A p p l e V a l l e y L R S P | 47
Table 4.1 Countermeasures General Information (Continued) CRF = Crash Reduction Factor, HSIP = Highway Safety Improvement Program, P&B = Pedestrian and Bicycle No. Type Countermeasure Name Crash Type CRF
Expected
Life
(Years)
HSIP
Funding
Eligibility
Systemic Approach
Opportunity?
R01 Lighting Add segment lighting Night 35% 20 90% Medium R02 Remove/Shield
Obstacles
Remove or relocate fixed objects outside of Clear Recovery Zone
All 35% 20 90% High
R03 Remove/Shield
Obstacles Install Median Barrier All 25% 20 90% Medium
R04 Remove/Shield
Obstacles Install Guardrail All 25% 20 90% High
R05 Remove/Shield
Obstacles Install impact attenuators All 25% 10 90% High R06 Remove/Shield
Obstacles Flatten side slopes All 30% 20 90% Medium
R07 Remove/Shield
Obstacles Flatten side slopes and remove guardrail All 40% 20 90% Medium R08 Geometric Mod. Instal raised median All 25% 20 90% Medium R09 Geometric Mod. Install median (flush) All 15% 20 90% Medium R10PB Geometric Mod. Install pedestrian median fencing on approaches P&B 35% 20 90% Low R11 Geometric Mod. Install acceleration/deceleration lanes All 25% 20 90% Low R12 Geometric Mod. Widen lane (initially less than 10 ft) All 25% 20 90% Medium R13 Geometric Mod. Add two-way left-turn lane (without reducing travel lanes) All 30% 20 90% Medium R14 Geometric Mod. Road Diet (Reduce travel lanes from 4 to 3 and add a two way left-turn and bike lanes All 30% 20 90% Medium
R15 Geometric Mod. Widen shoulder All 30% 20 90% Medium R16 Geometric Mod. Curve Shoulder widening (Outside Only) All 45% 20 90% Medium R17 Geometric Mod. Improve horizontal alignment (flatten curves) All 50% 20 90% Low R18 Geometric Mod. Flatten crest vertical curve All 25% 20 90% Low R19 Geometric Mod. Improve curve superelevation All 45% 20 90% Medium R20 Geometric Mod. Convert from two-way to one-way traffic All 35% 20 90% Medium R21 Geometric Mod. Improve pavement friction (High Friction Surface Treatments) All 55% 10 90% High Countermeasures for Roadways
48 | A p p l e V a l l e y L R S P
Table 4.1 Countermeasures General Information (Continued) CRF = Crash Reduction Factor, HSIP = Highway Safety Improvement Program, P&B = Pedestrian and Bicycle No. Type Countermeasure Name Crash Type CRF
Expected
Life
(Years)
HSIP
Funding
Eligibility
Systemic Approach
Opportunity?
R22 Operation/Warning Install/Upgrade signs with new fluorescent sheeting (regulatory or warning) All 15% 10 100% Very High
R23 Operation/Warning Install chevron signs on horizontal curves All 40% 10 100% Very High R24 Operation/Warning Install curve advance warning signs All 25% 10 100% Very High R25 Operation/Warning Install curve advance warning signs (flashing beacon) All 30% 10 100% High R26 Operation/Warning Install dynamic/variable speed warning signs All 30% 10 100% High R27 Operation/Warning Install delineators, reflectors, and/or object markers All 15% 10 100% Very High R28 Operation/Warning Install edge-lines and centerlines All 25% 10 100% Very High R29 Operation/Warning Install no-passing line All 45% 10 100% Very High R30 Operation/Warning Install centerline rumble strips/stripes All 20% 10 100% High R31 Operation/Warning Install edgeline rumble strips/stripes All 15% 10 100% High R32PB Ped and Bike Install bike lanes P&B 35% 20 90% High R33PB Ped and Bike Install separated bike lanes P&B 45% 20 90% High R34PB Ped and Bike Install sidewalk/pathway (to avoid walking along roadway) P&B 80% 20 90% Medium R35PB Ped and Bike Install/upgrade pedestrian crossing (with enhanced safety features) P&B 35% 20 90% Medium
R36PB Ped and Bike Install raised pedestrian crossing P&B 35% 20 90% Medium R37PB Ped and Bike Install Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) P&B 35% 20 100% Medium R38 Animal Install animal fencing Animal 80% 20 90% Medium Countermeasures for Roadways (Continued)
A p p l e V a l l e y L R S P | 49
Table 4.2 and Table 4.3 shows the proposed countermeasures for signalized and non-signalized intersections, respectively, of the Town’s Top 35 hot spot collision intersections.
