CITY OF RIALTO
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
March 2003
1 I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The primary goal of the Neighborhood Traffic Management Program (NTMP) is to provide the residents of Rialto with options for relief from such traffic related impacts as speeding, vehicle code violations, traffic volumes, noise and t hreats to pedestrian and bicycle safety. This program balances the need for quick response in some cases, and the advantages of economy of scale in others. The primary means of communication to and from the community will be through designated traffic ma nagement associations, and citizens are encouraged to participate through designated or created local associations who share a geographical boundary.
The City shall set aside an annual amount of funding for the Neighborhood Traffic Management Program duri ng the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) process. If these funds are exhausted during the budget year, then the process shall stop for the remainder of that year or until other funds are secured.
Why Traffic Management?
The City of Rialto is recommendin g the adoption of this approach to Neighborhood Traffic Management as a result of much concern about neighborhood traffic and an increase workload of complaints from residents and businesses. It has become ineffective and inefficient to address a traffic problem as though it was a unique and unusual circumstance. Many complaints are of the same nature and similar creative responses to similar circumstances are appropriate. Staff spends considerable time collecting data, authorizing memoranda and ancillar y reports to both constituents, Transportation Commissions and the City Council, along with follow- studies.
Major considerations in a neighborhood traffic management program include the establishment of policy guidelines, public participation, and education and enforcement strategies, recommend traffic control devices and criteria for their use.
The Neighborhood Traffic Management Program has tw o complementary components that will be referred to often in this document. They are defined as follows:
Ongoing Traffic Management:
This is the process by which the City can respond quickly to traffic issues one at a time, as they are reported. It is typically done by City Staff. The advantages are:
• It preserves the ability to be responsive
• Develops good community rapport by having a known process at City Hall
CITY OF RIALTO
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
March 2003
2 • Develops on staff experience and policy making capability Limitations to this process are:
* It can be overloaded with many complaints
* It has limited data gathering and presentation ability * It has limited public outreach capability
* It has limited design capability
Active Traffic Management
This is a proactive process that actively solicits resident involvement, and typically is supported by mobilizing specialists and consultants as key resources. Its advantages are:
• It addresses multiple related traffic concerns.
• It uses scale of economies to make the best use of available funding. • It is more visible.
• It promotes comprehensive solutions on an area wide basis.
Disadvantages are:
• Since it i nvolves considerable expense and effort by all involved, it can only be done periodically, typically annually or semi-annually. • It happens on a fairly protracted schedule, so residents do not see immediate results.
Traditionally, traffic concerns were han dled via on -going traffic management models.
This is again effective in certain cases ; however, when the same types of concerns are seen again and again, it is possible there is a need for the formulation of a comprehensive response. This need led to the active traffic management model. In practice, there is a need for both strategies in handling traffic problems in the City of Rialto.
Traffic Management Program Implementation and Use
Both traffic management strategies follow the same basic steps. The se are listed below and are more fully discussed in Section III, “Process Overview”. In some cases, it may not be necessary to follow every step, depending on the particular circumstances present.
The process will be as follows during implementation and use:
1. Input and identification of reported problem
2. Confirmation/Investigation of reported problem
3. Consideration of solution alternatives
4. Review of selected solutions
CITY OF RIALTO
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
March 2003
3 5. Modification of selected solutions
6. Transportation Commission recommendations
7. City Council action
8. Polling of affected residents
9. Design
10. Construction
11. Evaluation
II. POLICY GUIDELINES
The following policy guidelines are recommended for the implementation of local street traffic management projects:
• A combination of education, enforcement and engi neering methods should be used to manage traffic. Traffic management devices will be planned, designed and used in keeping with sound engineering and planning practices.
The Public Works Director and City Engineer shall direct the installation of traffic control devices in compliance with the State of California Vehicle Code.
• In general, the use of traffic control devices will be warrant -driven where warrants exist. Warrants are minimum requirements that should be met before a given number of devices are used.
