The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1994-03-07; Traffic Safety Commission; ; Update the 1992 Traffic Signal Evaluation PolicyCI1Y OF CARLSBAD TRAFFIC SAFFfY COMMISSION STAFF REPORT COMMISSION MEETING OF: March 7, 1994 ITEM NO. 6B LOCATION: Citywide INITIATED BY: Transportation Division REQUESTED ACTION: Update the 1992 Traffic Signal Evaluation Policy BACKGROUND: DATA: A Traffic Signal Evaluation Policy was established for the City of Carlsbad when the City Council adopted Resolution Number 88-252 on July 19, 1988. This policy was subsequently updated on March 27, 1990 when the City Council adopted Resolution Number 90-78 and updated again on February 18, 1992 when the City Council adopted Resolution Number 92-58. This policy is intended to provide the mechanism to establish a ranking system to impartially evaluate and compare potential future signalized intersection locations. Procedures contained in the Evaluation Policy were taken from similar signal policies established by the City of Escondido and the City of San Diego. When the Policy was adopted in 1988, staff indicated to the Traffic Safety Commission and City Council that the signal list contained in the report would be periodically updated. The attached report is a third update of the Policy as staff has conducted new and updated traffic studies at each intersection indicated in the 1994 Traffic Signal Evaluation Policy. Traffic signals meeting CALTRANS signal warrants are indicated on the Traffic Signal Qualification List. City Council adoption of the Traffic Signal Evaluation Policy that establishes the Signal Qualification List does not commit or require the signals to be installed in the order of ranking. For various reasons, it may be decided to defer installation of a signal at a location higher on the list and signalize a lower ranked intersection. Basically, the list provides a systematic listing of intersection priorities based upon preliminary engineering. A preliminary estimate and project report will be written prior to beginning final design, once authorized by the City Council. RECOMMENDATION: The Traffic Safety Coordinating Committee recommends that the 1994 Traffic Signal Evaluation Policy, including the Signal Qualification List, be adopted by the City Council. NECESSARY CI1Y COUNCIL ACTION: City Council approval and adoption, by Resolution, of the 1994 Traffic Signal Evaluation Policy will be required. r CITY OF CARLSBAD TRAFFIC SIGNAL EVALUATION POLICY PREPARED BY: TRANSPORTATION DIVISION 71 TRAFFIC OPERATIONS SECTION II FEBRUARY 1994 II iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii CITY OF CARLSBAD TRANSPORTATION DIVISION TRAFFIC SIGNAL EVALUATION POLICY REPORT FEBRUARY 1994 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE NO. INTRODUCTION ....................................................... 1 BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE ............................................ 1 POLICY .............................................................. 2 GENERAL ............................................................ 2 DATA ............................................................... 2-4 TRAFFIC SIGNAL QUALIFICATION LIST ...................................... 5 TRAFFIC SIGNAL DESIGN LIST ............................................ 6 UNWARRANTED TRAFFIC SIGNAL LOCATION LIST ............................. 6 APPENDIX A. TRAFFIC SIGNAL QUALIFICATION RATING SYSTEM B. CALTRANS TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS INTRODUCTION CITY OF CARLSBAD Transportation Division TRAFFIC SIGNAL EVALUATION POLICY REPORT The City of Carlsbad, located in North San Diego County, has grown from a small, agricultural based residential community in its early history to a city of approximately 65,000 residents. Various industrial, commercial, recreational, residential and agricultural land uses are found in Carlsbad. Associated with population increases has been an increase in vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian traffic. With increased volumes on Carlsbad's roadway system, it is apparent that there is need for a more detailed method of evaluating and determining future traffic signal locations. At this time, there are 70 signalized intersections in Carlsbad. Ownership and maintenance responsibility is as follows: ■ 59 signals owned and maintained by the City of Carlsbad. ■ 4 signals owned by the City of Carlsbad and maintained by Caltrans. ■ 7 signals owned and maintained by Caltrans. This report is based on the need to identify and evaluate the potential future traffic signals at various locations throughout the City of Carlsbad. It is the basis for a system that will continually be re-evaluated and updated on a regular basis. The Traffic Signal Qualification List is not steadfast. Financial constraints, private development, capital improvement projects or other valid considerations may dictate that a lower qualifying signal be installed at a given location. The qualification list does, however, serve as a guide for future traffic signal installations and only includes locations meeting CAL TRANS signal warrants. BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE As traffic volumes increase there becomes a need to consider various right-of-way controls at intersections. Depending upon traffic characteristics at a given intersection, the City will evalu- ate and choose from a variety of traffic control methods or devices to facilitate the safe and efficient movement of traffic and pedestrians. Included among the various intersection traffic control devices are: basic rules of the road governing right-of-way at intersections, yield sign installations, 2-way STOP sign installations, 3-way and 4-way STOP sign installations, channelization and median control and traffic signals. This report focuses on creating a Citywide listing of one of the safest and most efficient methods for intersection right-of-way control, the traffic signal. The purpose of a traffic signal qualification list is to compare and impartially rank the intersections under consideration. A Traffic Signal Qualification List was originally established for the City of Carlsbad in 1988 by City Council Resolution Number 88-252 and was updated in 1990 and again in 1992. This report is an update of the 1992 qualification list. All locations included on the list have met California Department of Transportation criteria (CAL TRANS Signal Warrants) for the installation of a traffic signal. 