Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout071300 PTS AgendaIn compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the office of the City Clerk at (909) 694~o444. Notification 48 hours prior to a meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to that meeting [28 CFR35.102.35.104 ADA Title III CALL TO ORDER: FLAG SALUTE ROLL CALL: PUBLIC COMMENTS AGENDA TEMECULA PUBLIC/TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION TO BE HELD AT CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, California Thursday, July 13, 2000 at 6:00 P.M. COMMISSIONERS: Coe, Edwards, Katan, Lanier, Connerton A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public can address the Commission on items that are not listed on the Agenda. Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you desire to speak to the Commission about an item no.~t listed on the Agenda, a pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the Commission Secretary. When you are called ~ speak, please come forward and state your name and address. For all other agenda items, a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the Recording Secretary before the Commission gets to that item. There is a three (3) minute time limit for individual speakers. NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC All mat~ers listed under Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and all will be enacted by one vote. There will be no discussion of these items unless members of the Public/Traffic Safety Commission request specific items be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action. COMMISSION CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Minutes of June 8, 2000 RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the Minutes of June 8, 2000 r: gtraffic\commissn\agenda\2000\0713 Agcnd a/ajp COMMISSION BUSINESS 2. Request for Multi-Way Ston Installation - Honors Drive at Balata Drive/Vardon Drive RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 That the Public/Traffic Safety Commission recommend that the City Council adopt a resolution establishing multi-way stop controls at the intersection of Honors Drive at Balata Drive/Vardon Drive. 3. In-Pavement Amber LED Flashine Liehts for Crosswalks RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 That the Public/Traffic Safety Commission review and evaluate the feasibility of installing In-Pavement Amber LED Hashing Lights for crosswalks and make a recommendation to the City Council. 4. Traffic Engineer's Report 5. Police Chief's Report 6. Fire Chief's Report 7. Commission Reports ADJOURNMENT The next regular meeting of the City of Temecula Public/Traffic Safety Commission will be held on Thursday, July 27, 2000, at 6:00 P.M., Temecula City Hall, Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. 2 ITEM NO. 1 CALL TO ORDER MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA PUBLIC/TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION JUNE 8, 2000. The City of Temecula PublicJTraffic Safety Commission convened in a regular meeting at 6:04 P.M., on Thursday, June 8, 2000, in the City Council Chambers of Temecula City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. FLAG SALUTE The audience was led in the Flag salute by Commissioner Edwards. ROLLCALL Present: Commissioners*Coe, Edwards, Katan, Lanier, and Chairman Connerton. Absent: None. Also Present: Deputy Director of Public Works Parks, Senior Engineer Moghadam, Associate Engineer Gonzalez, Battalion Chief Ritchey, Police Sergeant DiMaggio, Administrative Secretary Pyle, and Minute Clerk Hansen. *(It was noted that Commissioner Coe had to leave the meeting at 7:00 P.M.) PUBLIC COMMENTS No comments. COMMISSION CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the Minutes of May 11, 2000. 1.2 · Approve the Minutes of May 25, 2000. Commissioner Edwards indicated that on page 4, the May 25, 2000 minutes should reflect that Vice Chairman Edwards adjourned the meeting. MOTION: Commissioner Edwards moved to approve the Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1.1, and 1.2, as amended. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Lanier and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Commissioner Coe who abstained with respect to Item 1.1, and Chairman Connerton who abstained with respect to Item 1.2. COMMISSION BUSINESS 2. Vehicular Speed and Volume concerns - North General Kearny Road RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 That the Public/Traffic Safety Commission recommend the implementation of Stage 1 Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program strategies. Senior Engineer Moghadam provided the staff report (of record), noting the cut-through traffic in this area due to the location of Nicolas Elementary School; relayed the past discussions and City polices regarding the criteria warranting the installations of stop signs and speed undulations; noted the ineffectiveness of the temporary use of traffic circles of Via Cordoba, and the subsequent removal of the installations; advised that in light of the City Council's decision to adopt the Neighborhood Traffic Calming Policy on April 25, 2000 which encompassed a Subcommittee/Neighborhood meeting for determination of solutions to address negative traffic impacts, the use of the speed trailer, and the use of a radar gun by the residents (after a training period), staff was recommending that Stage I of the Neighborhood Traffic Calming Policy be implemented. For Commissioner Edwards, Senior Engineer Moghadam relayed that with respect to the temporary stop sign installations on Via Cordoba, a study would be conducted in approximately two months. In response to Chairman Connerton, Police Sergeant DiMaggio relayed that although the radar trailer had been placed in the area of discussion, there were no speed strips measuring the times and volumes. Chairman Connerton clarified that Stage I of the program encompassed the following: 1) a Subcommittee/Neighborhood meeting which was for the purpose of discussing resolution of the traffic impacts, and 2) the use of a radar trailer and potentially the use of a radar gun by the residents, advising that subsequent actions would be determined from the results of the previously mentioned discussions and study data. The following individuals addressed their comments regarding North General Kearny Road to the Commission: Mr. Doug Suchecki 39789 North General Kearny Road Ms. Cindy Mathes 39797 North General Kearny Road Mr. Todd Simon 39786 North General Kearny Road Ms. Adene Ferguson 39847 North General Kearny Road Ms. Theresa Suchecki 39789 North General Kearny Road Mr. Alan Brunkon 39823 North General Kearny Road Ms. Libby Modadty 39827 North General Kearny Road Ms. Linda Warrick 39875 North General Kearny Road Ms. Edna Brunkon 39823 North General Kearny Road The above-mentioned individuals relayed the following: Noted that Nicolas Elementary School was overcrowded, and the access provisions to the school were inadequate. Recommended installing stop signs and crosswalks at Paloma Valley Road and at Cross Creek Court. Recommended implementing Stage II of the program. Noted that up to this point in time there had been no solutions implemented on North General Kearny Road. Advised that only if enforcement was increased during peak traffic hours would enforcement be an effective speed deterrent. Recommended temporary installation of stop signs. Relayed that the speed of numerous ddvers on North General Keamy Road was excessive. Noted that vehicles would not stop for pedestrians crossing the street, relaying that there were sidewalks solely on one side of the street. · ,' Relayed that vehicles (including busses) were passing vehicles while entering and exiting their driveways. For Mr. Suchecki, Senior Engineer Moghadam confirmed that 85% of the drivers on North General Kearny Road were ddving at a speed of 32 MPH or lower according to the study. In response to Chairman Connerton's quedes, Mr. Brunkon relayed that he had noticed drivers ddving at excessive speeds between 3:00 P.M. and 5:00 P.M. In response to public input, Chairman Connerton relayed that since the Council passed the resolution for the new traffic policy this would allow the Commission to offer solutions to the community. In response to Commissioner Edwards, Police Sergeant DiMaggio advised that in July the Police Department would implement a new program, the Neighborhood Enforcement Team (NET) which would encompass a motorcycle officer being assigned solely to neighborhoods; provided assurance that there would be an Officer on North General Kearny Road for 12 hours per week; and with respect to the placement of the radar trailer, advised that this was solely an educational tool. Commissioner Edwards clarified that the Stage I phase of the program included the discussed increased enforcement, noting that it had been effective in the Via Cordoba area; relayed that numerous drivers were being cited for stop sign violations due to the recent installations on Via Cordoba, commenting further on the installation of stop signs; and recommended that Stage I of the program be implemented. Commissioner Lanier relayed concurrence with Commissioner Edward's comments, noting the ineffectiveness of stop signs and speed undulations for controlling speed; advised that the new proposed school associated with the new development in the area would most likely reduce the numbers of students accessing Nicolas Elementary School; and recommended that a study be conducted regarding speeds on connecting streets (to North General Keamy). For Commissioner Lanier, Police Sergeant DiMaggio confirmed that the CIP had incorporated the addition of additional Police Department Officers, providing additional information. Commissioner Coe relayed concern regarding installing stop signs and crosswalks at locations where there were numerous children, noting that there could be additional danger due to the appearance of a safe street crossing, relaying that vehicles did not consistently stop at crosswalks; and concurred with the implementation of Stage I of the program, relaying that the increased enforcement would be effective. For Commissioner Katan, Senior Engineer Moghadam provided the rationale for not installing crosswalks in this area; advised that if the School Distdct would provide a crossing guard, the City would install crosswalks at safe locations, advising that the crosswalk alone would not provide safety for the children, relaying that based on studies more accidents take place in crosswalks; in response to the public comments, clarified that staff was aware of the negative traffic impacts in the area of discussion, ergo, the numerous reports and studies had been conducted; and with respect to the installation of stop signs, advised that based on studies, stop signs were not effective at reducing speed. Commissioner Katan queded whether the traffic could be surveyed during the summer (when school was not in session) for comparison data in order to evaluate the additional generation of traffic generated from the school; advised that Stage I of the program would be more effective than past increased enforcement; relayed that the average speed surveyed on North General Kearny Road was 2 MPH higher than the average speed on Via Cordoba; and concurred with Commissioner Lanier's comments, noting that at a future point in time the new proposed school would modify the traffic flows. Chairman Connerton relayed that he had spent approximately 1.5 hours on Tuesday, June 6~h, monitoring speed proximate to the radar trailer on Sierra Madre Drive, noting that of the 15 cars sited, there was one vehicle travelling 38 MPH, and the remainder were travelling between 23-27 MPH; relayed that he then positioned himself at three locations on North General Kearny Road to monitor traffic, noting that at Willow Creek Drive, out of 20 vehicles sited, none had stopped at the stop sign, nor at the stop signs at Sierra Madre, or the side streets; relayed that while monitoring traffic on North General Kearny Road, he had sited three vehicles parking on the wrong side of the road to unload passengers, noting that he had not witnessed vehicles travelling at excessive speeds; queried the resolve of placing additional stop signs in light of the vehicles not stopping for the existing stop signs in this particular area; recommended that by going through the stages of the program, the solutions would be designed for the specific needs of the area; recommended increased enforcement prior to July; and relayed that the cross gutter proximate to Willow Creek Ddve which created a dip in the road was a natural deterrent to speeding. It was noted that Commissioner Coe left the meeting at 7:00 P.M. In response to community comments, Senior Engineer Moghadam reiterated that Stage I of the program encompassed meeting with the residents to gain specific input, placement of a radar trailer, and increased enforcement; and provided assurance that increased enforcement was an effective speed deterrent. Chairman Connerton provided additional information regarding the potential use of a radar gun by the residents. Senior Engineer Moghadam clarified that the temporary installation of stop signs was part of Stage I of the program, providing additional information. MOTION: Commissioner Edwards moved to approve staff's recommendation to implement Stage I of the program which encompassed additional enforcement, a meeting with the residents, and implementation of the radar trailer. Commissioner Katan seconded the motion. (Ultimately this motion passed; see below.) Commissioner Edwards recommended that there be a program where the residents could write down the license plate numbers of speeding vehicles, and pass on the data to the Police Department in order for a written warning to be sent to the drivers. In response, Chairman Connerton relayed that without utilization of a radar gun or trailer, he would be reluctant to support the effectiveness of the concept. In response, Commissioner Edwards concurred, recommending that there be provisions for a radar gun for the resident's use. In response to public comment, Chairman Connerton provided additional information regarding peak hours of traffic volumes; reiterated that he had seen construction workers attempting to escape the street when a car passed, acknowledging that there was a speed problem even though he had not witnessed it. Ms. Mathes relayed that due to the speed of the vehicles, it would be difficult to write down license numbers. For Ms..Mathes, Chairman Connerton provided additional information regarding the use of the radar gun and the temporary installation of the stop signs; and advised that if a driver received three citations in a year it could result in the loss of a driver's license. At this time voice vote was taken reflecting approval with the exception of Commissioner Coe who was now absent. 