Description of Road Management Objectives, Existing Use, and Proposed Use:

Similar documents
Description of Road Management Objectives, Existing Use, and Proposed Use:

Engineering Report: Apache-Sitgreaves National Forests. Black Mesa Ranger District. Analysis of. National Forest System Roads (NFSRs) #s 504 & 169

FOREST SERVICE HANDBOOK NATIONAL HEADQUARTERS (WO) WASHINGTON, DC

Itasca County ATV Policy/Ordinance Public Input Meeting. February 6, 2017 Marcell Family Center February 8, 2017 Itasca County Courthouse

FORM A PASCO COUNTY ACCESS CONNECTION PERMIT APPLICATION

City of Prince Albert Statement of POLICY and PROCEDURE. Department: Public Works Policy No. 66. Section: Transportation Issued: July 14, 2014

Access requests to County streets and roadways are processed through one of the following methods:

Guidelines for Engineering Analysis of Motorized Mixed Use on National Forest System Roads

Tonight we will be discussing accidents

Levels, and Road Uses

Driveway Design Criteria

Chapter 11 Highway and Rural Driving

Access Management Standards

Traffic Control Inspection Checklist Segment:

TRANSPORTATION FACILITY PLANNING Waugh Chapel Road Maytime Drive to New Market Lane

Truck Climbing Lane Traffic Justification Report

T R A N S P O R T A T I O N M E M O R A N D U M

CHAPTER 6H. TYPICAL APPLICATIONS

4. TRAIL DESIGN GUIDELINES

City of Wayzata Comprehensive Plan 2030 Transportation Chapter: Appendix A

Identify the letter of the choice that best completes the statement or answers the question.

Road Safety Audit Report: Interstate 516

ORANGE COUNTY TRAFFIC COMMITTEE. Speed Limit. Traffic Engineering. Deepthi Arabolu. Establish Speed Limit

Forest Service Travel Management Rule Status and Directives NOHVCC/NAOPM Conference Houston, TX March 26, 2009

(This page left intentionally blank)

Access Location, Spacing, Turn Lanes, and Medians

City of Elizabeth City Neighborhood Traffic Calming Policy and Guidelines

Guidelines for Integrating Safety and Cost-Effectiveness into Resurfacing, Restoration, and Rehabilitation Projects

PERFORMANCE ACTIVITY 306 DRAINAGE PIPE WORK DESCRIPTION 4

Economic Contribution of Off-Highway Vehicle Recreation in Colorado. Executive Summary Season. A joint cooperation report

ADJUSTING TO, FOLLOWING, AND MEETING URBAN TRAFFIC

Module 5: Navigating Roadways

Chapter 4 On-Road Bikeways

VDOT Crash Analysis Procedures for Roadway Safety Assessments

CITY OF SASKATOON COUNCIL POLICY

LARIMER COUNTY: ENGINEERING DOUGLAS ROAD (CR 54)

Ohio Share the Road Driver s s Education Unit

CHAPTER 6H. TYPICAL APPLICATIONS

ADA on Construction. Guidance for Section C Plan Preparers

Accommodating Pedestrians in the Work Zone

AGENDA REPORT. Issue: Discussion of potential improvements on Barnwell Road at Niblick Drive

Parks Highway: MP Lucus Road to Big Lake Road

El Paso County 2040 Major Transportation Corridors Plan

Street Paving and Sidewalk Policy

GEOMETRIC DESIGN STANDARDS FOR NEW RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION STREETS TABLE 1A CG-6 CURB AND GUTTER SECTION

Developed by: The American Traffic Safety Services Association (ATSSA) 15 Riverside Parkway, Suite 100 Fredericksburg, VA