1 POLICY As with most traffic engineering departments, it has been the policy of the City of Carlsbad Transportation Division to only recommend installation of traffic signals that meet the minimum criteria established by the California Department of Transportation. All data collection and evaluation to determine if criteria is met for a location to qualify for a traffic signal is under the direction of the City Traffic Engineer. GENERAL Traffic signals are electrically powered traffic control devices that direct the movement of vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians at an intersection. Traffic signals provide for the positive assignment of the right-of-way to effect the orderly movement of traffic and pedestrians with minimum delay and maximum safety. Many cities use a priority list system for ranking traffic signal projects. To qualify for this list, the signal analysis takes into account the relative delays on approaching streets, the collision history of the intersection and gaps in the major and minor street streams of traffic, pedestrian volumes and various other factors. An evaluation is then conducted to determine if a signal will minimize or correct an identified problem. Establishing a Traffic Signal Qualification List helps answer two basic questions: 1 . Do traffic conditions at the intersection meet the basic criteria that affect the benefits and costs of signal control; and 2. If so, how does this location compare with other locations throughout the City of Carlsbad that meet the same basic criteria? This evaluation provides a rational method of comparing one intersection with another, the end result being a ranking that lists the greatest need for signalization between all potential signal locations. The attached Traffic Signal Qualification List indicates each location under consideration and is arranged in descending order based upon the total qualification points accumulated at each location. A listing of future traffic signals does not mean that signals will exclusively be installed in the order of ranking. Existing conditions, right-of-way needs, need for left turn or right turn lanes, budget constraints, or other factors may indicate a location that is more appropriate than one higher on the list. The list establishes locations for which preliminary engineering should take place and then be re-evaluated before proceeding to final design. Traffic signals are not installed unless written authorization from the City Engineer directs their installation. DATA In recent years, traffic signals have experienced a technical evolution. Changes have evolved from pre-timed signals in which control mechanisms operate on a predetermined time schedule allotting a fixed amount of time of each interval in the cycle; to traffic actuated microprocessor units that can operate two to eight signal phases, highway ramp metering control, master controls for interconnected signal systems and traffic volume monitoring stations. 2 Traffic signals are an expensive control device to install and under certain conditions more problems may be created than are solved. These problems can range from increased accident frequency, delays, increased air or noise pollution and higher energy use, to circuitous travel along less desirable routes to avoid the signalized intersection. A properly signalized intersection, however, can resolve many problems and provide advantages ranging from reducing certain types of accident frequency, delay, and air pollutants, to creating an orderly traffic movement. In a coordinated signal system they help maintain an efficient, progressive traffic movement along an arterial roadway. Rankings of the various intersections for potential traffic signal installation was accomplished by using a Traffic Signal Qualification Rating System. Points were assigned to seven Qualification factors which are based on the California Department of Transportation criteria known as CAL TRANS Traffic Signal Warrants. Traffic Signal Qualification Rating System factors include the following: Factor 1-Minimum Vehicular Volume This factor considers the fact that at certain traffic volume levels the delay can be reduced and orderly flow through an intersection enhanced by signal controls. Factor 2 -Interruption of Continuous Traffic The interruption factor applies when the traffic volume on the major street is so high that few gaps occur to permit the minor street traffic to cross or enter the intersection. As a result, the minor street traffic may suffer long delays or experience hazards at the intersection. Factor 3 -Minimum Pedestrian Volume The minimum pedestrian volume factor reflects the length and frequency of gaps available for pedestrians to cross the major street as compared to the number of pedestrians that cross the street. Factor 4 -School Area Traffic Signals This factor recognizes the special problems that may occur at intersections near schools or on school walking routes. It is similar to the minimum pedestrian volume factor in that gaps in traffic are considered. Factor 5 -Progressive Movement or Signal Systems Existing or proposed signal systems are considered by this factor. Often traffic flow efficiency can be enhanced if signals are installed at proper spacing along an arterial or signal network. Such signals may assist in holding traffic in compact platoons that will arrive at adjacent . signalized locations in accordance with a turning plan. 3 ... Factor 6 -Accident History This factor reflects the fact that certain types of accidents could be reduced by traffic signal control. However, experience has shown that few changes in accident frequency can be expected at a location that historically has less than five accidents per year, or an accident rate of less than about 1.0 accident per million vehicles. Factor 7 -Special Conditions This factor recognizes the special problems that may occur due to the location of certain traffic generators, certain geometric or roadway features, sight distance obstructions, and various other criteria. • The above rating system is used to evaluate various potential signal locations; these locations are then ranked based on the following relative weight system: FACTOR DESCRIPTION 1 Minimum Vehicular Volume 2 Interruption 3 Pedestrian Volume 4 School Area 5 Signal System 6 Accident History 7 Special Conditions :.:-· :-... /TOTAL POSSIBLE 4 . .·., •· ... .. • ... ··MAXIMUM , ... · QUALIFICATION POINTS 15 10 10 10 5 15 15 r.•.-: ·.·, :•,;-· • RELATIVE WEIGHT . . . .. •· 19% 12% 12% 12% 7% 19% 19% ••• • • •• ···:: ..• '.":·•·••< .. /'·.: •.. . . / • •. : ~i:~( \ <I { ·1C-:~ 1994 TRAFFIC SIGNAL QUALIFICATION LIST LOCATION CALTAANS TOTAL QUALIFICATION FACTOR TOTAL QUALIFICATION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT SIGNAL VOLUME QUALIFICATION NUMBER FUNDING SOURCE/FISCAL YEAR WARRANTS MET 2P.M. -6P.M. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 POINTS 1 Poinsettia Lane/Paseo del Norte 7,9,11 5,739 15 10 0 0 4 0 7 36 PFF /Developer Responsibility 2 cartsbad VIiiage Dr./Avenlda de Anita 1,2,8,9, 11 4,740 13 9 0 0 5 2 6 34 Unfunded 3 Rancho Santa Fe Rd./Questhaven Rd. 1,2,8,9,11 7,770 15 10 0 0 0 0 8 33 Unfunded 3 Tamarack Ave./Hlghland Dr. 5 4,076 11 6 0 0 1 0 15 33 PFF /1998-2003 4 carlsbad Blvd./State St. 1,2,5,8,9, 11 5,983 15 10 0 0 0 0 5 30 PFF/2000+ u, 4 La Costa Ave./Plraeus St. Unfunded 2,9,11 9,116 11 10 0 0 5 0 4 30 5 Alga Rd./EI Fuerte St. 7,9,11 3,612 6 5 0 4 0 0 12 27 PFF/95-96 5 Carlsbad VIiiage Dr.Nalley St. 9, 11 5,309 10 10 0 0 0 0 7 27 Unfunded 5 La Costa Ave./Csdencla St. 2,6,9 3,992 4 7 0 0 0 1 15 27 Unfunded 6 Chestnut Ave./Plo Pico Dr. 4 3,120 10 2 0 0 0 0 11 23 Unfunded 7 Alga Rd./Cazadero Dr. 2,9,11 4,437 6 8 0 0 0 0 8 22 Unfunded 8 La Costa Ave./Saxorrt Rd. 2,9,11 9,557 7 10 0 0 0 0 3 20 Unfunded 9 La Costa Ave.N'rep castllla Way 9,11 4,887 4 0 0 0 0 0 7 11 Unfunded 10 cannon Rd./Paseo del Norte 1,7,8,9,11 3,746 7 0 0 0 0 0 3 10 PFF 94-95 TRAFFIC SIGNALS CURRENTLY BEING DESIGNED/CONSTRUCTED 1. ~arlsbad Village Drive/Jefferson Street 2. Carlsbad Village Drive/Madison Street 3. Carlsbad Village Drive/Roosevelt Street 4. Costa Del Mar/El Camino Real 5. Carlsbad Boulevard/Beech Avenue 6. Poinsettia Lane/Paseo del Norte TRAFFIC SIGNAL LOCATIONS INVESTIGATED (Did not meet CALTRANS Signal Warrants) 1. Alga Road/Mimosa Drive 2. Carlsbad Village Drive/Pontiac Drive 3. Carlsbad Boulevard/Chestnut Avenue 4. Carlsbad Boulevard/Cherry Avenue 5. Chestnut Avenue/Harding Street 6. Grand Avenue/Madison Street 7. Poinsettia Lane/Batiquitos Drive 8. Rancho Santa Fe Road/Cadencia Street 9. Tamarack Avenue/Carlsbad Village Drive 10. Tamarack Avenue/Garfield Street 11. Tamarack Avenue/Park Drive 12. Tamarack Avenue/Pontiac Drive 13. Tamarack Avenue/Skyline Road 14. Carlsbad Boulevard/Oak Avenue 6 APPENDIX TRAFFIC SIGNAL QUALIFICATION RATING SYSTEM Factor 1 -Total Vehlculer Volume Points are assigned based upon the graph below which considers major and minor street volumes and capacity. The entering volumes are based upon 4-hour counts (usually from 2:00 to 6:00 P.M. on a weekday). A maximum of 15 points may be assigned to this factor. 11'1 * _, 0 > ~ L.J a: .... 11'1 I :IC 750 OVER 700 600 500 ~ 300 200 100 NOTES 1. ALL VOLUMES ARE FOR 4 HOURS (USUALLY 2-6 P.M.) 2. MAXIMUM POINTS • 15 0 POINTS NTERSECTIONOF: 2-2 Lane Sta. 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 2800 2800 3000 3200 1-2 8 1-4 Lane St. 2200 2400 2800 2800 3000 3200 3400 3600 3800 ?-4 Lane Sta. 2500 2800 3000 3200 3400 3600 3800 4000 GX) ?-On•Wfrf Sta. 3200 3400 3800 3800 4000 4200 4400 4600 4800 TOTAL VOLUME ENTERING INTERSECTION 3400 3600 3800+ 4000 4200 4400+ 4400 4600 4800+ 5000 5200 5400+ Factor 2 -Interruption of Continuous Traffic Vehicles on through streets, if uncontrolled, tend to travel through minor street intersections at speeds that make it difficult and hazardous for vehicles and pedestrians from the side street to cross or enter the principal traffic stream. The total of the minor street vehicles plus pedestrians crossing or entering the major street must exceed 300 in four hours to receive any points. A maximum of 1 0 points may be assigned to this factor. 0-1649 0 4,700 1650-1949 1 5,600 1950-2249 2 6,400 2250-2549 3 7,300 2550-2849 4 8,200 2850-3149 5 9,000 3150-3449 6 10,000 3450-3749 7 10,700 3750-4049 8 11,600 4050-4349 9 12,400 4350-Over 10 12,500 And Up ~ ~ (.) LI. LI. ~ .... ; I .,,. Factor 3 -Pedestrian Volume A traffic signal may be needed where many pedestrians cross a major street. A maximum of 1 O points may be assigned to this factor. , 3600 & OVER 3200 2800 2,.00 2000 1600 1200 100 NOTES 1. ALL VOLUMES ARE FOR 4-HOURS (USUALLY 2~ P.M.) 2. MAXIMUM POINTS = 10 • 3. NO POINTS IF LESS THAN 100 PEDESTRIANS DURING THE 4 HOUR PERIOD. 4. NO POINTS IF LESS THAN 1200 MAJOR STREET VEHICLES DURING THE 4 HOUR PERIOD. 200 ~ 600 800 1000 1200 PEDESTRIANS CROSSING MAJOR STREET 1,.oo 1500 & OVER * ..I §; u ~ ~ ~ I-; I N Factor 4 -School Area Traffic Signals Points are assigned base1 upon the number of school age pedestrians crossing th e, major street as compared to the major street traffic. This factor will apply only to locations within . one mile of a school and where the nearest controlled intersection or potential crossing point is more than 600 feet away. A maximum of 1 o points may be assigned for this factor. 1500 1800 1100 750 500 .... -Ill I. = a: 250 1400 1000 600 .... C l I. ::, 200 0 POINTS 100 60 150 100 200 no 250 180 PEDESTRIANS CROSSING THE MAJOR STREET (Per 2-Hour Period) 350 (Urban) 220 (Rural) NOTE: No points will be assigned If nearest controlled crossing Is less than 600 feet away. Factor 5 -Progressive Movement or Signal Systems This factor depends upon engineering studies and must include the present and future traffic demands of the area. A signal may be justified when it forms a part of an interconnected or coordinated system. A maximum of 5 points may be assigned to this factor. Factor 6 -Accident History Only those accidents susceptible to correction by traffic signals are considered and then only if less restrictive measures such as warning signs, proper lighting, painted markings, etc. have failed. A maximum of 15 points may be assigned to this factor. NOTE: ACCIDENTS 0-2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 & Over POINTS 0 1 3 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Use the average of the last two years, provided the intersection has been in operation for two years. Factor 7 -Special Conditions This factor considers extenuating circumstances that are not covered in the previous six factors. These may include: the proximity of schools, churches, public buildings, and other traffic and pedestrian generators; an abrupt change from a rural to an urban area; the need for police control during portions of the day; a steep hill; a horizontal curve; restricted sight distance. This factor requires engineering judgment based on physical inspection of the site. A maximum of 15 points may be assigned to this factor. A summary of the factors considered to be special conditions and the points that were assigned follows: 1. Four-way STOP Control (5 points): Typically, right-angle accident frequency drops sharply after installation of a Four-Way STOP. However, total delay, as well as rear-end collision frequency, increase to a level higher than that which would be reflected by the results of Factors #1 and #2 .. 2. Proximity of a school (1 to 5 points): Depending on the type of school and its distance from the intersection in question, points are assigned to reflect the potential benefit to school-age pedestrians and bicycle traffic. 