HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-06-22 - AGENDA REPORTS - TRAFFIC SIG PRIORITY (2)CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
AGENDA REPORT
NEW BUSINESS City Manager Approva 4��
Item to be presented by4Bahman Jank
DATE: June 22, 1999
SUBJECT: FY 1999-2000 TRAFFIC SIGNAL PRIORITY EVALUATION REPORT
DEPARTMENT: Transportation & Engineering Services
RECOMMENDED ACTION
City Council accept the staff report; approve the ranked list of candidate traffic signal
locations; and select the intersection of Rye Canyon Road and Avenue Crocker 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, provides maximum safety to the community by installing traffic
signals only at the most critical intersections as determined by the rating system.
The complete copy of the Traffic Signal Priority System is shown as Exhibit "B."
Evaluation Results:
Staff evaluated twelve locations for traffic signal warrants this year. Eight of these
locations were carried from last year's list. Of the twelve locations evaluated, ten locations
satisfied one or more traffic signal warrants and are ranked as shown below. A tabulated
evaluation summary showing the points assigned by category and a location map are
attached. Exhibit "A" shows the detailed description of the relevant traffic operating
conditions for each location.
✓' '�l-P �L�ti7U �t,C�ri�tG� � µg m
FY 1999-2000 TRAFFIC SIGNAL PRIORITY EVALUATION
June 22, 1999 — Page 2
Ranking Summary of Candidate Traffic Signal Locations for FY 1998-1999:
Rank
Location
Points
1
Rye Canyon Road/Avenue Crocker
53
2
Avenue Tibbetts/Avenue Mentry
51
3
Copper Hill Drive/Seco Canyon Road
50
4
Soledad Canyon Road/Poppy Meadow Street
48
5
Sierra Highway/American Beauty Drive
44
6
Plum Canyon Road/Rodgers Drive
43
7
Soledad Canyon Road/Flowerpark Drive
42
8
Bouquet Canyon Road/Wellston Drive
41
9
Lyons Avenue/Kansas Street
39
10
Calgrove Boulevard/Wiley Canyon Road
37
The intersections of Bouquet Canyon Road/Camargo Drive and Bouquet Canyon
Road/Sutters Pointe Drive were evaluated, but did not meet any signal warrants.
The intersection of Copper Hill Drive/Seco Canyon Road is partially funded by development
fees and is expected to be fully funded with future development. The extension of Copper
Hill Drive west of McBean Parkway might also increase the need for signalizing this
intersection. Accordingly, staff is coordinating with area developers and has already
initiated the design process for this signal so its construction can be expedited in the
coming months.
All citizens who have requested a traffic signal in the past two years were notified in
writing regarding this agenda report (see attached).
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
Other action as determined by the City Council.
FISCAL IMPACT
Funds for this expenditure, in the amount of $160,000.00, have been budgeted in the
Fiscal Year 1999-2000 CIP Budget Account No. C0015-052.
ATTACHMENTS
Ranking Summary
Location Map
Exhibit "A" - FY 1999-2000 Traffic Signal Priority Evaluation Results
Exhibit "B" - Traffic Signal Priority Rating System
Citizen's Requesting Traffic Signal Letter
AN:lkl
muncil\siotyWdw
0
N
m
N
J
F -
FE
O
x
a
J
Q
Z
C)
N
U
LL
LL
Q
F-
H
J
U
F -
Z
Q
Cl)
LL
O
F
U
w
Y O
C
'Q
M
N
�-
N
O
N
�p
'7
a
V
a
M
M
x
Q O
Cl)
O
.-
.--
N
O
N
O
�
y U
H
x
N
co
7
M
M
V
n U E
0
A
a
G
m
V
m
m
m
m
m
m
V
(D
