HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-03-03; City Council; 14574; 1998 Traffic Signal Evaluation Policy- r’4
* WI Y OF CARLSBAD - AGENDA BILL
AB# 14,574
MTG. 3103198
DEPT. PW
TITLE- d
CITY OF CARLSBAD
1998 TRAFFIC SIGNAL EVALUATION POLICY CITY ATTY. 6s
CITY MGW
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Adopt Resolution No. 98-55
Policy.
approving the City of Carlsbad 1998 Traffic Signal Evaluation
ITEM EXPLANATION:
The Transportation Division of the Engineering Department has completed the 1998 Traffic Signal
Evaluation Policy, which also includes the Traffic Signal Qualification List. Prior to 1988, the City of
Carlsbad did not have a list that prioritized warranted traffic signal locations for future installations.
By adopting the Traffic Signal Evaluation Policy with Resolution Number 88-252 on July 19, 1988,
the City Council established the Traffic Signal Evaluation Policy and authorized staff to periodically
update the warranted traffic signal list and present the information to the Traffic Safety Commission and City Council.
The Traffic Safety Commission recommended, by a 3-O vote, at their February 2, 1998 meeting
that the 1998 Traffic Signal Evaluation Policy be adopted by the City Council. This is the fifth
update since 1988, however, the policy for evaluating traffic signals has not been revised from the
originally approved 1988 policy. Approval of the Traffic Signal Evaluation Policy and Traffic Signal
Qualification List does not obligate the City Council to authorize installation of a traffic signal or to
install traffic signals in the order as listed on the Traffic Signal Qualification List.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No impact until a traffic signal is installed. Design and construction of a traffic signal costs about
$125,000. Once installed, yearly operation and maintenance costs for each traffic signal is
approximately $5,000.
EXHIBITS:
1. Resolution No. 98-55 approving the City of Carlsbad 1998 Traffic Signal Evaluation
Policy.
2. 1998 Traffic Signal Qualification List.
3. 1998 Traffic Signal Evaluation Policy.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-
RESOLUTION NO. 98-55
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE 1998 CITY OF
CARLSBAD TRAFFIC SIGNAL EVALUATION POLICY.
WHEREAS, the City of Carlsbad recognizes the need for the installation of traffic signals
at various intersections to promote the safe and efficient movement of people and goods; and
WHEREAS, the City of Carlsbad recognizes the need for an objective policy to determine
when and where traffic signals will be installed in the future; and
WHEREAS, maintaining an up-to-date qualification list of warranted traffic signals will
assist staff when reviewing future Capital Improvement Programs (CIP) or developer projects to
determine the need and schedule of the traffic signal installation; and
WHEREAS, the 1998 Traffic Signal Evaluation Policy contains the 1998 Traffic Signal
Qualification List.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the-City Council of the City of Carlsbad,
California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct.
2. The City Council of the City of Carlsbad hereby adopts the evaluation procedures
and the updated
Evaluation Policy.
Ill
Ill
/Ii
r//
Ul
VI
VI
III
w
vi
vi
vi
Traffic Signal Qualification List as contained in the 1998 Traffic Signal
.
1 3. The Engineering Department of the City of Carlsbad is hereby authorized to
2 periodically update the Traffic Signal Qualification List as contained in the Traffic Signal
3 Evaluation Policy and present such updated list to the Traffic Safety Commission and the City
4 Council for review and approval.
5
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Carlsbad City Council
6 held on the 3rd day of March , 1998 by the following vote, to wit:
7 AYES: Council Members Lewis, Nygaard, Kulchin and Hall
8 NOES: None
er Finnila
11
12 .
13 ATTEST:
14
15 /
ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ, City Clerk
18
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
(SEAL)
a
i
s
u
a
5
CITY OF CARLSBAD
TRAFFIC SIGNAL EVALUATION
POLICY
PREPARED BY:
TRANSPORTATION SECTION
TRAFFIC OPERATIONS GROUP
JANUARY 1998
CITY OF CARLSBAD
TRANSPORTATION SECTION
TRAFFIC SIGNAL EVALUATION POLICY REPORT
JANUARY 1998
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE NO.
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
POLICY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........... 2
GENERAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..-................................................................................................ 2
DATA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............. 3-4
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
CITY OF CARLSBAD
Transportation Section
TRAFFIC SIGNAL EVALUATlON POLICY REPORT
INTRODUCTION
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 72,000 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 Cadsbad’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 88 signalized intersections in Carlsbad. Ownership and maintenance responsibility is
as follows:
n 79 signals owned and maintained by the City of Carlsbad (7 of which are partially
maintained by Caltrans).
n 9 signals owned and maintained by Caltrans.