• Some diversion of traffic from a traffic managed street to an adjacent street will be unavoidable. An increase of up to 25 percent of existing vehicles or 500 vehicles per day, which ever is less, would trigger an automatic analysis of that street. The analysis would include the evaluation of measures to lower the level of impact. Some diversion of traffic from a local street to a collector street is appropriate, based on the functional definitions of two types of streets.
• A low ambient level of non-neighborhood traffic on local streets usually exists and is veritally unavoidable. Ambient through traffic is estimated at between 10 percent and 20 percent of total daily traffic volume, and efforts to reduce this volume are usually not effective.
• Emergency vehicle access will be maintained in all traffic management plans.
Emergency vehicle travel times will also be considered when evaluation traffic management measures.
• Reasonable automobile, pedestrian and bicycle access should be maintained to streets with traffic management plans.
CITY OF RIALTO
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
March 2003
4 • Removal of some on -street parking spaces may be necessary to install some traffic management measures. Parking loss at specific locations will be blanced with the neighborhoods desire for traffic management devices. • In general, signs will conform to the State of California Traffic Manual and the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices.
• In some cases, the most effective and appropriate solution may require a major capital improvement. Such projects will be evaluated for inclusion in the City’s five year Capital Improvement Plan.
• Neighbors who assist in the funding of traffic calming projects on a 25% match will be given priority status. In the event more than one neighbor group wants to participate, a lottery system will be put in place.
III. PROCESS OVERVIEW
The Neighborhood Traffic Management Program includes a structured planning and implementation process. A traffic management program shall be responsive to the needs of the residents of a street and neighborhood. Th e Ongoing Traffic Management Process will handle routine issues as they arise. The Active Traffic Management Process will reach out to the neighborhoods to request input in their traffic issues. Both components may be handled by city staff acting with th e Transportation Commission or with the assistance of consultant services.
The two main components of the City’s Neighborhood Traffic Management Program (Ongoing Traffic Management and Active Traffic Management) handle each step in a slightly different ma nner. Each step, and the way each component treats them, is described below, and is summarized in Table 1, “Process Summary”.
1. Input of Reported Problem
Effort in this step is concentrated on knowing the specific type of problem perceived by residents and road users. The challenge is to avoid skipping too quickly to a solution, before the reported problems have been fully explored and confirmed.
a. Ongoing Traffic Management: Problems are recorded and acted upon as received by City Staff. Ongoing lev el of effort, so complaint resolution can be rapid and frequent.
b. Active Traffic Management: Problem reporting is actively solicited at area - wide neighborhood meeting, using consultant resources as needed. Includes short educational component. High e ffort required, so as this happens at infrequent periods (one year or more).
CITY OF RIALTO
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
March 2003
5 2. Confirmation and Investigation of Problems
This step is crucial to avoid reacting to the wrong or misperceived problem. The approach is to find out and learn enough about the reported problem to permit design of potential solutions using data gathering and on -site collaboration with resident or road users. See Appendix A, “Typical Traffic Issues and Studies ” for information on how reports of traffic problems are investigated and confirmed.
a. Ongoing Traffic Management: City staff investigates and quantifies problem, generally in the order reported. Complaint participation invited in problem investigation.
b. Active Traffic Management: Large-scale data gathering, organization, and presentations are made for each area. Participation of residents from neighborhood under study invited.
3. Consideration of Solutions
a. Ongoing Traffic Management: City staff identifies and selects appropriate warrant driven, locally focused solution. T ypically, category I and II solutions are used (see Section IV, Traffic Control Measures” for definitions of categories).
b. Active Traffic Management: Comprehensive, area-wide set of solutions analyzed. Warrant is used when available. Category II, III and IV devices considered.
4. Public Input
a. Ongoing Traffic Management: Return or advisory call to the complainant by City staff regarding City’s response.
b. Active Traffic Management: Proposed solutions discussed at public, area- wide neighborhood geographical meetings. After notification of residents on the affected streets. Public commentary invited and recorded.
5. Modification of Selected Solutions
a. Ongoing Traffic Management : As needed, in response to input from complainant.
b. Active Traffic Management: Public input used to refine and improve selected solutions. May require reiteration of steps 1 through 3, since new
CITY OF RIALTO
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
March 2003
6 problems, not heard at the initial public meeting, are likely to surface at the second public meeting.