0
w
N
N
N
yQ
N
9
00
O)
o
(O
n0
N
c0
U
U
ZF
-
¢CL
a
0
Z
0
Z
0
6.0
q
N
LO
LO
o
0
0
m
O
N
N
O
CL `
rN
$
n
LO
u
u')
LO
0
o
o
N
o
�
a
' o
'a
m
N
00
m
I�
N
x
E
H
Ln
n
m
rl
n
m
0)
G
>
dL
7
L C_ 0
LO
V
O
Nr,
N
O)
N
0
0)
O
f,
O
N
m
O
Nn
n
m
M
O
N
G
M
m
m
I�
m
m
N
N
co
¢
N
NCL
a
¢+"
L
d
L
m
m
LO
T
M
m
N
m
«
N
zo`
O C OCD
(°0
M
O
(mD
0)
0
m
cr
N
Ln
aa
of
o
of
m
ao
M
11
00
orn
06
C Te
A
`0
f0
Ri
ct{
N
N
N
ca
N
N
N
N
N
a 9
>
>
>
>
5
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
¢
¢
¢
o[
¢
¢
Q
Q
CC
¢
¢
w
rn
rn
m
d
m
m
°'
m
rn`
yid
N
0-
N
N
of
of
N—
of
O)
Oi
0
Z
0
N
N
N
N
On
W
O
O
co
O
O
.-
O
d
"
a �
�
N
0
JCl
M
V
O
N
O
r-
NO
d
D
d
E
9
w d
�'
(p
d O
O
0 d
qq d
O>
d
1>
B
O
2>
((pp
Z c
¢
m
i>a'
O>
2'
d�
9 R
D: O
o
a
0
c c
3 (qp
O
c
::
R
a. d
d
2 m
c d
o¢
> m
m
m a
t
m
7
7 C
w
U
�o
an d
V=
C
w O
w?
U d
w
V
w
N w
O U
O1T
..
V A
U w
ugi°
U
v>
v�
03
m^'
om
dmdm
«
T¢
Q¢
U y
Da
CL
d
N d
0�
7«
0
$ IL
C 3
J Y
ci
Q
c
d
3
m
w�
¢
(n
m
oz
to
mm
m
Y
C
H
•�
C
'�
w
=
r
r
�
r
s
¢
Q
�
r•
N
M
a
N
(O
P
aD
O)
s
w w
E 15
o c
_ co
E 3
> a)
U 0
00 N
� c N C\j
r d c
c °o m
° m ca
o ("D 3.-
0 m o
O 0 -NO c
N ° CO CO
m a) >_
L -:5 w Q
o m
m
a° `m o
v °° a) d
c > O) i c
0)'m Z c O
w w (n CO a)
co E
Ca
co0 C 2i O
° c >
� ) 0 °
w ca O
E a w w C L
O � Y
v S � cz (J
a) O O m m r
c C 0
w0 E ami
w a o
m ca
°) w a) .o
E 0 a
'0 C L 0
> O
o_
° w CL E m
w L y 0 C
`ca
U N N U a1 3
CD
U E w o
CU O c c L
m ° o 00
c E cu U N
O) U y{
Q O ca a)
E2 N a) N
E a)
c o0) ca
L O U N
CL o > O 0
E
ca U
a1 d �
A o (wn0
m a) 0 E .a
d c o ro
w F w v
o ° _ °
j C > L
E o 0 a)° L LL 'o
0 N> C U LL
Z «j m d E
CL Q c d
w N O .N L
v Q > o °
._ jn. U c o
U E 0 L
C_ N L U 0
a cn Q LL
Q N r N 4 c0 6
EXHIBIT "A"
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
FY 1999-2000 Traffic Signal Priority Rating Evaluation Results
SUMMARY
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 Rye Canyon Road and Avenue Crocker acquired the most points and ranked
No. 1 in the traffic 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 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 1999-2000.
The Traffic Engineering Division received several requests over the past year for traffic
signal installations. Staff evaluated a total of twelve intersections, of which four were new
requests and eight were carried over from last year's list. Out of these, ten (10) locations
met at least one traffic signal warrant and were prioritized based on our ranking system.
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 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:
Rye Canyon Road/Avenue Crocker - Ranked No. 1 (53 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
Exhibit "A"
Page 2
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 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.
Field observations showed that traffic congestion is primarily during a 10- to 15 -minute
interval during the afternoon peak period when employees leave the businesses in the area.
A maximum queue of 4 to 5 cars was observed on Avenue Crocker.
Additional points were given to Rye Canyon Road under the special conditions criteria on
the basis of the fact that the daily traffic volume on Rye Canyon Road is expected to
increase by 30 to 40 percent when its connection to Copper Hill Drive and Newhall Ranch
Road is complete. These roadway connections are expected to be in place by
September 1999.