Table 4.2 Proposed Countermeasure Recommendations (Signalized) S01 S02 S03 S07 S09 S10 S14 S15 S21PB
1 Apple Valley Rd & SR 18
2 Apple Valley Rd & Bear Valley Rd X X
3 Bear Valley Rd & Kiowa Rd X X
4 Bear Valley Rd & Jess Ranch Pkwy X X
5 Kasota Rd & SR 18
6 Navajo Rd & Powhatan Rd X X
7 Navajo Rd & SR 18 X X X X
8 Rancherias Rd & SR 18 X X X
9 Bear Valley Rd & Deep Creek Rd X X
10 Bear Valley Rd & Navajo Rd X X X X
11 Bear Valley Rd & Reata Rd X X
12 Kiowa Rd & SR 18 X X
13 SR 18 & Tao Rd X X X
14 Apple Valley Rd & Yucca Loma Rd X X X
15 Bass Hill Rd & SR 18 X
16 Central Rd & SR 18 X X X
17 Corwin Rd & SR 18 X
18 Dale Evans Pkwy & SR 18 X X
19 Bear Valley Rd & Westmont Dr X X
20 Bear Valley Rd & Central Rd X X
21 Jess Ranch Pkwy & Market Place Dr
23 Flathead Rd & SR 18 X X X
33 Apple Valley Rd & Pimlico Rd X
34 Apple Valley Rd & Sitting Bull Rd X
4 19 8 1 1 3 3 7 1
COUNTERMEASURES FOR SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS IN THE TOP 35 COLLISIONS Rank Intersection Name Signalized
Total Number of Countermeasures 47
50 | A p p l e V a l l e y L R S P
Table 4.3 Proposed Countermeasure Recommendations (Non-Signalized) mr = mini-roundabout (refers to the added countermeasure for HSIP Cycle 11 Call-for-projects: LRSM Version 1.6 – April 2022). See Table 4.1.
NS05mr NS06 NS07 NS08 NS09 NS13 NS15 NS18
22 Serrano Rd & Zuni Rd X X X X
24 Dale Evans Pkwy & Waalew Rd X X
25 Rimrock Rd & SR 18 X X X
26 Mondamon Rd & SR 18 X X X
27 Rincon Rd & Yucca Loma Rd X X X X X
28 Navajo Rd & Ramona Av X X X X
29 Kiowa Rd & Rancherias Rd X X X X X
30 Navajo Rd & Ottawa Rd X X X X
31 Kiowa Rd & Yucca Loma Rd X X X X
32 Pawnee Rd & SR 18 X X X
35 Rancherias Rd & Thunderbird Rd X X X X
3 10 7 7 7 3 3 1
COUNTERMEASURES FOR NON-SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS IN THE TOP 35 COLLISIONS Rank Intersection Name Unsignalized
41 Total Number of Countermeasures
A p p l e V a l l e y L R S P | 51
4.2 PROPOSED PROJECT SCOPES
In this LRSP, seven (7) projects have been identified as eligible for HSIP funding. The different projects, along with the countermeasures, locations, project costs, benefit costs, and B/C ratios associated with each project, are provided on the following pages. The combination of countermeasures that were selected for each project and location was selected to provide the most competitive applications for HSIP grant funding.
The project alternatives are listed below, and Table 4.4 summarizes each recommended project alternative. • Project Alternative # 1 – Navajo Road & Powhatan Road Protected Left-Turn Phase (S02 & S07) • Project Alternative # 2 – Bear Valley Road & Navajo Road and Apple Valley Road & Yucca Loma Road Lighting, Visibility and Leading Pedestrian Interval (S01, S02, & S21PB) • Project Alternative # 3 – Seven (7) Non-Signalized Locations (NS06, NS07, & NS08) • Project Alternative # 4 – Bear Valley Road Corridor Signalized Locations (S02, S20PB) • Project Alternative # 5 – Bear Valley Road Corridor Signalized Locations (S03) • Project Alternative # 6 – Town-wide Signalized Locations (S02, S20PB) • Project Alternative # 7 – Town-wide Corridor Signalized Locations (S03) Additionally, Appendix B provides detailed information for each project, including locations, cost breakdown, the crash data table, and the B/C ratio calculation.
52 | A p p l e V a l l e y L R S P
Table 4.4 Town of Apple Valley Summary of Project Alternatives Project
Number Description Countermeasure No.
Type of
Project
Locations
No. of
Intersections
Impacted
Total
Expected
Benefit
Total Project
Cost
B/C
Ratio
1 Improve signal hardware: lenses, back-plates with retroreflective borders, mounting, size, and number, and
Provide protected left turn phase (left turn lane already exists) S02, S07 Signalized 1 2,397,943 $ 190,000.00 12.62
2 Add intersection lighting (S.I.),
Improve signal hardware: lenses, back-plates with retroreflective borders, mounting, size, and number, and
Modify signal phasing to implement a Leading Pedestrian Interval (LPI) S01, S02, S21PB Signalized 2 15,481,106 $ 600,000.00 25.80 3 Install/upgrade larger or additional stop signs or other intersection warning/regulatory signs, and
Upgrade intersection pavement markings (NS.I.)