DESIGN BULLETIN #66/2010

TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES FOR LOW VOLUME ROADS

SCHOOL CROSSING PROTECTION CRITERIA

ALTERNATIVE WORKSHOP JULY

DRIVING ON EXPRESSWAYS/ INTERSTATE CHAPTER 11

Highway Capacity and LOS. Reading Assignment: pgs

PERFORMANCE ACTIVITY 613 IMPACT ATTENUATOR WORK DESCRIPTION 3

County of Greenville South Carolina. Traffic Calming Program Neighborhood Traffic Education Program and Speed Hump Program

Chapter 14 Challenging Driving Conditions

CITY OF WEST LAKE HILLS. Forest View Neighborhood Traffic Calming Study

Appendix T CCMP TRAIL TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION DESIGN STANDARD

Update to DOTD Roundabout Design Policy

Chapter Twenty-eight SIGHT DISTANCE BUREAU OF LOCAL ROADS AND STREETS MANUAL

October 2004 REVISIONS (2) SUPERELEVATION DEVELOPMENT 11.3(2)

PERFORMANCE ACTIVITY 405 LIMB MANAGEMENT

Road Safety Assessment

SECTION 14: LANDSCAPING AND BEAUTIFICATION

INDEX. Geometric Design Guide for Canadian Roads INDEX

DEFINITIONS Activity Area - Advance Warning Area Advance Warning Sign Spacing Advisory Speed Approach Sight Distance Attended Work Space

ORANGE COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS TRAFFIC INVESTIGATIONS

TRAFFIC CALMING GUIDE FOR TORONTO CITY OF TORONTO TRANSPORTATION SERVICES DIVISION

City of Turlock Traffic Calming Program

ENGINEER S PRELIMINARY REPORT. for the #######-###### COLLISION

Gary Eddy ATV/Snowmobile Administrator WI DNR

Active Transportation Facility Glossary

City of Vallejo Traffic Calming Toolbox

Construction Specifications Manual

Kennesaw Mountain National Battlefield Park Mountain Road Alternatives

DOT Policy and Procedure Integrity Excellence Respect

NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC CALMING POLICY

Alberta Infrastructure HIGHWAY GEOMETRIC DESIGN GUIDE AUGUST 1999

Strategies for Sharing the Road with Other Users

Recommended Roadway Plan Section 2 - Land Development and Roadway Access

TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS

Comments EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

APPENDIX F SUPPLEMENTAL TRAFFIC DATA

CONSTRUCTION ENCROACHMENT PERMIT APPLICATION AND PROCESSING INSTRUCTIONS

Review of Guidelines for Cycleway Safety Fencing

Lee s Summit Road Improvement Study Public Open House June 7, 2007 Summary of Comment Card Responses

Homework Module 7.01 Drivers Manual Study Questions

What Is a Complete Street?

MUTCD Part 6G: Type of Temporary Traffic Control Zone Activities

VILLAGE OF NILES TRAFFIC CALMING POLICY

Owl Canyon Corridor Project Overview and Summary

Unit Six: Driving Faster with More Risk URBAN, SUBURBAN, AND RURAL DRIVING

CITY OF ROCK HILL, SOUTH CAROLINA. Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program A Policy for Use of Traffic Calming on Local (Residential) Streets

Practical Application of Turn Lane Design Criteria in Developing Suburban & Urban Corridors

TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL POLICY AND PROCEDURES FOR TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES

GWINNETT COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

This Chapter sets forth the minimum design, technical criteria and specifications to be used in the preparation of all roadway plans.

City of Roseville Section 13 Design Standards. _Bikeways January 2016 SECTION 13 BIKEWAYS

City of Memphis On-Street Parking Modification Guidelines

Table of Contents. Introduction. Prompt List Arterials and Streets. Prompt List Interchange. Prompt List Intersections. Prompt List Limited Access

Swamp Road Residents Study

Transcription:

Engineering Report White River National Forest Eagle-Holy Cross Ranger District Analysis of Road # 600 Coffee Pot Road for Motorized Mixed Use Designation Page 1 of 12

