TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT SUMMARY

Similar documents
TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT STUDY

US 2 & ND 8 Signal Warrant Analysis

Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Report

Chapter 3 Chapter 3 TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT SUMMARY PURPOSE

Existing Conditions. Date: April 16 th, Dan Holderness; Coralville City Engineer Scott Larson; Coralville Assistant City Engineer

TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS REPORT US Route 6 Huron, Erie County, Ohio

CROSSING GUARD PLACEMENT CONSIDERATIONS AND GAP ASSESSMENT

Fisher Ave and Snoqualmie Parkway Signal

ORANGE COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS TRAFFIC INVESTIGATIONS

List of Attachments. Location Map... Site Plan... City of Lake Elsinore Circulation Element... City of Lake Elsinore Roadway Cross-Sections...

MEMORANDUM. Nantasket Road at Kingsley Road Kingsley Road at Sumner Street Kingsley Road at Revere Street Kingsley Road at Kenberma Street

TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS

Traffic Analysis Update: 195 Meandering Brook Drive Development

Memorandum. Bob Doyle - SGJJR. Chris Wall Wade Trim. Date: 5/16/2018. Huron Traffic Study Analysis Summary

PART 4. HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SIGNALS

IMPROVING PEDESTRIAN SAFETY AT UNCONTROLLED CROSSINGS. Guidelines for Marked Crosswalks

PART 4. HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SIGNALS TABLE OF CONTENTS

CITY OF SASKATOON COUNCIL POLICY

Section 400 Signal Design. Engineering Branch

Highway Capacity. 1. A traffic stream is carrying 4500 veh/hr in three lanes in one direction. What is the average headway per lane?

Basic Freeways and Multilane Highways (LOS) CIVL 4162/6162

The proposed development is located within 800m of an existing Transit Station where infill developments and intensification are encouraged.

Designing for Pedestrian Safety. Alabama Department of Transportation Pre-Construction Conference May 2016

City of Albert Lea Policy and Procedure Manual 4.10 ALBERT LEA CROSSWALK POLICY

MEMORANDUM INTRODUCTION AREA DESCRIPTION. DATE: December 8, 2017

Traffic Impact Analysis Walton Acres at Riverwood Athletic Club Clayton, NC

Traffic Control Devices

Establishment of Traffic Signal Policies and Procedures for Adoption on Saskatchewan s Highway Network

Topic No January 2000 Manual on Uniform Traffic Studies Revised July Chapter 8 GAP STUDY

TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES ON EDGEWATER BOULEVARD AT PORT ROYAL AVENUE (NORTH)

Table of Contents. I. Introduction 1. II. Elements of the School Crossing Program 1

TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS

Fundamentals of Traffic Control Devices

Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings. Shawn Turner, P.E. Texas A&M Transportation Institute

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

Glenn Avenue Corridor Traffic Operational Evaluation

Traffic Control Signals Review McCowan Road and Bridlegrove Drive

ALLEY 24 TRAFFIC STUDY

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

Traffic Analysis and Design Report. NW Bethany Boulevard. NW Bronson Road to NW West Union Road. Washington County, Oregon

Addendum to SDDCTEA Pamphlet 55 17: Better Military Traffic Engineering Revision 1 Effective: 24 Aug Crosswalk Guidelines

METHODOLOGY. Signalized Intersection Average Control Delay (sec/veh)

THE LANDMARK AT TALBOT PARK

Littleton and Ayer, Massachusetts Joint Intersection Remediation Project. Littleton-Ayer Road [Rt. 2A / 110], Willow Road, Bruce Street Intersection

SCHOOL CROSSING PROTECTION CRITERIA

Chapter 8 Chapter 8 VEHICLE GAP STUDY PURPOSE VEHICLE GAP STUDY (FIGURE 8-1)

Road Conversion Study Plumas Street

INDUSTRIAL BUILDING 3009 HAWTHORNE ROAD CITY OF OTTAWA TRANSPORTATION OVERVIEW REVISED. Prepared for: Canada Inc.