3. Enqineerin(~ and Traffic Survey Update - Citywide RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 That the Public/Traffic Safety Commission review and recommend that the City Council adopt an Ordinance establishing the recommended speed limits identified in Exhibit "A." Providing an overview of the engineering and speed surveys, Senior Engineer Moghadam provided the staff report (of record); and noted that the survey was conducted Citywide, relaying that there were six proposed changes in speed limits, providing further specification. For Commissioner Edwards, Senior Engineer Moghadam relayed that the residents had not been notified that the speed limits would be lowered in their areas. MOTION: Commissioner Lanier moved to approve staff's recommendation. Commissioner Katan seconded the motion and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Commissioner Edwards who abstained from Location Nos. 6, and 25 in the report, Commissioner Katan who abstained from Location No. 33, and Chairman Connerton who abstained from Location No. 30. TRAFFIC ENGINEER'S REPORT With respect to the request to contact the School Distdct regarding the stop location on Ynez Road, Senior Engineer Moghadam relayed that there would be no revisions to the stop location due to the lack of provisions for turnaround movements for the busses, and due to visibility impacts. Chairman Connerton relayed that in his opinion, the School District's response was unacceptable in light of the negative traffic impacts caused from the existing stop location. Associate Engineer Gonzalez provided additional information regarding the School District's decision to locate the stop location on Ynez Road, noting that Oscar's Restaurant was pdvate property. Chairman Connerton recommended agendizing the issue of installing provisions for bus radius turning movements at Tierra Vista due to the near collisions created at the existing stop location; and advised that the smaller busses could turnaround at Tierra Vista at this time. For Chairman Connerton, Senior Engineer Moghadam relayed that the park site was City property, as discussion ensued regarding relocating the stop location. In response to Commissioner Edwards, Associate Engineer Gonzalez relayed that the School Distdct had noted that numerous dropped-off students resided in the apartments proximate to Oscar's restaurant and others off of Tierra Vista. Additional discussion ensued regarding the potential of Tierra Vista being a through road when the development continued in this area; Chairman Connerton recommended additionally agendizing the Tierra Vista issue. POLICE CHIEF'S REPORT Police Chief DiMaggio provided information regarding the Traffic Awareness Now (TAN) Committee's program, noting the distribution of fliers, stickers, newspaper articles, and radio announcements associated with the traffic awareness; and advised that awards (gift certificates) were being distributed to safe and courteous drivers. Police Sergeant DiMaggio advised that the Police Department would be purchasing a new radar trailer in July, potentially with a speed strip and computer in order to calculate times and speeds, providing additional information regarding retrofitting the existing two trailers; and in response to Commissioner Edwards, relayed the plan to obtain additional radar guns. For Chairman Connerton, Senior Engineer Moghadam relayed concerns regarding the use of radar guns by private citizens. In response, Chairman Connerton relayed the effectiveness of the radar use with respect to reducing speed. In response, Senior Engineer Moghadam relayed that if there was a detailed program associated with the resident's use of the radar gun (inclusive of training by the Police Department), he could support the concept. FIRE CHIEF'S REPORT Battalion Chief Ritchey relayed that on Fdday, June 9~h the Balloon and Wine Festival would begin, noting that there would be 16 Fire personnel, and numerous fire vehicles associated with the event. COMMISSION REPORTS Per telephone correspondence she had received, Commissioner Edwards queried the striping on 79 South, specifying certain locations of concem. In response, Senior Engineer Moghadam relayed that staff was in the process of addressing the issue. Per community comments, Commissioner Edwards queded the striping proximate to the Margarita Road/79 South intersection. In response, Senior Engineer Moghadam relayed that this specific location south of the intersection was within the County, advising that staff would report the matter to the County. For Commissioner Edwards, Police Sergeant DiMaggio advised that Officer Scott had received notice of appreciation from the City. Commissioner Katan congratulated the TAN Committee and the Police Department for the successful traffic awareness program. With respect to the CIP, Commissioner Katan queded whether the denoted additional flashing school lights would include the North General Kearny area. In response, Senior Engineer Moghadam relayed that the signs need to be installed at the boundary of the school up to a maximum of 500 feet from the school boundary, noting the rationale for avoiding the 500 foot extensions. For informational purposes, Commissioner Katan relayed that via the newspaper, it had been noted that the School District was in the process of forming a traffic committee; and relayed that he had applied to serve on this committee. Chairman Connerton commended the Police Department for monitoring the parking at Temecula Valley High School; and noted that after the Officer leaves the site, that numerous vehicles were parking illegally. In response to Chairman Connerton's queries regarding Fire trucks not stopping at red lights, Battalion Chief Ritchey relayed that the Departmental Policy required vehicles to come to a complete stop at red lights and then preceed through the intersection; noted that in the City of Temecula via the Opticom System the light changes to green for the fire vehicles; and requested that specific information be relayed if there were complaints in order for him to address the matter, For Chairman Connerton, Senior Engineer Moghadam relayed that it was the City's responsibility to monitor the maintenance of the Opticom System. Chairman Connerton thanked the Fire and Police Departments for their diligent efforts in aiding in the auto accident his wife had been involved in. ADJOURNMENT At 8:08 P.M. ChairmanConnerton formally adjourned this meeting to Thureday, July 13, 2000 at 6:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula. Chairman Darrell L. Connerton Administrative Secretary Anita Pyle 8 R:\trafficminutes'~60800 ITEM NO. 2 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: AGENDA REPORT Public/Traffic Safety Commission Ali Moghadam, P.E., Senior Engineer, Traffic July 13, 2000 Item 2 Request for Multi-Way Stop Installation - Honors Drive at Balata Drive/Vardon Drive RECOMMENDATION: That the Public/Traffic Safety Commission recommend that the City Council adopt a resolution establishing multi-way stop controls at the intersection of Honors Drive at Balata Drive/Vardon Drive. BACKGROUND: A petition was received from Mr. Tom Hancock, representing the Temeku Hills Community to evaluate the need for Multi-Way Stop signs at the intersection of Honors Drive and Balata Drive/Vardon Drive due to increased vehicular volumes along Honors Drive and limited visibility at the intersection. An evaluation of traffic conditions has been performed to determine if the intersection satisfies the minimum warrant criteria for the installation of Multi-Way stop signs. The evaluation included a review of 24-hour vehicular volume dala and accident history at the intersection. In addition to the warrant analysis, a review of the sight distance and prevailing speeds was performed. The public has been notified of the Public/Traffic Safety Commission's consideration of this issue through the agenda notification process. Honors Drive is a 44-foot wide residential collector roadway that provides access to Margarita Road and Rancho California Road. The speed limit is posted at 30 MPH between Margarita Road and Temeku Drive. The average daily traffic (ADT) on Honors Drive is approximately 2,270. Balata Drive and Vardon Drive are 36-foot wide residential streets that provide direct access to Honors Drive for numerous single-family residential units. The prima facie speed limit on both streets is 25 MPH. Balata Drive and Vardon Drive are controlled by a stop sign at Honors Drive. The Caltrans Traffic Manual indicates that the Multi-Way Stop installation may be useful at locations where the volumes of traffic on intersecting roads are approximately equal and/or where a combination of high speed, restricted sight distance and an accident history indicates that assignment of right-of-way is necessary. Multi- Way Stop controls should not be used for controlling vehicular speeds. There are three (3) criteria that Caltrans has established for the evaluafon of Multi-Way Stop signs. These criteria are as follows: Where signals are warranted and urgently needed, the mul~way stop may be an interim measure that can be installed quickly to control traffic while arrangements are being made for the signal installations. I r:\traffic\commissn\agenda\2000\0713 ~honors@balata/ajp An accident problem, as indicated by five (5) or more reported accidents within a twelve (12) month period of a type susceptible to correction by a multi-way stop installation. Such accidents include right and left-turn collisions as well as right-angle collisions. 3. Minimum Traffic Volumes The total vehicular volume entering the intersection from all approaches must average at least 500 vehicles per hour for any eight (8) hours of an average day, and The combined vehicular and pedestrian volume from the minor street or highway must average at least 200 units per hour for the same eight (8) hours, with an average delay to minor street vehicular traffic of at least 30 seconds per vehicle during the maximum hour, but When the 85-percentile approach speed of the major street traffic exceeds 40 miles per hour, the minimum vehicular volume warrant is 70 percent of the above requirements. The Multi-Way Stop warrant analysis performed for the intersection indicates that the existing volumes are considerably lower than the applicable warrant criteria. Based on the warrant criteria multi-way stop controls are not justified at Honors Drive and Balata Drive/Vardon Drive. Additionally, there were no reported accidents within a twelve-month period at this intersection. A copy of the analysis is included as Exhibit "C". A review of the prevailing speed data on Honors Drive indicates that the 85~ percentile speed is 37 MPH in the vicinity of the Balata Drive/Vardon Drive intersection. The 85~ percentile speed is consistent with speeds found on other streets throughout the city with similar classifications. An evaluation of the intersection's sight distance visibility indicates that the visibility for northbound Balata Drive (looldng east and west) falls below the minimum stopping sight distance for a 37 MPH speed due to the vertical and horizontal alignment of the roadway. A sight distance of 270 feet is required for a prevailing speed of 37 MPH. The sight distance for southbound Vardon Drive (looking wes0 was also determined to fall below the minimum stopping sight distance for 37 MPH. The evaluation determined that the sight distance (between 180 feet and 225 fee0 on the three approaches is more appropriate for prevailing speeds between 28 MPH and 30 MPH. The warrant analysis indicates that multi-way stop controls are not justified at this location based on volume and accident history. However, the Caltrans Traffic Manual states that multi-way stop controls may be considered at intersections where the sight distance cannot be improved by removing the obstruction. Therefore, staff recommends the installation of multi-way stop signs at this location based on the lack of sufficient sight distance visibility. 2 r:\traffic\commissn\agenda\2000\0713~honors@balata/ajp FISCAL IMPACT: Funds are available for the installation of signs and associated pavement markings in the Public Works Routine Street Maintenance Account. Attachment: 1. Exhibit "A' - Location Map 2. Exhibit "B' - Petition - Temeku Hills Community 3. Exhibit "C' - Multi-Way Stop Warrant Analysis 4. Exhibit "D" - Vehicular Volume and Speed Data 5. Exhibit WE" - Sight Distance Evaluation 3 r:\t ra ffic\eommissn\agenda~2000\0713~honors@balata/ajp EXHIBIT "A" LOCATION MAP EXHIBIT "B" PETITION TEMEKU HILLS COMMUNITY RECEIVED JUN ~ ~ ~000 CITY OF TEMECULA ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT June 26, 2000 Mr. Bill Hughes City of Temecula Public Works Dept. As per our conversation, this is the petition for a stop sign to be considered at Honors, Balata and Vardon Drives in the Temeku Hills Community. Mayor JeffStone and myself both visited this intersection last month and could see there is a problem at this location. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. 41768 Cascades Ct. Temecula, Ca. 92591 mailing address: P.O.Box 892046 Temecula, Ca. 925892046 , Attn: Mayor Jeff Stone Transportation Department CITY OF TEMECULA Please Contact: Tom Hancock Coordinator 506-4496 PETITION FOR STOP SIGN We the undersigned, strongly request that a stop sign be put in at the comers of Honors, Balata, and Vardon Drives in the Temeku Hills Community. There have been many occasions where there have been near collisions. This is very dangerous and we would like to have this situation resolved. Let's not wait until someone is seriously injured or tragically killed. Name (Please Print)Please Sign HereAddress Phone Number , ,,, / -. (StopSign?etition) Atth: Mayor Jeff Stone Transportation Department CITY OF TEMECULA ' Please Contact: Tom Hancock Coordinator 506-4496 PETITION FOIl STOP SIGN We the undersigned, strongly request that a stop sign be put in at the comers of Honors, Balata, and Vardon Drives in the Temeku Hills Community. There have been many occasions where there have been near collisions. This is very dangerous and we would like to bare this situation resolved. Let's not wait until someone is seriously injured or tragically killed. Name (Please Print) Please Sign Here Address Phone Number Att{~: Mayor Jeff Stone Transportation Department CITY OF TEMECULA Please Contact: Tom Hancock Coordinator 5O6-4496 PETITION FOR STOP SIGN \Ve the undersigned, strongly request lhat a stop sign be put in a! the corners of Honors, Balala, and Vardon Drives ii] the Temeku Hills Community. There have been many occasions where there have been near co]iisions. This is very dangerous and we would like to have this situation resoh, ed. Lel's not wait until someone is seriously injured or tragically killed. Name (Please Print) ])lease Sign Here Address Phone Number / f ($topSignl>etition) . ('-- Gq:.. -,~ ':? '.~-7::?;, Att~n: Mayor Jeff Stone Transportation Department CITY OF TEMECULA Please Contact: Tom Hancock Coordinator 506-4496 PETITION FOIl STOP SIGN \Vc tim undersigned, strongly request that a stop sign be 10ut in at tile corners of Honors, Balata, and Vardon Drives in tile Temeku Hills Community. There have been many occasions where there have been near collisions. This is very dangerous and we would like to have this situation resoh, ed. Let's not wait until someone is seriously injured or lragically trilled. ]Name (Please Print) ] lease Slgl! Here Address Phone Number / (StopSignN:tition) ___ I. Attn: Mayor Jeff Stone Transportation Department CITY OF TEMECULA Please Co~ltacl: Tom Hancock Coordinator 506-4496 PETITION FOR STOP SIGN \Ve the undersigned, strofigly request that a stop sign be put in at the ct ~ ~'"s of Honors, Balata, and \"ardon Drives in the Temeku Hills Community. There have been many "coast°ns where there have I~een near collisions. This is very dangerous and we would like to have lhi:; situation resolved. I,et's nol wait until someone is seriously injured or tragically killed. Name (Please Print) Please Sign Here Address Phone Number I'StopSignPetition) Attn: Mayor Jeff Stone Transportation Department CITY OF TEMECULA Please Contact: Tom Hancock Coordinator 506-44.96 FE 1[ ITION FOR STOP S1GN \Ve tile undersigned, strongly request that a stop sign be put in at the corners of_-lJ_o_n~.and Vardon Drives in the Temeku Hills Community. ']'here have been many occasions where there ]lave beer~ near collisions. This is very dangerous and we would like to have this situation resolved. Let's not wait until someone is seriously injured or tragically killed. Name (Please Print) Please Sign ]-te!'e Address Phone Number 1 ($tot:,SignPetition) ~ ~"" AttiC: Mayor Jeff Stone Transportation Department CITY OF TEMECULA Please Contact: Tom Hancock Coordinator 506-4496 PETITION FOR STOP SIGN We the undersigned, strongly request that a stop sign be put in at the corners of Honors, Balata, and Va'don Drives in the Temeku Hills Community. There have bee:~ many occasions wherc there have been near collisions. This is very dangerous and we would like to have this situation resolved. Let's not wait until someone is seriously injured or tragically killed. Name (Please Print) ]:'lease Sign Address Phone Number (Stop$ignPet[tion) A. tt4~: Mayor Jeff Stone Transportation Department CITY OF TEMECULA Please Contact: Tom Hancock Coordinator 506-4496 PETITION FOR STOP SIGN We the undersigned, strongly request that a stop sign be put in at the conners of Honors, Balata, and Vardon Drives in the Temeku Hills Communky. There have been many occasions where there have been near collisions. This is very dangerous and we would like to have this situation resolved. Let's not wait until someone is seriously injured or tragically killed. ~e_(.Please,Print) l Please Sign Here ! Address I Phone Number (StopSignPetkion) EXHIBIT "C' MULTI-WAY STOP WARRANT ANALYSIS Multi-Way Stop Warranting Software 07/03/00 Major Street: Minor Street: Honors Drive Balata Drive/Vardon Drive Date of Analysis: 07/03/00 Name of Analyst: jlg Case Number: ~ Comments: 85th% Speed of Major Street: 37 WARRANT }/qALYSIS SUMMARY: WARRANT 1 - Accident Experience NOT SATISFIED - The accident warrant of 5 or more reportable accidents of a correctable type is not met with 0 accidents over a 12 month period. WARRANT 2 - Minimum Traffic Volumes NOT SATISFIED - The 100% vehicular warrant of 500 entering vehicles for any 8 hours of the day is not met with 0 hours meeting the warrant. WARRANT 3 - Vehicular & Pedestrian Traffic from Minor Road NOT SATISFIED - The combined total of 200 vehicles and pedestrians from the minor approach is not met with 0 hours meeting the warrant. Multi-Way Stop Warranting Software 07/03/00 START TIME NB SB EB 100% 7O% WB HOUR WARRILNT WARRANT TOT MET MET COMBINATION WARRANT MET 0:00 0 0 4 4 8 1:00 0 0 3 2 5 2:00 1 1 2 1 5 3:00 0 1 3 2 6 4:00 2 6 2 6 16 5:00 4 3 12 20 39 6:00 7 19 28 45 99 7:00 13 16 46 58 133 8:00 7 17 60 73 157 9:00 11 32 61 66 170 10:00 4 20 56 56 136 11:00 14 20 89 60 183 12:00 12 14 88 56 170 13:00 6 13 78 78 175 14:00 12 14 75 76 177 15:00 11 22 92 57 182 16:00 7 14 105 70 196 17:00 11 13 100 68 192 18:00 11 15 99 63 188 19:00 J 14 113 50 184 20:00 2 10 58 30 100 21:00 3 4 58 25 90 22:00 3 5 38 14 60 23.:00 1 0 16 4 21 >d o~ Collision Diagram East/West Street: HONORS DRIVE Cross Street: BALATA DRIVE-VARDON DRIVE From: 5/31/99 To: 5/31/00 Date Prepared: 6~27~00 Number of Collisions _0 Property Damage Only _0 Injury Collisions 0 Fatal Collisions Total Collisions Legend .