Install flashing beacons at stop-controlled intersections NS06, NS07, NS08 NonSignalized 7 11,188,349 $ 200,000.00 55.94 4 Improve signal hardware: lenses, back-plates with retroreflective borders, mounting, size, and number, and
Modify signal phasing to implement a Leading Pedestrian Interval (LPI) S02, S21PB Signalized 9 15,136,665 $1,200,000.00 12.61
5 Improve signal timing (coordination, phases, red, yellow, or operation) S03 Signalized 9 11,004,154 $ 500,000.00 22.01 6 Improve signal hardware: lenses, back-plates with retroreflective borders, mounting, size, and number, and
Modify signal phasing to implement a Leading Pedestrian Interval (LPI) S02, S21PB Signalized 21 19,923,675 $2,000,000.00 9.96
7 Improve signal timing (coordination, phases, red, yellow, or operation) S03 Signalized 21 13,931,906 $2,500,000.00 5.57
TOWN OF APPLE VALLEY SUMMARY OF PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
A p p l e V a l l e y L R S P | 53
SECTION 5: SCHOOL ZONE ANALYSIS
5.1 TOWN-WIDE SCHOOL ZONE ANALYSIS
As part of the LRSP, Michael Baker International (Michael Baker) conducted a Compliance Review for School Zone Traffic Controls for the seventeen (17) school sites throughout the Town. Table 5.1 lists each of the seventeen (17) schools evaluated in this project. Inventory, analysis, and reviews were conducted for school-related traffic controls.
This document details the methodology followed for each school and general information regarding the research undertaken. Separate attachments are included for each school.
Table 5.1 Town of Apple Valley LRSP School List
School Name Address Type
1 Apple Valley High School 11837 Navajo Rd. 92308 AVUSD 2 Desert Knolls Elementary School 18213 Symeron Dr. 92307 AVUSD 3 Granite Hills High School 22900 Esaws Rd. 92307 AVUSD 4 High Desert Premier Academy 21950 Nisqually Rd. 92308 AVUSD 5 Mariana Academy 10601 Manhasset, 92308 AVUSD
6 Phoenix Academy 20700 Thunderbird Rd. 92307 AVUSD
7 Rancho Verde Elementary School 14334 Pioneer Rd. 92307 AVUSD 8 Rio Vista School of Applied Learning 13590 Havasu Rd. 92308 AVUSD 9 Sandia Academy 21331 Sandia Rd. 92308 AVUSD
10 Sitting Bull Academy 19445 Sitting Bull Rd. 92308 AVUSD 11 Sycamore Rock Elementary School 23450 South Rd.92307 AVUSD 12 Vanguard Preparatory School 12951 Mesquite Rd. 92308 AVUSD 13 Yucca Loma Elementary School 21351 Yucca Loma Rd. 92307 AVUSD 14 Academy for Academic Excellence 17500 Mana Rd. 92307 Charter 15 Apple Valley Christian Academy 15757 St Timothy Rd. 92307 Private 16 Apple Valley County Education Center 12555 Navajo Rd. 92308 SB County 17 Apple Valley County Early Education Center 18415 Nakash Rd. 92307 SB County Note: AVUSD = Apple Valley Unified School District; SB County = San Bernardino County
54 | A p p l e V a l l e y L R S P
The following steps were taken in the evaluation of the school-related traffic controls:
1) Perform an inventory to document existing school area traffic control devices. 2) Outline and determine school zones' current code and traffic control standards. 3) Review school-related traffic control for each school to confirm the conditions of devices and ensure they are appropriately applied to meet current standard compliance. 4) Evaluate reports and recommendations.
5.1.1 Existing Condition Review Methodology
Michael Baker utilized aerial photos, existing reference documents, Google Earth, and construction drawings to populate a GIS database, using ArcGIS, with existing school zone traffic control features surrounding each school area for field review. This review covered an approximately ¼-mile radius area near each school site, per Safe Routes to School (SRTS) practices, to cover the local School Zone and school area travel routes.
The team then configured and used an ArcGIS mobile application (Figure 5.1) to provide the project staff with a streamlined field verification and record management process. Field inventories were conducted at each school site in November 2020 using the mobile application to confirm the data collected with photos at each location and documented conditions. The inventory data entry fields are as follows:
• School
• Object Information (Sign Name or Marking)
• Description (MUTCD Code)
• Condition (Satisfactory, Dirty, Bent, Cracked,
Graffiti, Tilted, Faded, Obscure, Missing, Future)
• Remarks (Inventory field notes)
• Inspected (Yes or No)
• Attachments (Photos)
The review and documentation were the initial steps
to establishing baseline conditions for determining
School Zone Traffic Control standard compliance
with current codes and established standards. Figure 5.1 ArcGIS Application Screen View
A p p l e V a l l e y L R S P | 55
5.1.2 Vehicle Code and Traffic Control Standards
The Vehicle Code, often referred to as California Vehicle Code (CVC), is one of 29 legal codes contained in the California Code of Regulations enacted by the California State Legislature, which is California's general statutory law. The CVC outlines, prescribes, and includes general regulations, laws, and rules of the road.