Forest: White River District: Eagle-Holy Cross Road Number: 600 Road Name: Coffee Pot Beginning Mile Post: 12.6 at Forest Boundary Ending Mile Post 23.0 at NFSR 632 Traffic Service Level - A, B, C, or D: B - Congested During Heavy Traffic Objective Maintenance Level 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5: 4 Moderate Degree of User Comfort Operational Maintenance Level 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5: 4 Moderate Degree of User Comfort Maintenance By: Forest Service and Garfield County Non-Forest Service ROW or jurisdiction? Yes/No NO Any road use agreements, maintenance agreements, or other encumbrances? Yes/No YES Description of agreements or encumbrances: Currently under a Cooperative Forest Road Agreement for road maintenance by Garfield County under a Schedule A Agreement. Maintenance performed by the county occurs once per year. Subject to the Highway Safety Act? Yes/No YES Non-Highway-Legal Vehicles currently permitted? Yes/No YES Is motorized mixed use consistent with State and Local laws? Yes/No YES Notes: Description of Road Management Objectives, Existing Use, and Proposed Use: 1999 Road Management Objectives (RMO) Worksheet is on file and signed by the District Ranger. A recent and updated RMO is currently not available. NFSR 600 is 29.7 miles long and currently consists of the following Motorized Mixed Use designations: M.P. 0.0 M.P. 12.6 is closed to mixed use and signed with Highway Legal Vehicles Only. M.P. 12.6 M.P. 29.7 is open to mixed use and is signed with Share the Road and ATV signs. The Coffee Pot Road is classified as an Arterial. Current use of this road is recreational and provides access for camping (designated sites & dispersed), hiking, fishing, hunting, OHV riding, sightseeing, wilderness access and horseback riding. Page 2 of 12

In 2006, a Motorized Mixed Use Judgment was prepared for this segment of the Coffee Pot Road (M.P. 12.6-M.P. 22.9). The original Judgment recommended closure to mixed use. During the comment period for the White River National Forest Travel Management Plan Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), the Colorado Division of Wildlife expressed concerns with the effects to hunting access if this segment did not allow motorized mixed use. In the selected alternative for the WRNF Travel Management Plan, the decision was made to allow mixed use on this segment of road. The Eagle/Holy Cross Ranger District requested that a detailed Motorized Mixed Use Report be prepared to confirm or to modify the original 2006 Motorized Mixed Use Judgment that recommended closure to mixed use. Summary of Findings: The Coffee Pot road is a heavily used forest road. This segment (M.P. 12.6 M.P. 23.0) is a single lane, aggregate (gravel) surfaced road with good alignment and grade. This segment is currently designated and signed for Motorized Mixed Use. There are no known or documented mixed use accidents. The horizontal alignment and grade is generally good and the adjacent roadside terrain is predominately gentle to moderate in nature. The road width varies from 14 to 20 feet with roadside drainage ditches and culverts. There are some sharp curves and sections that are lined with vegetation (trees and/or brush) that obscure the roadway and oncoming traffic. The majority of the road (8.3 miles) occurs in open parks, which provides easy escape options should a vehicle leave the road to avoid a collision. Approximately 2.1 miles of the road is lined with vegetation (trees and/or brush), with trees that are large enough (10-18 ) to be obstacles to vehicles leaving the road to avoid a collision. There are no posted speed limits on the segment of the road being studied and the reasonable and prudent driving speed is 30-35 mph. Speed studies were conducted on three separate occasions (Tuesday July 23, Thursday July 25, and Friday July 26). Travel speeds observed varied between 15 and 47 mph with the 85 th percentile speed at 36 mph. Pickup trucks/suv s were observed traveling at the highest speeds. Two traffic counters were deployed and traffic volumes were recorded between June 28, 2013 and October 22, 2013. A total of 17,985 vehicles were counted with an Average Daily Traffic (ADT) of 87 for the 3.75 month sampling period (117 days). Traffic volumes averaged 71 ADT on weekdays (Mon Fri) and 127 ADT on weekends. The peak period of use occurred on the first day of the 2 nd big game rifle hunting season, Saturday October 19, 2013 (220 ADT). Additional periods of peak use included the September 2, 2013 Labor Day holiday (212 ADT);, Page 3 of 12