~] Moving Vehicle ~ ~ Stopped Vehicle ~ ~ Backing Vehicle .,~ ~ Ran Off Road ~. Movement Unknown Right Turn Left Turn Sideswipe Day Night Pedestrian Fixed Object Bicycle DUI Inju~ Fatat EXHIBIT "D" VEHICULAR VOLUME AND SPEED DATA Barbara Iq. Sackett RECEIVED JUL 0 ~ 2000 CITY OF TEMECULA ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CITY OF TEMECULA BALATA DRIVE / VARDON DRIVE Counts Unlimited, Inc. i~loreno \/,riley, CA, 92557 Entering Volume Count June 2000 909 247 6716 909 924 8604 ctsunltd@aol.com CITY OF TEMECULA EALATA DR/VARUON DE & HONORS DKiVE 24 HR ENTERING VOLUME COUNT COUNTS UNLIMITED, INC. 909-247-6716 EAST/WEST Site Code: 15385534 Start Date: 06/28/2000 File I.D. : TEBAEOEW Page Begin < ...... EBND Time A.M. 12:00 06/28 1 12:15 2 12:30 1 12:45 0 4 01:00 2 0i:15 1 01:30 0 01:45 0 3 02:00 1 02:15 I 02:30 0 02:45 0 2 03:00 0 03:15 2 03:30 1 03:45 0 3 04:00 0 04:15 1 04:30 1 04:45 0 2 05:00 2 05:15 2 05:30 3 05:45 5 12 06:00 5 06:15 2 06:30 8 06:45 13 28 07:00 7 07:I5 8 07:30 13 07:45 18 46 08:00 13 08:15 20 08:30 12 08:45 15 60 09:00 15 09:15 18 09:30 13 09:45 I5 61 10:00 15 10:15 18 10:30 9 10:45 14 56 11:00 23 I1:15 17 1I:30 27 11:45 22 89 Totals 366 Day Totals 1286 Smli< % 40.2% Peak Hour 11:00 Volume 89 P.H.F. .82 P.M. A,M, 28 2 22 0 !4 1 27 88 1 2i 1 !4 0 !9 1 24 78 0 !7 0 i? I i8 0 23 75 0 28 1 16 0 24 0 24 92 1 26 1 23 1 26 2 3O 105 2 22 0 23 7 32 5 23 100 8 32 9 25 8 26 12 !6 99 16 34 16 26 t5 32 16 2! 113 11 !3 23 !5 13 16 12 i.l 58 25 14 7 23 15 i3 24 8 58 20 !i 14 !3 15 !0 12 4 38 15 16 14 920 393 91.7% WBND ...... >< ...... Combined P.M. A.M. 19 3 10 2 15 2 4 12 56 i 8 24 3 13 1 2O 1 2 21 78 0 5 26 1 15 2 11 0 1 24 76 0 3 18 1 17 2 12 I 2 10 57 1 5 22 1 19 2 14 3 6 15 70 2 8 14 2 14 9 22 8 20 18 68 13 32 13 14 17 10 20 20 45 13 63 29 73 19 23 14 23 13 29 58 4 50 29 104 9 36 8 33 8 24 73 5 30 40 133 5 22 9 33 5 37 66 6 25 35 127 4 29 4 33 4 21 56 2 14 29 112 3 40 1 33 O 41 60 0 4 35 149 591 759 984 2270 P,M, 42 32 3i 39 144 45 27 39 45 156 43 32 29 47 151 46 33 36 34 149 48 42 4O 45 175 36 37 54 41 168 45 42 46 29 162 53 4O 45 25 163 22 23 24 19 88 19 32 18 14 83 15 17 14 6 52 11 6 2 i 20 1511 07:00 08:00 0I:30 11:00 05:30 1i3 73 82 149 182 .83 .73 .78 .90 Nedmesday COUNTS UNLIMITED, INC~ CITY OF TEMECULA BALATA DR/VARDON DR & HONORS DRIVE 24 WOUR ENTERING VOLUME COUNT Begin < ...... NBND ...... >< ...... 8BND Time A.M. P,M. A.M. 12:00 06/28 i2:18 i2:30 !2:45 * 01:00 01:15 01:]0 01:45 * 02:00 02:18 02:30 02:45 1 03:00 03:!5 03:30 03:45 * 04:00 04:15 04:30 04:45 2 08:00 05:15 05:30 05:45 4 06:00 08:15 3 86:30 2 06:45 7 4 07:00 3 07:15 1 07:30 1 07:45 13 2 08:00 1 08:15 0 08:30 0 08:45 7 1 09:00 2 09:15 1 09:30 0 09:45 11 . 0 i0:00 2 i0:15 1 i0:30 0 !0:45 4 0 i1:00 1 !1:15 0 !i:30 0 ii:45 14 O Totais 63 86 Day Tccals 149 Split ~ 31.8% )8,3% 3 0 3 0 5 0 1 12 0 3 0 2 0 0 0 1 6 0 * 2 0 2 0 4 ! 4 12 0 I 3 5 0 1 i 2 11 0 1 3 0 2 1 7 2 6 3 0 2 2 6' 1 0 11 0 3 2 2 7 2 11 8 19 3 4 7 1 16 3 7 3 2 4 17 6 9 11 3 6 32 0 5 8 i 20 8 ] 5 4 20 135 68.1% 909-247-6716 NQRTR/$QUTR ...... >< ...... Combined P.M, A.M. P.M. 5 1 5 4 5 4 2 3 5 2 0 3 1 o 1 2 2 o 1 2 0 0 0 138 5 8 3 8 3 8 3 14 * 4 3 6 4 8 3 3 3 13 * 4 0 2 3 5 2 6 9 14 2 13 3 6 o 5 14 15 5 22 i 7 4 7 3 5 5 6 2 14 8 3 5 8 4 6 2 8 2 13 7 2 7 15 12 26 11 7 14 3 29 4 lo 5 10 5 24 4 7 3 11 1 I7 4 8 43 2 7 7 8 i 5 2 24 2 12 ! 6 0 8 0 198 224 422 61,6{ 26 18 26 33 21 24 4 7 8 26 8 5 3 21 0 2 0 12 Page Wednesday Site Code : 15385153 Start Date: 06/28/2000 File I.D. : TEBAHONS ; I Peak Hour 06:45 02:30 09:00 02:45 09:00 02:45 Volume 15 16 32 26 43 28 P.E.F. .46 .8 .72 .46 .63 .65 SPEEDPLOT 2 Spot Speed Analysis Vet. 2.00A/McTPJuNS Honors Drive: Bala~a Drive/Vardon Drive DIRECTION(S). ...... EB/WB DATE ............... 7/ 3/2000 TIME ............... 3:13 POSTED SPEED LIMIT.30 MPH CUM MPH NO. PCT. PCT. < 5 0 0.0 0.0 5 0 0.0 0 0 6 0 0.0 0 0 7 0 0.0 0 0 8 0 0.0 0 0 9 0 0.0 0 0 10 0 0.0 0 0 1t 0 0.0 0 0 12 0 0.0 0 0 13 0 0.0 0 0 14 0 0.0 0 0 15 0 0.C 0 0 16 0 0.0 0 0 17 0 0.0 0 0 18 0 0.0 0 0 19 0 0.0 0 0 20 0 0.© 0 0 21 0 0.0 0 0 22 2 2.0 2 0 23 3 3.0 5 0 24 2 2.0 7 0 25 5 5. 0 12 0 26 5 5. 0 17 0 27 10 10. 0 27 0 28 5 5,0 32 0 29 7 7.0 39 0 30 6 6.C 45 0 31 10 10.0 55 0 32 9 9.0 64 0 33 5 5.0 69 0 34 11 1!.0 80 0 35 4 4 . 0 84 0 36 1 1.0 85 0 37 3 3.0 88 0 38 3 3 .O 91 0 39 2 2.0 93 0 40 2 2.0 95 0 41 3 3 .C 98 0 42 1 i . C 99 0 43 0 0 . ~ 99 0 44 0 0 . 0 99 0 45 0 0 , C 99 0 46 0 0 . C 99 0 47 1 1 . 0 i00 0 48 0 O.C 100 0 49 0 0.C i00 0 50 0 O.C !00 0 >50 0 O. O i00 0 ~0TH PERCENTILE SPEED ................. 31 $STH PERCENTILE SPEED ................. 37 i0 MPH PACE SPEED .......... 25 through 34 PERCENT IN PACE SPEED .............. 73.0 PERCENT OVER PACE SPEED ............ 20.0 PERCENT UNDER PACE SPEED ........... 7.0 FtANGE OF SPEEDS ................. 22 to 47 VEHICLES OBSERVED .................... 100 AVERAGE SPEED ....................... 31.2 CUMULATIVE PERCENT VS. SPEED (MPH) + .... + .... + .... + .... + .... ~ .... + .... + .... + .... + 100 **********100 ** 90 ** 90 ** 80 * 80 70 60 * 70 60 50 * 40 * 3O 2O 10 10 20 30 40 50 PERCENT VS. SPEED (MPH) + .... + .... + .... + .... + .... + .... + .... + .... + .... + 15 15 10 10 5 5 + .... + .... + .... + .... + .... + .... + .... + .... + .... + 10 20 30 40 50 EXHIBIT "E" SIGHT DISTANCE EVALUATION ITEM NO. 3 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: AGENDA REPORT Public/Traffic Safety Commission Ali Moghadam, P.E., Senior Engineer, Traffic July 13, 2000 Item 3 ' In-Pavement Amber LED Flashing Lights for Crosswalks RECOMMENDATION: That the Public/Traffic Safety Commission review and evaluate the feasibility of installing In-Pavement Amber LED Flashing Lights for crosswalks and make a recommendation to the City Council. BACKGROUND: Public/Traffic Safety Commission Chairman Darrell Connerton requested that this item be placed on the agenda for review and discussion. Ms. Rose Cunningham from JTB Supply Company will make a presentation on flashing lights for crosswalks and provide answers to Commissioners' questions. FISCAL IMPACT: None Attachment: Light Guard System Handout I r:\traffi¢\eommissn\agcnda\2000\0713\crosswalk flash/ajp When the Pedestrian Crossing Isn't Clearly Visible... "Pursuing Safety 'hrou#h Technology." Patent Pending More and more drivers are seeing the light· Pedestrian vs. vehicle collisions are occurring at an alarming rate. In fact, pedestrians account for up to 50% of traffic fatalities in urban areas. In most pedestrian accidents, motorists say they just didn't notice there was a pedestrian in the crosswalk until it was too late to stop. If motorists have a hard time seeing pedestrians in daylight hours, imagine what happens when it's dark. According to the National Safety Council a pedestrian's chances of being hit increases 1100 times at night, and accordir~g to studies, 8 out of 10 drivers who struck people at night didn't see them in time. On average, the economic cost per pedestrian struck in a traffic collision is nearly a quarter of a million dollars. "In most pedestrian accidents, motorists say they just didn't notice there was a pedestrian in the crosswalk until it was too late to stop." Onty 1/2" above roadway surface. Now motorists are seeing the light! The LightGuard SystemTM alerts motorists that they are approaching an occupied crosswalk. Both sides of a crosswalk are tined with a senes of amber LED flashing lights encased in durable ~gs and embedded in the roadway facing oncoming traffic. The pedestrian activated flashing lights are visible to the approaching motorist as an advance warning that someone is in or near the marked crosswalk. INCREASED DRIVER AWARENESS Before and after field study evaluations consistently report the percentage of drivers yielding to pedestrians increases dramatically after installation of the LightGuar( SystemTM. Approach speeds decrease, motorists start braking sooner and the number of drivers noticing the crosswalks have increased up to 100%. "An attention getting device seemingly impossible to ignore." Drivers say the strobe-like flash catches their attention, especially at night or in bad weather conditions, such as rain or fog. Motorists typically react by letting off the accelerator, slowing or braking as they approach the crosswalk. The LightGuard SystemT'' creates a heightened state of aware- ness and may provide additional time for the approaching motorist to come to a safe stop for a pedestrian, or pass safely through the crosswalk without impeding the traffic flow. AN ECONOMICAL SOLUTION The LightGuard SystemTM offers a potentially cost-savin[ alternative to other signalized traffic control devices currently in use. 2292 Airpod Blvd. Santa Rosa, CA 95403 www.crosswalks.com Patent Pending · Amber LED's provide the' best visibility for motorists at distances in bright sunlight and adverse weather conditions. · Low cost installation with containment of all electronics in one roadside cabinet. · Solar cell battery power at crosswalk locations where electrical power is not available. The efficiencies of the LED strobe lights permit operation off solar power during daytime hours as well as operation off battery power during nighttime hours. · Flashing in-roadway lights can be viewed from as far away as 1000 to 1500 ft. from the crosswalk. Currently recommended for uncontrolled crosswalks at intersection or midblock locations. 707-542-4547 Call or write today for more information Simply put, if you are concerned about pedestrian injuries or fatalities in your community... ... The LightGuard SystemTM could be the solution you're looking for. FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS WHO IS LIGHTGUARD SYSTEMS, INC.? LightGuard Systems, Inc. (LGS) is a traffic control devices company located in Santa Rosa, CA USA since 1994. LGS has developed and currently sells a pedestrian crosswalk warning system referred to as "the LightGuard System?" This pedestrian crosswalk warning system is used to increase driver awareness at uncontrolled crosswalks. Mr. Michael Harrison is the inventor of the pedestrian crosswalk pedestrian warning system and the founder of LGS. He developed the concept because a friend was involved in a fatal pedestrian accident. He is committed to a transportation system primarily focused on making streets safe for cars, and making communities safer for pedestrians. WHAT IS THE LIGHTGUARD SYSTEMTM? The LightGuard SystemTM sometimes referred to as the "Pedestrian Crosswalk System" or SMART CrosswalkTM alerts motorists that they are approaching an occupied crosswalk. The crosswalk is lined on each side with a series of unidirectional flashing amber light emitting diodes (LED) lights, each encased in a durable housing, and embedded in the roadway facing oncoming traffic from either side of a crosswalk. The pedestrian activated flashing lights are visible to the approaching motorist as an advance warning that someone is in or near the marked crosswalk. HAS THE LIGHTGUARD SYSTEM BEEN TESTED? The LIGHTGUARD SYSTEMTM is the only product on the market that has been independently and extensively tested for the pedestrian crosswalk application. The City of Santa Rosa, CA initiated the testing of the new concept in 1994; and, subsequently other locations in California have been tested. Those locations include Fort Bragg, Lafayette, Orinda, Petaluma, and Willits. The California Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) and the University of North Carolina Highway Safety Research Center have sponsored studies of the experimental crosswalk warning system in California and Washington State. The results are found in the report entitled "An Evaluation of a Crosswalk Warning System Utilizing In- Pavement Flashing Lights" conducted by Whitlock & Weinberger Transportation Inc., of Santa Rosa, CA. This independent study is available and directions for obtaining a copy are available through the Web site www.crosswalks.com WHAT ARE THE COMPONENTS OF THE LIGHTGUARD SYSTEM? The LIGHTGUARD SYSTEMTM is comprised of the following major components: · High output, amber LED's housed in the in-roadway warning signals that provide the best visibility for motorists in bright sunlight and adverse weather conditions. · Flashing in-roadway-warning signals that are installed less than 1/2" above pavement and can be viewed from as far away as 1000 to 1500 ft. from the crosswalk. · Pedestrian manual push-button system and/or automatic activation system. Solar cell battery power for activation is also available where electrical power is not readily available. · One roadside NEMA approved cabinet to contain all electronics. · A diamond shape pedestrian sign(s) with a row of four flashing amber LEDs that indicates to the pedestrians the in-pavement flashing lights warning . system is active. HOW MUCH DOES THE LIGHTGUARD SYSTEMTM COST? The LIGHTGUARD SYSTEMTM is available in various configurations- four-lane intersections to two-lane intersections as well as custom configurations. Equipment prices can range from $10,000US to $20,000.00US or more depending on the site configuration. Installation is extra. Let the LightGuard Representative assist you in achieving the most cost-effective configuration for ~/our application based on your needs. IS THE LIGHTGUARD SYSTEMTM EASY TO MAINTAIN? Yes, the LIGHTGUARD SYSTEMTM is easy to maintain. LED technology insures long lamp life so that the System will be on; and, power to the System is minimal. In-roadway warning signals are very durable and a new snowplow resistant head is in development. The in-roadway warning signals are also easy to install and can be easily removed for re-paving purposes. The in-roadway-warning signal is self-cleaning. The white bollards or decorative posts are made of sturdy aluminum, are easy to clean and stand about three and half (3 1/2') feet tall. They are clearly visible to the motorist and pedestrian. No extra cleaning maintenance of the System is required due to its unique design. IS THE LIGHTGUARD SYSTEMTM EASY TO INSTALL? Yes, the System is easy to install. The System is a 12.5 D.C. volt system. Each base-plate only requires a one-inch (1") depression in the roadway surface. Saw cutting is at a minimum. Typical saw cutting requirements are one half inch (11/2') wide and one and three quarters inch (1 3~,,) in depth using standard equipment for in-road electrical installations. The bollards or decorative posts can be placed up to sixty feet apart. The foundation base of each bollard