6. Resident Polling
See section IV, “T raffic Control Measure”, for polling requirements for each traffic control measure. See Appendix B, “Resident Polling Procedures”, for specific common to all polling requirements.
a. Ongoing Traffic Management : Typically not done unless Category II, III or IV devices involved.
b. Active Traffic Management: The polling process depends upon the measure to be implemented. Solutions that have direct effect on fronting residents, such as diverters, speed humps, and chokers, must be approved by a polling process. See Section IV, Traffic Control Measures”, for specific polling acceptance criteria for each type of solution.
7. City Council Action
a. Ongoing Traffic Management : Typically requires minimal design work, done via City work order process.
b. Active Traffic Management: Requires detailed design work for layout of chokers, traffic circles, etc.
8. Design
a. Ongoing Traffic Management : Typically requires minimal design work, done via City Work order process.
b. Active Traffic Management: Requires detailed design work fo r layout of chokers, traffic circles, etc.
9. Construction
a. Notification: At least 10 calendar days before construction commences, signs will be placed in the affected area to notify residents and other stakeholders. Written notification will be sent to Fi re and Police Departments for comments and notifications.
b. Ongoing Traffic Management: Typically involves sign and striping placement, so purchase order or on-call contracting resources are used. c. Active Traffic Management : More complex construction may re quire separate, competitively bid contracts or inclusion in other contracts (overlay or capital projects).
CITY OF RIALTO
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
March 2003
7 10. Evaluation
a. Ongoing Traffic Management: As needed, subject to competition for priority status with new incoming complaints and responses. b. Active Traffic Management: Following construction of devices, area - wide data shall be gathered, analyzed, and presented in a format comparable to same work done in Step 2, Confirmation and Investigation.
Effectiveness of devices is judged at this time, which ma y call for looping back to Step 3 if further measures are needed. If such is the case, further measures can take either the Ongoing or Active Traffic Management paths, depending on resources available. Final Report Prepared.
CITY OF RIALTO
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
March 2003
8 TABLE 1: PROCESS SUMMARY
Traffic Management
Process
Ongoing Traffic Management Active Traffic Management Example
1. Input of Reported
Problem(s)
City staff responds to reported
traffic issues using work orders
and/or service requests.
Traffic issues actively elicited from
neighborhood associations at night
meetings. Presentation includes display
of permissible and non-permissible
solutions.
“Speeds and volumes are too
high on my street.”
2. Confirmation
/Investigation
City staff investigates and
quantifies problem using
resources as necessary for data
gathering and analysis.
Same Measure speeds, traffic
volumes; Do Origin-
Destination (O-D) study.
3. Solution
Alternatives
Identification of alternative
solutions and/or Traffic Control
Devices (TCD’s). Compare TCD
warrants with conditions.
Identification of alternative solutions
and/or TCD’s. Compare TCD warrants
with conditions.
Investigate enforcement, stop
signs, diverters, striping
changes, speed humps, etc.
4. Selection of
Solutions
City Staff selects. Report of options prepared with
recommendations, supported by
investigations. Report includes “before”
conditions. City staff selects solution.
Speed hump at two locations.
5. Public Input As needed, by City Staff. Display prepared with map/graphics showing selected solutions.
“We’d rather have street
closed at one end;” or, “Don’t
want it in front of my house.”
6. Modifications of
Selected Solutions
Public input evaluated and used as
appropriate.
Report prepared showing input received
and modified recommendations as
appropriate.
O-D study doesn’t support
street closure. Speed hump
relocated one block.
CITY OF RIALTO
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
March 2003
9 Traffic Management
Process
Ongoing Traffic Management Active Traffic Management Example
7. Resident Polling As required by selected measure. As required by selected measure. Affronting residents approve.
8. City Council
Action
None. Required for traffic circles, chokers,
gateways, closures and diverters.
Agenda item for City Council
approval.
9. Design City staff, using
consultant/vendor assistance as
required.
City design or consultant design with
City direction.
Prepare location
drawing/detail sheets.
