Agenda 06/22/2010 Item #16A14
Agenda Item No. 16A14
June 22. 2010
Page 1 of 8
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Recommendation to accept a Traffic Signal Warrant Study and approve the installation
and operation of a Traffic Signal at the intersection of Rattlesnake Hammock Road
(CR864) at Grand Le1y Drive/Skyway Drive, at annual maintenance cost of approximately
$3,500.00.
OBJECTIVE: To request the Board to accept a Traffic Signal Warrant Study and approve a
fully actuated traffic signal be constructed, activated and maintained at the intersection of
Rattlesnake Hammock Road (CR864) at Grand Lely Drive/Skyway Drive in accordance with
any and all applicable Federal, State, and County standards and specifications governing such
traffic control devices.
CONSIDERATIONS: Florida Statute 9316.006 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,
performed and approved by a Professional Engineer registered to practice in the State of Florida,
has concluded with the detennination that the subject intersection meets the minimum warrants
for signalization, as set f(lrth in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD).
Staff of the County's Traffic Operations Section concurs with that detennination and installation
of a traffic signal at this location is within Collier County Access Management Guidelines.
FISCAL IMPACT: Cost for design, including post-design services, are approximately
$48,000.00, while cost for construction of the signal is approximately $245,000.00. Final costs
for the work will be reconciled once construction has been completed and all invoices are paid.
The developer of Lely Resort will reimburse the County 33.33% of all costs associated with the
signalization based upon the Developer's Contribution Agrcement (DCA) recorded on Fcbruary
9, 2004 in O.R. Book 3498, Pagc 233. Upon inspection and acceptance, Collier County will
assume responsibility for the operation and maintenance of thc signal, including electricity
billing, at an average annual maintenance cost of approximately $3,500 per signal location, paid
for through the nomml Trame Signal Maintenance, electricity, and Signal Section personnel
funds in the annual Traffic Operations 10 1 Funds budget.
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item has bcen reviewed and approved by the County
Attorney's Office and is lcgally sufficient for Board action-.-SRT.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: This action will result in no growth management
impact.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners accept a Traffic Signal
Warrant Study and approve a fully actuated traffic signal be constructed, activated and
maintained at the intersection of Rattlesnakc Hammock Road (CR864) at Grand Lely
Drive/Skyway Drive 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.
Attachment: Traffic Signal Warrant Study
Agenda Item No. 16A14
June 22. 2010
Page 2 of 8
COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Item Number:
16A14
Item Summary:
Recommendation to accept a Traffic Signal Warrant Study and approve the installation and operation
of a Traffic Signal at the intersection of Rattlesnake Hammock Road iCR864) at Grand Lely
Drive/Skyway Drive, at an annual maintenance cost of approximately $3,500.
6/22/20109:00:00 AM
Meeting Date:
Approved By
Eugene Calvert
Project Manager, Principal
Date
Transportation Division
Traffic Operations
6/4/201011:31 AM
Approved By
Barbara LaPierre
Management/Budget Analyst
Date
Transportation Administration
6/4/2010 3:43 PM
Transportation Division
Approved By
Lisa Taylor
Management/Budget Analyst
Date
Transportation Division
Transportation Administration
6/7/201010:24 AM
Approved By
Nick Casalanguida
Director - Transportation Planning
Date
Transportation Division
Transportation Planning
6/8/20108:36 AM
Approved By
Norm E. Feder, AICP
Administrator - Transportation
Date
Transportation Division
Transportation Administration
6/8/2010 9:36 AM
Approved By
Scott R. Teach
Deputy County Attorney
Date
County Attorney
County Attorney
6/8/20103:10 PM
Approved By
Najeh Ahmad
Director" Transportation Engineering
Transportation Engineering &
Construction Management
Date
Transportation Division
6/9/20109:51 AM
Approved By
Natali Betancur
Administrative Assistant
Date
Transportation Division
Transportation Road Maintenance
6/9/201010:52 AM
Approved By
OMB Coordinator
Date
County Manager's Office
Office of Management & Budget
6/9/20103:44 PM
Approved By
Leo E. Ochs, Jr.
County Manager
Date
County Managers Office
County Managers Office
6/9/2010 5:06 PM
Agenda Item No. 16A14
June 22. 2010
Page 3 of 8
,~~-~----- ~----T' --
I I
I I
I ..,- i
I ___ I
I ~.