requires concrete; and, anchor "J" bolts. The pedestrian LED-flashing signs can be easily installed in the sidewalks using two inch (2") galvanized poles meeting agency or city standards. Controller enclosure can be either pole mounted or wall mounted. Power source is 110, 120 volts AC or solar powered, and usually connected to a nearby street light. THE LIGHTGUARD SYSTEM rM IS ..... THE LATEST IN LED TECHNOLOGY UNIDIRECTIONAL IN-ROADWAY WARNING SIGNALS DESIGNED AS A PEDESTR/AN CROSSWALK SYSTEM EXTENSIVELY THIRD PARTY TESTED BY GOVERNMENT FUNDED EVALUATION STUDIES NOT INCANDESCENT LIGHTBULBS NOT BIDIRECTIONAL NOT FOR AIRPORT RUNWAYS NOT UNTESTED OR UNPROVEN DESIGNED AND TESTED WITH AN "ENHANCED" LED FLASHRATE TO GAIN THE ATTENTION OF THE MOTORISTS NOT PULSED ON/OFF EITHER MANUAL OR AUTOMATIC ACTIVATED USING THE "APPROVED" NUMBER OF IN-ROADWAY WARNING SIGNALS PROVEN TO BE EFFECTIVE IN ALERTING THE MOTORISTS EASY TO INSTALL AND MAINTAIN NOT USING UNRELIABLE OVERHEAD SENSORS NOT JUST "LIGHTBULBS IN THE STREET" NOT REQUIRING DEEP TRENCHING TO INSTALL, NOT OPEN TO DEBRIS COLLECTION NOR COSTLY TO MAINTAIN COST EFFECTIVE TO BUY AND INSTALL NOT "A PUZZLE OF PARTS IN A BOX" AND EXPENSIVE TO INSTALL THE LIGHTGUARD SYSTEMTM IS THE RECOGNIZED PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALK WARNING SYSTEM FOR REDUCING PEDESTRIAN INJURIES, NEAR TRAFFIC COLLISIONS AND ACCIDENTS. CALL YOU LOCAL LIGHTGUARD SYSTEMTM REPRESENTATIVE NOW. HEWLETT-PACKARD TECHNICAL BRIEF In-Pavement Amber LED Flashing Lights Visually Alert Motorists Approaching Crosswalks The safety of a pedestrian crossing a street is largely dependent upon the vigilance of the pedestrian. A pedestrian must stop and look each way along the street before entering a crosswalk to ensure there is sufficient time between oncoming traffic to safely cross to the other side of the street. Motorists are required by law to give a pedestrian the right of way whenever a crosswalk is occupied. There are problems with this scenario. As the population ages, pedestrians become less adaptive at discerning sufficient clearance time between oncoming vehicles. Motorists traveling in varied conditions may have difficulty seeing pedestrians in crosswalks in sufficient time to ensure their safe passage across the street. Increasing vehicle traffic flows make it difficult for motorists to see and identify marked crosswalks. In the United States, some 6000 pedestrians are killed each year while crossing a street, according to statistics from the Surface Transportation Policy Project, Washington, DC. Data indicates that pedestrians are 1,110 times more likely to be hit by motorists during nighttime hours than during daytime hours. In many cases, where a motorist has hit a pedestrian in a crosswalk, the motorist claims to have not seen the pedestrian. Such is the case when vehicle/pedestrian collisions occur at night, in adverse weather conditions such as rain or fog, and in traffic when a motorist pulls around to pass a vehicle that has stopped in his/her lane of traffic for a pedestrian in a crosswalk. These vehicle/pedestrian collisions could have been prevented if some kind of visual warning had been presented to the motorist involved to indicate the crosswalk was occupied by a pedestrian. Such is the purpose of an in-pavement amber LED flashing lights visual warning system at crosswalk locations. The concept of an in-pavement amber LED flashing lights visual warning system is to alert motorists they are approaching an occupied crosswalk. This in-pavement visual warning gives motorists traveling at the posted speed limits up to 45 mph sufficient time to slow down and if necessary come to a stop to allow pedestrians in a crosswalk to safely cross the street. In- pavement amber LED flashing lights visual warning systems prove to be especially effective at crosswalks were pedestrian traffic is 100 or more per day crossing the street. It needs to be emphasized, that this in-pavement visual warning system is primarily for motorists, and is most effective at mid-block and uncontrolled intersection crosswalks where typically there are no traffic signals or other traffic control devices present. It is the actions taken by motorists to slow down or stop, once they have seen the in-pavement amber LED flashing lights, that ensure the safety of pedestrians in the crosswalk. At speeds of 35 mph or less, motorists have sufficient time to respond to the flashing amber lights at a distance of 400 feet from the crosswalk. At speed in excess of 40 mph, motorists need a distance of 600 feet, or greater, in order to have sufficient time to respond appropriately to the flashing amber lights. Pedestrians must still be alert to oncoming traffic and take normal precautions while crossing the street. One significant advantage of an in-pavement amber LED flashing lights visual warning system from a traffic engineering point of view, is that it does not unnecessarily impede traffic flow. Whereas, ordinary traffic signals at pedestrian crosswalks require traffic to stop during a red signal indication, even if the crosswalk is not occupied, this system permits traffic to proceed with caution if there are no pedestrians in the crosswalk. The in-pavement amber LED flashing lights visual warning system currently being tested in the United States is the Pedestrian Crosswalk Warning System, also referred to as the as Smart CrosswalkTM, developed by LightGuard Systems, Inc. of Santa Rosa, California (http://www.crosswalks.com), utilizing amber AllnGaP LEDs provided by Hewlett-Packard of San Jose, California (http://www.hp.com/go/LED_lamps). System Configuration The configuration of a typical mid-block crosswalk system is illustrated in Figure 1. Amber LED modules are placed into the surface of. the street along each side of the crosswalk facing on- coming traffic. The beam angle of the amber LED light is set to about 8° with respect to the surface of the street to provide visibility to motorists at a distance up to 1500 feet (457 meters) from the crosswalk. Placement of the LED modules is such that they are located between the normal :,,ehicle tire paths. The LED modules are unidirectional, do not flash across the surface of the crosswalk so that the flashing LEDs are not seen by pedestrians. This was a requirement of the California Traffic Control Devices Committee, for two reasons, when testing of crosswalk in- pavement amber LED flashing lights visual warning systems was first approved. The first reason is pedestrians in crosswalks must not see the flashing amber lights and, as a result, feel a false sense of safety that does not exist. The second reason is that many pedestrians in a crosswalk, especially when walking in opposite directions, would obscure the flashing amber lights from the view of approaching motorists. BOLLARD GATE ENTRY WiTH INTERRUPTIBLE INFRARED SIGNAL BEAM CONTROL UNIT AND SOLAR PANEL POWER SUPPLY IN-PAVEMENTMO WiTH FLASr LED LIGHTS i .. PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALK SIGN WITH FLASHING ~___~AMBER LED LIGHTS Figure 1. Basic Configuration of a Crosswalk In-Pavement Amber LED Flashing Lights Visual Warning System. Module Height Above Pavement Surface Less Than % inch (19 mm) Flashing Amber LEDs Figure 2. Unidirectional Amber LED Module. The unidirectional amber LED modules, shown in Figure 2, are permanently imbedded directly into the pavement, facing down roadway away from the crosswalk, protruding above the surface of the pavement less than 3A inch (19 mm). Automatic activation bollard gates are placed at each end of the crosswalk to activate the system. The bollards also provide low level amber LED illumination of the crosswalk entrance to enhance pedestrian safety when stepping offthe curb onto the street crosswalk during nighttime hours. An electronic control unit provides system functions such as date, time, direction of pedestrian travel, pedestrian traffic count data collection, and adjustable crossing time and LED flash rate. The system operates off 12 volts dc and, although typically operated off an ac power line source, may be totally operated off solar cells and batteries, with no 120/220 volt ac electrical connection required, a significant cost advantage. The system is only activated when a pedestrian enters the crosswalk to cross the street. Otherwise, the system is in an off-state. The use of bollard gateways at each end of the crosswalk is the preferred method of activating the system, since no action by a pedestrian, other than walking between the bollards, is required. When a pedestrian enters the crosswalk, after first determining it is safe to cross the street, the pedestrian breaks an infrared beam signal passing between two bollards. This infrared beam signal is designed to sense direction of motion, activating the system with pedestrian motion entering the crosswalk and ignoring pedestrian motion leaving the crosswalk. The amber LEDs flash in unison, in both directions along the street, at a rate set for maximum recognition by approaching motorists. Pedestrians crossing the street do not see the flashing lights. Timing is set in the control unit to allow sufficient time for a pedestrian to cross the street, typically about 21 seconds for a two lane roadway. Once triggered, the system may be retriggered by a second pedestrian entering the crosswalk, from either end of the crosswalk, before the first pedestrian leaves the crosswalk. A standard diamond shaped amber pedestrian crosswalk sign is place along side the street at a distance of 200 feet (61 meters) up-roadway to alert motorists. A second diamond shaped amber pedestrian sign, illustrated in Figure 3, is placed adjacent to the bollard gates at the crosswalk entrance. This additional sign has three flashing amber LED lights providing a secondary alert to motorists that the crosswalk is occupied. These flashing lights also let pedestrians know the in- pavement amber LED flashing lights visual warning system is active. Flashing Amber LED Lights Figure 3. The Diamond Shaped Pedestrian Crosswalk Sign with Flashing Amber LED Lights, Placed at Bollard Gate Entries To a Crosswalk. Some system installations utilize a pedestrian operated push button to activate the system. In these installations, a pole mounted control box containing the bush button, a small sign with the .words "CROSS WITH CAUTION", and a row of four flashing amber LEDs, as shown in Figure 4, is placed adjacent to the entrance to crosswalk,. This row of four flashing amber LEDs indicates to pedestrians the in-pavement amber LED flashing lights visual warning system is active. The words "CROSS WITH CAUTION" are to remind pedestrians to maintain vigilance for their own safety by paying attention to traffic conditions while crossing the street. Flashing Amber LED Lights Figure 4. Pedestrian Operated Pushbutton with Flashing LEDs / "CROSS WITH CAUTION" Sign. 4 LED Flash Rate The LED flash rate, developed through testing across many test site installations, has proven to be effective in catching the eyes and, therefore, the attention of motorist as they approach a crosswalk. The flash rate, as shown in Figure 5, consists of 6 cycles of 40 milliseconds ON, 100 milliseconds OFF, followed by 250 milliseconds of steady state ON. LEDs = ON LEDs = OFF --~.~ 40 ms 250 ms ~ Steady ON ~ 100 ms 100 ms ~ Flash period = 1190 ms Next Flash Period Figure 5. LED Flash Rate Diagram. Quantity of 50.4 Flash Periods per Minute. Quantity of N Flash Periods = Flash Duration. The duration of the flash rate, electronically set in the system control unit, is based on the width of the roadway and is maintained for the length of time necessary for a pedestrian to safely cross the street. Why Amber LEDs? Initial versions of crosswalk in-pavement flashing lights visual warning systems used xenon strobes. These early xenon strobe versions were not successful. Xenon strobes provide a flash of white light, although visible in nighttime conditions, is not readily visible in bright sunlight or in adverse weather conditions such as fog. Xenon strobes also require considerable power to operate, and because they burn out, do not provide a long term light source without the need of periodic relamping. Amber colored light is used because, internationally, a flashing amber light is understood to mean caution. Also, people who have red-green color vision deficiencies see the color amber the same as do those with normal color vision. AIInGaP LEDs were chosen because they produce high intensity saturated amber light, which provides the necessary visibility in both bright sunlight and adverse weather conditions including fog. This is the same high intensity amber LED light being used in over-highway variable message signs and used in roadway work zone trailer mounted message signs, trailer mounted arrow boards, and barricade warning lights. Unlike xenon strobes that produce high energy light essentially in all directions, LEDs provide a narrow angle beam of high energy amber light that is easily focused down roadway which catches the eyes of approaching motorists. LEDs, being semiconductor devices, can be flashed indefinitely without any damaging effects. A minimum of power is required to operate the LEDs, and due to their very high reliability and the fact that LEDs do not bum out, they provide a dependable light source that does not require periodic relamping. 5 A Remedy for a Dangerous Situation A dangerous situation is when a motorist pulls around to pass a vehicle stopped in the lane of traffic in front of him/her, not realizing the vehicle'in front is stopped at a crosswalk to allow a pedestrian in the crosswalk to cross the street. The probability of the passing motorist hitting the pedestrian in extremely high. especially at night and/or during adverse weather conditions, as shown in Figure 6a. With an installed crosswalk in-pavement amber LED flashing lights visual warning system, the motorist approaching the stopped vehicle in the lane in front of him/her would also see the in-pavement flashing amber LED lights. The motorist would then be visually alerted that he/she is approaching an occupied crosswalk and that a pedestrian, not yet in view. is crossing the street, and that is the reason the car in front is stopped. The motorist is now alerted to also come a stop as his/her vehicle reaches the crosswalk, as shown in Figure 6b. Without In-Pavement Flashing Amber LED Lights. With In-Pavement Flashing Amber LED Lights. Figure 6. In-Pavement Flashing Amber LED Lights Alerts a Motorist Passing an In-Lane Stopped Vehicle that an Occupied Crosswalk is Directly In Front. Added safety at Railroad Grade Crossings This same technology can be applied to railroad grade crossings. Railroad grade crossing, in conjunction with automated red signal indications, may, or may not use automatically actuated gate arms that lower to block traffic from crossing the tracks as a train approaches the crossing. The problem is that some motorists take a dangerous risk and drive around these lowered gate arms to beat the train and cross the railroad tracks to save some time, as indicated in Figure 7a. Many do not make it. The train hits the vehicle and the occupants are killed, and the train can even possibly be derailed. Installing four quadrant gate arms to prevent such accidents has been discussed. The problem here is the possibility of trapping a vehicle on the tracks between lowered four quadrant gate arms with no apparent avenue of escape. The installation of an in-pavement red LED flashing lights visual warning system, in place of a four quadrant gate arm system, as illustrated in Figure 7b, may prevent such accidents. A motorist attempting to drive around a lowered gate arm would see a row of flashing red LEDs across the surface of the road in front of him/her, acting as a psychological barrier of bright, vivid red light, providing a visual warning to the driver of impending danger, causing the driver to have second thoughts, and make a no-go decision against driving around the gate arms to beat the train. Without In-Pavement Flashing Red LED Lights. With In-Pavement Flashing Red LED Lights. Figure 7. In-Pavement Flashing Red LED Lights Alerts a Motorist of Impending Danger While Attempting to Beat a Train at a Grade Crossing. Testing of