the second day of the 2 nd big game rifle hunting season, Sunday October 20, 2013 (196 ADT), Saturday August 3, 2013 (195 ADT);, and the Friday before the 2 nd big game rifle hunting season, October 18, 2013 (195 ADT). Traffic types, observed during speed studies, are varied and consist of the following vehicle types: passenger cars (18%), pickup trucks/suv s (43%), pickup trucks/suv s towing trailers (18%), OHV s (18%), and RV s (3%). OHV (ATV s, unlicensed motorcycles/dirt bikes, and UTV s) use is currently authorized with the vast majority of OHV riders (65%) observed wearing head protection (helmets). The vast majority of OHV s (90%) were observed traveling between 20-29 mph which is well below the 85 th percentile (36 mph) The original 2006 Motorized Mixed Use Judgment rated the crash probability as high and crash severity as medium. Mitigation measures may be used to reduce the probability and severity by varying degrees. Factors Considered: 1. Operator Considerations: This segment of road is subject to the Highway Safety Act and to Colorado State laws for operators. Colorado Off-Highway Vehicle (OHV) State Laws no person under the age of ten years may operate an off-highway vehicle on such public street, road, or highway of this state or on such city street or county road. No person ten years or older may operate an off-highway vehicle on such public street, road, or highway of this state or on such city street or county road unless: 1. The person has in his possession a valid driver s license issued by the State of Colorado or another state; or 2. The person is accompanied by and under the immediate supervision of a person who has in his possession a valid driver s license issued by the State of Colorado or another state. The phrase under immediate supervision shall mean that, at a minimum, the unlicensed operator is within visual contact of the licensed supervisor. There are no Colorado State laws requiring head protection (helmet) for OHV operators. 2. Crash History: There are no known or documented mixed use accidents on this segment of NFSR 600. Page 4 of 12

3. Traffic Volume and Type Non-Highway-Legal-Vehicles Less than 12 inch tread width: Less than 50 inch tread width: Greater than 50 inch tread width: Highway-Legal-Vehicles Passenger Cars: Pickup Trucks/SUV s Commercial Vehicles: Recreational Vehicles (RV s): X X X X X X Traffic counts were compiled between June 28, 2013 and October 22, 2013. Traffic counters used were manufactured by TRAFx and utilize magnetometer technology and advanced embedded software to detect passing vehicles. Two traffic counters were deployed and traffic volumes were recorded between June 28, 2013 and October 22, 2013. A total of 17,985 vehicles were counted with an Average Daily Traffic (ADT) of 87 for the 3.75 month sampling period (117 days). Traffic volumes averaged 71 ADT on weekdays (Mon Fri) and 127 ADT on weekends. The peak period of use occurred on the first day of the 2 nd big game rifle hunting season, Saturday October 19, 2013 (220 ADT). Additional periods of peak use included the September 2, 2013 Labor Day holiday (212 ADT);, the second day of the 2 nd big game rifle hunting season, Sunday October 20, 2013 (196 ADT), Saturday August 3, 2013 (195 ADT);, and the Friday before the 2 nd big game rifle hunting season, October 18, 2013 (195 ADT). Based on observations made during speed studies, conducted on July 23, 25, 27, 2013, passenger cars accounted for 18% (21 vehicles) of the total traffic (119 vehicles), while pickup trucks/suv s made up 43% (51 vehicles) of the traffic. Pickup trucks/suv s towing trailers accounted for 18% (21 vehicles), with OHV s (ATV, UTV s, & motorcycles) accounting for 18% (22 vehicles) of the traffic. The remaining 3% (4 vehicles) of the total traffic consisted of RV s. An additional observation made during the speed studies was that the vast majority of OHV riders (65%) were wearing head protection (helmets), with 35% of the riders not using helmets. Page 5 of 12