Avenue Tibbetts at Avenue Mentry — Ranked No. 2 (51 points). Avenue Tibbetts is a
divided east/west arterial leading to the Valencia Industrial Center with three travel lanes
in each direction. The posted speed limit is 45 mph. Avenue Mentry 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 Avenue Mentry to stop before entering the
intersection.
The evaluation showed that four signal warrants were satisfied, warrant Nos. 2, 8, 9 and
11. There were five reported traffic accidents within a recent 12 -month period of which four
were susceptible to correction by a traffic signal.
A maximum queue of 14 to 15 vehicles was observed during the afternoon peak hour.
During this time period the majority of the traffic on Avenue Tibbetts was eastbound. A
delay of 30-90 seconds was observed for some motorists. No significant queue was observed
during the morning peak period.
Daily traffic on Avenue Tibbetts is expected to decrease by 40 to 50 percent once the Copper
Hill Drive/Rye Canyon Road connection and Newhall Ranch Road extension to Rye Canyon
Road is complete.
Copper Hill Drive/Seco Canyon Road — Ranked No. 3 (50 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
Exhibit "A"
Page 3
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 with northbound and southbound
traffic being almost equal. The longest queue observed was 9 to 10 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. The new extension of Copper Hill Drive west of McBean
Parkway might also increase the traffic volumes using this intersection. Staff is
coordinating efforts with area developers and has already initiated the design for this
signal in order to expedite its construction.
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.
Soledad Canyon Road/Poppy Meadow Street - Ranked No. 4 (48 points). This is a
tee -intersection with Poppy Meadow Street 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. Poppy Meadow
Street 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 Poppy Meadow Street to stop
before entering the intersection.
The evaluation showed that two signal warrants were satisfied, warrant Nos. 2 and 9.
There was one reported traffic accident within a recent 12 -month period which was
susceptible to correction by a traffic signal. No queuing problems were observed during
peak periods.
Potential grant funds (MTA/Federal, etc.) are expected to pay for approximately 80 percent
of the cost of this signal in Fiscal Year 2000-2001.
Sierra Highway/American Beauty Drive - Ranked No. 5 (44 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.
Exhibit "A"
Page 4
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 two reported traffic accidents at this
intersection within a recent 12 -month period, both of which were susceptible to correction
by a traffic signal.
Plum Canyon Road/Rodgers Drive — Ranked No. 6 (43 points). Plum Canyon Road is
a four -lane arterial that connects to Whites Canyon Road. The posted speed limit is
45 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 part of the
"Suggested -Route -To -School" and a school 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 three signal warrants were satisfied, warrant Nos. 2, 9, and 11.
There were two reported traffic accidents within a recent 12 -month period, neither of which
were susceptible to correction by a traffic signal.
The majority of the traffic on Rodgers Drive is southbound during the morning and
afternoon peak periods. During the morning peak hours, a maximum queue of 4 to 6
vehicles was observed, with a delay of up to 30 seconds.
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.
A maximum queue of 9 to 10 vehicles was observed during the morning peak hour. No
significant queue was observed during the afternoon peak period.
Potential grant funds (MTA/Federal, etc.) are expected to pay for approximately 80 percent
of the cost of this signal in Fiscal Year 2000-2001.
Exhibit "A"
Page 5
Bouquet Canyon Road/Wellston Drive - Ranked No. 8 (41 points). Bouquet Canyon
Road is a major divided north/south arterial. There are two travel lanes with a bicycle 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-way stop sign installation which requires the traffic on Wellston Drive
to stop before entering the intersection.
The evaluation showed that three signal warrants were satisfied, warrant Nos. 2, 9, and 11.
There was one reported traffic accident within a recent 12 -month period which was
susceptible to correction by a traffic signal. The observed traffic pattern during the peak
hours did not show a significant delay.
Lyons Avenue at Kansas Street - Ranked No. 9 (39 points). This is a tee -intersection
with Kansas Street terminating at its connection with Lyons Avenue. Lyons Avenue is a
divided east/west major arterial with two travel lanes in each direction. The posted speed
limit is 40 mph. Kansas Street 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
Kansas Street to stop before entering the intersection.
The evaluation showed that two signal warrants were satisfied, warrant Nos. 9 and 11.
There were two reported traffic accidents within a recent 12 -month period, both of which
were susceptible to correction by a traffic signal.
