Agenda 06/22/2010 Item #16A 9
Agenda Item No. 16A9
June 22, 2010
Page 1 of 24
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Recommendation to accept a Pedestrian Signal Warrant Report and approve the
installation and operation of a Pedestrian Traffic Signal at the intersection of Radio Road
(CR 856) at San Marcos Boulevard, at an annual maintenance cost of approximately
$1,500.00.
OBJECTIVE: To request the Board to accept a Pedestrian Signal Warrant Study Report and
approve a pedestrian traffic si!,'Ilal be constructed, activated and maintained at the intersection of
Radio Road and San Marcos Boulevard with any and all applicable Federal, State, and County
standards and specifications governing such traffic control devices.
CONSIDERATIONS: Florida Statute !)316.130(7) (b) requircs that vehicles come to a stop and
remain stopped to allow a pedestrian to cross a roadway when a pedestrian is in the crosswalk
and signage is provided. If signage is not provided, motorists are required to yield the right-of-
way, but are not required to stop if it is not needed. The 2009 Manual on Uniform Traffic
Control Devices (MUTCD) contains provisions to enhance pedestrian crossing safety by
utilizing "Stop Here for Pedestrians" signs (RI-5c) within Section 2B.I1. The purpose of the
signs defined by the MUTCD is to enhance the safety of the pedestrians by giving the motorist
increased notification that pedestrians may be using the crosswalk.
In March 2010, Stop Here for Pedestrian signs and pavement markings were installed to
supplement the existing Pedestrian Crossing signs (WI 1-2) in accordance with Section 2B.12,
Section 2C.50 and Section 38.18 of the MUTCD. During a two week period, motorists were not
complying with the state law and it was reported by many that the signs and their respective
meaning was confusing. A number of rear end collisions occurred during this time. On April
13,2010, the Stop Here for Pedestrians signs were removed. The Pedestrian Crossing signs were
left in place.
Following the removal of thc Stop Here for Pedestrian signs, it was determined that a signal
warrant analysis should be performed to see if a pcdestrian traffic signal is warranted at this
location.
Florida Statute 93 16Jl06 provides that the County "may place and maintain such traffic control
devices which conform to the manual and specifications of the Department of Transportation
upon all streets and highways under their original jurisdiction as they shall deem necessary to
regulate, warn or guide traffic." A traffic engineering study (attached). performed and approved
by a Professional Engineer registered to practice i.n the State of Florida. has concluded with the
determination that the subject intersection meets the minimum warrants for signalization, as set
forth in the MUTCD. Specifically, Warrant 4, Condition A of the MUTCD was found to be
satisfied. Staff of the County's Traffic Opcrations Section concurs with that determination and
installation of a traffic signal at this location is within Collier County Access Management
Guidelines.
Collier County Traffic Operations will be providing the design, most materials (mast arms,
controller cabinet, etc.) and inspection of the work. A signal contractor under an Annual
Contract will be providing labor and installation of the signal.
Agenda Item No. 16A9
June 22, 2010
Page 2 of 24
Lighting within the crosswalk area will also be improved with the addition of the traffic signal.
Currently arterial street lighting exists only on the north side of Radio Road. We have requested
that Florida Power and Light install two additional street lights on the south side of Radio Road
to provide better illumination of the crosswalk. This issue becomes more critical with the
completion of the landscaping beautification project along this section of Radio Road.
FISCAL IMPACT: Work for the sil,'Ilal installation has already been budgeted and will done
using one of the County's annual contracts. Costs for this work will be approximately $55,000.
Collier County Traffic Operations will supply most materials for the installation using parts and
equipment already in stock. Costs for those parts and equipment are estimated at approximately
$21,000, resulting in a total cost for the signal to be $76,000. Upon inspection and acceptance,
Collier County will assume responsibility for the operation and maintenance of the signal,
including electricity billing, at an average annual maintenance cost of approximately $] ,500 for
this signal location, paid for through the nonnal Traffic Signal Maintenance, electricity, and
Signal Section personnel funds in the annual Traffic Operations 101 Funds budget. The
operating and maintenance costs for this signal are far less than it would be for a regular signal as
only one roadway, Radio Road, is signalized. There is far less equipment in the field to maintain
and operate and, thus, costs are considerably less.
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item has been reviewed and approved by the County
Attorney's Office and is legally sufficient for Board action....SRT.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: ThIS action will result in no growth management
impact.
RECOMMENDATION: That thc Board of County Commissioners accept a Pedestrian Signal
Warrant Study Report and approve that a pedestrian traffic signal be constructed, activated and
maintained at the intersection of Radio Road and San Marcos Boulevard in accordance with any
and all applicable Federal, State, and County standards and specifications governing such traffic
control devices.