In accordance with CVC Division 11 (Rules of the Road), Chapter 2 (Traffic Signs, Signals, and Markings), Article 2 (Official Traffic Control Devices), Section 21400,
"The Department of Transportation [Caltrans] shall … adopt rules and regulations prescribing uniform standards and specifications for all official traffic control devices placed pursuant to this code…".
Per the CVC Section 21400, the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD) is published by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). It is issued to adopt uniform standards and specifications for all official traffic control devices in California and shall be the standard for all official traffic control. This California MUTCD incorporates Federal Highway Administration's Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (2009 Edition) dated December 2009 and the previous California MUTCD dated January 13, 2012.
5.1.3 School-Zone Related Compliance Review Analysis Methodology The requirements and guidance provided in the latest version of the CA MUTCD Revision 5 (March 27, 2020) were utilized in this analysis, in addition to the CVC for cross reference purposes for further defining and evaluating the legal code descriptions applicable for traffic controls for school zones outlined in the CA MUTCD. The CA MUTCD Part 7 Traffic Control for School Areas sets forth basic principles and prescribes standards for designing, applying, installing, and maintaining traffic control devices for school areas' unique conditions.
CALIFORNIA VEHICLE CODE (CVC)
The CVC was reviewed for cross-reference purposes to define and evaluate the legal code descriptions applicable for traffic controls for school zones outlined in the CA MUTCD. The following CVC sections listed below are cited throughout the CA MUTCD Chapter 7 and are contained in Appendix C for reference:
56 | A p p l e V a l l e y L R S P
• Section 377 – Limit Line
• Section 627 – Engineering and Traffic Survey (E&TS)
• Section 21102 – Local Authority to Close Streets
• Section 21368 – Crosswalks Near Schools
• Section 21372 – Guidelines for Traffic Control Devices Near Schools • Section 21373 – School Board Request for Traffic Control Devices • Section 21458 – Curb Markings
• Section 21949 through 21971 – Pedestrians’ Rights and Duties • Section 22350 – Basic Speed Law
• Section 22352 – Prima Facie Speed Laws
• Section 22358.4 – Decrease of Local Limits Near Schools or Senior Centers • Section 22504 – Unincorporated Area Parking; School Bus Stops • Section 40802 – Speed Traps
An essential aspect of a school zone's traffic control system is establishing roadway travel speeds and speed limits.
Per the LRSP’s analysis, the roadway classification, type, and posted and/or prima facie speed limit were identified for each school area and school zone. This is important due to each school's surrounding road characteristics in determining the appropriate placement and application of CA MUTCD traffic control.
CVC Section 22352 establishes the prima facie speed limit at 25 miles per hour (mph) in a school zone when children are present. 25 mph speed limits should be used for school zones when approaching or passing a school building or grounds contiguous to a highway and posted with a standard "SCHOOL" warning sign. Reduced speed limits for school zones are in effect when children are present. "When Children Are Present" is defined in CVC Section 22352 as "while children are going to or leaving the school, during school hours or the noon recess period." The prima facie limit shall also apply when approaching or passing any school grounds not separated from the highway by a fence, gate, or other physical barriers while children use the grounds, and the highway is posted with a standard "SCHOOL" warning sign.
CVC Section 22352 also notes that 25 mph prima facie, in addition to school zones, may also be applied for a residential district or a local road or street, provided as follows:
A p p l e V a l l e y L R S P | 57
A “residence district” is defined in the CVC 515 is that portion of a highway and the property contiguous thereto, other than a business district, (a) upon one side of which highway, within a distance of a quarter of a mile, the contiguous property fronting thereon is occupied by 13 or more separate dwelling houses or business structures, or (b) upon both sides of which highway, collectively, within a distance of a quarter of a mile, the contiguous property fronting thereon is occupied by 16 or more separate dwelling houses or business structures. A residence district may be longer than one-quarter of a mile if the above ratio of separate dwelling houses or business structures to the length of the highway exists.
It is important note that the Town of Apple does not meet the residence district defined on CVC 515 due to zoning.
Furthermore, regarding the CVC and notable speed enforcement, a classified local street or road can be deemed a de facto residence district with a similar prima facie 25 mph. These classified roads are similar to a school zone and exempt from an E&TS required for radar speed enforcement.