A maximum queue of 14 vehicles was observed at this intersection with a delay range of 20
to 40 seconds.
Calgrove Boulevard/Wiley Canyon Road -Valley Oak Court - Ranked No. 10
(37 points). Calgrove Boulevard is an east/west secondary road that has one travel lane in
each direction, a two-way left -turn along the center, and a bicycle lane on each side. 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.
For evaluation of this intersection, 1998 traffic volumes were used, as Wiley Canyon Road
is currently under construction and is closed to through traffic. The evaluation showed that
two signal warrants were satisfied, warrant Nos. 9, and 11. There was one reported traffic
accident within a recent 12 -month period.
Bouquet Canyon Road/Camargo Drive - Not Ranked. Bouquet Canyon Road is a
major divided north/south arterial with two to three travel lanes in each direction. The
posted speed limit is 50 mph. Camargo Drive is a two-way local street forming a tee-
Exhibit "A"
Page 6
intersection with Bouquet Canyon Road. The intersection is controlled by a one-way stop
sign installation which requires the traffic on Camargo Drive to stop before entering the
intersection. This intersection did not meet any of the traffic signal warrants and was thus
not considered for further evaluation.
Bouquet Canyon Road/Sutters Pointe Drive - Not Ranked. Bouquet Canyon Road is
a major divided north/south arterial with two to three travel lanes in each direction. The
posted speed limit is 50 mph. Sutters Pointe Drive is a two-way local street forming a tee -
intersection with Bouquet Canyon Road halfway between the two signals of Haskell
Canyon Road and Urbandale Drive. The intersection is controlled by a one-way stop sign
installation which requires the traffic on Sutters Pointe Drive to stop before entering the
intersection. This intersection did not meet any of the traffic signal warrants and was thus
not considered for further evaluation.
AN:lkl
council\sig ty99Aoc
EXHIBIT "B"
City of Santa Clarita
Traffic Signal Priority Rating System
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.
CLQ ,�tamo YII:l►/:I11A�`1
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:
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.
Revised 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. Category 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
5,700
- 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
Revised 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.
Revised 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. Category 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 (EPD) accidents 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 cost of each type of accident as estimated by
the National Safety Council. Accidents for the preceding year are utilized for the
calculation.
Revised 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. Category 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 (EPD) accidents 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 cost of each type of accident as estimated by
the National Safety Council. Accidents for the preceding year are utilized for the
calculation.
Revised August 1998
Exhibit "B"
Page 5
6. Category No. 6 — Approach Speed
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% Sneed 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
Type 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
AA/AA 5
Revised 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; restricted sight distance caused by intersection geometry; and high
traffic congestion as evidenced by observed delays and long queues during peak 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
AN:lkl
c uncil\si"ty99.da
Revised August 1998
-z-
L
L
L
L
O
O
O
O
ep
ep
as
e5
0
0
0
0
0
0
ID
0
0
o
n
m
0
0
0
0
0
0
cu
0
0
7
ly
~
p
i
r
m
�
o
0
m
0
o
m
m
,O
o
0
M
0
P
�
n
�
o
0
N
At
b
m
o
o
Co
O
n
o
m
N
O�
$ O
y41
0
0o
a
o
00
0
-W
0
n
0
m
�a
1n
aD
o
OD
O +
OCD
a
o
0
0
0
0
o
a
.nN
N
0
o
w
N
I�
a {[pfir�
;dF
P7 W
40
o
Y
[9+
N
m
m
V
N
7
m
D
0
0
0
0
m
a
1N
N
i�
Ln a N o W %
N
EDVORaav asRHoM
3
mazoe sus aorma
o
F
O
City of
Santa Clarita
Building & Safety
255-4935
City Clerk
255-4391
City Council
259-2489
City Manager
255-4900
Code Enforcement
286-4076
Field Services
294-2500
Finance
255-4920
Human Resources
284-1418
Parks, Recreation &
Community Services
255-4910
Planning Services
255-4330
Police Services
(Sheriffs Department)
255-1121
Street Maintenance
294-2520
Transit Services
294-2510
Waste Management
286-4096
23920 Valencia Blvd., Suite 300
Santa Clarita
California 91355-2196
June 15, 1999
-Name-
-Address-
«CityState-
Phone (661)269-2489
Fax (661)259-8125
Websfte: www.santa-clarta.COM
Subject: FY 1999-2000 Traffic Signal Priority Evaluation
Dear -Salutation-:
This letter is to inform you that the subject matter will be on the agenda at the
City Council's June 22, 1999 regular meeting, starting at 6:30 p.m. The City has
adopted the City of Santa Clarita Traffic Signal Priority System that is used in
establishing the traffic signal priority list.