3. Horizontal and Vertical Curvature and Visibility (1 to 5 points): The alignment of a major street can affect the visibility available to side-street motorists, and the relative safety of their crossing or merging maneuvers. There may also be other restrictions to visibility, such as utility poles and appurtenances and trees and shrubs on private property. 4. High Speed on a Through Street (1 to 3 points): In addition to worsening the problems caused by visibility restrictions, very high approach speeds can worsen the severity of the accidents which occur. Traffic Manual TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING 9-1 ------------------------------------4-1992 CHAPTER 9 TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING Traffic Signals, Basic Information and Warrants 9-01 9-01.1 Introduction A traffic signal is an electrically powered traffic control device, other than a barricade warning light or steady burning electric lamp, by which traffic is warned or directed to take some specific action. The following types and uses of traffic signals are discussed in this chapter: Traffic Control Signals, Pedestrian Crossing Signals, Ramp Metering Signals, Flashing Beacons, Lane-use Control Signals, Traffic Control at Movable Bridges, Priority Control of Traffic Signals, Traffic Signals for One-lane, Two-way Facilities and Traffic Signals for Construction Zones. Traffic control signals are valuable devices for the control . of vehicle and pedestrian traffic. However, because the y assign the right of way to the various traffic movements, traffic control signals exert a significant influence on traffic flow. Traffic control signals, properly located and operated, should have one or more of the follow ing advantages: 1. They provide for the orderly movement of traffic. 2. Where proper physical layouts and control measures are used, they increase the traffic handling capacity of the intersection. 3. They reduce the frequency of certain types of accidents, especially the right angle type. 4. Under favorable conditions, they can be coordinated to provide for continuous or nearly continuous movement of traffic at a definite speed along a given route. 5. They permit minor street traffic, vehicular or pedestrian, to enter or cross continuous traffic on the major street. Improper or unwarranted signal installations may cause: 1. Excessive delay. 2. Disobedience of the signal indications. 3. Circuitous travel of alternate routes. 4. Increased accident frequency. Experience shows that the number of right-angle collisions may decrease after the installation of signals, but the number of rear-end collisions may increase. The installation of signals may increase overall delay and reduce intersection capacity. Consequently, it is of the utmost importance that the consideration of a signal installation and the selection of equipment be preceded by a thorough study of traffic and roadway conditions made by an engineer experienced and trained in this field. Equally important is the need for checking the efficiency of a traffic signal in operation. This determines the degree to which the type of installation and the timing program meet the requirements of traffic. 9-01.2 Traffic Signal Warrants The justification for the installation of a traffic signal at an intersection is based on the warrants stated in this Manual and in the Manual On Uniform Traffic Control Devices. The decision to install a signal should not be based solely upon the warrants, since the installation of traffic signals may increase certain types of collisions. Delay, congestion, approach conditions, driver confusion, future land use or other evidence of the need for right of way assignment beyond that which could be provided by stop signs must be demonstrated. See Section 4-03 of this Manual for stop sign warrants. 9-2 TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING Traffic Manual 4-1992 ------------------------------------- When the -85th percentile speed of traffic on the major street exceeds 40 miles per hour in either an urban or rural area, or when the intersection lies within the built-up area of an isolated community having a population of less than 10,000, the location is considered rural. All other areas are considered urban. Figures 9-1, 9-2, 9-3 and 9-4 are examples of warrant sheets. Warrant Sheet 9-4 should be used only for new intersections or other locations where actual traffic volumes cannot be counted. The installation of a traffic signal should be considered if one or more of the warrants listed below are met: A. Warrant I -Minimum Vehicle Volume. The Minimum Vehicular Volume warrant is intended for application where the volume of intersecting traffic is the principal reason for consideration of a signal installation. The warrant is satisfied when for each of any 8 hours of an average day the traffic volumes given in the table below exist on the major street and on the higher-volume minor street approach to the intersection. Numberof Vehicles per Vehicles per lanes for hour on hour on moving major s.treet higher-volume traffic on (total of both minor-street each approach approaches) approach ( one direction only) Major St. Minor St. Urban Rural Urban Rural 1 1 500 350 150 105 2 or more 1 (5()() 420 150 105 2 or more 2orma:e (5()() 420 200 140 1 2 orma:e 500 350 200 140 The major street and the minor street volumes are for the same 8 hours. During those 8 hours the direction of higher volume on the minor street may be on one approach during some hours and on the opposite approach during other hours. B. Warrant 2 -Interruption of Continuous Traffic. The Interruption of Continuous Traffic warrant applies to operating conditions where the traffic volume oh a major street is so heavy that traffic on a minor intersecting street suffers excessive delay or hazard in entering or crossing the major street. The warrant is satisfied when, for each of any 8 hours of an average day, the traffic volumes given in the table below exist on the major street and on the higher-volume minor street approach to the intersection, and the signal installation will not seriously disrupt progressive traffic flow. Number of Vehicles per Vehicles per lanes for hour on hour on moving major street higher-volume traffic on (total of both minor-street each approach approaches) approach (one direction only) Major St . Minor St. Urban Rural Urban Rural 1 1 750 525 75 53 2 or more 1 900 630 75 53 2 or more 2 or more 900 630 100 70 1 2 or more 750 525 100 70 The major street and the minor street volumes · are for the same 8 hours. During those 8 hours the direction