Prepared By: Dale A. Bathon, P.E., Principal Project Manager, Traffic Engineering
Department, Growth Managcment Division -- Capital Construction and Maintenance
Attachment: Pedestrian Signal Warrant Study Report
Agenda Item No. 16A9
June 22, 2010
Page 3 of 24
COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Meeting Date:
16A9
Recommendation to accept a Pedestrian Signal Warrant Report and approve the installation
and operation of a Pedestrian Traffic Signal at the intersection of Radio Road (CR 856) at
San Marcos Boulevard, at an annual maintenance cost of approximately $1.500.
6/22/20109:00:00 AM
Item Number:
Item Summary:
Approved By
Eugene Calvert
Project Manager, Principal
Date
Transportation Division
Traffic Operations
6/4/201011:30 AM
Approved By
Barbara LaPierre
Management/Budget Analyst
Date
Transportation Division
Transportation Administration
6/4/20103:43 PM
Approved By
Norm E. Feder, Alep
Administrator - Transportation
Date
Transportation Division
Transportation Administration
6/8/20109:35 AM
Approved By
Najeh Ahmad
Director - Transportation Engineering
Transportation Engineering &
Construction Management
Date
Transportation Division
5/8/201010:30 AM
Approved By
Scott R. Teach
Deputy County Attorney
Date
County Attorney
County Attorney
6/6/20103:09 PM
Approved By
Nick Casalanguida
Director - Transportation Planning
Date
Transportation Division
Transportation Planning
6/912010 11:09AM
Approved By
Lisa Taylor
ManagementlBudget Analyst
Date
Transportation Division
Transportation Administration
6/9/20101 :28 PM
Approved By
Natali Betancur
Administrative Assistant
Date
Transportation Division
Transportation Road Maintenance
5/9/20101:31 PM
Approved By
Jeff Klatzkow
County Attorney
Date
6/10/201011 :49 AM
Approved By
OMS Coordinator
County Manager's Office
Agenda Item No. 16A9
June 22, 2010
Page 4 of 24
Date
Office of Management & Budget
6/11/20101:53 PM
Approved By
Leo E. Ochs, Jr.
County Managers Office
County Manager
Date
County Managers Office
6/11/20105:42 PM
Agenda Item No. 16A9
June 22, 2010
Page 5 of 24
c
o
L
L
.1
E
R
PEDESTRIAN SIGNAL WARRANT STUDY
REPORT
Radio Road, CR 856
At
San Marcos Boulevard
c
o
IV
T
Y
Al'provcd Hy:
Eugene Calvert, PE, .'TOE
TRAFFIC OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT
COLLIER COUNTY. FLORII)A
May 26. 2010
"d ,.
.,~:~-,
~
Agenda Item No. 16A9
Jl:lp,e; 22, 2010
Page 6 of 24
PEDESTRIAN SIGNAL WARRANT STUDY
Radio Road, CR 856 at San Marcos Boulevard
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This rcport presents the findings of aT raftic Signal Warrant Study for the pedestrian
crosswalk on Radio Road, CR 856 at San 1\1areos Boulevard in Collier County, Florida.
The study was initiated in response to a request to enhance Ihe safety of the existing
crossvvalk due to the large number of area rcsidems that use the crosswalk to access the
shopping center on the south side of Radio Road and the Collier Area Transit (CAT) bus
SlOps on both side ofthe roadway
The existing crosswalk is located approximately 75 iCet cast of the Radio Road
intersection \vith San Marcos Boulevard. Radio KomI is an eas!~west. four-lane divided
roadway that is functionally classified as an I !rban Collector providing a major
connection netween Airport-Puiling Road to the west and to Davis Boulevard/Collier
Boulevard to the cast. The Average Daily Traffic (ADT) on Radio Road was measured
to be 20.757 vehicles pcr day wllh" peal; bourly traf1ic of 1.419 vehicles per hOllr. The
posted spcecllimit on P..adiu Road ~ ---+S ~v!PH.
San J'vlarcos Boulevard is a t\VO"-l:Hk~ ]0C~11 n):;H.iv,'<J)' that prc}\'idcs access to a residential
neighborhood to the north of Radio Road. The majorilY dfpedeslrians that utilize this
crosswalk are residents of the area north of Radio Road. Peak htHJrly pedestrian traffic
was found to be 88 pedestrians per hour, with a pcak IS.minute volume of 28
pedeslrians
The crosswalk is cLHTently marked with high visihiJity pavement markings and pedestrian
v\'aming signs. There is a general trend of' rear-end and siue s\.vlpe vehicular crashes
:lssOclatl'd \vilh v~hjcles responding to 1he pedestrian crosswalk. O:1ly seven crashes
occurred at the crosswalk durin~ the 4 vears (2(l(l{)-200'Jj for which crash data is
avuiiat"'.dc. two or which mh}i\'~J p~'d(~strLm/bii..'>'ck in,iur} crashes.
The pedestrian crossing failed cU meetlhc Warrant 4. whieh is the Pedestrian Signal
V/arTant. hy' approximate];' 5~";) (.'1 pt..->(h.::striaw;) orthe l\::(juired numhcr ofpedestrians
during the peak I hour period.