This report has been prepared with the purpose of identifying and evaluating future traffic
signals at various locations throughout the City of Carlsbad. It is the mechanism to continually
re-evaluate and update potential traffic signal locations 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 CALTRANS traffic 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
evaluate 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 establishing a Citywide listing of one of the 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 1990,1992,1994, and 1996. This report is an
update of the 1996 qualification list. All locations included on the list have met California
Department of Transportation criteria (CALTRANS Traffic Signal Warrants) for the installation of
a traffic signal.
POLICY
As with most traffic engineering departments, it has been the policy of the City of Cartsbad
Transportation Section 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 mdvement 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 for
signalization than one higher on the list. The list establishes locations for which preliminary
engineering should take place and then be reevaluated before proceeding to final design.
Traffic signals are not installed unless written authorization from the City Engineer directs their
installation.
In recent years, traffic signals have experienced a technical evolution. Changes have evolved
from pm-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.
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
CALTRANS Traffic Signal Warrants.
Traffic Signal Qualification Rating System factors include the following:
Factor l- Minimum Vehicular Volume
This factor considers the fact that at certain traffic volume levels the delay can be reduced and
orderly tlow through an intersection enhanced by signal controls.
Factor 2 - lnterruution 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 Sianals
This factor rewgnizes 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 - Proaressive Movement or Sianal Svstems
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 timing plan.
Factor 6 - Accident Histow
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 .O accident per million vehicles.
Factor 7 - SDecial Conditions
This factor rewgnizes 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 MAXlMUY RELATIVE QUALlFlCATlON POINTS WEIGHT
1 Minimum Vehicular Volume 15 19%
2 Interruption IO 12%
3 Pedestrian Volume 10 12%
4 School Area 10 12%
5 Signal System . 5 7%
6 Accident History 15 19%
7 Special Conditions 15 19%
80 TOTAL POSSIBLE Points 100K
0 0
0 0
0 d F
m rD 7 7
3 3 d d
9 'C 0 9 z 'C n c-0 E 6 .G I 8 25 'C a z 5 2 z a $ ':z",; s-0 m-c rnrug E-2 s!c rnrrn~ I-ILL-
m -r
2 N. t
N n 0 c
TRAFFIC SIGNALS CURRENTLY BEING DESIGNED/CONSTRUCTED
1. College Boulevard/A&on Avenue
2. Cannon Road/LEG0 Drive
3. Alga Road/Melrose Drive
, TRAFFIC SIGNAL LOCATlONS INVESTIGATED
(Did not meet CALTRANS Signal Warrants)
1. Cannon Road/Car Country Drive
2. Cartsbad Boulevard/Cherry Avenue
3. Cartsbad Village Drive/Pontiac Drive
4. Carlsbad Village Drive/Tamarack Avenue
5. Chestnut Avenue/Harding Street
6. Chestnut Avenue/Pi0 Piw Drive
7. Chestnut Avenue/Valley Street
8. Grand Avenue/Madison Street
9. Hasp WayMlintergreen Drive/Grove Avenue
10. La Costa Avenue/Calle Madero
11. Tamarack Avenue/Pontiac Drive 12. Tamarack Avenue/Skyline Road
13. Tamarack Avenue/Sunnyhill Drive
-
TRAFFIC SIGNAL QUALIFICATION RATING SYSTEM
Points are assigned based upon the graph beiow which considers major and minor street
vofumes and capacity. The entering volumes are based upon 4410~ counts (usually from 200
to 6:00 P.M. on a weekday). A maximum of 15 points may be assigned to this factor.
NOTEi
1. AuvowMEsAREFoR4HolJm(wsuAuY26P.AIL)
2 bAAxMUMPo~-15
ER
700
600
v,
i!i
g
SW
t
ti
400
s # 300
jE 200
100
I I I i I I I I I I
“‘I I
2-2Lanesa. lea 1800 aoao PO0 2400 2808 28m eaoo a00 3400 8ew w
1-2814l~neSt ZOO 2400 m a#KI 3MO 3aDo 8400 w.eaao 4ooo 42w 4400+
24LaneSla. ‘2800 9ooo a00 8400 8800 8Mo 4ooo ra#, uoo 4600 41100+
24haWay Sta. 3200 3400 3840 8aco 4wo 4200 4400 4800 4800 so00 52#) m+
TO?‘AL VOLUME ENTERING INTERSECTION
Factor 2 - Interrmtion of Continuous Traffic
Vehicles on through streets, if uncontrolled, tend to travel through minor street intersections
at speeds that make it difficutt 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 10 points may be assigned to this factor.