of higher volume on the minor street may be on one approach during some hours and on the opposite approach during other hours. C. Warrant 3 -Minimum Pedestrian Volume. A traffic signal may be warranted where the pedestrian volume crossing the major street at an intersection or mid-block location during an average day is: 100 or more for each of any four hours; or 190 or more during any one hour. Traffic Manual TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING 9-3 ------------------------------------4-1992 The • pedestrian volume crossing the major street may be reduced as much as 50% of the values given above when the predominant pedes- trian crossing speed is below 3.5 feet per second. In addition to a minimum pedestrian volume of that stated above, there shall be less than 60 gaps per hour in the traffic stream of adequate length for pedestrians to cross during the same period when the pedestrian volume criterion is satisfied. Where there is a divided street having a median of sufficient width for the pedestrian(s) to wait, the requirement applies separately to each direction of vehicular traffic. Where coordinated traffic signals on each side of the study location provide for platooned traffic which result in few er than 60 gaps per hour of adequate length for the pedestrians to cross the street, a traffic signal may not be warranted. This warrant applies only to those locations where the nearest traffic signal along the major street is greater than 300 feet and where a new traffic signal at the study location would not unduly restrict platooned flow of traffic. Curbside parking at non-intersection locations should be prohibited for 100 feet in advance of and 20 feet beyond the crosswalk. A signal installed under this warrant should be of the traffic-actuated type with push buttons for pedestrians crossing the main street. If such a signal is installed within a signal system, it shall be coordinated if the signal system is coordinated. Signals installed according to this warrant shall be equipped with pedestrian indications conforming to requirements set forth in other sections of this Manual. D. Wa"anl 4 -School Areas. See Chapter 10 of this Manual. E. Wa"anl 5 -Progressive Movement. The Progressive Movement warrant is satisfied when: 1. On a one-way street or on a street which has predominantly unidirectional traffic, adjacent signals are so far apart that the necessary degree of platooning and speed control of vehicles would otherwise be lost; or 2. On a two-way street, where adjacent sig- nals do not provide the necessary degree of platooning and speed control and the proposed and adjacent signals could con- stitute a progressive signal system. The installation of a signal according to this warrant should be based on the 85th percentile speed unless an engineering study indicates that another speed is more desirable. The installation of a signal according to this warrant should not be considered where the resultant signal spacing would be less than 1,000 feet. F. Wa"ant 6 -Accident Experience. The Accident Experience warrant is satisfied when: 1. Five or more reported accidents of types susceptible to correction by traffic signal control have occurred within a 12-month period, each accident involving personal injury or property damage to an apparent extent of $500 or more; AND 2. Adequate trial of less restrictive remedies with satisfactory observance and enforcement has failed to reduce the accident frequency; AND 3. There exists a volume of vehicular traffic not less than 80% of the requirements specified in the Minimum Vehicular Volume Warrant or the Interruption of Continuous Traffic Warrant; AND 4. The signal installation will not seriously disrupt progressive traffic flow. G. Wa"ant 7 • Systems Warrant. • A traffic signal installation at some intersections may be warranted to encourage concentration and organization of traffic flow networks. The systems warrant is applicable 9-4 TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING Traffic Manual 4-1992 ------------------------------------ when the common intersection of two or more major routes has a total exi sting, or immediately projected, entering volume of at least 1,000 vehicles during the peak hour of a typical weekday, or each of any five hours of a Saturday and/or Sunday. A major route as used in the above warrant has one or more of the following characteristics: 1. It is part of the street or highway system that serves as the principal network for through traffic flow; 2. It includes rural or suburban highways outside of, entering or traversing a city; or 3. It appears as a major route on an official plan such as a maj or street plan in an urban area traffic and transportation study. H. Wa"ant 8-Combination of Wa"ants. In exceptional cases, a signal may be justified where no single warrant is satisfied but where Warrants 1 and 2 are satisfied to the extent of 80 percent or more of the stated numerical values. I. Wa"ant 9-Four Hour Volume Warrant. The Four Hour Volume Warrant is satisfied, when for each of any four hours of an average day, the plotted points representing the vehicles per hour on the major street (total of both approaches) and the corresponding vehicles per hour on the higher volume minor street approach (one direction only) all fall above the curve in Figure 9-6 for the existing combination of approach lanes. When the 85th percentile speed of the major street traffic exceeds 40 miles per hour, or when the intersection lies within a built-up area of an isolated community having a population of less th an 10,000, the four hour volume requirement is satisfied when the plotted points referred to fall above the curve in Figure 9-7 for the existing combination of approach lanes. J. Wa"ant 10 -Peak Hour Delay Wa"ant. The Peak Hour Delay Warrant is intended for application where traffic conditions are such that for one hour of the day, minor street traffic suffers undue delay in entering or crossing the major street. The peak hour delay warrant is satisfied when the conditions given below exist for one hour (any four consecutive 15 -minute periods) of an average weekday. The peak hour delay warrant is met when: 1. The total delay experienced by traffic, on one minor street approach controlled by a STOP sign, equals or exceeds four vehicle-hours for a one-lane approach and five vehicle-hours for a two-lane approach; AND 2. The volume on the same minor street approach equals or exceeds 100 vph . for one moving lane of traffic or 150 vph for two moving lanes; AND 3. The total entering volume serviced during the hour equals or exceeds 800 vph for intersections with .four or more approaches or 650 vph for