10. Construction County forces, private vendor,
overlay contract, concrete
contract, and special contract.
Same. Change order to existing AC
overlay contract.
11. Evaluation As needed. City staff investigates and prepares report using “after” traffic conditions
with consultant/vendor assistance, as
needed.
Measure speeds, volumes, do
O-D study.
CITY OF RIALTO
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
March 2003
10 IV. Traffic Control Measures
The following list consists of possible neighborhood traffic control measures by category.
Category I: Implemented at the Discretion of Traffic Investigator • Police Department Enforcement Requested
• Radar Trailer Speed Advisory
•
Category II Implemented at the Discretion of the City Engineer • Class II (on street) Bike Lane Striping
• Speed and Warning Signs
• Stop Signs
Category III Installed at the Discretion of the Public Works Director
• Landscape Curbside Trees
• Rumble Strips
• Speed Humps (Permanent and Temporary)
Category IV Installed with Approval of the City Administrator with recommendation by Transportation Commission and City Council Approval
• Forced Channelization
• One-Way Chicane
• Speed Limit Change
• Speed Table, Raised Intersection
• Traffic Circle
• Choker, Bulb-Out, Curb Extension, Center Island Narrowing
Category V Installed only after other measures have proven unsuccessful and with approval from City Council, re commendation from Transportation Commission, meeting of warrants along with approval from City Administrator, City Engineer and Public Works Director.
• One-Way Closure
• Street Closing (Cul De Sacs)
• Turn Restriction Signs
CITY OF RIALTO
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
March 2003
11 A. Category I Measures
These can be implemented by or coordinated through the City Traffic Investigator.
Education And Enforcement
This is an important component of the traffic management program and may be used as a first action of the process. Education and enforcement may be sufficien tly effectively to reduce the identified problem. These measures are mostly used when a street may not be appropriate for any measure, such as the collector or arterial intended streets, but have traffic complaints from residents. It should be noted that these measures have been found to be effective only when in place. The residual effect after they are withdrawn is often negligible.
Usage And Warrants
The use of speed trailer and special signs alert motorists to the posted speed limit, and a concentrated effort by the police department to enforce the posted speed limit of the affected streets are typically the most effected measures for Category I.
Each candidate street will be surveyed to determine the volume of speed. The data will be analyzed to determine if the street would qualify for a traffic management measure. If the street were to qualify for education and enforcement, then special signs and the speed trailer would be withdrawn and an additional speed survey will be conducted. The target 85th percentile speed is 30 miles per hour in a school zone or 32 miles per hour in a residential street. Additional surveys will be conducted within a further 45 days to determine if the speed has changed from the last survey. If the survey shows a lasti ng effect, no additional enforcement will be implemented. If the measure proves to be ineffective with the speed trailer or “special sign” program, and heightened police enforcement of the speed limit will be utilized.
Approval
The City Traffic Investigator can implement these measures.
Cost
Minimal, the city already owns and operates a speed trailer, and deployment would be within the regular duties of the City Traffic Investigator and the Police Department.
B. Category II Measures
These can be implemen ted by the City Engineer, using outside vendors, other outside agencies and resources appropriate to the city purchasing policy.
CITY OF RIALTO
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
March 2003
12 BIKE LANES
The City of Rialto will develop and draft a Bikeway Master Plan for the city. The plan is the blue print for a b ikeway system that includes both on street and off street facilities.
When adopted, the bikeway program will be implemented as the identified streets are improved or striped.
Usage & Warrants
Bikeway design in California uses the guidelines and standards established by the California Department of Transportation as document in Chapter 1000: Bikeway Planning & Design in the Highway Design Manual, July 1, 1995.
Approval:
At the discretion of the City Engineer.
Removal:
Bike lane signs and stripes would t ypically not be remove d; however, removal would be at the discretion of the City Engineer.
Cost:
Cost for bike lanes is about $0.75/ft for stripes plus $50.00 per legend.
SPEED AND WARNING SIGNS:
Speed and warning signs , including street legends, are t he easiest and simplest of the techniques on this list. The purpose of posting the speed limit on a residential street is to inform the motorist of the prima facia speed limit of 25 miles per hour and to attempt to gain compliance with the speed limit. Warning signs provide information to the motorist.