In-pavement Amber LED Flashing Lights Visual Warning System Extensive testing and evaluation of crosswalk in-pavement amber LED flashing lights visual warning systems has taken place within the State of California under the auspices of the California Traffic Control Devices Committee (CTCDC). Initially, 3 test sights in the City of Santa Rosa were installed and tested in 1994 to prove concept. A quantity of 8 additional installations in California cities have also been successfully installed. These include Fort Bragg (1 4-way intersection, state highway, January, 1997), Lafayette (1 T-intersection and I mid- block, February, 1997), Willits (1 T-intersection, state highway, February, 1997), Petaluma (1 mid-block, July, 1997), Orinda, at JFK University (1 mid-block, July, 1997), Thousand Oaks (1 mid-block, July, 1998), and Suisun City (1 mid-block, October, 1998). Other installations outside of California have also proved beneficial towards improving pedestrian safety. These include Orlando, Florida (1 mid-block, March, 1997), the Island of Saipan (2 mid-blocks, August, 1997), Kirkland, Washington (2 mid-blocks, ,October, 1997), Reno-Tahoe International Airport, Reno, Nevada (1 passenger crosswalk, July, 1998), Olympic Golf and Country Club, Seattle, Washington (1 mid-block, October, 1998), and Seattle University, Seattle, Washington ( 1 mid-block, October, 1998). So successful were the two test site crosswalk installations in Kirkland, Washington, the City of Kirkland has installed a total of 18 crosswalk in-pavement amber LED flashing lights visual warning systems throughout the city. The most recent studies were funded by the State of California Office of Traffic Safety~ the US Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC, in conjunction with the University of North Carolina Highway Safety Research Center. Results of these studies strongly recommends the use of in-pavement amber LED flashing lights visual warning systems to improve pedestrian safety in crosswalks. The latest evaluation report, An Evaluation of a Crosswalk Warning System Utilizing In-Pavement Flashing Lights, dated April 10, 1998, is available. Contact Whitlock & Weinburger Transportation, Inc., 2200 Range Avenue, Suite 102, Santa Rosa, California 95403, telephone 707-542-9500, or contact the California Office of Traffic Safety, Sacramento, California. A Brief Summary of Test Results Independent evaluations of California test sites show consistent and compelling results indicating a definitive acceptance of motorist to this type of occupied pedestrian crosswalk warning system. Data from six test sites in California, in the form of non-weighted averages, are summarized in Table 1. The data indicates the percentage of drivers yielding to pedestrians in crosswalks increases form a of 30% to 58% during daytime hours, and increases from a low 13% to an encouraging 71% during nighttime hours. Table 1. Percentage of Drivers Yielding to Pedestrians and Advanced Braking Distance for Six Crosswalk In-Pavement Amber LED Flashing Lights Visual Warning System Test Sites in California. Data in the Form of Non-Weighted Averages.~ Percentage of Drivers Yielding to Advanced Vehicle Braking Pedestrians Distance (feet) Without System I With System Without System With System Daytime Daytime Daytime Daytime Location Nighttime Nighttime Nighttime Nighttime Santa Rosa, CA 25% 64% 152 ft 220 fi Summerfield Road 1% 87% 187 ft 268 ft Fort Bragg, CA 47% 85% 106 ft 142 ft Main Street 1 I% 95% 90 fi 216 fi Lafayette, CA 6% 21% 130 fl 127 fi Mt. Diablo Blvd. 1% 53% 93 ft 174 fl Lafayette, CA 8% 32% 173 fi 2t0 ft Pleasant Hill Road 2% 39% 201 fi 318 ft Petaluma, CA 68% 87% 99 ft 119 ft Petaluma Blvd. S. 56% 83% 97 fi 123 fi Willits, CA 26% 61% 170 fi 193 ft Main Street 6% 66% 141 fi 228 fi Non-Weighted 30% 58% 138 fi, 168 ft Average 13% 71% 135 ft 221 fi The data from Table 1, converted to non-weighted average percentage increases and presented in Table 2, shows motorists yielding to pedestrians in crosswalks increases by 158% during daytime hours and increases by an impressive 840% during nighttime hours. The advanced braking distance when approaching a crosswalk increases by 23% during daytime hours and increases by 70% during nighttime hours. Wh~ lock & Wcmburgcr Fransponat on. nc., An Eva uat on ofa Crosswa k Warn ng System Utilizing In-Pavcmcm Flashing IJighls~ Sama Rosa. Calilbrnia~ April lO. 1998 8 Table 2. Percentage Increase in Number of Drivers Yielding to Pedestrians and Percent Increase in Advanced Braking Distance for Six Crosswalk in-Pavement Amber LED Flashing Lights Visual Warning System Test Sites in California. Data, in the Form of Non-Weighted Averages, is Derived From Table 1. Percent Increase in Percent Increase in Drivers Yielding to Vehicle Braking Pedestrians Distance Location Daytime Nighttime Daytime Nighttime Santa Rosa, CA Summerfield Road 156% 860% 45% 43% Fort Bragg, CA Main Street 81% 764% 34% 140% Lafayette, CA Mt. Diablo Blvd. 250% 520% -2% 87% Lafayette, CA Pleasant Hill Road 300% 1850% 21% 58% Petaluma, CA Petaluma Blvd. S. 28% 48% 20% 27% Willits, CA Main Street 135% 1000% 22% 64% Non-Weighted Average 158% 840% 23% 70% Economics of Installation Play an Important Roll The cost of a traffic/pedestrian signal installation at a crosswalk typically runs in the neighborhood of $100,000. An in-pavement amber LED flashing lights visual warning system installation at a mid-block crosswalk across a two lane roadway cost under $20,000. As this figure indicates, the installation of an effective crosswalk in-pavement amber LED flashing lights visual warning system can be accomplished for about 1/5th the cost of traffic/pedestrian control signals. US Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Authorization for Testing Traffic engineering authorities in the United States wishing to install crosswalk in-pavement amber LED flashing lights visual warning system test sites for evaluation may apply to and receive authorization from the FHWA. Request for authorization should conform to the testing guidelines set forth in Section lA-6 of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). Authorization is granted under the title FHWA IV-138(E) Pedestrian Crosswalk LED Warning Lights. It is the intent of the FHWA to use data gathered from authorized test sites as justification for recommending national standards and warrant definitions for crosswalk in- pavement amber LED flashing lights visual warning systems be written by the National Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for inclusion in the MUTCD. Once these national standards and warrants have been included in the MUTCD, traffic authorities within the United States may use these standards and warrant definitions to install permanent systems throughout their jurisdictions without first having to receive prior authorization. Traffic engineering authorities in the United States wishing to install in-pavement amber LED flashing lights visual warning systems for field testing should contact: Michael F. Trentacoste, Director, Office of Highway Safety, FHWA, 400 7th Street, Washington, DC 20590, Attention: Mr. Harry Taylor. Reference: Request to Experiment-Pedestrian Crosswalk LED Warning Lights IV-138(E). 9 Caltrans Moves To Adopt State Standards for California After years of extensive testing in the state of California, the CTCDC, on July 17, 1997, recommended to Caltrans that crosswalk in-pavement amber LED flashing lights visual warning systems be adopted for use throughout the State of California. Based on this recommendation, Caltrans has undertaken the task of developing standards and guidelines, pursuant to the California vehicle Code Section 21400, towards making these systems standard traffic warning devices in California. When Caltrans issues these standards and guidelines, cities and counties within the state of California may then proceed to install permanent crosswalk in-pavement amber LED flashing lights visual warning systems at critical crosswalk locations within their jurisdictions. For further information, contact: Caltrans, Traffic Operations, Office of Signs, Delineation, and Technical Support, 1120 N Street, MS 36, P.O. Box 942873, Sacramento, Califom!a 94273-0001; Telephone: 1-916-654-4551; FAX: 1-916-653-6080. Awards for Enhanced Pedestrian Safety Awards have been given for the added safety provided to pedestrians by the installation of crosswalk in-pavement amber LED flashing lights visual waming systems. These awards include: · The California Helen Putnam Award of Excellence, awarded to the City of Santa Rosa, February, 1997. Presented.by California Governor Pete Wilson, for the City's successful efforts installing and testing of the first LED lighted crosswalks to enhance pedestrian safety in California. · A Community Excellence Award from the Washington State Traffic Safety Commission, awarded to the City of Kirkland Washington, April, 1998. Presented by John Moffatt, Director of the Traffic Safety Commission and the Pedestrian Safety Coordinator for the Federal Highway Administration, for the successful installation and testing of the City's first two LED crosswalk test sites. · San Francisco Bay Area Metropolitan Transportation Commission's (MTC) "Transportation Award of Merit", September, 1998. Awarded to LightGuard Systems for their development of the first crosswalk in-pavement amber LED flashing lights visual warning system. 10 KJRKLAND'S EXPERJENCE WITH 1N-PAVEMENT FLASHING LIGHTS AT CROSSWALKS~ David Godfrey, P.E., Traffic Engineering Manager Tony Maz.zella, Neighborhood Traffic Control Program Coordinalor2 ITEflMSA Annual Meeting, February 8, 1999, Lynnwood, Washington ]nlroduction Located in the Puget Sound region, Kirkland Washington is a suburb of Seattle and has a population of approximately 50,000. The Kirkland City Council recognizes pedestrian safety and walkablitiy as key components in the livability of the City, and pedestrianism has been a theme of the City for some time. The In-Pavement Flashing Lights Crosswalk Warning System CFlashing Crosswalk") is a series of flashing light units installed just below the pavement surface along the crosswalk lines and facing traffic. Its purpose is to warn drivers of the presence of a pedestrian about to cross or already in the crosswalk at uncontrolled intersections. In an eft'on to increase pedestrian safety, the first two flashing crosswalks installed outside of California were installed in fall of 1997, at mid-block locations in Kirkland This paper describes Kirkland's experience with flashing crosswalks, including how the system works and how it is installed, effectiveness, response from the public and application criteria. In general, the flashing crosswalks are considered to be a success both in terms of their effectiveness in causing vehicles to respond to pedestrians and in terms of their public support. In fact, at the time of this writing, Kirkland is receiving bids for an additional 14 systems. Hislory In 1993. in response to an unusually high incidence of pedestriaWvehicle collisions resulting in a significant number of pedestrian fatalities and injuries, the City of Santa Rosa, California introduced a new concept in proactive pedestrian warning systems for uncontrolled crosswalks, known formally as an In-Pavement Flashing Lights Crosswalk Warning System. The idea for the system originated with a private citizen who is a pilot and believed that the strobe lights used on runways to help pilots land their planes might be useful in providing greater protection for pedestrians at crosswalks. Th'S paper was prepared for TRB's6'h Nanonal' Conference on Transportation' Planmng' for Small and Medium- Sized Communities (September. 1998; Spokane, WA) under the title Success in Redesigning Main Streets for Pedestrians. - City of Kirkland, Washington, 123 - 5th Avenue, Kirkland, WA 98033~6189 (425) 828-1214/fax (425) 803- 1904/dgodli'ey&ci.kirkland.wa.us Godfrey and Mazzella Page 2 to study the effectiveness of the device. In 1994-95, the system was installed at three locations in Santa Rosa and between 1996-97 at locations in the California cities of Foil Bragg, Lafayette, West Hollywood, Willits and Orinda, and two locations in the City of Kirkland, Washington. Funding to evaluate the effectiveness of the device in Kirkland was provided through the Federal Highway Administration Pedestrian Facilities Program which is being conducted by the University of Noilh Carolina Traffic Safety Research Center. The City of Kirkland first became aware of the device through a communication by the State of Washington Traffic Safety Commission (WTSC) which knew of the City's interest in pedestrian safety innovation. Based upon conversations with the manufacturer (LightGurad Systems, Inc, Santa Rosa, CA) and other user cities along with materials provided by those parties, we decided to propose to our City Council that we experiment with the device. WTSC generously offered to provide $10,000 toward the installation costs. SySlem Descriplio~ The flashing crosswalk systems installed at Kirkland consist of heads imbedded in the pavement, a controller and push-button activation devices, as shown in Figure 1. Heads were installed at seven locations perpendicular to the crosswalk across both approaches and across all lanes to incrcase visibility and command attention. Illumination is provided by LED banks in each head which sit behind a clear lens. At the recommendation of the manufacturer, the heads are mounted at varying Iow angles to the roadway centerline, and aim at points 250, 300 and 350 feet down the roadway and at various positions across the traveled way (see Figure 1). Earlier California devices used plastic heads to contain the LED units; snow plowing considerations in Kirkland required design of a snow plow resistant head. This requirement caused the manufacturer to develop a more durable aluminum head which bolts to a recessed plate. Recently, an even lower profile head has been developed. The winter of 1997-1998 was a relatively mild one in the Puget Sound and the devices were not rigorously tested. Even in the worst weather years, Kirkland does not see much snow plowing and rubber bladed plows are used. All new locations will use heads with a lower profile which will minimize the effects of snow plowing. The device is controlled by a solid state controller unit mounted in a standard type NEMA housing. The controller is capable of flashing the LEDs for a variable amount of time, counting the number of pedestrian activations, and dimming the displays; a time clock can initiate a constant activation or allow the head to burn steadily. Because it is'designed to work from a ~J volt power supply, the cabinet also contains a back-up battery which can power the crosswalk for several hours of operation. The flash rate of the LEDs is a proprietary rate consisting of, in simple terms, two quick OhS followed by a longer on followed by a long off. This flash cycle is approximately 3 seconds long and was designed to maximize the effects that attract viewer's attention while not causing negative side effects to those sensitive to flashing lights. Kirkland sets the flasher to remain active for a time interval in seconds equal to the number of feet of the crossing divided by 3. Godfrey and Mazzella Page 3 Observations show that this time is reasonable for most pedestrians. Optimally, the time would bc long enough to protect the pedestrians but not long enough to show vehicles flashing heads when no pedestrians are present. Pedestrians activate the device, wait for traffic to clear the crosswalk or come to a stop, and then begin to walk across the street: Studies in Kirkland show that the 85th percentile walking speed is considerably more than 3 feet per second so that the extra time allowed for in the crossing interval used for vehicles to stop is compensated for by the walking speed. Several methods for activation have been used by practitioners ir/different areas. The most straightforward of these methods uses a push button similar to those used in standard traffic signal installations and are used in Kirkland. The buttons used in Kirkland's installations include FIGURE I: SCHENATIC OF TYPICAL KIRKLAND FLASHING CROSSWALK B) CUT AWAY VIEW OF IN'PAVEHENT HEAl) an array of LEDs on the button mounting housing that flash when the in-pavement heads flash. Pushing the buttgn while the Crosswalks is flashing causes the timer to reset and a fresh timing interval to begin. Observations in Kirkland have not shown that pedestrian buttons cause a "false sense of security" as evidenced by caution pedestrians use after they push the activation button. Activation schemes that are passive to the pedestrian are used following the assumption that pedestrians will exercise more caution ii' they do not know the crosswalk is flashing. In other Godfrey and Ma:,vella Page 4 cities, microwave detectors have been used with limited success; the devices were not able to detect 100% of pedestrians. Video detection as used in traffic signals have been used with more rdiability. LightGuard Systems, Inc. has developed a bollard system that activates the heads when a pedestrian passes between the boltards. Whitlock & Weinberger~ indicate that an automatic detection system is more appropriate than a push button system. ( '()SIs The first two systems in Kirkland were installed for $25,000 (,plus $10,000 in grant funds from the Washington Traffic Safety Commission). The City purchased equipment from LightGuard, Inc. and they were installed by City crews. A recently bid road project had two flashing crosswalks (installed) and the low bidder submitted a unit cost of $18,000 each. The latest bids received on a project to install 14 crosswalks came in at $15,000 per location. ],.