3450-3749
37504049
40504349
43!SOver
7
8
9
10
10,700
11,600
12,400
12.500 And UD
A traffic signal may be needed where many pedestrians cross a major street. A maximum
of 10 points may be assigned to this factor.
3200
1600
1200
1. Ml VOLUMES ARE FOR 4-HOURS (USUALLV 24 P.M.) 2 MAXIMUM POINTS - 10
3. NO POINTS IF LESS THAN 100 PEDESTRIANS DURlNb THE 4 HOUR PERIOD.
4. NO POINTS IF LESS THAN 12W MAJOR STREET VEHICLES DURING THE 4 HOUR
PERlOO.
loo 200 600 800 lam 1200 l-400 1SOOL
PEDESTRIANS CROSSING MAJOR STREET
C
Factor 4 - School Area Traffic Slanalq
1500
1100
!t
g u E 750
d
%
%o
-
j
Points are assigned base1 upon the number of school age pedestrians crossing ttw 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 10 points may be assigned for this factor.
1400
1000
200
--m
w-w--
100 150 200 60 100 140 350 (urbwr) 220 otur~l)
PEDESTRIANS CROSSING THE MAJOR STREET
(Per 2-Hour Period)
NO= No pointa will ba as&ad H nearest controlled crossing b leea
than 600 foot away.
Factor 5 - Procrre8slve Movement or Slanal Svstems
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.
ACCIDENTS POINTS
o-2 0 3 1 4 3
5 . 5
6 6 7 7
6 6
9 9
10 10
11 11
12 12
13 13
14 14
15 &Over 15
NOTE: Use the average of the last two years, provided the intersection has been in operation for two years.
Factor7 Swc . Ial CondItIona
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 nrral 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 condftions and the points that were assigned follows:
1. Four-way STOP Control (5 points): Typically, right-angle accldent 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 #l and 12 .
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 refiect the potential benefit to
school-age pedestrians and bicycle traffic.
3. Horizontal and Vertical Cuwature 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 addiion to worsening the problems
caused by visibility restrictions, very high approach speeds can worsen the seventy of
the accidents which occur.
901.1 lntroductlon
Auafficsignalisanelectricallypoweredtraffie
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
arediscussedinthischapterzTrafKcControlSignals,
Pedestrian Crossing Signals, Ramp Metering
Signals, Flashing Beacons, Lane-use Control
Signals,Tra&ccontrOlatMovablcBridgcs,~~ty
Control of Traffic Signals, Trafk Signals for One-
lane, Tweway Facilities and Traffic Signals for
Construction Zones.
Trafficcomrolsignalsaredevicesforthecontrol
of vehicle and pedestrian traffic. They assign the
right of way to the various traffic movements.
Traffic control signals have one or more of the
following advantages:
1. They provide for the orderly movement of
traffic.
2. They increase the traffic handling capacity
of the intersection.
3. They reduce the frequency of certain types
of accidents, especiaIiy the right angle type.
4. They can be coordinated to provide fa
continuous or nearly continuous movement
of traffic at a deftite speed.
5. They pemit minor street traffic, vehicular
or pedestrian, to enter or cross continuous
traffic onthe major street.
Experience shows that the number of right-
angle collisionsmay decrease after the installation
of signals, but the number of rearend 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
precededbyathoroughstudyoftrafficandroadway
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
typeofinstalladonandthetimi.ngprogrammeetthc
requirements of traffk.
901.2 Traffic Signal Warrants
The justification for the installation of a traffic
signal at an intersection is based on the warrants
statedinthisManualandintheManualOnUniform
Traffic Control Devices published by the Federal
Highway Administration (FHWA). 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
WaRiUltS.
When the 85th percentile speed of traffic on the
majorstreetexceeds64km/hineitheranurbanor
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.
Traffic Manual TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND UGHTING 9-l
1.19%
CHAPTER 9
TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING
Tmffic Signals, Basic Information and Warrants 9-01
9-2
7-1941
TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING Traffic Manual
Figures g-1,9-2,9-3 and 9-4 are examples of
warrant sheets. Warraut Sheet 9-4 should be used
only fornew intersections orotherlocations where
it is not nasonable to count actual traffic volumes.