L
L
.,
..E"
JIfit'
TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT STUDY
Rattlesnake Hammock Road, CR 864
at
Grand Lely Drive/ Skyway Drive
';\2"
Ji d:,~ I:
" '. -: - .,.'- _ _ - .,-. ;.> ~,':',: t ,',f:, ~_ ~:
-" l~' tl A..~l;i.,
--.=---
c:
~
U'
AI
7'..
y-
Approved By:
Eugene Calvert, PE, PTOE
TRAFFIC OI'ERATIO'\'S
GRO\\TII MANAGEMENT DIVrSIO'i
COLLIER COII'\'TY, FLORIDA
May 26. 2010
,
Agenda Item No. 16A14
June 22. 2010
Page 4 of 8
Traffic Signal Warrant Study Report
Rattlesnake Hammock Road (CR 864) at
Grand Lely Drive/Skyway Drive
BACKGROUND
The Collier County Traffic Operations Section has conducted a traffic signal warrant
study at the above location. The purpose of the study is to ascertain if the referenced
intersection meets signal installation warrant requirements set forth in the Manual on
Unil(wn Traffic Control Devices (MUTeD).
Thc MUTCD, prepared by thc Fcderal Highway Administration, has been designated by
Florida Statutes to govern placement and design oftral1ie signals, signs, and pavement
markings on public and private roads within the State of Florida. Through a resolution
approved by the Board of County Commissioners, Collier County uses MUTCD Warrant
I. Traffic VOIlU11C Warrant and Warrant 7. Crash Experiences Warrant as basic guidelines
for traffic signal installation within Collier County. The rcsuits of this traffic signal
warrant study arc as 1()lIows:
EXISTING CONDITIOI\'
LOCATION: The study intersection is located on Rattlesnake Hammock Road (CR
864) which is functionally dassiticd as a major connector and is considered the major-
street in the study. Rattlesnakc llammock Road is a two-way, 6-lane divided highway
with curbs and gutters on both sides. It connects to the anerial road of ('oilier Boulevard
(CR 951) at its east end and Tamiami Trial East (USA I ) at the wcst end. The posted
speed limit is 45 mph and the average daily trame volume is 11,881 vehicles (2009 data).
The study intersection side streets are local roads providing access to the adjacent
communities.
:!'UQ-;o;:iWf't!:RII:8C'rI(iN
*
~Ir
intersection I,ocation
Agenda Item No. 16A14
June 22. 2010
Page 5 of 8
Un Sky\-vay Drive, southbound approach, there is one exit lane for all traflLc movements.
Sky \Vay' Drive, Snlllhhound /\ppruach
On Cirand LeI::: Drive. northbound ~lrproadl. there afC 1\\'(1 [alles. The let! lalle i'i a
through and Idt-llIrn combination lam:. v,'hile the ng.ht lane IS ~1Il exclusive rlghi-turn onlJ
lane
r,;i'..1L..j'
~
~
I, ~.. ~ .....
!,~,-~ " ','.+.."~-
~ " .,,, ,
jI/iP"...... .,... --'. ..' I
-. ~..'-.".'....
-.....~
''''''-.,''''''-
[,rand 1 .1...:1: ! )r1\T. '-',-;orlhhound .'\pproach
Un Rattlesnake Ilaml1llK:k Ro,hl. h\lth caslh~HlI1d and westhound. there arc olle lcn~turn.
onL' righl-lUrtl and lhree through l~lfle~; on each dircc!jlln.
Agenda Item No 16A14
June 22. 2010
Page 6 of 8
I.'F
'''\ .'
~~,,;..-,
~ ~.'
rt'"
Rattle Snake Hammock Road, Eastbound Approach
{
. \,
<,.~-~'l
-'-'--~
Rattle Snake Hammock Road, Westbound Approach
SPEED LIMIT: Since the posted speed limit on Rattlesnake Ilammock Road is 45
MPH, according to the MUTeD, 70% of the traffic volume requirements will be used for
the analysis.
TRAFFCI SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS
WARRANT I, EIGHT-HOUR VEHICULAR VOLUME: The minimum vehicular
volume is intended for application at locations where a large volume of intersecting
traffic is the principal reason to considering for the installation of a tmffic control signal.
The traffic volume data including both major-street and minor-street left turn traffic were
Agenda Item No. 16A14
June 22. 2010
Page 7 of 8
collected. To meet Warrant I. hoth major-street and minor-street must meet the
minimum volume requirements. The MUTeD states that the right-turn traffic should not
be included in the minor-street volume if the movement enters the major-street with
minimal conflict. Adequate gaps in the major-street traffic exist to allow right.-turn
movement from the minor-streets without excessive delay or conflict.