The cro~swa[k ovcf\vhdrnlng!)' meets the signa! warrant for a pedestrian hybrid trafIic
signal. Ho\vc\'cr, a pedestnan hyhrid trafiic signai was only recemly approved under the
200Q rvfl n CD and such 8 signal has not yet been installed in Collier Counly. There is
concern that since the hy'bricl traffie signal is ne-w, drl\crs nBY he confused and \vill not
kno\';' what is required of them.
Therefore, it is recommended that d regular traffic signal he installed at the crosswalk.
And because the median wil! provide a refuge to pedestrians, each crossing of the
directional lanes on Radio (Cl6tbollnd and westbound) should be provided with sepamte
pedestrian call buttons, AIl I~lCilitics should he brought into compliance with ADA
requirements.
I
SECTION
Agenda Item No. 16A9
JUI ,e 22, 2010
Page 7 of 24
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
I. Background ........ ...... .......... ... .... ........... ...... .... ..... . .... ..... ... 4
2. Existing Conditions........... ........................................................ 4
3. Alternative Trials ... ......................... .............. ............ ... . .... .... .... 7
4. Traffic/Pedestrian Counts ............. ......................................... 8
5. Access Management ... ..... ....... ........
6. Crash Analysis ..........
.................................10
.... 10
7. TratficSignal Warrant Analysis ........................
8. Recommendations and Conclusions.................
Appendix A: Crash Diagrams..
..........10
........... 13
.................. 14
[ jst of Figures nnd Exhibits
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure J
Figure 4-
Figure 5
Figure 6
Exhibit 1
Exhibit 2
Exhi bit 3
Exhibit 4
Exhibit 5
Site Lo,oation Map.. ... ......... ........ ......... ......... ..... ....... 5
Pedestrian V"fume ADT Summary...
Tmffic Volume ADT Summary...
MUTCD Figure 4C-6 .
MUTCD Figure 4C-1\
MUTeD Figure 4F-2 ...
.....8
...9
"
. "
.... ]2
............................... 13
Site Condition .............
............5
. ...6
...... 6
CAr Bust Stop in Background ........................
Advance Pedestrian Crossing Signs.................
Radio Road. Eastbound Approach
~
'.. I
Drivers Were ConfJsed by RI-5c Signs.....
......8
Agenda Item No. 16A9
dtH,(. 22, 2810
Page 8 of 24
PEDESTRIAN SIGNAL WARRANT STUDY
Radio Road, CR 856 at San Marcos Boulevard
1. BACKGROUND
Collier County Traffic Operations has conducted a pedestrian signal warrant study at the
existing pedestrian crosswalk located cast of San Marcos Roulevard on Radio Road, CR
856. The purpose of the study is to ascertain that if the referenced pedestrian crossing
meets minimum warrant requirements f{Jr a tralTic signal installation which are set forth
in Section 4C.05 of the Manual on Unifom1.j raiile Control Devices (MUTCD) and in
Section 3.8.6 of the Traffic Engineering Manual (Topic No. 750-000-(05) by the florida
Department of Transportation (FDOT): and to determine if the intersection meets
mlnimum requirement for signali;:ation set forth in the County's Policy for Access
rv1anagcrnent.
The MlleD, 2009 Edition prepared by the rcderallJighway Administration (FIIW A),
has neen designated by Florida Statutes w govern placement and design oCtratllc signals.
signs and pavement markings on public and private ruads \vithin the Stale of Florida.
fhc MeTCD providcs guidelines in Section 4C05 Warrant 4. Pedestrian Volume and in
Chapter 4F Pedestrian I Iybricl B~acons for signalization of pedestrian cross"\valks. The
MUTeD states that a tranle control signal should not be installed unless it will improve
the overall safety' and/or operation of [he- inters('('tlcH"cro:;;sv.'ulk.
2, l';,}(-,STlNG CONDITION
The study crosswalk is mid-block crossing located on Radio Road approximately 7S feet
east of the intersection with San ~1arcos Boulevard. /\ .15-t()Ol v.'ide median in Radio
Road rrovides a pedestrian refuge Co:' the crosswalk.
Radio Road is an east-west four-lane divided roadway" that lS functionally classified as an
llrban Collector providing a maior connection belween Airport-Pulling Road to the west
and to Davis Boulevard/Collier Boulevard to the cast. The posted speed limit on Radio
Road is 45 MPH.
The Radio Road i San [..'larCl:);'; Boulevard intersection is a "'T'- intersection with San
Marcos Boulevard intersecting with Radio Road from the north. The median of Radio
Road prohibits Ictl tum movement from San Marcos Boulevard, but allows cast bound
direcl1onal1cft turns onto San Marcos r1oul~vard. Sll1ce south hound 1en turn movements
from San Marcos Boulevard un: restricted. south bound traffic from San tv1arcos
Boulevard does not impact the redestrian crl)ssing on Radio Road. San Ivlarcos
f~Olde'vard is a two-lane local roadway' rrovidin~; access 10 the residential area to the
north of Radio Road. Roadway lighting is provided on the north side of Radio Road.