The installation of a traffic signal should be
considered if one of more of the warrants listed
below are met:
A. W-1 -Minimum Vehickk 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 au
average day the traflic volumes given in the table
below exist on the major street and on the higher-
volume minor street approach to the intersection.
Number of
lanes for
moving
t&iiCOn
each approach
Vehicles per Vehicles per
houron houron
ma* street hightT-VOhUlM?
(totalofboth minor-street
approaches) an-W= directiculally)
Major St. Minor St. Vrbuzn Rural Urban Rural
1 1 5cn 350 150 105
2ormore 1 600 420 150 105
2ormore 2ormoxe 600 420 200 140
1 Zormore 500 350 200 140
The major streetand the minor street volumes
areforthesame8hours. Duringthosc8hoursthe
direction of higher volume on the minor street may
be on one approach during some hours and on the
opposite approach dk.ng other hours.
B. Wanunt 2 - Intenxption of Continuous
Tgk.
The Inten-upAon of Continuous Traffic wamnt
applies to operating conditions where the traffic
volume on a major street is so heavy that traMicon
aminorint ersecthg street suffers excessive delay
orhazardinenteringor crossing the major stxeet.
The warrant is satisfied when, far 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 disqt progressive traffic flow.
Numberof Vehicbper Vehicles per
lawstbr houron houron
moving major street higher-volume
tdiiCO0 (totalofborh minor-stleet
=w)Pl-h approaches) approech(- climxkmollly)
Major St. Minor St. VtM Rural V&an Rural
1 1 750 525 75 53
2ormore 1 900 630 75 53
2orma 2ormonz 900 630 100 70
1 2ormore 750 525 100 70
The major street and the minor street volumes
are f6r 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. Warrud3-MinimumPeddrian Vohtme.
A traffic signal may be warranted where the
pedestrian volume crossing the major street at an
intusectionormid-blocklocationduringanaverage
day is:
100 or more far each of any four hours; or
190 or more during any one hour.
Traffic Manual TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LlGHTlNG 9-3
7.*am
lbepedestrianvolumecrossingthemajorstreet
may kreducedasmuch asSO%ofthevaluesgiven
ahove when the pmdominant pedestrian crossing
speed is below 1 m/s.
In addition to a minimumpedesuk 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 pericd when
the pedestrian volume criterion is satiskd. Where
thereisadividedstreethavingamedianofsuffkient
width for the pedestrian(s) to wait, the requirement
appiies separately to each direction of vehicular
t&f%.
Where coordinated traffic signals on each side
of the study location provide for platooned traffic
which result in fewer 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 90 m and where a new traffic
signal atthestudylocation wouldnotundulyrestrict
platooned flow of traffic. Curbside parking at non-
intersecti~locati~sshouldbeprohibitcdfarU)m
in advance of and 6 m 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.
Signalsinstalledaccording tothiswarrantshall’
beequippedwithpedesuianindicationsconforming
to requirements set forth in other sections of this
Manual.
D. Warmnt 4 - ScbolAmws.
See Chapter -10 of this Manual.
E. Wamzn~ 5 - Pmgmssive Movement
The Regressive Movement warrant is satisfied
when:
1. Onaone-waystreetoronastreetwhichhas
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. Ona~~waystrcet,whaeadjacentsignals
do not provide the necessary &gree of
platooning and speed control and the
proposed and adjacent signals could
constitute 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
warrantshouldnotbeconsideredwheretheresubant
signal spacing would be less than 300 m.
F. Wammt 6 - Acci&nt Experience.
The Accident Experience warrant is satisfkd
when:
1. Five or more reported accidents of types
susceptible to correction by traffic signal
control have occurred within a 1Zmonth
period, each accident involving pMsonal
injuryorpqertydamagetoanapparent
2. Adequate trial of less restrictive remedies
with satisfactory observance and
e&mementhasfailedtoreducetheaccident
frequency; AND
9-4
7.99%
TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING Traffic Manual
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. W-t 7 - Systems Wwant.
Atrafficsignalinstallationatsomei.nterse&ons
may be warranted to encourage concentration and
organization of t&Tic flow networks. The systems
warrantisapplicablewhenthecommonintersection
of two ormore majorroutes has a total existing, or
immediately projecte& 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/cK Sun&y.