REQUIREMENT: MliTCn. Warrant 1 Condition A: Minimum Vehicular Volume:
The MUTeD states that 70% "fthe normal volume requirement may be used when the
major street speed exceeds 40 \t1PJ T. !\1inimum required vehicular volumes are:
600 vph (70% ~ 420 vph) f()[ 8 hours on the major-street for the total of both approaches
and 150 vph (70% ~ 105 vph) for 8 hOllrs on the minor-street approach in one direction
lmly_
A 24- hour trafile volume data of the intersection was collected on March ]0,2009. The
highest hourly traffic volumes for minor-street left-turn plus through movements are
abstracted and tabulated below.
TIME
Grand Ld:: Drh'c
/ Skyway fJdv(' (:\frnor
Str(;'et,~;'l
RattiesflZikc> Hammol"k Road
fi\tsjo:- Str~et}
NB(LT+ SH(one Ell WB Tn'al
Th~ough) lane, total) ')'hrouuh Tllrollgh
7:00-8:00 56 44 ';02 312 614
8:00-9:00 150 (\1.) 41 I 183 794
9:00-10:00 76 5i 3(16 401 769
10:00-11 :00 94 :,'; ](12 407 769
-
11:00-12:00 ]OJ " 294 349 643
".
12:00-13:00 i09 .H,l 407 187 794
1:\:00-14:00 '19 41 . c' ,~_ ',"" 795
i4:00-15:00 1.14 ,", ~: :44S 402 847
.-.--
15:00-16:00 IOl -D 431 420 851
16:00-17:00 ')8 40 462 446 908
17:00-18:00 q::.. .J1l 521 4' 1 982
ni
18:00-19:00 ()4 :'.7 .',57 363 720
,.-.
19:00-20:00 "' _:, ",.' 267 )JJ
__"1'0
20:00-21 :00 79 ~O 2::5 1('"1 418
. 'f,~
Tahld: Traffic'VoluIDl's
RESULT: Traffic volume on the major-street (Rnttksnake Hammock Road) met the
minimum vehicular volume or 420 vph for I J hours. However. there were only 3 hours
Agenda Item No. 16A14
June 22, 2010
Page 8 of 8
met the required 105 vph on thc minor-strcet Warrant requirements are NOT met.
REQUIREMENT: MUTCD, Warrant I Condition B: Interruption ofConlinuous
Traffic:
The MUTCD states that 70% of the normal volume requirement may be used when the
major street speed exceeds 40 MPII. Minimum required vehicular volumcs are:
'JOO vph (70% = 630 vph) for 8 hours on major-street (total of both directions) and 75 vph
(70% c,~ 53 vph) for 8 hours on minor-street (one direction only),
RESUL T: There were total of II hours (from 8:00-19:(0) that the major-street through
movements volume (combined both dircetion) met the required 630 vchicle per hour
while minor-street. northbound 1et1-turn plus through, met or exceeded the 53 vehicle per
hour volume requirements during the same hours. Warrant requirements are MET.
WARRANT 7, CRASH EXPERIENCE
This Warrant is intended I()r application where the severity and trequency of crashes are
the principal reasons to consider installing a traffic control signaL To meet Warrant 7 it
must be found that all of the following criteria are met:
A. Adequate trial of alternatives with satisfactory observance and enforcement
has failed to reduce the crash frequcncy: and
B. Five or morc rep011ed crashes. of types susceptible to correction by a traffic
control signaL havc occurred within a 12-month period. and
c. r;-or each of any 8 hours of an average day. XO~/o of'the required volume of
warrant I condition A or wan'ant I condition B exist on the major-street and
higher-volume minor-street approach. respectively, to the intersection.
RESlJL TS: Thc crash history of the intersection for tbe past three years has been
reviewed. There were two crashes occurred in 2009. both are right-angle crashes, In
2008. there were two crashes recorded, one right~anglc and one run-off-road. In 2007,
live crashes reported, one of which was a right- angle crash. The crash history of the
intersection. as shown in the attached collision diagrams, docs not meet requirement lor
Warrant 7, Warrant requirements arc NOT met
CONCLl!SION & RECOMMENDATION
Based on the collected traffic volume data and crash history review, it is determined
that the subject intersection met MLJTCD Warrant J B requirements for traffic
signal instaliation, Therefore. it is recommended that the referenccd intersection should
be considered for a traftic control signal.
"