.RRauT
TR.FFV- et,'..IHEFFZJN e - -TRAFFIC AIL1 L
i