intersections with three approaches. K. Wa"ant 11 -Peak Hour Volume Wa"ant. The Peak Hour Volume Warrant is intended for application where traffic conditions are such that for one hour of the day minor street traffic suffers undue delay in entering or crossing the major street. The peak hour volume warrant is satisfied when the plotted point, representing the vehicles per hour on the major street (total of both approaches) and the corresponding vehicles per hour on the higher volume minor street approach (one direction only) for one hour (any four consecutive 15-minute periods) of an average day, falls above the curve in Figure 9-8 for the existing combination of approach lanes. Traffic Manual TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING 9-5 -------------------------------------4-1992 When the 85th percentile speed of major street traffic exceeds 40 miles per hour, or when the intersection lies within a built-up area of an isolated community having a population of less than 10,000, the peak hour volume warrant is satisfied when the plotted point,. referred to above, falls above the curve in Figure 9-9 for the existing combination of approach lanes. 9-01.3 Guldellnes for Lett-Turn Phases Since separate signal phases for protected left turns will reduce the green time available for other phases, alternate means of handling left turn conflicts should be considered first. The most likely possibilities are: 1. Prohibition of left turns. This can be done only if there are convenient alternate means of making the movement. Typical alternate means are: a. A series of right and/or left turns around a block to permit getting to the desired destination; or b. Making the left turn at an adjacent unsignalized intersection during gaps in the opposing through traffic. 2. Geometric changes to eliminate the left turn. An effective change would be a complete separation or a complete or partial "clover leaf' at grade. Any of these, while eliminating left turns, requires additional cost and right of way. 3. Provide protected-permissive or permis- sive-protected left turn operation. The protected left turn interval may be prohibited during certain periods of the day to allow only permissive intervals for left turn movement in order to increase the green time available for other phases. Refer to Section 9-03.8 for the requirements of protected-permissive or permissive-protected left turn operation. Protected left tum phases should be considered where such alternatives cannot be utilized, and one or more of the following conditions exist: 1. Accidents. Five or more left turn accidents for a particular left tum movement during a recent 12-month period. 2. Delay. Left-tum delay of one or more vehicles which were waiting at the beginning of the green interval and are still remaining in the left turn lane after at least 80% of the total number of cycles for one hour. 3. Volume. At new intersections where only estimated volumes are available, the fol- lowing criteria may be used. For a pre- timed signal or a • background-cycle- controlled actuated signal, a left tum vol- ume of more than two vehicles per ap- proach per cycle for a peak hour; or for a traffic-actuated signal, 50 or more left turning vehicles per hour in one direction with the product of the turning and con- flicting throug~ traffic during the peak hour of 100,000 or more. 4; Miscellaneous. Other factors that might be considered, include but are not limited to: impaired sight distance due to horizontal or vertical curvature, or where there is a large percentage of buses and trucks. 9-01.4 Removal of Existing Signals Changes in traffic patterns may result in a situation where a traffic signal is no longer justified. When this occurs, consideration should be given to removing the traffic signal and replacing it with appropriate alternative traffic control devices. 9-6 TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING Traffic Manual 1-1992 ------------------------------------- Figure 9-1 TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS CALC ________ DATE ____ _;__ DIST co RTE PM CHK DATE _____ _ Major St: __________________ Critical Approach Speed Minor St: __________________ Critical Approach Speed Critical speed of major street traffic ~ 40 mph - ----- - - -----□Dr ) RURAL (R) In built up area of isolated community of < 10,000 pop. ---------0 URBAN (U) mph mph WARRANT 1 -Minimum Vehicular Volume 100°/4 SATISFIED YES □ NO □ 80°/4 SATISFIED YES O NO □ 0 MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS (80% SHOWN IN BRACKETS) u R u R APPROACH 1 2 or more I I I I I I I LANES Hour Both Apprchs. 500 350 600 420 Major Street (400) (280) (480) (336) Highest Apprch. 150 105 200 140 Minor Street (120) (84) (160) (112) WARRANT 2 -Interruption of Continuous Traffic 100°/o SATISFIED YES □ NO 0 80 SATISFIED YES □ NO 0 % MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS (80% SHOWN IN BRACKETS) u A u R APPROACH 1 2 or more I I I I I I I LANES Hour Both Apprchs. 750 525 900 630 Major Street (600) (420) (720) (504) Highest Apprch . 75 53 100 70 Minor Street (60) (42) (80) (56) WARRANT 3 -Minimum Pedestrian Volume 100°/o SATISFIED YES □ NO □ REQUIREMENT FULFILLED Pedestrian volume crossing the major street is 100 or more for each of any four hours or is 190 or more during any one Yes □ No □ hour;ANQ There are less_than 60 gaps per hour in the major street traf-Yes □ No □ fie stream of adequate length for pedestrians to cross; Atm The nearest traffic signal along the major street is greater Yes □ No □ than 300 feet; ANQ The new traffic signal will not seriously disrupt progressive Yes □ No □ traffic flow on the major street. The satisfaction of a warrant Is not necessarily justification for a signal. Delay, congestion, confusion or other evidence of the need for right-of-way assignment must be shown. Traffic Manual TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING 9-7 ---------------------------------------1-1992 Figure 9-2 TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS WARRANT 4 -School Crossings Not Applicable ___ -------0 See School Crossings Warrant Sheet D WARRANT 5 -Progressive Movement SATISFIED YES O NO 0 MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS DISTANCE TO NEAREST SIGNAL FULFILLED > 1000 FT. N ft, s ft, E ft, w ft. YES 0 NO □ ON ONE WAY ISOLATED STREETS OR STREETS WITH ONE WAY TRAFFIC SIGNIFICANCE AND ADJACENT SIGNALS ARE SO FAR APART THAT NECESSARY PLATOONING & SPEED CONTROL WOULD BE LOST ~----------------------------------------------ON 2-WAY STREETS WHERE ADJACENT SIGNALS DO NOT PROVIDE NECESSARY PLATOONING AND SPEED CONTROL PROPOSED SIGNALS COULD CONSTITUTE A PROGRESSIVE SIGNAL SYSTEM □ □ WARRANT 6 -Accident Experience SATISFIED YES □ NO □ REQUIREMENTS WARRANT ✓ FULFILLED ONE WARRANT WARRANT 1 -MINIMUM VEHICULAR VOLUME SATISFIED ---------------------------.