Fabrication and installation of signs is a low-cost item. However, the effectiveness of the signs is short lived and motorists who travel the area soon pay no attention to them.
Also, a proliferation of signs could cause visual blight or visual pollution in some neighborhoods.
Usage & Warrants:
Speed and warning signs are used to guide and warn traffic of conditions on or adjacent to the highway. Warning signs alert vehicle operators to use caution, red uce speed, or make a maneuver in the interest of the operator’s safety and/or pedestrians. Typically, warrants that govern the installation of speed and warning signs are: Changes in horizontal alignment, intersections, control devices, converging traffi c lanes, narrow roadways, and changes in highway design, grades, roadway surface conditions, railroad crossings, entrances and crossings, and other miscellaneous conditions.
CITY OF RIALTO
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
March 2003
13 Speed and warning signs are installed at the discretion of the City Engineer and must follow State and Municipal Codes.
Approval:
At the discretion of the City Engineer.
Removal:
Signs and legends of this type would typically not be removed; however, removal would also be at the discretion of the City Engineer.
Cost:
$200.00 per new sign and $200.00 per legend.
STOP SIGNS
The installation of stop signs as a technique to reduce speed s or volume s on neighborhood streets is not used. Stop signs at any location must meet State and City warrants before installation can occur. Stop sig ns are intended to assign the right of way at locations when traffic volumes meet specified levels and /or there is a sight distance problem or many pedestrians. Stop signs do not reduce speed or the volume of traffic and, in fact, result in increased localized air pollution, rolling stops through intersections, so called “jack rabbit” starts from stop sign controlled intersections and create a false sense of security for pedestrians, especially children at controlled intersections.
Usage and Warrants
Stop signs are installed at the discretion of the City Engineer according to State and adopted City criteria. It should be noted that the Manual on Uniformed Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways state that stop signs should not be used for speed control.
Approval
At the discretion of the City Engineer.
Removal
Signs of this type would not be typically removed; however, removal would be at the discretion of the City Engineer.
Cost
Cost is approximately $200.00 per sign and legend.
CITY OF RIALTO
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
March 2003
14 C. Category III Measures
To be authorized by the Public Works Director, and City Engineer , and is subject to residential polling.
CURBSIDE TREES
The purpose of planting trees in the curbside or parking strip area in front of the sidewalk of residential or collector streets is to give the impression of a narrower street and thus slow traffic. A variation on this planting idea is to place trees at selected parking space locations along the street. Trees are not as effective in areas with monolithic sidewalks and no planting strip in front of the sidewalk until the trees reach maturity. The trees act a buffer zone between motorists and pedestrians and also provide a visual barrier between the two. Trees have no impact on the volume of traffic but have minor impact on speed.
To be effective, trees must be planted consistently along street frontages at a rate of about one every 30 to 50 feet and will need time to mature. Tree planting has sometimes been criticized as merely a “beautification project” rather than a tra ffic control project. While trees most definitely improve the aesthetics of roadways, they also provide value in traffic calming. This measure, in particular, should be encouraged in new developments.
Usage:
Curbside trees may be used when all other met hods are not available. It is also possible for residents to implement this alternative themselves through a concerted neighborhood effort.
Approval:
At the discretion of the Public Works Director, with recommendation s from the City Engineer and Planning Director, and with an approval rate of 67 percent of the effected residents.
Criteria for the installation of trees include the following:
• Other traffic management devices are not acceptable to the emergency response services.
• The neighborhood is oppose d to other measures or other measures previously installed are not as effective as desired.
• The neighborhood is deficient in street landscaping.
• Existing conditions, such as right of way and sidewalks, allow for installation of trees.
Removal
Planted trees would not be removed unless they are safety hazards.
CITY OF RIALTO
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
March 2003
15 Cost:
For the City to purchase and plant 15 -gallon landscape trees, the cost is currently about $150.00 per tree. A major additional cost component would be provision of watering and maintenance. Th is cost will vary according to where the nearest water supply is, or whether regular truck water will be used.