A majorroute as used in the above warrant has
one or more of the following characteristics:
1. Itispartofthesueetorhighwaysystemthat
serves as the principal network forthrough
tlaic flow;
2. It includes rural or suburban highways
outside of, entering or traversing a city; or
3. It appears as a majar route on an official
plansnchasamajorstteetplaninanurban
area traffic and transportation study.
H. W-t 80 Combination of Wanants.
In exceptional cases, a signal may be justified
where no single w-t is. satisfied but where
Warrants 1 and 2 are satisfied to the extent of 80
percent or more of the stated numerical values.
I. Warrant 9 -Four Hour Volume W-t.
The Four Hour Volume Wanant is satisfied,
when for each of any four hours of an average day,
theplottedpoiutsrepresentingtbevehiclesperhour
on the major street (total of both approaches) and
the corresponding vehicles per hour on the higher
volume minor street approach(one direction only)
aUfaUabovethecurveinFigure9-6fortheexisting
combination of approach lanes. When the 85th percentile speed of the major
street traffic exceeds 64 km/h, or when the
intersection lies within a built-up area of an isolated
community havingapopulationoflessthan lO,CKlO,
the four hour volume requirement is satisfied when
theplottedpointsreferredtofall abovethectuvein
figtue 9-7 for the existing combination of approach
lanes.
J. Wammt 10 -Peak Hour Delay Warrur&
The Peak Hour Delay Warrant is intended for
application where tra.Ec conditions are such that
for one hour of the day, minor street traffic suffers
unduedelayinenteringorcrossingthemajorstreet.
The peak hour delay warrant is satisfied when the
conditions given below exist for one hour (any four
consecutive 15minute 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-hoursforatwo-laneapproach; AND
2. The volume on the same minor street
approachequalsorexceeds 1OOvphforone
moving lane of traffic or 150 vph for two
moving lanes; AND
-
Traffic Manual TRAFFIC SlGNALS AND LIGHTlNG 9-5
7.19%
3. The total entering volume sliced during
the hour equals or exceeds 800 vph for
intersections with four or more approaches
or 650 vph for intersections with thtee
approaches.
K. WarmntII-PeakHourVoiumeWammL
ThePeakHourVolumeWarrantisintendedfor
application where traffic conditions are such that
for one hour of the day minor street traffic suffers
uaduedelayin entering orcrossingthemajorstreet.
The peak hourvolume warrant is satisfied when
theplottedpoint,representingthevehiclesperhour
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
Figureg-8 for the existing combination of approach
lanes.
When the 85th percentile speed of major street
traffic exceeds 64 km/h, or when the in-on
lies withii a built-up area of an isolatedcommunity
having a population of less than 10,000, the peak
hour volume warrant is satisfied when the plotted
poin& referred to above, falls above the curve in
Figure 9-9 far the existing combination of approach
lanes.
841.3 Guidelines for Le?t-Turn Phases
Since separate signal phases for protected left
turns will reduce the green time available for other
phases,altematemeansofhandlinglefttumconflicts
should be considered first.
The most likely possibilities are:
1. Prohibit& 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 trai?ic.
2. Geometric changes to eliminate the left
turn. An effective change would be a
complete separation or acomplete orpartial
“clover leaf’ at grade. Any of these, while
elimiming left turn+ requires additional
cost and right of way.
3. Rovideprohtcted-ptrmissiveorpermissive-
protected left turn operation. The protected
left turn interval may be prohibited during
certainperiodsofthedaytoallowonly
permissive intervals for left turn movement
in order to increase the green time available
for other phases. Refer to Section 9-03.8
fortherequirementsofprotected-pennEve
or permissive-protected left turn operation.
Pmtec&lefttum phasesshouldbeconsidered
where such altematives cannot be utilized, andone
or more of the following conditions exist:
1. Accidents. Five or more left turn accidents
foraparticularleft tummovementduringa
recent 12-month period.
2. Delay. Left-turn delay of one or more
vehicleswhichwerewaitingatthebeginning
ofthegreenimervalandarestillremai&g
inthelefttutnlaneafteratleast80%ofthe
total number of cycles for one hour.
3. Volume. At new intersections where only
estimated volumes are available, the
following criteria may be used. For a
9-6 7.lna6 TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING Traffic Manual
pretimed signal or a background-cycle-
controlledactuatedsignal,alefttumvolume
of more than two vehicles per approach per
cycle for a peak hour, or for a traffic-
actuated signal, SO or more left turning
vehicles per hour in one direction with the
product of the turning and conflicting
through traffic during the peak hour of
100,ooo or mom.