The Traffic Engineering Division received and reviewed requests for traffic
signalization at the following intersections in the City:
1. Rye Canyon Road/ Avenue Crocker
2. Avenue Tibbetts/Avenue Mentry
3. Copper Hill Drive/Seco Canyon Road
4. Soledad Canyon Road/Poppy Meadow Street
5. Sierra Highway/American Beauty Drive
6. Plum Canyon Road/Rodgers Drive
7. Soledad Canyon Road/Flowerpark Drive
8. Bouquet Canyon Road/Wellston Drive
9. Lyons Avenue/Kansas Street
10. Caigrove Boulevard\Wiley Canyon Road
11. Bouquet Canyon Road/Camargo Drive
12. Bouquet Canyon Road/Sutter Pointe Drive
Each intersection was evaluated and the locations that satisfied at least one of
the traffic signal warrants utilized in the City of Santa Clarita Traffic Signal
Priority System were identified. All intersections, except Bouquet Canyon Road
at Camargo Drive and Bouquet Canyon Road at Sutters Pointe Drive, satisfied
at least one or more signal warrants. Of the ten warranted intersections,
Rye Canyon Road/Avenue Crocker was at the top of the signal priority list, and
is recommended for signalization next year.
All intersections in this year's signal priority list which did not get funded, will
be reevaluated next year along with new candidate locations for signalization.
For your reference, a copy of the complete agenda report, including all
supporting data, is enclosed with this letter.
PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
June 15, 1999
Page 2
Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at
(805)286-4172.
Sincerely,
Bahman Janka, P.E.
City Traffic Engineer
BJ:NMB:Ikl
trarc\sis tyMm
Enclosure
cc: Mayor Darcy and Councilmembers
George A. Caravalho, City Manager
Anthony J. Nisich, Director of Transportation & Engineering Services
Ms. Robyn Kortje
18141 American Beauty Drive, #147
Santa Clarita, CA 91351
Mr. Jim Hachey
20532 Romar Lane
Santa Clarita, CA 91350
Mr. Paul Gillespie
20510 Romar Lane
Santa Clarita, CA 91350
Ms. Carmel Brockman
27915 Sarabande Lane, #419
Santa Clarita, CA 91351
Mr. Rudolph Freno
27940 N. Tyler Lane
Santa Clarita, CA 91351
Mr. Kent Cotterell
28072 Vernal Way
Santa Clarita, CA 91350
Mr. John Lampignano
24730 Avenue Tibbetts
Santa Clarita, CA 91355
Mr. Bob Winnaker
20540 Jay Carroll Drive
Santa Clarita, CA 91350
Mr. Raymond Defrenzo
22609 Copper Hill Drive
Santa Clarita, CA 91350
Nancy Mickel
28634 N. Avocado Place
Santa Clarita, CA 91350
Mr. Donald Allen
29200 Snapdragon Place
Santa Clarita, CA 91351
Ms. Karen Clark
28343 Lobelia Lane
Santa Clarita, CA 91354
Mr. Don Olson
28835 Seco Canyon Road
Santa Clarita, CA 91350
Ms. Connie Worden Roberts
23920 Valencia Boulevard, Suite 100
Santa Clarita, CA 91355
Mr. Robert Doyle
22430 W. Lemon Street
Santa Clarita, CA 91350
Mr. William Barritt
25540 Rye Canyon Road
Santa Clarita, CA 91355
Ms. Alana Franco
29256 Poppy Meadows
Santa Clarita, CA 91351
Ms. Elizabeth Schwab
27525 Newhall Ranch Road
Santa Clarita, CA 91355
Mrs. Meena Date
25019 Dogwood Court
Santa Clarita, CA 91381-2211
Ms. Dianne Allen
19301 Ventura Boulevard,#203
Tarzana, CA 91356
traffic\sigpty.doc