Per CVC 40802 (b)(1) “… a local street or road is one that is functionally classified as “local” on the “California Road System Maps,” ... When a street or road does not appear on the “California Road System Maps,” it may be defined as a “local street or road” if it primarily provides access to abutting residential property and meets the following three conditions:”
a) Roadway width of not more than 40 feet.
b) Not more than one-half of a mile of uninterrupted length. Interruptions shall include official traffic control signals as defined in Section 445.
c) Not more than one traffic lane in each direction
CALIFORNIA MANUAL UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES (CA-MUTCD) The review guidance and determinations specific to the School Zone Analysis work are outlined in CA-MUTCD Chapters 7B Signs and 7C Markings. Road signs provide road users with regulations, warnings, and guidance information. School Zone Signage advises road users that they are approaching a school zone/crosswalk or reducing the posted speed limit. Pavement markings have defined essential functions in a proper school area traffic control scheme. They are often used to supplement the regulations or warnings provided by traffic signs, signals, or other devices. A summary of Chapters 7B Signs and 7C Markings sections are provided in Table 5.2.
58 | A p p l e V a l l e y L R S P
Table 5.2 School Zone Traffic Controls
CA MUTCD
Section Signage Details Section Description/Standard Summary 7B.09 School Zone
Sign, Plaques,
and/or School
Warning Assembly
The School Warning Assembly A(CA) shall be used on streets with prima facie 25 mph speed limits (Residential/Local Road-Street) that are contiguous to a school building or school grounds. • School Warning Assembly A(CA) should be posted at the school boundary or may be posted up to 500 feet in advance of the school boundary.
• A School Zone (S1-1) sign may be supplemented with a SCHOOL (S4-3P) plaque (see Figure 7B-1 or 7B-1(CA)). These signs collectively can also be referred to as Assembly A (CA). • Assembly A (CA) Conventional size 36" X 48" unless otherwise determined by the engineer 7B.11 School
Advance
Crossing/Warning
Assembly
A School Advance Crossing assembly shall consist of Assembly D(CA) or a School (S1-1) sign supplemented with an AHEAD (W16-9P) plaque or an XX FEET (W16-2P or W16-2aP) plaque.
These signs collectively can be can also be referenced as Assembly D (CA). • Assembly D(CA) shall be used in advance of the first School Crossing assembly that is encountered in each direction as traffic approaches a school crosswalk. See Table 2C-4 for advance placement guidelines.
• A School Advance Crossing assembly or Assembly D(CA) shall be used in advance of any Assembly B(CA), Assembly E(CA) or Assembly C(CA)
• Assembly D (CA) Conventional size 36" X 48" unless otherwise determined by the engineer 7B.12 School
Crossing/Crosswalk
Warning Assembly
The School Crosswalk Warning Assembly B(CA) or E(CA) shall be posted at all yellow and white school crosswalks that are not controlled by a STOP (R1-1) sign, a YIELD (R1-2) sign, or a traffic signal.
• Shall be posted at uncontrolled yellow crosswalks adjacent to schools or crosswalks along school routes.
• Shall NOT be posted if a crosswalk is controlled by STOP Sign, YIELD Sign, or Traffic Signal. • Can be posted at white crosswalks.
• Assembly B conventional size 36" X 48" and Assembly E conventional size 90" x 24" unless otherwise determined by the engineer.
A p p l e V a l l e y L R S P | 59
Table 5.2 School Zone Traffic Controls (Continued)
CA MUTCD
Section Signage Details Section Description/Summary
7B.15 School Speed
Limit Assembly
The fixed-message School Speed Limit Assembly C(CA) shall consist of a top plaque (S4-3P) with the legend SCHOOL, a Speed Limit (R2-1) sign, and a bottom plaque WHEN CHILDREN ARE PRESENT (see Figure 7B-1(CA)). These signs collectively can be can also be referenced as Assembly C(CA).
• Assembly C(CA) shall be used on streets with speed limits greater than 25 mph that are contiguous to a school building or school grounds.
• If used, Assembly C(CA) may be posted up to 500 feet in advance of the school boundary. • Assembly C (CA) Conventional size 36" X 72" unless otherwise determined by the engineer. •
7B.15 End School
Speed Limit Sign
The downstream end of an authorized and posted reduced school speed limit zone shall be identified with an END SCHOOL SPEED LIMIT (S5-3) and/or Speed Limit (R2-1) sign. 7B.16 Reduced
School Speed Limit
Ahead Sign
A Reduced School Speed Limit Ahead (S4-5, S4-5a) sign should be used to inform road users of a reduced speed zone where the speed limit is being reduced by more than 10 mph, or where engineering judgment indicates that advance notice would be appropriate for Assembly D(CA). • If used, the Reduced School Speed Limit Ahead sign shall be followed by an Assembly C(CA). • The speed limit displayed shall be identical to the speed limit displayed on the subsequent Assembly C(CA).
7B.13 School Bus
Stop Ahead Sign
&
7B.14 School Bus
Turn Ahead Sign
The School Bus Stop Ahead (S3-1) sign shall be installed in advance of an approved school bus stop where there is not a clear view in advance of the stop from a distance of 200 feet. Refer to CVC 22504(c).
The SCHOOL BUS TURN AHEAD (S3-2) sign may be installed in advance of locations where a school bus turns around on a roadway at a location not visible to approaching road users for a distance as determined by the “0” column under Condition B of Table 2C-4, and where there is no opportunity to relocate the school bus turn around to provide the distance provided in Table 2C4.