¥udlaliOn procedures 5iling and installing tile in-pavement heads is the most complicated portion of the installation procedure. Itl Kirkland the heads were aligned with the pavement markings of the existing zebra sl31c crosswalk the zebra stripes were laid out to be outside wheel paths (figure la). Manufacturer's recommendations were followed for the number of heads to be used. Once the locations and number of heads were determined, alignment relative to the centerline was set aLzain following manufacturer's recommendations. This was acco.mplished by stationing a person at the head and another then at the appropriate upstream location. Working after dark, a laser leveling device was sited on the target and then rotated across the head location and the appropriate angle marked on the pavement. Simpler methods for aiming the heads can also be used satsifactorily. At the location of each head, pavement ,,vas excavated by heating it with a torch and scooping it out using hand tools to make a hole just slightly larger than tile base plate of the head (figure 1 b). A narrow bar about a yard long was bolted to the base plate, and placed in the excavation so that the bar suspended the base plate in the hole and ensured that the head was properly aligned relative to the centerline and flush with the pavement. Fast curing epoxy poured around the base adheres it to the pavement. When the base is set, the flashing head is bolted to the base and connected to the wires coming from the base. Wire from the pushbut~ons and heads is run across the pavement in sawcuts and sealed in a manner similar to that used for inductive loops at traffic signals. Coriduit carries the wires under the curbs from the pavement to the push button locations. 'At the first two Kirkland locations, overhead illuminated signing was already present in the median, and this made a convenient location for the cabinet installations and soume for AC power. Because the s3'stem runs on a,9 : Whitlock & Weinberger Transportation, Inc., An Evaluation ora Crosswalk Warning System Utilizing In-pm, ement F/mhing.Light.~, ApriJ, 1998, p. 2 Godfrey and Mazzella Page 5 voh power supply, solar power is an option, but since AC power was readily available, solar power was not used. Before and Afler Study Whitlock & Weinberger Transportation, Inc. (W-Trans) of Santa Rosa, California, under a contract with FHWA (through University of North Carolina Highway Safety Research Center) conducted before and after studies on the effectiveness of flashing cr0sswalks~. Data was collected using conflict/behavioral sampling techniques since collecting adequate accident data would take five to ten years of after experience. A staged "test" pedestrian was used to ensure consistency; driver reaction to the pedestrian both looking to cross the street and stepping into the roadway was measured using four variables: · Approach speed (from 500 to 300 feet from the crosswalk). · Travel time and deceleration (from 500 to 100 feet from the crosswalk) · Braking distance (distance from the crosswalk where vehicles began to brake) · Driver reaction (what did the driver do: yield to pedestrian, react but did not yield, did not yield) Data was collected manually using stop watches and markers pre set at 100, 300 and 500 feet in advance of the crosswalk. Measurements were made both before and after flashing crosswalk installation in both daytime and nighttime conditions. Table 1 summarize the results of before and after studies at each location. The data suggests that thc devices are effective in both increasing the number of drivers that yield to pedestrians and the distm~ce from the crosswalk where drivers apply theipbrakes. Godfrey and Mazzella Page 6 TABLE 1 Results of Before and After Studies on two sites in Kirkland Before Location Heading Light After Central Way East Day Before After Night Before After West Day Before After Night Before After NE 124th Street East Day Before After Night Before After West Day Before After Night Before After Distance from crosswalk when brakes applied (ft.) 200 278 115 238 192 244 175 270 209 214 204. 244 271 312 266 304 Drivers yielding lo Peds (Percent) 62 92 16 100 59 94 .27 98 46 85 65 93 55 92 48 97 Notably, the night time yielding pementage at Central Way in the eastbound direction went from 16 to 100 percent. In fact the lowest yielding after percentage at Central Way was 92 percent. Increases in braking distances were similar to the increases in yielding drivers. Results were similar but not as dramatic at the NE .124th Street location. The performance of the devices was similar at most of the other 10 locations covered in the W- ' Trans study. This led to their finding that "The concept of flashing amber lights embedded in the pavement at uncontrolled crosswalks clearly has a positive effect in enhancing a drivers a,wareness of crosswalks and modifying driving habits to be more favorable to pedestrians.'s Following installation of the two flashing crosswalks, and an article on the device which appeared in a City publication which is sent to all households, the City received many comments by phone, letter and in-person from the public. Almost all were highly favorable and supportive of additional installations. Specific statements included: "l'm really impressed I do a lot of walking...at least now you can ggt across the street...l'd like to see them all over town." "We think they're great, especially when you can't see well, like in times of darkness. We love it for kids walking to school." "They sure draw altenlion to the crosswalk. Now l.feel more comfortable sending my son downtown and l feel more comfortable driving." Ibld, Godfrey and Ma?~ella Page 7 The only negative comment came from a bicyclist who expressed concern over the possibility of striking a lighthead while riding his bike. Lightheads were away from the wheelpath of a bicycle, and in future installations we will continue to work to avoid this potential conflict. A more formal recognition of Kirkland's effort to improve the pedestrian environment came from WTSC which presented the City with the first annual Community Excellence award for renovation in pedestrian facilities. With the award came a $1,000 grant. Since the installation of the two flashing crosswalks, Kirkland has received numerous inquiries from other local government jurisdictions about the device. The City of Seattle has installed the system at a busy crosswalk near a private university campus; the City of University Place, Washington plans an installation as part of a roadway improvement project and we expect other localities to follow suit. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) has constituted a technical committee to develop application guidelines. l.stallation Criteria When the City Council contemplated construction of an additional set of flashing crosswalks, it became obvious that a system was needed to select and prioritize locations. Since the City had recently completed a ~;ystem of ranking other Capital Improvement Projects, a similar process was envisioned for flashing crosswalk prioritization. A committee of citizens that had worked on the earlier priority ranking was reconvened to develop ranking criteria. City Staff prepared an ioitial set of criteria and then ratted a set of test locations to get an idea of how the criteria work. A major point of ~scussion that is a sample of the types of discussion that took place was whether to give more points to locations that already have protective devices. One theory held that ifa location has improvements such as medians and overhead signing, it is a good candidate for flashing crosswalks since the level of improvement reflects its validity as a location into which more improvements should go. The other philosophy said that flashing crosswalks at locations already benefiting from improvements should be delayed with improvements coming at less developed locations first. This second approach was adopted. Similar discussions took place around other issues with the criteria ultimately being approved as shown in Table 2. 0 An Evaluation of a Crosswalk Warning System Utilizing In-Pavement Flashing Lights April 10, 1998 Studv Conducted By W- Trans 2200 Range Avenue, Suite 102 Santa Rosa, CA 95403 (707) 542-9500 Steve Weinberger, Project Manager sweinberge~w-trans, com Primarv Funding Provided By State of California Office of Traffic Safety Additional Funding Provided B¥ Federal Highway Administration through the University of North Carolina Highway Safety Research Center Executive Summary In response to an unusually high incidence of pedestrian/vehicle collisions, the City of Santa Rosa, Califumia, initiated a new concept in proactive pedestrian warning systems for uncontrolled crosswalks in 1993 after experiencing a significant number of pedestrian fatalities and injuries. A private citizen came forth to the City with an idea for a flashing device to be installed on the pavement surface along the crosswalk lines and facing traffic. The In-Pavement Flashing Lights Crosswalk Warning System's purpose was to warn the driving public of the presence of pedestrians in the crosswalk at uncontrolled intersections. The citizen is a pilot and the idea came to him when he thought that airport runway strobe lights used in landing his plane might be useful at crosswalks. The experimental system consists ora series of flashing light units which are embedded in the pavement adjacent to a marked crosswalk. The lights reflect toward the oncoming traffic to warn drivers of a pedestrian's presence. The California Traffic Control Devices Committee allowed the City of Santa Rosa to test the experimental device at selected locations. The California Office of Traffic Safety also granted funds to the City to study the effectiveness of the device. The private citizen developed the In-Pavement Flashing Lights Crosswalk Warning System, while the City was responsible for the construction and installation requirements of the device and the analysis of the device through a consultant. The system was evenVaally installed at three locations in the City of Santa Rosa, two in 1994 and one in 1995. Those test sites were evaluated and the findings presented in a report, Analysis of an Experimental Pedestrian Crosswalk Device, W-Trans/TJKM, July 17, 1995. In 1996, the California Traffic Control Devices Committee (CTCDC) endorsed the testing of the system in additional California cities in order to determine if the device should be sent on to the California State DeparUnant of Transportation for standardization. Evaluation of an Experimental Crosswalk Warning System dated July 1, 1997, presented an evaluation of the ln-Pavemetu Flashing Lights Crosswalk' Warning System based on the operation and experience in the Cities of Fort Bragg, Lafayette, Petaluma, Willits. Additional evaluation was conducted at one of the original Santa Rosa test sites two years following the initial installation of the device. Primary funding for that study was provided primarily by the California Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) through the Cities of Fort Bragg, Lafayette, West Hollywood and Willits. This report presents an update to the Evaluation of an Experimental Crosswalk Warning System based on additional experience in the Cities of Orinda, California and Kirkland, Washington. Funding for this update was provided through the Federal Highway Administration's Pedestrian Facilities Program which is being conducted by the University of North Carolina Highway Research Center. Findings The concept of flashing amber lights embedded in the pavement at uncontrolled crosswalks clearly has a positive effect in enhancing a driver's awareness of crosswalks and modifying driving habits tO be more favorable to pedestrians. The In-Pavement Flashing Lights Crosswalk Warning System has a much more significant effect in enhancing a driver's awareness of crosswalks during adverse weather conditions such as darkness, fog, and rain. Over the long term, the affect of the crosswalk warning system will degrade slightly during daytime conditions from initial implementation of the system. However, the resulting long term conditions still represent improved vehicle reaction characteristics compared with conditions before installation. The In-Pavement Flashing Lights Crosswalk Warning System has the potential to be an effective traffic control device since it fulfills a need, commands attention, conveys a clear meaning, commands respect of road users, and gives adequate time for proper response. An automatic detection system is more appropriate than a push button system and can result in less confusion for the pedestrian. A recently demonstrated "bollard gateway system" which utilizes two parallel modulated visible red beams seems to be the most promising automatic activation technology. The warning system seems to be particularly effective at locations where there is at least a moderate flow of pedestrians ( 100 pedestrian crossing per day ). At speeds less than 35 mph, drivers seem to be able to respond properly if at least 400 feet of sight distance is provided to the warning system. At speed greater than 40 mph, drivers seem to have difficulty stopping safely if less than 600 feet of sight distance is available prior to the warning lights. The presence ora lighting device at the outer edge of the navel lane may be a hazard to some bicyclists. Each successive prototype of the lighting devices which has been tested has been superior in terms of their physical durability. Further improvements to its durability are still warranted. However, the desires of the market will dictate further physical evolution of the device. Recommendations Since the concept of flashing amber lights embedded in the pavement at uncontrolled crosswalks clearly has merit in modifying driving habits to be more favorable to pedestrians, further use of this concept should be pursued at appropriate locations. The current installation pattern shou!d be maintained as a standard. However, the outermost device should be placed to avoid the path of bicyclists to the extent possible. The device should be no higher than aA-inch which is the maximum h~ight of a standard lane delineator button. Amber flashing lights seem to the most appropriate color based on vehicle laws and considering a person's visual capabilities. In the long run, an automatic pedestrian activation system seems to be more appropriate than a pedestrian push button. This allows the pedestrian to cross with caution and at their own discretion. The most promising technology to date has been a "bollard gateway system." Appropriate street lighting should be considered at crosswalks where the system is applied. Street lighting will allow the pedestrian to be more visible at night and wash