4. Speed Anticipated Average Speed (85 th percentile): 36 mph There are no posted speed limits on the segment of the road being studied and the reasonable and prudent driving speed is 30-35 mph. Colorado Revised Statue 42-4-1101, Speed Limits notes the following and (a) is applicable to this segment of the Coffee Pot Road. (1) No person shall drive a vehicle on a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the conditions then existing. (2) Except when a special hazard exists that requires a lower speed, the following speeds shall be lawful: (a) Twenty miles per hour on narrow, winding mountain highways or on blind curves; (b) Twenty-five miles per hour in any business district, as defined in section 42-1-102 (11); (c) Thirty miles per hour in any residence district, as defined in section 42-1-102 (80); (d) Forty miles per hour on open mountain highways; (e) Forty-five miles per hour for all single rear axle vehicles in the business of transporting trash that exceed twenty thousand pounds, where higher speeds are posted, when said vehicle is loaded as an exempted vehicle pursuant to section 42-4-507 (3); (f) Fifty-five miles per hour on other open highways which are not on the interstate system, as defined in section 43-2-101 (2), C.R.S., and are not surfaced, four-lane freeways or expressways; (g) Sixty-five miles per hour on surfaced, four-lane highways which are on the interstate system, as defined in section 43-2-101 (2), C.R.S., or are freeways or expressways; Speed studies were conducted with the Bushnell Speed Radar Gun which utilizes Doppler Radar technology with +/- one-mile per hour (mph) accuracy. The studies were conducted on three separate occasions (Tuesday July 23, Thursday July 25, and Friday July 26). The July 23 (Tuesday) speed study was conducted at various locations along the segment of road being studied, while the July 25 (Thursday) speed study was conducted in the Crane Park area (M.P. 21.0), and the July 26 (Friday) speed study was conducted near the traffic counter located at M.P. 13.6. Each of the three separate speed studies covered six hours each day for a total of eighteen hours. Page 6 of 12

Traffic speeds observed varied between 15 and 47 mph with the 85 th percentile speed at 36 mph. Only one passenger car was observed traveling above the 85 th percentile (39 mph). Pickup trucks & SUV s were traveling at the highest speeds, up to 47 mph, with nine pickup/suv s observed traveling above the 85 th percentile of 36 mph. Only one pickup/suv, towing a trailer, exceeded the 85 th percentile and was traveling 39 mph. A single OHV (UTV) was observed twice traveling above the 85 th percentile (38 mph and 45 mph), with the vast majority of OHV s (20) traveling well below the 85 th percentile (20 29 mph). Also observed was the fact that the vast majority of OHV riders (65%) were wearing head protection (helmets). 5. Road Surface Type: This segment of road is aggregate (gravel) surfaced and in good condition. There is vegetation (trees and/or brush), on two sections of the road that have narrowed the usable roadway. The two sections are between M.P. 13.0-13.9 and M.P. 16.1-17.1 and total approximately 1.9 miles. 6. Intersections With Other Roads and Trails: There are five road intersections, one campground entrance, numerous access points leading to dispersed camp sites, and one trailhead along this segment of the Coffee Pot Road. This segment of road intersects with Maintenance Level 3 roads 300.3A (Deep Creek Overlook) and 600.3L. Both 300.3A (Deep Creek Overlook) and 600.3L have adequate sight distance, in both directions, at their intersections with the Coffee Pot road. This section of road also intersects with Maintenance Level 2 roads 600.3C (Coffee Pot Springs Campground), 604, 622, and 632. Roads 604, 622, and 632 all have adequate sight distance, in both directions, at their intersections with the Coffee Pot road. Road 600.3C (Coffee Pot Springs Campground) has adequate sight distance to the north and inadequate sight distance to the south at the intersection with the Coffee Pot road. Roadside brushing and clearing is needed at the 600.3C intersection to improve sight distance to the south to allow for earlier detection of oncoming traffic. The Broken Rib Trailhead has two entrances off the Coffee Pot Road. The south entrance has adequate sight distance to the north and inadequate sight distance to the south due to brush and needs to be cleared. The north entrance has adequate sight distances in both directions. 7. Other Roadway Factors: The roadway is in good condition, but there are some segments that have vegetation (trees and/or brush) on fill slopes and/or in the road shoulder that should be cleared to provide full Page 7 of 12