60 | A p p l e V a l l e y L R S P
Table 5.2 School Zone Traffic Controls (Continued)
CA MUTCD
Section Pavement Marking Details Section Description/Summary 7C.02 Crosswalk
Markings
When transverse crosswalk lines are used, they shall be solid white or yellow, marking both edges of the crosswalk, except as noted in the Option. Refer to CVC 21368.
• Whenever a marked pedestrian crosswalk has been established in a roadway contiguous to a school building or school grounds, it shall be yellow.
• Marked crosswalks shall be yellow if the nearest point of the crosswalk is within 600 feet from a school building or the grounds thereof, with options for use up to 2,800 feet under certain circumstances and “…it appears that the facts and circumstances require special painting or marking of the crosswalks for the protection and safety of persons attending school.”
• If any one of the crosswalks is required to be yellow at an intersection, then all other marked pedestrian crosswalks at that intersection shall also be yellow. Refer to CVC 21368. • Crosswalks locations along school routes outside the school zone, and as noted above, shall be white. 7C.03 Slow School
Crossing Pavement
Marking
The SLOW SCHOOL XING marking shall be used in accordance with the provisions of CVC 21368 in advance of all yellow school crosswalks. They shall not be used where the crossing is controlled by stop signs, traffic signals, or yield signs.
They shall be yellow, with the word XING at least 100 feet in advance of the school crosswalk. • Shall be used in advance of all yellow school crosswalk within the School Zone as noted above, and in accordance with Assembly B(CA) and E(CA).
• Shall NOT be used where the crosswalks is controlled by Stop, Yield or Traffic Signals. • XING shall be placed at least 100 feet in advance of the school crosswalk. • Installed in a single lane.
The SCHOOL marking may be used with the School Assemblies A(CA) or C(CA), except at locations where SLOW SCHOOL XING markings are required.
• If used, the marking shall be yellow.
• If used, SCHOOL marking should be located adjacent to School Assemblies A(CA) or C(CA).
SCHOOL XING pavement markings used at remote locations along school routes outside the school zones shall be white. • Should be used in advance of all white school crosswalks • Shall NOT be used where the crosswalk(s) is controlled by Stop, Yield, or Traffic Signals. • XING shall be placed at least 100 feet in advance of the school crosswalk. • Installed in a single lane.
A p p l e V a l l e y L R S P | 61
5.2 RESULTS OF THE TOWN-WIDE SCHOOL ZONE ANALYSIS
Michael Baker completed the Town-wide school zone review and analysis for all 17 schools by June 2021. Prepared for each school was a standalone School Zone audit memo signed and stamped by a licensed Civil and Traffic Engineer and contained in Appendix D. As a result of these school zone audits, the Town of Apple Valley provided the following actionable items and results for traffic safety improvement.
5.2.1 Engineering and Traffic Surveys
The Town has rural two-lane undivided roads surrounding some schools, homes, and residences that do not meet the 25 mph prima facie speed or a posted speed limit, which per CVC 22349, allows for vehicle travel up to 55 mph.
The LRSP’s review noted several rural country road locations and other arterial classifications with higher travel speeds for appropriate warning of speed reduction determination. It was recommended that the Town follow up with an Engineering and Traffic Survey (E&TS) to confirm findings for these roadways without a posted speed limit that do not meet 25 mph prima facie criteria.
The Town directed Michael Baker to perform an E&TS evaluation for these segments as a separate task to establish a posted speed limit and confirm appropriate School Zone and other Advance Warning signage for nine (9) locations near seven (7) schools. The E&TS was completed in January 2022, with the results in Table 5.3.
Table 5.3 Engineering and Traffic Survey (E&TS) School Zone Locations School Roadway Segment
85th
Percentile
Speed
Recommended
Speed Limit
Apple Valley High School Sandia Road Navajo Road to Mohawk Road 40 mph 40 mph High Desert Premier Academy Nisqually Road Navajo Road to Central Road 46 mph 45 mph Sandia Academy Sandia Road Mohawk Road to Kiowa Road 44 mph 40 mph Sycamore Rock Elementary School Joshua Road Zuni Road to South Road 56 mph 55 mph South Road Central Road to Joshua Road 54 mph 50 mph
Vanguard Preparatory School Mesquite Road Pahute Road to Ottawa Road 47 mph 45 mph Ottawa Road Central Road to Joshua Road 48 mph 45 mph
Apple Valley Christian Academy Outer Hwy 18 N Tao Road to Rimrock Road 49 mph 50 mph Apple Valley County Education Center Pahute Road Navajo Road to Quinnault Road 45 mph 45 mph
62 | A p p l e V a l l e y L R S P
5.2.2 All-Way Stop Warrants
Michael Baker also studied and prepared all-way stop (AWS) warrants to evaluate the two (2) study intersections of Joshua Road at South Road near Sycamore Rocks Elementary School and Ottawa Road at Mesquite Road near Vanguard Preparatory School. The study performed the all-way stop (AWS) warrant analysis per the criteria outlined in the CA-MUTCD, Section 2B.07 Multi-way Stop Applications to review the two study intersections. The AWS warrant analysis was completed in January 2022, with both locations meeting the criteria for AWS control. As part of the AWS analysis, updated school traffic control recommendations were provided to account for this change.