The location map and site condition phlltographs arc shown on the following page:
J
Agenda Item No. 16A9
June 22, 2010
Page 9 of 24
f
~', . . " ;.
2.1 ~
" i
~I i'
0
"
Ii.
~
':
"~'---"'.'-'-'7"":-~"'-
"-,d,""",
.",1
Figun' J
SITE LOCATION MAP
There arc two Collier Area Transit (CAT) bus SlOps located in the vicinity of the
pedestrian crosswalk providing transit connection both to the case and to the west. Both
CAT hus stops arc located west of the croc;swalk. one on each side of Radio Road.
,/
~l
1--'--1
\ \ I 11;ll'. ~">l\'p
~ ----.-
I
"\it\'
-.
1
..-/1
( (,l':~.,\\:tlL ; "cdl ill:1
...---..-- .~.
~li'if'~.4i;"ii-.:;:L '
-
......
";;;.;
,,>
"...
~
,
Wi,
.-.
*
Exhibit 1
SITE CONnITION
Agenda Item No. 16A9
June 22. 2010
Page 10 of 24
J'I
, '1:,Jl
'I. -,. '.;'
'.....".......IilI..-.... - I' ..'
~""';!l..~....f:j -. iI.~-.JI!I!Ir. ',,_,' .".l..l.J.,.... ,"~
,AM-, n,' _'.... - .',.,_ -._'tj.!lt.,.~~:'- .
- -"".~_ ":':"/ '~:..:4~~.~-~.'_ .,,~~.Jw__,.;,.i., ':i..
- - - - - " "'",,' ~(rI:_,....tf'T-,i -1:',. ~'I_'"
..."..
Exhibit 2
CAT Bus Stop in Background
Exhihit 3
Advance Pedestrian Crossing Signs - Westbound Approach
Agenda Item No. 16A9
June 22. 2010------
Page 11 of24
F;xhibil 4
Radio Road, Easthound Approach
The existing crosswalk has advance pcodcstrian warning signs (\\i11-2) installcd prior to
the crossing. In addition, post-mllunled warning signs (WII-2) with supplemental
downward pointing arrow plaques ha\'c been placed at the Joca.lion of the': crossing pint
\-vhere pt'dcstricms cross the roao\.\'ay. Crosswalk pavement markings with white
longitudinal lines parallel to tranic flow have been provided for the cross\valk.
3. ALTERNATIVE TRIALS
Florida StaTlltc ~ 316.130(6) (b) requires that vebicles come to it stop and remain Slopped
to allow a pedestrian to cross a roadway wben a pedestrian is in tbe crosswalk and
slgnagc is provided. I r signage is not rrovidcd. motorists are requircd to yield thc right-
of~way. but arc not required to stop if it is not needed. The 2009 MUTeD contains
provisions to enhance pedestrian crossing safety by utilizing "Stop Here for Pedestrians"
signs IRI-Sc) within Section 2B.11. Ihe purpo:,e olthe signs delined by the MUTCD jo
to enhance the safety of the pedestrians hy glying the motorist increased notification that
pedestrians may be using till: crossvvalk.
In March 20 I O. SlOp [icre for Pedestrian signs and pavement markings were install to
$uppk'ment the existing Pl:ucstrian Crossing signs (\\.,' 11-2) in accordance with Section
2n. t2_ Section 2C.SO and Section 3B.18 01 the MUTeD. During a two weck period,
motorists \verc not complying w-ith the Slate law anti it was reported by m311j' that the
signs and lhcir respective meaning \\-as confusing. A number of rear end collisions
occurred during this time. On April 13, 2010 the Stop Here for Pedestrians signs were
removed. The Pedestrian Crossing signs were left in place.
(1
Agenda Item No. 16A9
Ju"" :2::2:, :2:010
Page 12 of 24
Exhihit 5
Drivcrs Wcre Confused fly R] -5e Signs
4. TRAFFIC 1 PE/)ESTHIAN COL1\'TS
Pedestrian volume counts \Vert' lah.t:Tl (j!1 April :,:t), 20] O. lhc pedl.'strial1 volumes \-vere
abstracted and arc shown in the Figure :2 j(lr the highest 4-hour time period.
TIME
(Datc 04128/1 0)
15:45 - 16:00
16:00 - 16:15
16: 15 - 16:30
16:30 -- 16:45
16:45 - 17:00
"--_.."--"----- -----..