out the glow of the lighting devices so they do not distract the pedestrian. Federal standardization through the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) and consistency with crosswalk laws in states other than California should be investigated. An organization such as the Institute of Transportation Engineers would be an appropriate organization to pursue this course of action. Based on the experience of the initial test sites, it is recommended that the following guidelines be met for installation of the In-Pavement Flashing Lights Crosswalk Warning System. The development of guidelines will be important in focusing use of the device where it will be most effective and maintaining its effectiveness through limiting the number of locations where it is present. · The Crosswalk Warning System should be used at uncontrolled crosswalks. · Main street average vehicular approach speeds should be 45 mph or less· · Main street traffic volumes should be between 5,000 and 30,000 vehicles per day. (It should be noted that the City of West Hollywood will be testing the device on Sunset Boulevard which has 55,000 vehicles per day.) · At speeds less than 35 mph, the approaching motorist should have visibility of the lighting devices at least 400 feet in advance of the crosswalk (measured from 3.5-foot eye height of the driver to I-inch height at the edge of the crosswalk line). At speeds greater than 35 mph, appropriate additional sight distance to the warning lights should be provided· · There should be no other crosswalks or traffic control devices at least 250 feet in advance or following the crosswalk location. · A minimum pedestrian volume of 100 pedestrians per day is suggested for application of the system· Agencies which install the system should ensure that the public is educated on the proper use of the device by both the driver and the pedestrian. [Fora full copy of the report, please e-mail a request including your phone and fax number to ]sweinber~er(~w-t tans.corn Home I En.qineerin.q & Planning Services Alternative Transportation Services I Roundabouts I Related Sites Development and Analysis of a Pedestrian Crossing Warning System by lan Lewin and John O'Farrell Lighting Sciences Inc. 7830 East Evans Road Scottsdale, Arizona 85260 Telephone: 480-991-9260 Fax: 480-991-0375 Paper no. 35 Introduction Conventional a-affic signals are used throughout the world to increase road safety. Such signals typically control vehicles but are also employed for control of pedestrian movement using the walking man or Walk/Don't Walk signs. Over the last I 0 ~vears, there has been a major trend towards the use of light emitting diodes (LED's) in traffic signals. Some cities have instituted major programs for the replacement of incandescent bulb traffic signals with those using LED's. Traffic signals used for crosswalk control are typically part ora signalized intersection, and thc pedestrian signals (walking man) are activated as pan of thc overall traffic control. However, there are many instances of crosswalks which have no signals, many of which occur at mid-block. Here, safety of thc pedestrian is dependent on the oncoming driver seeing the pedestrian on the crosswalk and slowing or stopping as appropriate. Clear visibility or a warning of thc presence ora pedestrian is essential to assist in avoidance of accidents, many of which in this situation are proven to be fatal. The authors have been involved over recent years in the development ora lighting system which it is believed increases pedestrian safety at crosswalks. The system consists of embedded roadway markers which arc internally lighted. Thasc arc arranged to provide an early warning to motorists ofthc presence of a pedestrian in the crosswalk. This paper describes the concept, application and cvalnation of such a system. Description of the System Lighting systems mounted in the roadway surface arc not new. Embedded devices using incandescent or quartz-halogen-lamps have been used for many years at airpom. These approach lights assist pilots in identifying the runway location during landing. They are constructed strongly enough m withstand the impact of planes landing or running over them. The concept of the pedestrian warning system is to employ an improved version of thc airport in-pavement light at roadway crosswalks. Figure I provides a plan view ora typical arrangement of such devices, illustrating the general direction of the beams of light. The light pattern fi.om each light is aimed so as to converge with that fi.om adjacent lights within an area which is roughly 33m (100 lt.) long in the approach lanes. A driver approaching the crosswalk therefore sees the complete row of warning lights. The location of this zone of overlapping beams can be adjusted at installation time by the aiming direction of the lights. A horizontal beam spread of slightly greater than ±5 degrees is created optically within each in-pavement light. The vertical beam spread is roughly *-3 degrees with the beam centered at 3 degrees above the horizontal. This covers the range of distances over which it is desirable to have the driver see the lighted markers. Figure 2 diagrammatically illustrates the horizontal and vertical coverage at given distances fi.om the lights. This figure also provides estimated stopping distances for various vehicle speeds. Figure 3 shows a test installation in Petaluma, California. The in-pavement lights do not operate continuously. They are activated by the presence ofa pedesu'ian in the crosswalk. This can be achieved most simply by button activation by the pedestrian, but other systems can be used. Activation by breaking of an ultrasound beam by the pedestrian stepping into the crosswalk can be used. Experiments also have been mR with an overhead video camera and image recognition software which is able to identify the presence ora person moving towards the crosswalk. Experiments have indicated that the conspicuity of the warning lighl system can be greatly improved by operation of the lights in a flashing mode. This can readily be achieved through the use of the light emitting diodes, coupled to electronic pulsing circuitry. LED's do not suffer from the problem of high inrush current associated with incandescent sources, and thus they are ideal for Figure 3. Warning light system with overlapping be. am patterns. pulse operation. All LED's in a particular installation flash in unison. Figure 4 illustrates a typical device. Overall height is approximately 38 mm (I.5 inches), with 13 mm (0.5 inches) protruding above the pavement surface. Sides of the unit are sloped at 30 degrees from the horizontal such that the unit does not present a hazard to bicyclists and motorcyclists. Overall width of the unit is roughly 154 mm (6 inches). A version of the device has been developed with a metal rail at each side to serve as riders to lift a snow plough blade for use in snow areas. Light Emitting Diodes LED's offer numerous advantages over incandescent sources: · Very long life. Because there is no filament to burn out, LED life is very substantially greater. Life in excess of 50,000 operating hours can be reasonably anticipated. · Reduced maintenance. Partially as a result of the long life, but also because of favorable lumen depreciation characteristics, maintenance intervals can be extended. · Reliability, With no filament lo burn out, premature or unexpected failure is uncommon with LED's. 2 Color. LED's emit light of a particular, deeply saturated color. Incandescent sources emit white light, and colored light for traffic control is achieved by the use of light absorbing colored lenses with Iow transmittance. LED's greatly outperform incandescent sources for colored applications where a miniature source is needed. lru-ush current. Incandescent sources deteriorate more rapidly in flashing applications due to application of voltage to the relatively cold filament. The filament at this instant has Iow resistance which results in inrush current. Inrush current can be in excess of 20 times the design operating current for the filament2. Physical size. The LED system can be made to be extremely compact because of the very small size of the LED's themselves. This is particularly important for in-pavement devices, as pan of the road surface must be removed to install the devices. The LED system can consist ora small "pancake", while the typical incandescent airport in-pavement light used a much larger buried cylinder. Module Height Above Pavement Surface Approximately 112 Inch Baseplate Depth Below Pavement Surface Approximately 1 inch Figure 4. In-pavement light. FLASHING AMBER LEDs LED's were therefore the fa'st choice source. It will be noted that many of the reasons for this are identical to the reasons for their widespread application in traffic signal roundels. Numerous forms and colors of LED's are available. Particularly high efficiency devices have recently become available using AllnGaP technology. (Pronounced "allingap" - Aluminum, Indium, Gallium, Phosphide). The AlinGaP semiconductor is embedded in an optical grade epoxy which provides high temperature and moisture resistance. This form of LED was selected, in a package size of TPA. Color of the LED's employed in the devices is amber of 592 nm dominant wavelength, as is suitable for cautioning devices. For other applications, red, green or multicolored LED's may be preferred. AIInGaP LED's are available in a variety of beam sp~'eads. 15 degree devices were selected. Optica A variety of different optical systems have been developed for control of the LED output. The beam pattern from the LED itself is conical with a 15 degrees beam spread. If such LED's are arranged in a horizontal row with their axes aimed horizontally towards the driving lanes, the vertical angle of the beam will be from -'/.5 degrees to +7.5 degrees. All light at angles below the horizontal is wasted. The LED's therefore are tilted upwards so thai their axes are 3 degrees above horizontal, and a lens is used to concentrate the beam into a narrower vertical range. This produces a center beam intensity maximized at 3 degrees vertical, and by design of the proper lens element, a vertical range from 0 to 6° is produced. Horizontally, a wider beam spread is needed. The output of the device must cover a total range of 10° for the form of application shown in figure 1. The 15 degrees beam spread produced by the LED itself can be narrowed to provide the proper coverage by lensing. By modifying the LED's light output range using lensing to produce beam spreads (horizontally and .vertically) that do not greatly exceed the required range, the intensity within the required range can be increased. This allows the number o£LED's used in each device lo be minimized, in turn allowing the size of the device also to be minimized. To cause an alteration of the vertical beam while producing a different alteration of the horizontal beam spread, a "pillow prism" is needed. The pillow prism can have different curvatures in the horizontal and vertical planes, and its use with traffic con~'ol devices has previously been reported.~ Figures 5 shows the tabular distribution of intensity achieved using a single 15° conical dis~ibution AIInGaP LED with suitable lensing. Twelve such LED's are used in each device to produce the desired output intensity of 40 candelas over the angular range of interest. Pulsed Light and Flash Rate Flashing of the pedestrian warning signal system provides several advantages over steady state operation: Flashing of the device is more conspicuous and alerts the driver more readily, as discussed below. · A pulsed light source is less likely to be confused with other sources such as fixed or vehicular lighting. · LED's exhibit improved maintenance characteristics when operated in a flash mode. Figure 6. LED degradation comparison for 100% (continuous burning) and 10% (10% on pulse, Regarding the last point, most light sources experience accelerated depreciation when operated for short duty cycles. The LED does not. Figure 6 iUustrales the relative light output of an LED operating continuously versus flashing. The LED under flashing operation (solid curve) experiences the same rate of light depreciation as in continuous mode (dashed curve), basedon identical on-lime~. That is, 1000 hours of continuous operation produces the same depreciation as operation for 10,000 hours at a 10% duty cycle. This is because degradation can only occur during the time which forward current flows through the p-n junction of the LED semiconductor. Under flashing conditions with a short duty cycle, therefore, the LED is aa almost everlasting device. Flash rate has been studied, and the devices consmacted for evaluation use a unique flash cycle. The LED's flash rapidly 5 times, using 80 msec pulses separated by 80 msec offperiods. There is then a single longer pulse of 250 msec. After 80 msec off, the pulse train repeats. There are indications that this maximizes temporal contrast, while staying below the photoconvulsive responsive frequency indicated by the National Institute of Health, Epilepsy Research Insitute.4 Signage The in-pavement system can be used alone or in connection with roadway Signage. The · electronic drive system is housed in a controller box adjacent to the crosswalk, and cabling can be mn to additional LED's at other locations. Figure 7 illustrates the use of yellow LED's in a modified pedestrian warning sign which flash in unison with the crosswalk lights. Te~t Sites Over twelve installations oftbe above-deseribed pedestrian warning system have been installed for evaluation purposes. Funding was pro('idcd by the California Office of Traffic Safety and thc Federal Highway Administration. Data collection was done before and after the .installation of the warning system. Information collected was driver approach speed, travel time and deceleration, braking distance and driver reaction (when the driver reacted aad,'or yielded to the pedes~an). Interviews also were conducted with both drivers and pedestrians. Actual data Ar the various test crossings vary greatly depending upon several factors. However, a positive response was obtained in all situations. Data from a test system installed in Willits, California on a state highway at a T intersection are provided in Figure 8 for before and after system installation. Prior to installation, less than 40 percent of drivers yielded to pedestrians. After installation, this figure rose to near 65%. The distance at which drivers first braked also increased. At other sites, the effectiveness of the system is reduced where drivers have difficulty in stopping due to high density traffic conditions or high speeds. The system is found to be most effective under conditions of Iow visibility caused by fog or rain, and during nighttime operation. Presentation of detailed test results of several installations and a synopsis of driver and pedestrian comments may be found in reference 5. In summary, the following conclusions were derived and reported in the studies funded by CalTrans: · The flashing amber lights embedded in the roadway al uncontrolled crosswalk have a positive effect in increasing driver awareness and modifying driver habits towards pedestrians. * The effect is highly significant during darkness, fog and rain. · The system is particularly effective at locations of at least moderate pedestrian flow (100 + pedestrian crossings per day). · Proper driver response requires at least 120 m (400fl.) of warning distance (for speeds up to 35mph). · At speeds of greater than 40 mph, 180 m (600 fl.) or more warning distance should be provided. Further Work It is intended to continue the evaluation of further test sites. As of February 1999, 16 test installations are in place. Work also is progressing with the California Department of Transportation (CalTrans) in the development of a performance specification for such devices. Further improvements are being made in the lighthead itself. These are expected to produce increased performance through the use of higher output LED's. Multi-color systems, providing red, amber and green are also under development. It is hoped and anticipated that the systems described will provide increased safety and a significant reduction in vehicle/podestrian injuries and fatalities. 