5.2.3 School Area Traffic Control Update
After Michael Baker completed the Town-wide school zone for the seventeen (17) schools, the Town used the signed and stamped audit memos and school zone recommendations for deployment to bring all schools into compliance with the newly adopted Town standards. The Town advertised the deployment work for contractor bid on February 24, 2022. The winning contract costs under $80,000 and performed the work outlined in Table 5.4 with completion in the second quarter of 2022.
Table 5.4 Town-wide School Area Traffic Control Update
ITEM DESCRIPTION TOTALS
Removed outdated/non-standard Traffic signs/posts 72
Replaced Existing Traffic Sign Panel (condition/faded) 31 Installed New Traffic Signs/Posts 73
Removed Pavement Markings Removal (Words/Legends) 57
Installed New Pavement Markings (Words/Legends) 59
A p p l e V a l l e y L R S P | 63
SECTION 6: PRIORITIZE AND INCORPORATE STRATEGIES
6.1 FUTURE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
This section describes strategies the Town may take to evaluate the success of this LRSP and steps needed to update the LRSP in the future. The effectiveness of safety improvements recommended in this LRSP should be assessed following installation to ensure the project operates as intended. This document should be considered a living document that is updated every 3 to 5 years to determine how well the implemented strategies have performed and update the crash data to identify new trends that might occur throughout the Town.
The following strategies should be implemented to ensure the Town's success in improving safety performance:
• The Town should establish a committee to meet periodically to oversee the implementation of the safety improvements listed in the LRSP.
• Safety partners such as the Fire Department, Police Department, Recreation Department, and local school districts should meet yearly to discuss the safety improvements' effectiveness. • Develop a spreadsheet or database to track safety project installations and record three (3) or more years of "before" and "after" collision information at those locations. Once countermeasures are constructed, schedule and track assessment date to ensure they happen.
• Field observations should be conducted shortly after the project is completed by the Engineering Department to ensure the project is operating as intended.
Table 6.1 summarizes programs and action items recommended to successfully improve roadway safety throughout the Town.
64 | A p p l e V a l l e y L R S P
Table 6.1 Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP) Implementation Plan Program/
Policy/Plan Action/Goal Responsible Party Timeline
Highway Safety
Improvement
Program (HSIP)
Cycle 12
Apply for Proposed Project Scopes identified in the LRSP and/or new projects for locations identified through Town collision monitoring
Engineering
Department September 2024
School Zone
Analysis
Update with each LRSP Cycle to continually review for California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA-MUTCD) and California Vehicle Code (CVC) code compliance.
Engineering
Department
Annually – Up to 3
years (Year 2025)
All-Way Stop
(AWS) Warrant
Monitoring
Program
For non-signalized locations, set up monitoring program for collisions and traffic volumes to determine if future warrant analysis for improvement to controls is needed.
Engineering
Department
Annually – Up to 3
years (Year 2025)
Town-Wide
Engineering
and Traffic
Survey (E&TS)
Update
This work is currently in progress with an estimated completion of December 2022 since most of the Towns current speed limits will need to be recertified by February 2023.
Engineering
Department
Initial – Fiscal Year
2022/2023
Safe Streets for
All (SS4A)
Federal Program aimed at funding initiatives to prevent roadway deaths and serious injury.
Town can apply and identify specific plans, design, and other activities below:
• Develop or update a comprehensive safety action plan (Action Plan). • Conduct planning, design, and development activities in support of the Action Plan. • Carry out projects and strategies identified in the Action Plan.
Engineering
Department
Initial September
2022 Frequency
(TBD)
Reconnecting
Communities
Program (RCP)
Federal Program aimed at funding initiatives to reconnect communities that were previously cut off from economic opportunities by transportation infrastructure. Town can apply and identify specific plans, design, and other activities below:
• Develop or update a comprehensive safety action plan (Action Plan). • Conduct planning, design, and development activities in support of the Action Plan. • Carry out projects and strategies identified in the Action Plan.
Engineering
Department
Initial
October 2022
Frequency (TBD)
Traffic Signal
System Master
Plan
Implement Town-wide Traffic Signal System inventory and assessment master plan to provide a means of automated traffic control and monitoring to improve operations and safety at signalized intersections.