17:00- 17:i5
17:!5 - 17:30
17:30 -17:45
Pedestrian
Count
9
8
15
17
20
lfl
19
13
TIME
matc 4129/1 0) ,
If :45 - 12:00
- - -...----------
12:00 - 12: 15
12:!5 - 12:30
12:30 -12:45
12:45 - 13:00
P:OO - U: 15
U: [5- 13:30
13:30 - 13:45
13:45 - ]4:00
Fi~un' 2
Pedestrian Count SumnuuJ'
Pcdestrian
Count
28
28
18
14
20
8
7
iO
iO
Agenda Item No. 16A9
June 22, 2010-
Page 13 of 24
Mechanical traffic counts were collected on Radio Road for each direction of travel for a
24-hollf period on Wednesday. February 10,2010. Detailed reslills orth" mechanical
trallie counts are presented in Figure 3.
Radio Road (CR 856) east of Livingston Road (CR 881)
Station 688
2010 -I 1st Quarter Annual
HOUR Daily
ENDING E/B W/B TOTAL Average
0100 35 20 55
0200 22 11 33
0300 32 30 62
0400 42 44 H6
o [)()O 95 llO 205
0500 384 i ~8.s 772
i
muo 776 l(Vl 1.480
0800 877 771 1,6'18
0901.1 -'-H: r: J ~ L,,2b6
'...1..1 ,),_....
1000 7..' S73 1,335
D.',
1100 8/1 IJL:" LAH4
1200 894 ~;5S 1,4!~12 i
1300 810 :>4'::; L4i9
1400 ~)6t; ").:15 1,;)'.1 1
1500 1,113 ::),:i8 1,G51
16()O I.LJ9 ~-, 76 l,/lS
1 JOO 1.100 .:158 i.Sr;h
1800 7iO ~',71 t.1O]
1900 5D8 2119 7\; 7
200(1 4.' -; 181:, 603
" ,
2100 301 106 407
2200 198 103 301
2300 g4 46 13(1
2400 66 2H SL1-
TOTAL 1.3,017 S,W8 21,125
Dt,TE 2/1 0
Figun: J
Traffk V..IIIRlC AnT Sllmmll~.
s
Agenda Item No. 16A9
June 22, 2010
Page 14 of 24
5. ACCESS MANGEMENT
Access Management is intended to protect public satety and general wclfare, and to
preserve the functional integrity and capacitv or the arterial roadway. Radio Road has
been designated as an Access Class 5 roachvay in the County's Access Management
System. The Access Management System was approved through Resolution 0] -247.
Co!lector and arterial road\vay facilities have been assigned an a.ccess classification and
access standard in order 10 provide the basis for management of the roadways so that the
sakty', cap8city and operating conditions of the rowjvv'ays will not be adversely impacted.
-"'.n Access Class 5 roadway requires median restrictions and provides the minimum
signal spacIng to be 0.5 mi]c~.
The nearest slgnaiizcd intcrsection on Radio Road to the west, approximately 0.6 miles at
the intersection with 1 ,ivingston Road: to the east the nearest sipmli/eu intersection is
approx1matcly I, I mi!c~ at Devonshire Boulcvardi(\nlntry;,;ide Drive. The l5 I()()t wide
median or Radio Road is landscaped and channc,:i/cd to I'('strict left turn 1ll0Venlcnts ill
compiiancc with the ('tWill) Access Manag('ment Policy.
Linder the A(;ccss iv1anagemcnt Polic~ ~~ si,~naii7.cd pC'destrian crosswalk \vould be
"1I<",,,e1.
6. CRA.SH ANALSIS
The crash histoI)' of the intt'fsc:c1ion for the past ti\'e :"(~ars bas bet'o 1\'''\ ic\vc(L The
record ",hows that there were 16 crashes bet\.\'cen 1005 and 2009. According, to the
j\/f{}TCU. an intersection must have':3 (If more crashes in 2 l~~month period that are
stlsceptibk (() correction by traffic comrol signal to justll)- the installation of a traffic
signal. 'rne cr::::sht's during thi:-; )-year period included ()jdy s('\.cn IT) crashl:s thal may be
susceptible to correction hy a traffic comro! :-;1!!.naJ with three in ?L 1 :-l11onth period. /\s a
L~'suIL the c;-ash hislUry dues llO! nH.'ct the \\arrant requirement. C:rash diagrams 3re
attached to this report in /\ppcndix A.
7. TRAFFIC SIGI\AL ,"ARRANT AN\!oiSIS
A signal VI'srrant analysis \\'<.1:" pcrfonllcd for the redesrr!un crosswalk on Radio Road.
The analysis \Va" conducted follov,nog lhe signa! \A;1!Tanls outlined in th(~ tv1liTCL), 200Q
r~dition. Three signal \varrants were c\:aluatt."d. i'he warranh t"\'aluated \',:ere: \Varrant 4.
Pedestrian Volume: \\"arrant 7. C['~~sh !-fistOf.'': ilnd Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons under
Chapter 41..