901.4 Removal of Existing Signals
Changes in traffic patterns may, result in a
situationwhcrcatrafficsignalisnolongerjustified.
When this occurs, consideration should be given to
removing the traffic signal and replacing it with
appropriate altunative traffic conqol devices.
4. MisceZZ~w. Other factors that might be
considered, include but are not limited to:
impakdsightdistanceduetohorizontalor
vertical cuwature, or where there is a large
percentage of buses and trucks.
-
Traffic Manual TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING
Figure Q-1
TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS
9-7
I-19M
CALC DATE
DIST CD RTE Km CHK DATE
Major St: CrktcatAfqroachSpeed
Minor St: CrtticatAppmachSpeed
Crtttcalspeedofrnajorstreettraffii > 64km/h-.------------ f
tnbulupareaofhdatedcommunitydC10.000pap. _________ 0 >
RURAL (FL)
Cl URBAN (U)
WARRANT 1 - Minimum Vehicular Volume 1Mm SATISFIED YES 0 NO 0
80% SATlSFlED YES 0 NO 0
UIR UIR
APPROACH LANES 1 2ormore
soulAppels. 500 350 Ma)Df slmet ww (2eo) lz 4% HiiestApprcll. 350 105
Mmrsmet 11201 fa41
WARRANT 2 - Interruption of Continuous Traffic 100% SATISFIED YES 0 NO 0
80% SATlSFlED YES 0 NO 0
UIR UIR
APPROACH LANES 1 2ormom ,
BothApprchs. 750 525 900 630 Major street WV (420) mm eo4~
i!izEGr~ 53 100
$1 _ (42) _,W $1 _
WARRANT 3 - Minimum Pedestrian Volume 100% SATISFIED YES 0 NO 0
I REOUIREMEM I
Pedestrian volume crossing the major street is 190 or more
for each of any four hours or is 190 or more during any one
There are less than 90 gaps per hour in the major street traf-
fic stream of adequate length for pedestrians to cross: AND
The nearest traffic signal along the major street is greater
than 90 m; &&j
The new traffii signal will not seriously disrupt progressive
traffic flow on the major street.
FULFILLED I ~ Yes Cl No 0 -4 Yes 0 No 0
Yes 0 No q 1
Yescl~D ( I
The satisfaction of a warrant is not neceeearity Justification for a signal; evidence of the need for right-of-way assignment must be shown. Delay, congestion, confusion or other 2s
9-6
7-1996
TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING
Figure 9-2
Traffic Manual
TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS
WARRANT 4 - School Areas
WARRANT 5 - Progressive &lovement
Nol Applicable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . cl
see school Pmtection Warrants Sheet Cl
‘SATISFIED YES 0 NOD
Ml NlMUM REOUIREMENTS I DlSTANCE TO NEAREST SlGNAL FULFILLED 1 >3OOm N m, S m, E m, W
ON ONE WAY lSOLATED STREETS OR STREElS WITH ONE WAY TRAFFlC SIGNIFICANCE AND ADJACENT SIGNALS ARE SO FAR APART THAT NECESSARY PIATOONING a SPEED CONTROL WOULD BE LOST -----------------------------------------------
ON 2-WAY STREETS WHERE ADJACENT SIGNALS DO NOT PROVlDE NECESSARY PLATOONING AND
SPEED CONTROL PROPOSED SIGNALS COULD CONSTlTUlE A PROGRESSIVE SIGNAL SYSTEM
WARRANT 6 -Accident Experience SATlSFlED YES0 NO0
REOUIREMENTS WARRANT J FULFILLED
ONE WARRANT WARRANT 1 - MNIMUM VEHlCUlAR VOLUME
SATlSFlED -----------------------------..- OR so% WARRANT 2 - INTERRUPTKJN OF CONTlNUOUS TRAFflC y=cl WEI
SIGNAL WILL NOT SERIOUSLY DISRUPT PROGRESSIVE TRAFFtC FLM cl cl
ADEQUATE TRIAL OF LESS RESTRICTlIfE REMEDIES HAS FAILED TO REDUCE ACCIDENT FREOUENCY q cl
ACC. WITHIN A 12 MONTH PERIOD SUSCEPTIBLE OF CORR. a INVOLVlNG INJURY OR 1 $500 DAMAGE ----------------c------------------------------.
WNlMUM REOUIREMENT NUMBER OF ACCIDENTS
SORMORE cl Cl .