width use of the road. Removal of trees growing in the shoulders should also have the stumps removed so as not to hinder road surface maintenance operations. Approximately 8.3 miles (80% of the road segment) is in open parks, with much of the road (5.7 miles - 55%) consisting of gentle to moderate terrain which provides escape options for drivers leaving the road in an attempt to avoid a collision. An additional roadway factor is the dust clouds created by vehicles during periods of little or no precipitation. Oncoming traffic may have difficulty seeing vehicles traveling in the opposite direction due to the dust. The only practical mitigation is an application of a dust palliative product, however, this mitigation is not cost effective as the application of dust palliative products can cost between $3,000.00 and $3,700.00 per mile. 8. Roadside Conditions: As mentioned previously in #7 Other Roadway Factors, there are some sections of road that are lined with trees that are large enough (10-18 diameter) to be obstacles to vehicles leaving the road to avoid a collision (2.1 miles 20% of the road). There are also sections of road, containing horizontal curves that have reduced and limited sight distance due to overgrown vegetation (trees and/or brush). This vegetation obscures the roadway and on-coming traffic and requires clearing and brushing. Clearing and brushing, at a minimum, should be 5 from the top of the ditch or 5 from the edge of the road, whichever is greater. The majority of the road (approx. 5.7 miles - 55% of the road) occurs in open parks with gentle to moderate terrain that provides escape options for vehicles leaving the road to avoid a collision. Page 8 of 12

M.P. 16.5 Example of inadequate sight distance due to vegetation (small trees/brush) obscuring roadway around curve. Coffee Pot Springs Campground entrance Example of inadequate sight distance due to vegetation (small trees/brush) obscuring roadway at Campground intersection. Page 9 of 12

Coffee Pot Springs Campground entrance Example of adequate sight distance. M.P. 16.3 Example of reduced road width usability due to vegetation (trees/brush) crowding roadway. Page 10 of 12

9. Risk Without Mitigations: Original 2006 Motorized Mixed Use Judgment Crash Probability/Severity rating Crash Probability: High: X Medium: Low: Crash Severity: High: Medium: X Low: There are no known or documented mixed use accidents on this segment of the road. Factors contributing to the high crash probability include the high volume of traffic and the speeds at which vehicles are traveling. Speeds above the 85 th Percentile (36 mph) are not uncommon and exceed the stopping sight distance for most horizontal curves occurring in vegetation (tree/brush) lined sections that obscure the roadway and oncoming traffic. Pickup trucks & SUV s are most likely to travel at speeds exceeding the 85 th Percentile 14%, with observed speeds of up to 47 mph. Vehicles tend to travel at higher speeds in open park areas 85 th percentile of 38 mph verses 35 mph in tree lined sections. A crash severity of high is possible due to the speeds which vehicles travel at, however, due to the gentle to moderate terrain adjacent to the roadway in the open park areas (5.7 miles - 55%), the severity is rated as medium as the adjacent terrain provides escape options for vehicles leaving the road to avoid a collision. Mitigation Measures: Installation of motorized mixed use signs ( Share the Road and ATV ) to inform users of the types of traffic they can expect to encounter on the road. Reduce road surface maintenance frequency (2 years between maintenance cycles instead of the current 1 year cycle) to provide a rougher road surface to reduce travel speeds. Roadside clearing/brushing to increase sight distances on curves for earlier detection of oncoming vehicles. Roadside clearing/brushing, with tree stump removal, to increase the usable width of the road. Page 11 of 12