\\-'urrant 4+ Condition A: For CJch or an) 4 hours of an average day:, the plotted points
representing the: vehicks per h(wr on the major Slr:.:i.::t and the corresponding pedestrians
rer hour crossing the nu~,or street all i"ail aDove the curve tl1 Figure 4C-6:
The existing speed limit is 45 r-..'lPH on RaJio Roau. 'The \'H ~.TCD provides a 7W% tactor
fiJr required pedestrians when 85lh-percentaik on the majnr ~,trcc[ exceeds 35 mph.
Agenda Item No 16.A.9
June 22, 2010
Page 15 of24
During the first quarter of 20 I O. the traffic volume for both directions on Radio Road was
2L125 vehicles per day.
The traffic volume data including pedestrian tramc were evaluated for the highest 4 hour
time period. The traffic volume of the major-street (Radio Road) averaged t ,397
vehicles per hour for both directions i(l[ a four hour period when the peak 4-hour
pedestrian traffic averaged ill pedestrians per hour. The graph in Figure 4C-6 of the
MlrI CD requires that the pedestrians crossing the major stred to be at least 75
pedestrians per hour when the vehicular volumes arc greater than 800 vehicles per hour.
Signal Warrant 4 was NOT mel for Condition A.
Figure: 4C-5. Warrant 4, Pedestrian Four-Hour Volume (70~/O Factor)
::):: L,_
~)=DESTRV4h:::
;::~'>'::S;H-~'
~;..j~:,~ 3' ~E~
,:J ::C;::~~','~-i:1L.':tr'!:'
j:-~ '+_-),.J~- "i"r;'~j
i,f;:,J >'H<T( ,,; A
1,r:"VJ ;-. ,-i':;
;:1[;;::>-
Figure 4
MUTCH Figure 4C-6
Warrant 4, Condition B: For I hour (any consecutive IS-minute periods) of an average
day, the plotted point representing the vehicles per hour on the major streel (total of both
approaches) and the corresponding pedestrians per hour crossing the major street should
fal] above the curve in Figure 4C.8. .Che tramc volume of the major-street (Radio Road)
exceeded].4 t 9 vehicles per hour for the CO!Tcsponding highest hourly pedestrian volume
of 88 pedestrians per hour
During the first quarter 01'2010, the traflie volume for both directions on Radio Road was
2 t, 125 vehicles per day.
The peak I hour pedestrian volume is 8,8. pedestrians per hour with the corresponding 1.
hour vehicular volume of 1..419 vehicles per hour when the peak hourly pedestrian trame
10
Agenda Item No. 16A9
JUllv 22, 2010
Page 16 of 24
was 88 pedestrians per hour. The graph in Figure 4C-8 of the MUTeD requires that the
pedestrians crossing the major strecl to he at least 9 J pedestrians per hour when the
vehicular volumes are greater than J 100 vchicles pcr hour. Signal Warrant 4 was :"lOT
met for Condition B.
::!;.f'..1c'0 4t. V\.;;ir~;}n! 4, Pe.destrian PP,H, 40ur {fO';'",
"L'i
'~
. ~
.~
.,--,~......., -
---------
4(",
c.,. or ALL
i'ED~STRIANS
CH(JSSJf\JC
kIAJ()R ST~EET-
PC O!:SlPI i\N~
PER H.:X.JP ;r-PH'
:Tf!
i
I
L
Figure :;
MllTCD Fi~urc 4('-8
\V'arrant 71 Crash EXfJ(>ri('IH.'C: j'hi.:~' \i...'arralH i:, lnt~m.hxl for application \\'her~ the
severity and Irequency of crashes an: tt1\..' principal rcason::: to consider installing a traffic
control signal. To flIed \\'arram 7 il must bc" hlund that all oC the fbJlo\ving criteria are
met:
L\. Adequate trial of altemati\.'es i.vith satisfactory observance and enfOrCl.:'nlent
has tailed to reduce Hk' crash Crequency. and
B. Five or more reponed crash::~;. of types susceptible to correctiun by a traftic
control signa), h<J\l' (lce-LIlTed within a 12-mornh rk~riod, and
C. The \.--olurnc ()fr{~&:strian traffic i:.;. )"1(1: kss than SO percent of the n..:quircrne:Hs sre~ined
[n the Pedestrian Yolu!11e: \\J,r;Hlt.
During the past 4-ycar time periud 20()6.2009. tv,'che (12) crash..::::; occurr~d '-it or nt:arthc
crosswalk location. The CI"(jshcs included:; rear ends. 1 fixed object, 2 side sv,..ipes. 3 angle
crashes, and 2 pedestrian cra:;hes. Only ~~l'ven (7) or the foregoing crashes for the 4-year
period may have been correctable !( 0. pedestrian traffic signa! would have been in place.
The crash history of the intersection does N(}J meet the crash requirements set forth by the
11
Agenda Item No. 161'.9
June 22, 2010
Page 17 of 24
MUTCD. Si~nal Warrant 7 requirement was NOT met.
Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons, Section 4F.OI: Pedestrian hybrid beacon should be
considered if it is found that the traffic volume and pedestrian volumes exceed the limits
as indicalcd in Figure 4F-2 of the MUTCD and the location docs not mect traffic signal
warrants under Scction 4C.05 (Trank Signal Warrants).
Figure 4F-2. Guidelines for the Installation of Pedestrian
Hybrid Beacons on High-Speed Roadways
SP'-":{,"i ~r <',,::rt:' L1"r;
',F)'.,SW,;..', .HI{];"
M
T()fi\l OF ALL AlO
PEDESTRIANS CROSSING
THE MAJOR STREET - PEDESTRIANS
PER HOUR (PPHl 20\")
'>..,"','0
., <
I' ~~
L
Figure (,
'vWTCD Fi~ure 41'-2
Guidelincs for the installation of Pedestrian Ilybrid Beacons on high-speed roadways
(Section 4F.0 I) stipulatc that at least 20 pedestrians per hour cross the major strccl while
the total of both approaches should be at least 1.250 vehicles per hour. At the Radio
Road crosswalk. the peak hour tranic is 88 pedestrians per hour and the ]()Dr-holtr
average or pedestrians is 61 pedestrians per hour. Si~llal Warrant for Pedestrian
Hybrid Beacons is MET.
8. RECOMMK'IDA nONS ANn CONCkUSIONS
In order to be signalized. an intersection should meet at least one of the warrants listed in
the MUTeD and alsc> meet the minimum spacing warrant identitied in the Policy for
Aeecss Management. At this location however. Radio Road traffic volumes arc 21.] 25
ADT, approximately double the volume shown on the Ml 'TCD graphs and the posted
speed limit is 45 mph in this seclion of Radio Road offering limited gaps for pedestrians
to sakly cross.
Agenda Item No. 16A9
Ju"" 22, 2010
Page 18 of 24
The pedestrian crossing failed to meet the MUTeD Pedestrian Signal Warrant 4 by only
5 pedestrians (5%) of the required nwnber of pedestrians during the peak I hour period.
The crosswalk overwhelmingly meets the signal warrant for a pedestrian hybrid traffic
signal. However, a pedestrian hybrid traffic signa! was only recently approved under the
2009 MUTeD guidelines and such a signal has not yet been installed in Collier County.
There is concern that since the hybrid tramc signal is new. drivers may be confused and
will not know what is required of them.
Radio Road is functionally classified as a Class 5 Urban Collector under thc Collier
County Access Management Policy and a traffic signal at the crosswalk location meets
the requirements for a traffic signal as set tanh by the Policy.
It is recommended however that a regular traffic signal be installed at the
referenced crosswalk on Radio Road. It is further recommended that the median in
Radio Road be utilized as a pedestrian refuge and that each crossing ofthc directional
lanes on Radio [eastbound and westbound be prm.ided with separated pedestrian call
huttons. All f.~lcjljtie~. including detectable warning strips should be brought into
compliance with currenl .'\DA n:quiremems. in addition. it is recommended that roadway
lighting he provided on the south side of' the roadw3:' at the crosswalk location and at the
C.>\I bus stop location
Agenda Item No 16A9
June 22, 2010
Page 19 of 24
i\ppcmJi, i\
('rash I)iag,rams
1.1
N'
l.{)!
C"l'
C"l1
C"ll
0,
wi
0:1
~!I
0'
>
...J.
CD I'
8:1
.......ui
.... cr:! I
0<,1
Q..2.1
()) z: !
0::: < !
(j)' :
E 1:CV'!
~c6'[1
.m~; I
ocr: I
();! .~ ;tf.
C'-;l - Xlr..n
0: ~ :<9
On::!t : vV'
'en 'I ] ~~
'09,1 ~ ~~;.;
o Ci, L__;___~ ~1_
Agenda Item No. 16A9
June 22, 2010
Page 20 of 24
I"
,-
10-
'-
;;
.:
.,
'"
"' '"
<Il <Il N
2:! u;
N "0
"' C "' c
f- ~ (ll Q)
... u 0::: 2 01
QJ <tl QJ w (l)
... " ~
0 ... '" ...J
(ll '"
U- t- O N I II
N .<,'~" " ':'
N ~'{~w,1
M !!~ ,::}
"'1 ~I
'""i~,""J'i
..'0
. .. ,
] ,
,J' I
. I
: I
I
I
,
,
-
l:
-
"
~
- =
:.: ~
1 ;i
J': .E
.-,
Agenda Item No. 16A9
June 22, 2010
Page 21 of 24
l~
I~
~
~
l
....
i C>
C>
<fJ N
I (l) '" (l) in
.r: ~ -C
<fJ C N
I I- ~ ttl C
U a:: 2 (l)
... Ol
II (l) rn (l) .... Cll
-
0 - 0 ....J
ttl 0
" u... l- N
I! Cl
" Oi
q ii3
L
H
t!
n
"
II
ii
Ii ..,
[1
'I
;1
I'
.I
~llil
('fll
('fllll -
('t")1.
oil
LlJ
o
0:
Zl
.:!