WARRANT 7 - Systems Warrant SATISFIED YES 0 NO 0
I MINIMUM VOLUME
REQUIREMENT I ENTERING VCLUMES - ALL APPROACHES
I 1000 VEHIHR ’ t DURlNG TYPICAL WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR VEIUHR
--------------------------------
OR
DURlNG EACH OF ANY 5 HAS. OF A SAT. ANOlOR SUN. VEWHR
I-
I CHARACTERlSTlCS OF MAJOR ROUTES MAJOR ST. MINOR ST.
HWY. SYSTEM SERVING AS PRINCIPLE NETWORK FOR THROUGH TRAfflC -----------------------------------------I------
RURAL OR SUBURBAN HWY OUTSIDE OF, ENTERING. OR TRAVERSING A CITY --------------~--,---,-,,,,,,,,,,,,,.,,,,-- ------
APPEARS AS MAJOR ROUTE ON AN OFFlClAL PLAN
ANY MAJOR ROUTE CHARACTERlSTlCS MET. BOTH STREETS
FULFILLED
YESONDO
0 cl
The satistsction of a wamnt is not necessarily )ustifkation for a signal. Delay, congestion, confuslon or othef ewldence of the need for right-of-way aesignment must be shown.
Traffic Manual TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING 9-9
7-lB%
Figure 9-3
TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS
WARRANT 8 - Combination of Warrants SATISFIED YES 0 NO 0
REQUIREMENT WARRANT J FULFtLLED
TWO WARRANTS 1. MINIMUM VEHKXJLAR VOLUME
SATISFIED
80% 2. INTERRuPTloN OF coNnNtJous TRAFFIC =cl Nuzl
WARRANT 9 - Four Hour Volume SAlISflED* YES q NO 0
Approach Lanes
BothI’#mdes - MajorStreet
Highest Approaches - Minor Street
one Elk! HOW
II
* Refer to Fmre 96 (URBAN AREAS) or Fwre 9-7 (RURAL AREAS) to determine if this warrant is satisfied.
WARRANT 10 -Peak Hour Delay
(ALL PARTS MUST BE SATISFIED) SATISFIED YES q NO 0
1. The total defay experienced for traffic on one minor street approach controlled by a STOP sign equals or exceeds four vehicfehours for a onelane approach and fiie vehicle-hours for a twofane approach; AC&! YES 0 NO 0
2.
3.
The vofume on the same minor street approach equals or exceeds 100 vph for
one moving lane of traffic or 150 vph for two moving lanes; m YES q NO 0
The total entering vofume serviced during the hour equals or exceeds 600 vph for intersections with four or more approaches or 650 vph for intersections with three approaches. YES 0 NO 0 .
WARRANT 110 Peak Hour Volume
Approach Lanes
Both Approaches - Major Street
Highest Approaches - Minor Street i
SATISFIED* YES 0 NO q
One %ie f-four
P
* Refer to Figure 9-8 (URBAN AREAS) or Figure 9-9 (RURAL AREAS) to determine if this warrant is satisfied. __
The sattsfactlon of a warrant ts not tbecmsarily justlfkation far a stgnal. Delay, congestkn, confusion or ether evfdence t ot the need for rtght+H-way assignment must be shown.
9-10
7-198
TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING Tmff ic Manual
Figure 94
TRAFflC SJGNAL WARRANTS
(Based on Estimated Average Dally Traffic - See Note)
URBAN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . RURAL Minimum Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . EADT
1. Minimum Vehicular
Satisfied Not satisfied
Number of lanes for moving Iraffic on each approach
Vehicles per day on Vehicles per day on
major street (total of higher-volume minor
bolhapproaches) street approach (one
direction only)
Major Street Minor Street Rural Urban Rural
1 . . . ..s................................ 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,000 5,600 2,400 1,680
2 or more . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 I..................................... 9,600 6,720 2.400 1,680
2 of more . . . ..-............... 2 or more . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,600 6,720 3,200 2.240
1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 or mom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,000 5,600 3.200 2,240
2. lnten~ption of Continuous Traffii
Safisfii Nof satisfied _
Number of lanes for moving traffi on each approach
Vehicles per day on
major street (total of
bothapproaches)
V8hiikS per day on
hiih8FVdum8 minor
street approach (one
direction only)
Major Street Minor Street Urban Rural Urban Rural
1 . . . . . . . . . . . . ..*...................*... 1 . . . ..*....*.....................**.... 12,000 6,400 1,200 050
2 or more . . . . . . . . . . . . ..-....... 1 . .._............-..................... 14,400 10.080 1,200 850
2 cf more . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 or more . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..-.. 14,400 10,080 1,600 1,120
1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 or more . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,060 8,400 1,600 ; 1120 1
3. Combination
safiified NtA Satklii
No one warrant satisfd, but following warrants
fulfilled 80% or rmre . . . . . . . . .