--OR YES 0 NO □ 80% WARRANT 2 -INTERRUPTION OF CONTINUOUS TRAFFIC SIGNAL WILL NOT SERIOUSLY DISRUUPT PROGRESSIVE TRAFFIC FLOW □ □ ADEQUATE TRIAL OF LESS RESTRICTIVE REMEDIES HAS FAILED TO REDUCE ACCIDENT FREQUENCY □ □ ACC. WITHIN A 12 MONTH PERIOD SUSCEPTIBLE OF CORR. & INVOLVING INJURY OR 2:: $500 DAMAGE -----------------------------------------------MINIMUM REQUIREMENT NUMBER OF ACCIDENTS 5 OR MORE □ □ WARRANT 7 -Systems Warrant SATISFIED YES □ NO □ MINIMUM VOLUME ENTERING VOLUMES -ALL APPROACHES ✓ FULFILLED REQUIREMENT DURING TYPICAL WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR VEH/HR 1000 VEH/HR ---------------------------------- OR DURING EACH OF ANY 5 HRS. OF A SAT. AND/OR SUN. VEH/HR YES ONO □ CHARACTERISTICS OF MAJOR ROUTES MAJOR ST. MINOR ST. HWY. SYSTEM SERVING AS PRINCIPLE NE1WORK FOR THROUGH TRAFFIC ------------------------------------ - - - -- ---- RURAL OR SUBURBAN HWY OUTSIDE OF, ENTERING, OR TRAVERSING A CITY / ~----------------------------------- - ---~----- APPEARS AS MAJOR ROUTE ON AN OFFICIAL PLAN ANY MAJOR ROUTE CHARACTERISTICS MET, BOTH STREETS □ □ The satisfaction of a warrant Is not necessarily justification for a signal. Delay, congestion, confusion or other evidence of the need for right-of-way asslgnmnent must be shown. 9-8 TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING Traffic Manual 1-1991 ------------------------------------- Figure 9-3 TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS WARRANT 8 -Combination of Warrants SATISFIED YES □ NO □ REQUIREMENT WARRANT ✓ FULFILLED TWO WARRANTS 1. MINIMUM VEHICULAR VOLUME SATISFIED 80% 2. INTERRUPTION OF CONTINUOUS TRAFFIC YES □ NO □ WARRANT 9 • Four Hour Volume SATISFIED* YES □ NO □ Aooroach Lanes Both Approaches . Major Street Highest Approaches Min or Street One 2 or more /// Hour * Refer to Figure 9-6 (URBAN AREAS) or Figure 9-7 (RURAL AREAS) to determine if this warrant is satisfied. WARRANT 10 -Peak Hour Delay SATISFIED YES □ NO □ (ALL PARTS MUST BE SATISFIED) 1. The total delay experienced for traffic on one minor street approach controlled by a STOP sign equals or exceeds four vehicle-hours for a one-lane approach and five vehicle-hours for a two-la ne approach; AND YES □ NO □ 2. The volume on the same minor street approach equals or exceeds 100 vph for one moving lane of traffic or 150 vph for two moving lanes; AND YES □ NO □ 3. The total entering volu me serviced during the hour equals or exceeds 800 vph for intersections with fou r or more approaches or 650 vph for intersections with three approaches. YES □ NO □ WARRANT 11 -Peak Hour Volume SATISFIED* YES □ NO □ Aooroach Lanes Both Approaches -Major Street Highest Approaches . Minor Street One 2 or more /// Hour * Refer to Figure 9-8 (URBAN AREAS) or Figure 9-9 (RURAL AREAS) to determine if this warrant is satisfied. The satisfaction of a warrant is not necessarily justification for a signal. Delay, congestion, confusion or other evidence of the need for right-of-way assignment must be shown. Traffic Manual TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING 9-9 ------------------------------------1-1992 Figure 9-4 TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS (Based on Estimated Average Daily Traffic -See Note) URBAN ......................... RURAL ............................. Minimum Requirements EADT 1 . Minimum Vehicular Vehicles per day on Vehicles per day on Satisfied Not Satisfied major street (total of higher-volume minor both approaches) street approach (one Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach direction only) Major Street Minor Street Urban Rural Urban Rural 1 ...................................... 1 ...................................... 8,000 5,600 2,400 1,680 2 or more : ....................... 1 ...................................... 9,600 6,720 2,400 1,680 2 or more ........................ 2 or more ......................... 9,600 6,720 3,200 2,240 1 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 2 or more ......................... 8,000 5,600 3,200 2,240 2. lnteruption of Continuous Traffic Vehicles per day on Vehicles per day on Satisfied Not Satisfied major street (total of higher-volume minor both approaches) street approach ( one direction only) Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach Major Street Minor Street Urban Rural Urban Rural 1 ...................................... 1 •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 12,000 8,400 1,200 850 2 or more ........................ 1 ...................................... 14,400 10,080 1,200 850 2 or more ........................ 2 or more ......................... 14,400 10,080 1,600 1,120 1 ..................................... 2 or more ......................... 12,000 8,400 1,600 1,120 3. Combination Satisfied Not Satisfied 2 Warrants 2 Warrants No one warrant satisfied, but following warrants fulfilled 80% or more ......... 1 2 NOTE: To be used only for NEW INTERSECTIONS or other locations where actual traffic volumes cannot be counted. 9-10 TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING Traffic Manual 1-1992 ----------------------------------- Figure 9-5 SCHOOL PROTECTION WARRANTS CALC _______ _ DATE _____ _ DIST co RTE PM CHK ________ DATE _____ _ Major St : ________________ _ Minor St: ________________ _ Critical Approach Speed Critical Approach Speed mph mph Critical speed of major street traffic 2: 40 mph ______________ D } or RURAL (R) In built up area of isolated community of< 10,000 pop. ______ ----D 0 URBAN (U) FLASHING YELLOW SCHOOL SIGNALS (ALL PARTS MUST BE SATISFIED) Minimum Requirements PART A u Vehicle Volume Each of 200 2 hours School Age Pedestrians Each of 40 Crossing Street 2 hours AND PART B Critical Approach Speed Exceeds 35 mph AND PARTC R 140 40 I Is nearest controlled crossing more than 600 feet away? SCHOOL AREA TRAFFIC SIGNALS (ALL PARTS MUST BE SATISFIED) Minimum Requirements PART A u R Vehicle Volume Each of 500 350 2 hours School Age Pedestrians Each of 2 hours 100 70 Crossing Street ------.... ----0( 500 350 per day AND PART B I ----- Is nearest controlled crossing more than 600 feet away? SATISFIED YES O NO 0 } SATISFIED YES O NO 0 SATISFIED YES O NO 0 SATISFIED YES O NO 0 SATISFIED YES O NO 0 } SATISFIED YES O NO 0 SATISFIED YES O NO 0 Traffic Manual TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING 9-11 ----------------------------------1-1991 500 ::c g; 400 I ::c I-(..) ttl ~ 300 a: a: I-0. en a. a: ~ 200 ow z ::::E -::, ::::E ..J 0 > 100 ::c Q ::c 0 300 400 Figure 9-6 FOUR HOUR