O'i
>';
....JI
CO.l
j
U:H
On
to!
00:::1
a.. <(!
Q) ~i
a:: ~i
CI) ,I
E \a'!
co ~'I
'- (O.~!
0)1.0 ,i
co COI
.- ,
o 0:: ,d
0,
c: ~H
OO!I.
._ 0::,
en II
.-0:
8~'1 H
;;
~
i
c
~
~',
~
:.I =
~ ".
~~
r: :.E,~
- ...
~ 0'-',"\
'C' '
..;.
.. ,
-I' I
:
"I
~f
~I
;!
,...
_ e;;:'~
2~;:'
':::.,.Z
"'-:::-\'r'
_~ .,~_~i.
~.,
~t
(1.
~
,..0
-t;
t,
~
I
i
I
d
il
il
I
I
i
I
!
II
:1
:1
I
I
"
'II
Iii
~i
<"l'
<"ll
,
1:11
<"l'I'
o ,~!
I
iSH
0:
zl
o
>
-l
en Ii
__ 8111
Co- a>
g~1
Q)
a:: Z I
<[
r- (i) L
~@I
!..- -'~',
l'"'"'t'\(() 1
"'-'lID,
row
O~)i
~ ,I
c:~i
001
--~,
CJ) :
--0,
__'J
- 0'
o 'i
()~i
Agenda Item No. 16A9
June 22. 2010
Page 22 of 24
k
I~
l
'"
'"
'"
en (]) '"
II) Q) "
.c ~ "C
en ::: ~ :::
I- ~ (ll (])
... 0 0:: 2 C1
(]) ro (]) '" (])
.::: '"
0 .... '" ...J
(ll '"
u... ~ Cl N .
N
N
M
=0'
'"
'"
:;
;,
]
1'.
.
-=:
~.:
:J: -
1; E.
" :(!
1;1
~ -
=;i
z
...,..'.
.~-l.'
-'!:
~7;
"
~
~. '~
- .::::: :::.~
~;'~
- .,,2:
-.-;-oft!
.._~ '::U',_____
.-,
,-
i
I}
.
.~.
~ ~.
:; .::
J.=
Agenda Item No. 16A9
June 22, 2010
Page 23 of 24
-
-
l
...
Q
<fl "
Ql Ql N
Q) .05
.L: N 'tl
<fl c: ;:: C
I- ~ ra Ql
.... u 0:: g en
Ql ro Ql ... j
.....
"6 ... "
ra c
u.. f- N
0 ;0
>::
-
I
I
I
II
II
Ii
II
II
n
II
:1
i
d
i
i
i
I
Nil
~il
M'
Ii
M
01
W'I
o
o.
Z:
_'I i
o
>
-l
CO
(f)
O!
t:: () !
0:::
0<(
0.."" :
Q) ""',
7',
cr: ::( d
(f)1
E=d
Ctl ~'i1
'- -';i
0') to !i
""'~'I
,'" 00 ,
0511
c~,
.Q~'
en i
.-o!
=01
8~!
'"
'"
I
:': I
; !
.1
, I
~.
.;
"
;;
:.;
~
"'
~
.."
-:J'
~f
~. ::s
~ l~r
--v.aI/
E .!i:-
. ~
~ -
-
;;
:: ~
t c
.~ ;
~-
v.
r
;-
..... :;1%
~ ':::'_~
.-, -...........
~~----r-
:;i ..Jr--
.:.:<
_~__---v; .
~II
(')'1'.
i; I
Mi
0.1
will
oil
~!I
O.
>:
....J.'
I,
~'I.
0'
-0:,
'- q
o tx:'1
,--. <(.,
.......:2'.
m :1
Z,l
a: <(Ii
(j) Ij
1=1
- r.:.\,
Ctl ~q
-- ~'.I
~<O'
"-"1.0 i
co 00'
otx:
o
C-
OO
0:::
(/)0
00
U~
i '"
'"
II if) 0
Q) ill (l.> '"
iO
J:: N "C
if) C <c
:1 ~ ro ('Il c
0 0::: -" (l.>
... OJ
(l.> ro Q) '" (l.>
.....
"6 ..... 0 ...J
ell 0
u.. f- N
0 iO
N
<D
.:t
I
iI
If
I
:r
;1 --.
:;
::
~
"::I'
.
~ 9
_ c
", :II'!
E .3""
-=
Agenda Item No 16A9
June 22. 2010
Page 24 of 24
I~
It
:i:
.~
C
..., ,~:~
... :::: -;:;-.<
- -
~~
...,..7.
....:-<
::::J(.
'"
- ~
c.. I'.
-
; t.
-'.
'"
z
I.:; I
;' 1
... i
~
-.
~
~