Troutbeck Farm Development

Traffic Impact Analysis Chatham County Grocery Chatham County, NC

6. signalized Intersections

Chapter 5 5. INTERSECTIONS 5.1. INTRODUCTION

Access Location, Spacing, Turn Lanes, and Medians

Broadway Street Pedestrian Safety Study Cass Street to 700 Feet North of Randall Avenue

TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY And A TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS FOR A SENIOR LIVING AND APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT

Walton Acres at Riverwood Athletic Club Clayton, North Carolina

Public Information Meeting. Orange Camp Road. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Beltway to I-4. Presented by: Volusia County August 2, 2018

Development of Arlington County s Marked Crosswalk Guidelines. Jon Lawler, P.E. Design Engineer Arlington County, VA

FORM A PASCO COUNTY ACCESS CONNECTION PERMIT APPLICATION

Appendix B Warrants, Standards, and Guidelines for Traffic Control Devices used at Senior Citizen and Disabled Person Crossings

Access Management Regulations and Standards

TRAFFIC STUDY. Birch Bluff Road / Pleasant Avenue 01/15/2018. City of Tonka Bay 4901 Manitou Road Tonka Bay, MN WSB PROJECT NO.

Vision Zero High Injury Network Methodology

Operational Ranking of Intersections: A Novel Prioritization Methodology

JONESBORO HIGHWAY 63 HIGHWAY 18 CONNECTOR STUDY

MIT Kendall Square Initiative

HENDERSON DEVELOPMENT 213, 217, 221, 221 ½, 223 HENDERSON AVENUE and 65 TEMPLETON STREET OTTAWA, ONTARIO TRANSPORTATION OVERVIEW.

Truck Climbing Lane Traffic Justification Report

Signal Spacing A Technical Memorandum Prepared by

The Corporation of the City of Sarnia. School Crossing Guard Warrant Policy

Access Management Regulations and Standards

TOWN OF MORAGA MORAGA WAY AND CAMINO PABLO/CANYON ROAD IMPROVEMENTS Town Council Meeting March 13, 2019

URBAN QUARRY HEADQUARTERS 2717 STEVENAGE DRIVE CITY OF OTTAWA TRANSPORTATION OVERVIEW. Prepared for: Urban Quarry 4123 Belgreen Drive, Ottawa K1G 3N2

Installation of Traffic Signals and Pedestrian Crossings

1609 E. FRANKLIN STREET HOTEL TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

MEMORANDUM. To: 1.0 PURPOSE

Focus of activity - The land near intersections often contains a concentration of travel destinations.

APPENDIX A TWO-LANE RURAL ROADS ELEMENTS OF DESIGN CREST VERTICAL CURVES

1 VicRoads Access Management Policies May 2006 Ver VicRoads Access Management Policies May 2006 Version 1.02

2009 PE Review Course Traffic! Part 1: HCM. Shawn Leight, P.E., PTOE, PTP Crawford Bunte Brammeier Washington University

UNCONTROLLED PEDESTRIAN CROSSING GUIDELINES

CITY OF BEVERLY HILLS

Date: 09/22/2016 Subject: To: From: PennDOT Engineering District 5-0. Dear Applicant,

Background on the Revisions to VDOT s Access Management Spacing Standards

Intersection Control Evaluation Report Project: Alternative: Location: Evaluator:

AGENDA ITEM H-3 Public Works

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

THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY

OFFICE/RETAIL DEVELOPMENT 1625 BANK STREET OTTAWA, ONTARIO TRANSPORTATION BRIEF. Prepared for: Canada Inc.

ROUNDABOUTS/TRAFFIC CIRCLES

NEW YORK CENTRAL PARK SUBDIVISION BLAIS STREET/ST-PIERRE STREET EMBRUN, ONTARIO TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY. Prepared for:

Abstract. Background. protected/permissive operation. Source: Google Streetview, Fairview/Orchard intersection

Traffic Study of Fuller Street, Cady Street, West Street and West Avenue. Final Report

Traffic Control Signals Review 4325 McCowan Road

SCHOOL CROSSING PROTECTION CRITERIA

PERFORMANCE ACTIVITY 613 IMPACT ATTENUATOR WORK DESCRIPTION 3

4 COMMUNITY SAFETY ZONES WALTER SCOTT PUBLIC SCHOOL AND ROSELAWN PUBLIC SCHOOL TOWN OF RICHMOND HILL

Traffic Control Signals - Cosburn Avenue and Cedarvale Avenue

Pedestrian Crossing Protection Review - Howard Street

FAIRFIELD INN & SUITES HOTEL 135 THAD JOHNSON PRIVATE OTTAWA TRANSPORTATION BRIEF. Prepared for:

Transcription:

Level 1. Is the critical speed of major street traffic > 7 km/h (4 mph)? Yes No 2. Is the intersection in a built-up area of isolated community of <1, population? Yes No If Question 1 or 2 above is answered "Yes", then use "7%" volume level 7% % WARRANT 1 - EIGHT-HOUR VEHICULAR VOLUME Applicable: Yes No Warrant 1 is satisfied if Condition A or Condition B is "%" satisfied. Satisfied: Yes No Warrant is also satisfied if both Condition A and Condition B are "8%" satisfied. Condition A - Minimum Vehicular % Satisfied: Yes No 8% Satisfied: Yes No (volumes in veh/hr) Approach Lanes Level Both Approaches on Major Street Highest Approach on Minor Street Minimum Requirements (8% Shown in Brackets) 1 2 or more % 7% % 7% 5 35 6 42 (4) (28) (48) (336) 15 15 14 (12) (84) (16) (112) Eight Highest s Record 8 highest hours and the corresponding volumes in boxes provided. Condition is % satisfied if the minimum volumes are met for eight hours for either the % or 7% conditions. Condition is 8% satisfied if parenthetical volumes are met for eight hours. Condition B - Interruption of Continuous Traffic Applicable: Yes No Condition B is intended for application where the traffic volume is Excessive Delay: Yes No so heavy that traffic on the minor street suffers excessive delay. % Satisfied: Yes No 8% Satisfied: Yes No Eight Highest s Minimum Requirements (volumes in veh/hr) (8% Shown in Brackets) Approach Lanes 1 2 or more Level % 7% % 7% Both Approaches 75 525 9 63 on Major Street (6) (42) (72) (54) Highest Approach 75 53 7 on Minor Street (6) (42) (8) (56) Record 8 highest hours and the corresponding volumes in boxes provided. Condition is % satisfied if the minimum volumes are met for eight hours for either the % or 7% conditions. Condition is 8% satisfied if parenthetical volumes are met for eight hours. WARRANT 2 - FOUR-HOUR VEHICULAR VOLUME Not Applicable: Delay is not excessive. WARRANT 3 - PEAK HOUR Not Applicable: This signal warrant shall be applied only in unusual cases. Such cases include manufacturing plants, industrial complexes, or high-occupancy vehicle facilities that attract or discharge large numbers of vehicles over a short time. Based on MUTCD 3 Page 1 of 5 rev. 8/5

Level 1. Is the critical speed of major street traffic > 7 km/h (4 mph)? Yes No 2. Is the intersection in a built-up area of isolated community of <1, population? Yes No If Question 1 or 2 above is answered "Yes", then use "7%" volume level 7% % WARRANT 2 - FOUR-HOUR VEHICULAR VOLUME Applicable: Yes No If all four points lie above the appropriate line, then the warrant is satisfied. Satisfied: Yes No Plot four volume combinations on the applicable figure below. 7 FIGURE 4C-1: for "%" Level Four s Highest Major Minor s Street Street 6 5 4 3 2 OR MORE LANES & 2 OR MORE LANES 2 OR MORE LANES & 1 LANE 1 LANE & 1 LANE 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 1 13 14 *115 *8 * Note: 115 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor street approach with two or more lanes and 8 vph applies as the lower threshold volume threshold for a minor street approach with one lane. FIGURE 4C-2: for "7%" Level 4 3 *8 *6 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 * Note: 8 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor street approach with two or more lanes and 6 vph applies as the lower threshold volume threshold for a minor street approach with one lane. Based on MUTCD 3 Page 2 of 5 rev. 8/5

Level 1. Is the critical speed of major street traffic > 7 km/h (4 mph)? Yes No 2. Is the intersection in a built-up area of isolated community of <1, population? Yes No If Question 1 or 2 above is answered "Yes", then use "7%" volume level 7% % WARRANT 3 - PEAK HOUR Applicable: Yes No If all three criteria are fullfilled or the plotted point lies above the appropriate line, Satisfied: Yes No then the warrant is satisfed. Plot volume combination on the applicable figure below. Unusual condition justifying use of warrant: FIGURE 4C-3: for "%" Level 6 Record hour when criteria are fulfilled and the corresponding delay or volume in boxes provided. Peak 5 4 3 2 OR MORE LANES & 2 OR MORE LANES 2 OR MORE LANES & 1 LANE 1 LANE & 1 LANE *15 * 1. Delay on Minor Approach *(vehicle-hours) Approach Lanes 1 2 Delay 4. 5. Delay : Yes No 2. on Minor Approach *(vehicles per hour) Approach Lanes 1 2 15 : Yes No 3. Total Entering *(vehicles per hour) No. of Approaches 3 4 65 8 : Yes No 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 1 13 14 15 16 17 18 * Note: 15 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor street approach with two or more lanes and vph applies as the lower threshold volume threshold for a minor street approach with one lane. 5 4 3 FIGURE 4C-4: for "7%" Level 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 1 13 * Note: vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor street approach with two or more lanes and 75 vph applies as the lower threshold volume threshold for a minor street approach with one lane. * Based on MUTCD 3 Page 3 of 5 rev. 8/5