1 2
2 Wanants 2 warrants
Nom Tob8tmedonlyforNEwlNTERsEcnoNsofoth8r loutiomwh8mRlsnot-to
abuntetualtmttkvolumes
26
Traffic Manual TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING 9-11
?a%
Figure 9-5
SCHOOL PROTECTION WARRANTS
.
CALC DATE
iiizCORTEKPM CHK DATE
Major St: cmicalAppr=hSpeed
Minor St: Critical Approach Speed
km/h
km/h
Criticalspeedofmajorstreettiaffii ‘64kmlh ____________ -_ g
InbuHlupareaoflsolatedcommunitydc1O,000pop.,,,--,----o >
RURAL (R)
0 URBAN (U)
FLASHING YELLOW SCHOOL SIGNALS SATISFIED YES
(ALL PARTS MUST BE SATISFIED)
Minimum Reauirements .
* AND
PART B
Critical Approach Speed Exceeds 56 km/h
AND
PART C
SATISFIED
0
cl
SATISFIED YES 0 NO 0
Is nearest controlled crossing more than 180 m away? .SATlSFlED YES Cl NO 0
SCHOOL AREA TRAFFIC SIGNALS SATlSflED YES 0 NO q (ALL PARTS MUST BE SATISFIED)
SATlSflED YES q NO cl
PART B
Is nearest controlled crossing more than 180 m away? SATISFIED YES 0 NO [3
24
9-12
7-1008
TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING
Figure 9-6
FOUR HOUR VOLUME WARRANT
(Urban Areas)
Traffic Manual
-2 OR MORE LANES (MAJOR) 6 2 OR MORE UNES (MINOR)
2 OR MORE LANES (MAJOR) & 1 LANE (MINOR)
400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100
MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH
1200
I
‘Nom
115VPHAPPUESASTHEWWERTHRESHOLDWlJJMEFORAMlMORSrREEl APPRWCNWl7NlWOORMORElANESAND6OVPN APPuEsAsTHEmwER TtlRESNOLD VOUJME FOR A NINOR STREET APmoAcNlNtawrrNoNELANE.
Traffic Manual TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND IJGHTING 9-13
74996
Figure 9-7
FOUR HOUR VOLUME WARRANT
(Rural Areas)
E > ’ 300 4 ua w k% ‘PE % 200 $y I3
B g 100 = A
0
2 OR MORE LANES (MAJOR) 2 OR MORE LANES (RINdR,
- 2 OR MDRE LANES (MAJOR) A 1 LANE (MINOR)
OR 1 IANE (MAJOR) & 2 OR MORE LANES (WINOR)
1 LANE(MAJOR)&l LANE(RdNOR)-
200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
MAJOR STREET -TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH
*NOlEt
80VPHAPWESASTHELMHERTHRESHOU)VD~EKHIAMlNORSTREEt APPROACHWIlHTWDORYORELANESAND6OVPH APPUESASTHEIDWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE.
9-14
7-1996
TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING Traffic Manual
Figure 9-8
PEAK HOUR VOLUME WARRANT
(Urban Areas)
B
? 500 r
w’$ 2 0 400
k E
= 2 300 e; rz g 200
3 i 100
0 1 LANE (MAJOR) & 1 LANE (MNOR)
II
400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800
MAJORSTREET-TOTAl.OFBOTHAPPROACHES-VPH
2 OR WRE iANES (MA&BR) & 2 OR MORE LANES (MINOR)
150VPHA~ASTHEUrmERTHRESn~WKUMEFORAMiNOR~
APPROlACH~TWOORMORELANESANDlaoV~APW~ASTHE~ THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR m WPRMCHING WITH ONE LANE.
I
?2
-
Traffic Manual TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING 9-15
7-1986
Figure 9-9
PEAK HOUR VOLUME WARRANT
(Rural Areas)
300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300
MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH
~~VPHAPPUESASTm-lHEWOLD VOUMEFORAYlNORSlNEEl APPROlMmW~TWOOCI~LAWESAND75VPHAPPUESASTHEUrmeR THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPN-ING WITH ONE LANE.
33