2004_0726_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

� ��p �i�� rr�n# � ��►�r��: ��i� �o, ��x�� . Eaterse�tian Laratinn ��rr�at ��n�iii�o� � �� ir�na � : I�ebra � l�arn T�rr�� T�riv� P��1 �r�-�t � w�� in��ti�n �l ririvat� �rive [i��ak� {9ri�� 5�uih �f Terr•,:�- ��scal 5t�e�t at `I' inters�ctions wi�}t Terraoe L?ri+r� --- MMUTCD (2Br5)Warrants for Stop Sign: Because the STOP sign causes a substantial inconvenience to motorists, it shouldbe used only where warranted. A STOP sign may be warranted at an intersection where one or more of the following conditions e�st :Do any of the following conditions exist at this intersection: ❑ Intersectionof a less importantroad with a main road where applicationof the normal Right-of-way rule is unduly hazardous. Street entering a through highway or street. ❑ � Unsignali�ed urter��si� m� s��nal�xs� �e�, �_.. - - — .— „��.� ..� ❑ Oibea �n«rsecdoas �vhere a�ambine��m of high spe�ed, re�€tri,��ed �icw. aod sGrious ac�id�ni re�o�d t�ica�r� a nea! �cM cnnrrull�� ihe ��T[7� x��n. i Comments ' N/A The intersection cfPascal and Terracehas historically been a thru street. ,'�� A .��A MM[JTCD (2B-6) Multiway Stop Signs The °Multiway Stop" installation is useful as a safety measure at some locations. It should ordinarilybe used only where the volume of traffic on the intersecting roads is approximately equal. A traffic control signal is more satisfactoryfor an intersection with a heavy volume of traffic. Any of the following conditions may warrant a multiway STOP sign installation: Do any of the following conditions exist at this intersection: � Where traff'ic signals are warranted and urgently needed, the multiway stop is N/A an interim measure that can be installed quickly to control traffic while arrangements are being made for the signal installation. � An accidentproblem, as indicated by five or more reported accidents of a N/A type susceptible of correctionby a multiway stop installation in a 12-month period. Such accidents include right- and left-turn collisions as well as right- angle collisions. j Minimumtraffic volumes: �(a) The total vehicular volume entering the intersection from all approaches � N/A must a�erage at least 500 vehicles per hour for any 8 hours of an a�erage day, and �(b) The combined vehicular and pedestrian volume from the minor street or N/A highway must a�erage at least 200 units per hour for the same 8 hours, with an a�erage delay to minor streetvehicular traffic of at least 30 seconds per � vehicle during the maximum hour, but ❑��} u-hc� nc� 95-perwcnliL� appr�ach 5p�d af ±hc rn�ja� s�c�t tratFic c�ec�cds �lFonr� A�� rs �ro�o�r�, �� s� ��ef��+�u� �W miles pr.r h�vw� LF� Til�fllTiWm v�}�IGUI�r ti^Gl,wne wa�ranl iai 7�i ��oe�< <�P ��r,i�ab�. t}Lf $�}84'C [L��ilrt[[4Ctlif. Conclzcsion: The proposed traffic on the Terrace Drive extension (236 ADT) is significantly less than the existing volumes on Pascal (802 ADT) and Terrace Drive (1188 ADT). Historically the existing streets have been the thru street. It is recommended that the traffic be monitored in case the traffic on Terrace Dr Extension (TDE) is higher than estimated. Should the traffic on TDE increase over 500_ an all- wav stob si�n is recommended.