WARRANT 4 - PEDESTRIAN VOLUME Applicable: Yes No Record hours where criteria are fulfilled and the corresponding volume or gap Satisfied: Yes No frequency in the boxes provided. The warrant is satisfied if condition 1 or 2 is fulfilled and condition 3 is fulfilled. Pedestrian Pedestrian Gaps 1. Pedestrian volume crossing the major street is ped/hr or more for each of any four hours and there are less than 6 gaps per hour in the major street traffic stream of adequate length. 2. Pedestrian volume crossing the major street is 19 ped/hr or more for any one hour and there are less than 6 gaps per hour in the major street traffic stream of adequate length. 3. The nearest traffic signal along the major street is located more than 9 m (3 ft) away, or the nearest signal is within 9 m (3 ft) but the proposed traffic signal will not restrict the progressive movement of traffic. WARRANT 5 - SCHOOL CROSSING Applicable: Yes No Record hours where criteria are fulfilled and the corresponding volume or gap Satisfied: Yes No frequency in the boxes provided. The warrant is satisfied if all three of the criteria are fulfilled. 1. There are a minimum of 2 students crossing the major street Students: : during the highest crossing hour. 2. There are fewer adequate gaps in the major street traffic stream during the period Minutes: Gaps: when the children are using the crossing than the number of minutes in the same period. 3. The nearest traffic signal along the major street is located more than 9 m (3 ft) away, or the nearest signal is within 9 m (3 ft) but the proposed traffic signal will not restrict the progressive movement of traffic. WARRANT 6 - COORDINATED SIGNAL SYSTEM Applicable: Yes No Indicate if the criteria are fulfilled in the boxes provided. The warrant is Satisfied: Yes No satisfied if either criterion is fulfilled. This warrant should not be applied when the resulting signal spacing would be less than 3 m (1, ft). 1. On a one-way street or a street that has traffic predominately in one direction, the adjacent signals are so far apart that they do not provide the necessary degree of vehicle platooning. 2. On a two-way street, adjacent signals do not provide the necessary degree of platooning, and the proposed and adjacent signals will collectively provide a progressive operation. Based on MUTCD 3 Page 4 of 5 rev. 8/5

WARRANT 7 - CRASH EXPERIENCE Applicable: Yes No Record hours where criteria are fulfilled, the corresponding volume, and other Satisfied: Yes No information in the boxes provided. The warrant is satisfied if all three of the criteria are fulfilled. 1. One of the Warrant 1, Condition A (8% satisfied) warrants Warrant 1, Condition B (8% satisfied) to the right is met. Warrant 4, Pedestrian at 8% of volume requirements: 8 ped/hr for four (4) hours or 152 ped/hr for one (1) hour 2. Adequate trial of other remedial measure Measure tried: has failed to reduce crash frequency. 3. Five or more reported crashes, of types susceptible to Number of crashes per 12 months: correction by signal, have occurred within a 12-mo. period. Met? WARRANT 8 - ROADWAY NETWORK Applicable: Yes No Record hours where criteria are fulfilled, and the corresponding volume or other Satisfied: Yes No information in the boxes provided. The warrant is satisfied if at least one of the criteria is fulfilled and if all intersecting routes have one or more of the characteristics listed. 1. Both of a. Total entering volume of at least 1, veh/hr Entering : the criteria during a typical weekday peak hour. to the right b. Five-year projected volumes that satisfy Warrant: 1 2 3 are met. one or more of Warrants 1, 2, or 3. Satisfied?: 2. Total entering volume at least 1, veh/hr for each of any 5 hrs of a non-normal business day (Sat. or Sun.) Met? 1. Part of the street or highway system that serves as the principal roadway network for through traffic flow. 2. Rural or suburban highway outside of, entering, or traversing a city. 3. Appears as a major route on an official plan. Characteristics of Major Routes Met? CONCLUSIONS Remarks: Warrants Satisfied: Based on MUTCD 3 Page 5 of 5 rev. 8/5