6 References L~win, lan; Corbin, John; Janoff, Michael. "The Application of Light Emitting Diodes to Traffic Signals." Jounml of the lES, Winter 1997. Illuminating Engineering Society of North American, New York. 2. lES Handbook 8a Edition, Figure 6-79 and pages 179-180. Illuminating Engineering Society of North America, New York. Lewin, lan; Heinisch, Richard. "Optical and Energy Efficiency of Signal Lights." Lighting Design and Application, January 1989. Illuminating Engineering Society of North America, New York. 4. Communications from Dr. T. Cohn, School of Optometry, University of California at Berkeley, to Mr. C. Tan, CalTrans, Office of Transpor',ation Laboratory, dated September I l, 1998. Weinberger, S. 'Experimental Crosswalk Warning Device Testing in California." Compendium of Technical Papers fi.om the 1997 technical conference, Institute of Transportation Engineers, (ITE). 7 ITEM NO. 4 TRAFFIC ENGINEER'S REPORT APPrOVAl CITY A~-rORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANCE CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer June 27, 2000 Department of Public Works Monthly Activity Report RECOMMENDATION: Attached for City Council's review and filing is the Department of Public Works' Monthly Activity Reports for the month of May 2000. MOACTRPT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Monthly Activity Report May \ June 2000 Prepared By: Scott Harvey Submitted by: William G. Hughes Date: June 27, 2000 PROJECTS UNDER CONSTRUCTION 1. First Street Bridge This project will construct First Street from Pujol Street to Front Street, including the construction of a bridge over Murriela Creek and the realignment of Santiago Road. The new intersection of First Street, Front Street and Santiago Road will be signalized. The Contractor is continuing to place CIDH piles for the center bridge pier and abutment. Construction of the reining wall mt'Ih of First Street west of Murriela Creek is underway, along with storm drain and sewer improvements at various locations on the project site. Utility relocations for the proposed improvements on Santiago Road are nearly complete. 2. Pala Road Bridge The new Pala Road Bridge is now open to through traffic. The soundwall at Rainbow Canyon/Pala are under construction, paving should be completed by late June. 3. Pujol Street Sidewalk, Curb & Gutter This project is now complete. Acceptance by the City Council is schedule be in July. 4. Margarita Community Park Lighting and Fencing A final inspection was performed for the project on June 8, 2000. The lighting for the hockey rink and tennis courts successfully passed the specified meter test requirements that evening. The fencing is complete except for some minor correction. The project is scheduled for acceptance July 11, 2000. 5. Sports Park Tot Lot Equipment Replacement This project will replace the tot lot equipment at the Rancho California Sports Park. McLaughlin Engineering & Mining, Inc. was awarded the constxuction contract at the May 9, 2000 City Council meeting. Construction is anticipated to begin on July 5, 2000 and end in August 2000. 6. Calle Aragon Park Drainage Structures The City Council awarded the contract on May 23, 2000 and a pre-construction meeting was held on June 20, 2000, with an anticipated construction start date of June 26, 2000. R:WIon~hlyActivityRepo~\CIP\200OWlay 7. Adding an Additional Lane On Ynez Road Between Tierra Vista and Rancho Vista and Widening the Southwest Corner of Margarita Road at Santiago Road Construction on this project started on Jane 14, 2000. Excavation and base placement, and paving were completed on both locations. Loop installation and striping remain. Completion is expected in late June. 8. Rancho California Sports Park Parking Lot Rehabilitation E.A. Mendoz was awarded the contract at the .lane 13, 2000 City Council meeting. Work is anticipated to start on July 7, 2000. 9. FY 99- 2000 Slurry Seal Program This is a ne~v project to slurry, seal various streets in the Los Ranchitus area betweea Rancho California Road and Pauba Road. The sluny seal includes the application of a Rubberized Polymer Modified Emulsion (RPME), crack sealing, traffic control and the removal and replacement of all traffic striping and stenciling. The City Council awarded the project at the Jane 13, 2000 City Council meeting to American Asphalt Repair & Resurfacing Company, Inc. Sealing work is anticipated to begin in July. 10. FY99-2000 Pavement Management System, Various Streets This is a new project, which will reconstruct the entire roadway on Ynez Road between Santiago Road and Jedediah Smith. Pavement work is anticipated to begin in July. PROJECTS BEING ADVERTISED FOR BIDS NONE PROJECTS IN DESIGN 1. Murrieta Creek Crossing Between Winchester and Rancho California Road- Low-flow Crossing at Via Montezuma Preliminary discussion with USACOE and Riverside County Flood Control District has begun. The Construction window is from September through March due to environmental issues. Staff is in the process of reviewing an environmental consultant request for proposal. In addition, surveying of the project area has been completed and in-house design has been initiated. A hydrology study may be required. 2. Pavement Management System, Jefferson Avenue This project will rehabilitate Jefferson Avenue from the northerly City limits to Rancho California Road. The design process has started. Areas to be rehabilitated will be identified. Plans and Specifications will then be completed. Construction is expected to start in September 2000. 2 R:~IonthlyActlvityRcpotx\cn~2000\May 3. Old Town Parking Lots This project consists of two proposed parking lots. One will be located on the west side of Front Street just north of Second Street, and the other lot is located on the south side of Fourth Street west of Front Street. The project is currently being designed m-house. A landscape architect and an electrical consultant are being utilized to do the specialty work. The design for the Second Street parking lot is almost complete. Awaiting 90% submittal of landscape design. This project is scheduled to be advertised for bids in July 2000. Design for Fourth Street Parking Lot is on hold pending the Mercantile building plans. 4. Diaz Road Realignment The consultant is currently preparing the improvements plans for 70% submittal. Design completion is expected by the mid July 2000. ' 5. Margarita Road Widening, Pauba Road to Dartolo Road The consultant completed 90% plans and submitted them to the City. Staff is reviewing these plans. A minor delay is expected due to utility and developer's (Home Depot) coordination. The consultant is also potholing existing utilities to determine their exact location. The City intends to back charge the utility companies for the cost of the pothuling. Design completion is expected in August 2000. 6. Santa Gertrudis Bridge Widening at 1-15 This is Phase II of the Southbound Auxtliaty Lane at Winchester Road project. This project will widen the I-15 southbound off-ramp at the Santa Gertrudis Creek Bddge to provide an additional lane on the freeway just north of Winchester Road. The design consultant submitted the Ia plan check to the City, R.C.F.C.D. and Caltrans the fa'st week of January. Staff has received Caltrans Division of Structures in Sacramento plan check comments on June 7, 2000. Staffis still waiting for R.C.F.C.D. plan check comments. 7. Traffic Signals Design at Pala Road and Loma Linda and at Pala Road and Wolf Valley The consultant submitted 90% final plans for both traffic signals and the proposed striping plans. Staff is reviewing these plans and in the process of preparing specifications and bid documents for this project. This project will be advertised for bids in July or August. 8. Pala Road Improvements- Phase II (79 South to Pechanga Road) Design of this project is proceeding as scheduled. Preliminary design work include gcotechnical investigation, environmental assessment, surveying and utility research. In addition, staff is coordinating the work with the Pechangas and Spring Pacific Properties, the developer for Wolf Creek. The City's design consultant, DMJM, will submit 70% plans on July 17, 2000. The project is funded for design only at this time. 9. Pala Road Interim Improvements - (Widening to accommodate four lanes from bridge to WolffValley) The interim road widening will be done as pm of the Pechanga sewer line construction. An encroachment Permit was issued to the Pechangas for the sewer line. This project will be constructing the new sewer line/pavement section from Muirfield Drive to Wolf Valley Road. Construction is anticipated to begin in July 2000. 10. Rancho California Road Median Modifications at Town Center This project is currently in design. Design completion is expeCted in August 2000. 3 R:~/l°nthlyActivityRep°rt\C IP\2000~aMay 11. Sports Park Pond Desiltation This project will clean up the Desiltatinn Pond in the Sports Park by removing the silt to allow proper drainage downstream. Design is essentially complete. An Environmental Mitigation Plan is presently being prepared by the biologist. This project is scheduled to be advertised for bids in July 2000. 12. Pauba Road Improvements - Phase II (West of Margarita to just west of Showalter) The design process is to begin shortly. The RFP was sent out on April 18, 2000 to design consultants and responses were received on May 1, 2000. Negotiations are underway with one of the consulting fmrts. Work will be courdmated with design of the library project. City Council is scheduled to approve the consulting agreement at the July l 1, 2000 City Council meeting. 13. Senior Center Expansion The expansion will include and addition of 3000 square feet of building area for recreational, office, and meeting purposes. Design completion is expected in August 2000. 14. Temecula Library A full service library, approximately 34,000 square feet in area, will be designed and built on Pauba Road, just west of Fire Station #84. This project will provide the community with library resources and sexvices. Design is progressmg on schedule. The theme of the building, the building layout, building form, and furniture layout were approved by the design committee. The committee has come to consensus on the colors to be used for the building . exterior, building interior and carpeting. The design committee is in the process of choosing the different type of furniture required for the library. Design is scheduled for completion in September 2000. 15. Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Over Murrieta Creek T.Y. Lin McDaniel has been selected as the prime consultant for the design of this project. Staff is currently negotiating with McDaniel to ret-me the scope of work. Design is anticipated to begin in July 2000. 16. Chaparral High School Swimming Pool The Design committee has chosen the layout of the 25-Yard x 25-Meter pool at Chaparral High School. The facility will include a smaller recreation pool component and a bathhouse with locker room facilities, reslxooms and showers. An alternative to add spray type play equipment will be included in the construction bid. 4 R:kMonlhlyActivityRcpo~\CIP\2000~4ay I,- Z LU 0 .-I 0 0 I-- Z UJ UJ 0 ...I o o (/3 I-- Z U.I U.I 0 TO: FROM: DATE: MEMORANDUM Bill Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer ~f~rad Buron, Maintenance Superintendent June 5, 2000 SUBJECT: Monthly Activity Report - May, 2000 The following activities were performed by Public Works Department, Street Maintenance Division in-house personnel for the month of May, 2000: I. SIGNS A, Total signs replaced 14 B. Total signs installed 39 C. Total signs repaired 9 II. TREES A. Total trees trimmed for sight distance and street sweeping concerns 8 3~951 59 317 III. ASPHALT REPAIRS A. Total square feet of A. C. repairs B. Total Tons CATCH BASINS A. Total catch basins cleaned RIGHT-OF-WAY WEED ABATEMENT A. Total square footage for right-of-way abatement 95 VI. GRAFFITI REMOVAL A. Total locations B. Total S.F. 44 5~104 VII. STENCILING A. 270 New and repainted legends B. 34~634 L.F. of new and repainted red curb and striping Also, City Maintenance staff responded to 43 service order requests ranging from weed abatement, tree trimming, sign repair, A.C. failures, litter removal, and catch basin cleanings. This is compared to 47 service order requests for the month of April~ 2000. The Maintenance Crew has also put in 92 hours of overtime which includes standby time, special events and response to street emergencies. The total cost for Street Maintenance per[ormed by Contractors for the month of May~ 2000 was $124~693.74 compared to $18~t42.70 for the month of April~ 2000. Account No. 5402 $ 112,028.74 Account No. 5401 $ 12,665.00 Account No. 999-5402 $ - 0 - CC: Ron Parks, Deputy Director of Public Works Ali Moghadam, Senior Engineer - (CIPFFraffic) Greg Butler, Senior Engineer (Capital Improvements) Amer Attar, Senior Engineer (Capital Improvements) Jerry Alegria, Senior Engineer (Land Development) 0 0 0 0 LU CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION GRAFFITI REMOVAL MONTH OF MAY, 2000 DATE LOCATION WORK COMPLETED 05/01/00 LOMALINDA 100' WEST OF PALA ROAD REMOVED 100 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/01/00 LOMALINDA PARK #1 REMOVED 16 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/01/00 LOMALINDA PARK #3 REMOVED 24 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/01/00 END OF VIA EDUARDO ALONG CHANNEL REMOVED 128 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/01/00 6TM AT PUJOL REMOVED 15 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/01/00 LOMALINDA NEXT TO PARK #1 REMOVED 84 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/01/00 RUSTIC GLENN AT MARGARITA REMOVED 4 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/03/00 DIAZ SOUTH OF AVENIDA ALVARADO REMOVED 30 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/08/00 MARGARITA AT PlO PICO REMOVED 40 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/08/00 RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AT VINTAGE HILLS DRIVE REMOVED 136 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/09/00 28374 FELIX VALDEZ REMOVED 81 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/12/00 MEADOWS PARKWAY AT DE PORTOLA REMOVED 2 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/12/00 WINCHESTER BRIDGE AT DIAZ REMOVED 430 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/15/00 MARGARITA AT YUKON REMOVED 2 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/15/00 RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AT YUKON REMOVED 9 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/15/00 DIAZ 10W NORTH OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD REMOVED 60 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/15/00 BUSINESS PARK 100' N/O RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD REMOVED 40 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/16/00 BUTTERF1ELD STAGE AT 79 So. REMOVED 4 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/22/00 T.J. MAXX - MERVYNS REMOVED · 62 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/22/00 MEADOWS PARKWAY AT McCABE REMOVED 8 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/22/00 VIA CORDOBA AT VIA SALITO REMOVED 10 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/22/00 CORTE SIERRA AT LOMALINDA REMOVED 302 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/23/00 VIA RIO TEMECULA AT CHANNEL REMOVED 392 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/23/00 MARGARITA AT HWY 79 SO. (UNDER BRIDGE) REMOVED 1,959 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/23/00 JEDEDIAH SMITH AT HWY 79 SO. REMOVED 880 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/23/00 [ WINCHESTER AT NICOLAS (UNDER BRIDGE) REMOVED 51 S.F. OF GRAFF1TI DATE LOCATION WORK COMPLETED 05/24/00 FOOD FOR.LESS REMOVED 14 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/25/00 CLUBHOUSE DRIVE REMOVED 6 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/26/00 HILLCREST ELEMENTARY SCHOOL REMOVED 108 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/30/00 CORTE VILLOSA AT CAMINO R.OMO (14 LOCATIONS) REMOVED 105 S.F. OF GRAFFITI TOTAL S.F. GRAFFITI REMOVED $~104 TOTAL LOCATIONS 44