VOLUME WARRANT (Urban Areas) .2 OR MORE LANES (MAJOR) & 2 OR MORE LANES (MINOR) 2 OR MORE LANES (MAJOR) & 1 LANE (MINOR) OR 1 LANE (MAJOR) & 2 MORE LANES (MINOR) 1 LANE (MAJOR) & 1 LANE (MINOR) 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 MAJOR STREET• TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES· VPH *NOTE: 115 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOWME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 80 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOWME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE. 9-12 TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING Traffic Manual 1-1991 --------------------------------- ::t: a. > 400 1-::t: 300 WU w< a:O I-a: (/) 8: a:< 200 Ow Z:E :i :::, ..J 0 > ::t: 100 C, :i: 0 200 Figure 9-7 FOUR HOUR VOLUME WARRANT (Rural Areas) ,._-2 OR MORE LANES {MAJOR} 2 OR MORE LANES {MINOR} '---2 OR MORE LANES {MAJOR} & 1 LANE {MINOR} OR 1 LANE {MAJOR} & 2 OR MORE LANES (MINOR) * 1 LANE (MAJOR) & 1 LANE (MINOR) * 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 MAJOR STREET -TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES -VPH * NOTE: 80 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 60 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE. 1000 ~ w w cc ~ Cl) cc 0 z s Traffic Manual TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING 9-13 ----------------------------------1-1991 600 :r: Q. > 500 I :r: (.) cc 400 0 cc Q. Q. cc 300 w 2 ~ _, 0 200 > :r: <., ~ 100 0 Figure 9-8 PEAK HOUR VOLUME WARRANT (Urban Areas) 2 OR MORE LANES (MAJOR) & 2 OR MORE LANES (MINOR) 2 OR MORE LANES (MAJOR) & 1 LANE (MINOR) OR 1 LANE MAJOR) & 2 OR MORE LANES (MINOR) 1 LANE (MAJOR) & 1 LANE (MINOR) --- * * 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 MAJOR STREET -TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES -VPH * NOTE: 150 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 100 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE. 9-14 TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING Traffic Manual 1-1991 ---------------------------------Figure 9-9 PEAK HOUR VOLUME WARRANT (Rural Areas) 500 ------------------......----.------.-----,-----,,----, 0 300 2 OR MORE LANES (MAJOR) & 2 OR MORE LANES (MINOR) 2 OR MORE LANES (MAJOR) & 1 LANE (MINOR) OR 1 LANE (MAJOR) & 2 OR MORE LANES (MINOR) 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 MAJOR STREET-TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES-VPH * NOTE: 100 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 75 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE. 1200 1300 Traffic Manual TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING 9-15 ------------------------------------1-1992 Figure 9-10 DIRECTIONAL TRAFFIC COUNT SHEET ~ < LU (/) a.. z < a: (/) t; LU LU Z O • < LU ..J ..J a.. < LL 1- 0 ~ 0 z INSERT NORTH POINT AM PEAK PM PEAK I I I I I I I I I ( )( )( * ENTIRE COUNT PER IOD NO.OF LANES PE DESTRIANS TOTAL* PEAK :,c C w Cl. 2 Cl. :,c C w Cl. 2 C ~ TOTAL• I I I-/ } I-_ _.. ~' ) ' X - ' \ --.... ....__ \ • ..J C I-0 I- :it C w Cl. 2 Cl. :,c C w Cl. 2 C PEDESTRIANS Not to Scale ~ AM PEAK ___ P_M_P_E-AK--TO_T_A __ L .,,.....,.--,.--,.--,.- ' "-1::===:::=' ===:::' ===' ~ .._ --I I I I~~ ,,.... _::=I =1 ===::;:=1 ~I ~ , ( )( )( ) ~ . I LU ..J a.. < l-o I- (/) LU z < ..J LL 0 0 z DIRECTIONAL TRAFFIC COUNT DIST - - -CO - - -RTE - --PM - -- INTERSECTION GIVE NAME CITY DAY DATE TOTAL* PEAK HOUR TO HOUR NO.OF LANES ____ _ TOTAL VOLU ME AM _____________ _ PEAK HOUR VOLUME PM __________ ---- HOUR VOLUME 9-16 TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING Trame Manual 1-1991 Traffic Signal Development Procedures 9-02 9-02.1 Introduction General requirements for the development of tr:.iffic sig n:.il, lighting and electrica l systems projects are noted in the Project Development Procedures \1anual. The cost of traffic signals on Federal Aid highway projects is eligible for fede ral participation under certain conditions. The preparation of a Project Study Report may be required for major traffic signal lighting and/or electrical system projects for scoping and programming purposes. The Project Develop- ment Procedures Manual and the appropriate Pro- gram Advisor should be co nsulted to determine srecific reporting requirements. 9-02.2 Project Report The District shall prepare a project report of the investigation of condi tions at locations where J. new traffic signal is to be installed, an existing traffic signal is to be modified or an existing traffic signal is to be removed. District Directors arc: authorized to approve project reports in accordance with the cu rrent Departmental policies contained in the Project Development Procedures Manual. Three copies of the District-approved project report shall be forwarded to the Chief. Office of Project Planning and Design. A projec t report sha ll be prepared whether the work is performed by the S rate or by others. General requirements for project reports are noted in the Project Development Procedures Manual. A project report for the installation, modification (except for upgrading projects involving specific equipment) or removal of a traffic signal should incl ude the following specific information: I. Traffic Counts. Both pedestrian and vehicular traffic counts should include the periods of the average day when the signals would appear to be needed most. The counts should be at least eight hours in duration, not necessarily consecutive, but including a.m. and p.m. peak hours. Traffic counts for a new signal shall be shown on appropriate Traffic Signal Warrant Sheets and a Directional Traffic Count Sheet. Where pedestrian volumes are significant, show the volume on each crosswalk for the same periods as the vehicle count. When estimated traffic volumes are used in establishing traffic sig nal warrants, they should be prepared on Form TS-l0D. See Figure 9-4. , Collision Diagram. A collision diagram for the intersection covering the recent accident experience history. The diagram should cover a 3-year interval. 3. Condition Diagram. A condition diagram showing existing roadway conditions. Any railroad grade crossine: within 200 feet of the intersection should be shown. 4. Improvement Diagram. A diagram showing existing and proposed signals, phasing, channelization and other proposed improvements. This may be combined with 1, 2 and/or 3 on a single plan. 5. Estimate. An estimate of the cost of the project (including State furnished materials) and the proposed method of financing. 6. Other Specialized Data When Appropriate: a. Classification of Vehicles. The classification is required when it is a significant factor in affecting intersection capacity.