RUMBLE STRIPS
Rumble strips consist of raised ceramic markers that were originally designed to alert drivers to dang erous or expected conditions. They are also seen on freeways as lane markers. On local streets their purpose is to reduce speed. This alternative has a mixed response in some cities, but has had significant positive response in others. The objection to the rumble strips lies in the noise that is created by vehicles traveling over the strips.
In some neighborhoods, the noise seems to be more intrusive than in other neighborhoods. Speed reduction ranges from 0 to 15 miles per hour. Bicyclists may find the rumble strips to be objectionable ; therefore, they are not recommended on a bicycle route. Increased maintenance may also be required.
Usage:
Rumble strips are not used in residential areas due to noise concerns.
Figure 4.1 Curbside Trees
CITY OF RIALTO
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
March 2003
16 Approval:
At the direction of the Public Works Director.
Removal:
Removal will be done only when street resurfacing is completed based upon the pavement management system.
Cost:
The cost per site will be different based upon the width of the street and the number of strips placed. Estimated average cost will be $2,000.00 per site.
SPEED HUMPS (TWO TYPES)
TYPE 1 - PERMANENT SPEED HUMPS
Certain types of speed humps (also referred to as undulations or speed bumps) can be very effective at slowing traffic and also have an impact on the amount of traffic on local neighborhood streets. Speed humps range in height from about 3” to 4” and are approximately 12 feet in length along the street and extend across the entire street. They are not the older style speed bump that is much shorter in length and sometimes much Figure 4.2 Rumble Strips
CITY OF RIALTO
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
March 2003
17 taller. The older style speed bumps are ineffective at slowing traffic as most motorists have realized that it is actually easier to cross them at higher speed than at slower speeds.
Speed bumps are not recommended for use the Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan (NTMP); speed humps are recommended. They should not install indiscriminately, however. Permanent humps should only be installed after testing the location with portable temporary humps during an evaluation phase. Very specific criteria for the use of permanent speed humps have been developed by other cities, including roadway classification, traffic volume, traffic speed, whether or not the roadway is an emergency route, on -street parking conditions, whether or not th e roadway is a bicycle route, the location of schools and sidewalks along with other criteria. The criteria have been simplified for our use and are described below. The disadvantages of speed humps include complaints from residents of neighboring street s due to diversion of traffic onto their streets, emergency vehicle travel time, and bike route impacts.
• Speed humps should be placed a minimum of 175’ to 200 ’ from the nearest intersection and should be spaced a maximum of 500’ apart , but more typically about 300’ to 400’ apart to be effective. Some streets will require multiple speed humps.
Usage:
Permanent speed humps are one of the preferred alternatives to slowing traffic and slightly decreasing the volume of traffic. Criteria for installation of s peed bumps include the following:
• The street should be a local neighborhood street.
• The street must be at least 250 feet to 700 feet in length between controls, four way intersections, and/or curves with a radius of less than 250 foot radius. • The speed limit may not be greater than 25 miles per hour. • The 85th percentile speed must be at least 32 miles per hour. • At least 67 percent of the responding street residents must approve the speed bumps.
• Adequate provision of access for emergency vehicles must be provided. • The street should be a local street -it may not be two lane (each direction) roadway collector or arterial.
• This street can not be part of the regional transit bus network. • The street must have an average daily traffic volume of at least 600 vehicle s and not exceed 3,500 vehicles per day.
Approval:
At the discretion of the Public Works Director with recommendation from the City Engineer, a 67 percent approval of affected residents (within 400 yards of device) , and with City Council approval.
CITY OF RIALTO
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
March 2003
18 Removal:
Upon request within 18 months, 67 percent approval of the effected responding neighborhood residents (within 400 yards of device).
Cost:
Cost estimates range from $3,000 to $5,000 for each speed hump, including signing and striping.