Engineering
Department
Initial – Fiscal year
2023/2024
Caltrans
Sustainable
Communities
Grant
SR 18 Part II Corridor Enhancement Plan: major collision and safety issues in the Town need to be evaluated further with another SR 18 Corridor study for the remaining length from Apple Valley Road to Navajo Road. Since this grant is available annually, the Town can apply again, for other Town emphasis areas, in future Caltrans Sustainable Communities cycles.
Town of Apple
Valley &
Caltrans
District 8
Initial – Fiscal Year
2022/2023
A p p l e V a l l e y L R S P | 65
6.2 EXISTING TOWN TRAFFIC SAFETY PROGRAMS
Local entities in the Town of Apple Valley currently offer a range of traffic safety initiatives in accordance with the California Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) and California Highway Patrol (CHP) safety programs to prevent traffic fatalities and injuries on local roads. This section describes these existing stakeholder programs discussed at the Stakeholder Engagement Meeting from Section 1.2. Each program aids in administering Education, Enforcement, and Emergency Services, 3 of the 5 E’s of Traffic Safety Strategies, in the community. Table 6.2 lists the existing Town’s stakeholder programs related to enhancing traffic safety in the Challenge Areas discussed.
Table 6.2 Existing Traffic Safety Programs in the Town
Program Description
Pertinent
Challenge
Area
Responsible
Party Contact Links
“Traffic Tip
Tuesday”
Social Media
Series
“Traffic Tip Tuesday” is a social media series posted every Tuesday across the Apple Valley Police Department’s social media platforms. It features a weekly video or graphic with a traffic safety tip that covers a local traffic safety issue the traffic deputy observed in the field. The posts conform with the California Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) media campaigns. The August 2022 campaign focused on back-to-school safety.
All
San Bernardino
County Sherriff’s
Department
(SBCSD) – Apple
Valley Police
Department
Jackie Alban
[email protected]
(760) 240-7428
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram
“Age Well,
Drive Smart”
Driving
Courses
“Age Well, Drive Smart” is a free two-hour driving course held bi-monthly to teach seniors (65 years old and older) defensive driving and refresh their knowledge of the rules of the road.
They also learn about normal age-related physical changes and how they can affect their driving abilities. The course aims to reduce the risk of traffic collisions and share alternate transportation options for seniors who can no longer drive.
Aging
Drivers
San Bernardino
County Sherriff’s
Department
(SBCSD) – Apple
Valley Police
Department
Jackie Alban
[email protected]
(760) 240-7428
CHP
Website
“Start Smart:
Driving Smart
to Stay Safe”
Driving Course
“Start Smart: Driving Smart to Stay Safe” is a free two-hour driving course held bi-monthly. It aims to help newly licensed or soon-to-be licensed teenage drivers (typically 15-19 years old) become more aware of the responsibilities that
accompany the privilege of being a licensed driver.
Young
Drivers
San Bernardino
County Sherriff’s
Department
(SBCSD) – Apple
Valley Police
Department
Jackie Alban
[email protected]
(760) 240-7428
CHP
Website
66 | A p p l e V a l l e y L R S P
Table 6.2 Existing Traffic Safety Programs in the Town (Continued) Program Description
Pertinent
Challenge
Area
Responsible
Party Contact Links
Certified Child
Passenger
Seat Safety
Program
The Child Passenger Seat Safety Program (via Safe Kids
Worldwide) is a free program where certified child passenger safety (CPS) technicians check to make sure child car seats are installed correctly. CPS Technicians also teach
parents/vehicle owners how to independently use and install the car seat. Installations are done at the Apple Valley Fire District Station 331 (22400 Headquarters Drive, Apple Valley, CA 92307). To perform installations, participants must have the manufacturer information of the child safety seat or booster seat and the owner’s manual of their vehicles.
Occupant
Protection
Apple Valley Fire
Protection District
(AVFPD)
Jennifer Alexy
[email protected]
(760) 247-7618
ext. 113
Safe Kids
Worldwide
Website
Driving Under
the Influence
(DUI)
Checkpoints
DUI Checkpoint is a law enforcement program prescribed to deter, detect, and arrest intoxicated drivers. Checkpoints are set up when impaired driving is more common– nights,
weekends, and holidays. The Sherriff’s Department recently submitted a renewal application to the Office of Traffic and Safety (OTS) for the Town for Fall 2022.
Impaired
Driving
San Bernardino
County Sherriff’s
Department
(SBCSD) – Apple
Valley Police
Department
N/A CHP
Website
Town Council Agenda Report
Date: November 8, 2022
To: Honorable Mayor and Town Council
Subject: CLOSED SESSION
From: Douglas Robertson, Town Manager
Submitted by: Thomas Rice, Town Attorney
Town Attorney
Budgeted Item: Yes No N/A
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation – Pursuant to Paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Government Code Section 54956.9: (1) Case No.: CIVDS1600180 – Town of Apple Valley vs. Apple Valley Ranchos Water Company Et Al.; and (2) Town of Apple Valley vs. Apple Valley Ranchos Water Company, et al., Court of Appeal Case No. E078348.