TYPE II - TEMPORARY SPEED HUMPS
Temporary speed humps are manufactured from hardened rubber to match the profile of permanent bumps that are made on the job site from hot asphalt or ordered from recycled material manufactures. Matching sections of the rubber bumps can be fitted together and fastened to the road pavement by anchor plates and bolts. Temporary speed bumps will be used at locations where the effectiveness of speed humps is in question, and a trial period is considered necessary. Temporary humps will also be used in locations where the need for a bump is established, but where it is not feasible to install the recycled or hot asphalt hump. Streets planned for an asphalt overlay in the near future would be a typical location where a temporary hump would be installed pending completion of the overlay.
Usage:
Warrants for the use of portable speed humps follow the same procedures as the candidates for permanent installation. Often, the placement of temporary speed humps can be used at a location the Public Works Director with recommendation from the City Engineer. The site must be studied for four months after the installation prior to the permanent installation of speed humps.
Figure 4.3 Permanent Speed Hump
CITY OF RIALTO
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
March 2003
19 Removal:
Generally, removal of the temporary speed humps will vary in time not to exceed 120 days per location.
Cost:
The cost to place and remove each portable speed hump is between $2,000 and $5,000 per site.
D. Category IV Measures
These must be authorized by the City Administrator, recommended by the Public Works Director, Transportation Commission and adopted by resolution by the City Council.
CHOKERS AND BULB-OUTS (Necked Intersections)
Necked intersection are also referred to as chokers or bulb outs and may be installed at either the intersection or at the mid -block, or both. The purpose of the narrowing is to reduce the width of traveled way and thus both slow and reduce traffic. The narrowing is Figure 4.4 Temporary Speed Hump
CITY OF RIALTO
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
March 2003
20 usually accomplished by extending the curb line into the street, whether for a bulb -out or a simple narrowing. Chokers and bulb-outs reduce traffic volumes if they are narrow and the travel lanes are so that they “feel” very tight to the motorist or are installed frequently along a considerately length of street. The intersection is narrowed with chok ers and so decreases the crossing length for pedestrians. However, chokers bring vehicles close to the curb, which could increase pedestrian hazards, and narrowing of the lane forces more vehicles and bicycles together. Some or all of the parking may be eliminated, depending upon the extent of the bulb-outs.
Chokers and bulb -outs may or may not be landscaped but should always be constructed with a raised curb. Painting only of chokers and bulb -outs in not effective. Increased maintenance will be requir ed for street sweeping, gutter clearing, and landscaping.
Chokers and bulb -out also may have a fairly significant impact on street parking, especially if they are installed for some distance along a street.
Usage:
Chokers and bulb outs are used in situat ions that appear to require more action than other types of speed and volume controls discussed previously in this process. Criteria for the installation of chokers and bulb-outs include the following:
• Average daily traffic (ADT) on the affected street s hould be between 800 and 3,500 vehicles per day.
• Streets must be at least 750’ long.
• The speed limit may not be greater than 25 miles per hour. • The 85th percentile speed must be at least 32 miles per hour. • The street must be a local street; it may not be t wo lanes (each direction) roadway or a collector.
• Excessive cut through or no resident traffic (about 25 percent) as calculated from the expected generation based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip General Handbook , or by an origin and destination study.
• Adequate provisions for emergency and transit vehicles must be provided.
Approval:
At the discretion of the Public Works Director with recommendations from the City Engineer, recommendation from the Transportation Commission, an approval rate of 67 percent of the responding effected residents, and City Council Approval.
Removal:
Upon request and within 24 months, 67 percent approval of the responding neighborhood, but cannot be greater than those voting this device into place.
CITY OF RIALTO
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
March 2003
21 Cost:
The cost ranges from $2,500, for a simple raised berm , to $40,000 for low maintenance/high aesthetic landscaped inlands, per set (one on each site of the street).
ONE-WAY CHICANES
A one-way chicane is an artificial series of tight turns with only enou gh width for one - way travel through a short section. They are similar in construction to chokers or bulb - outs but protrude more substantially into the street. While chokers merely reduce the width of the street, chicanes eliminate one lane for a short di stance. The purpose of a one-way chicane is to reduce both the speed and volume of traffic. One way chicanes are quite effective; in Seattle Washington volumes were reduced up to 35 percent, and speeds were reduced up to 25 percent. Some noise may be ge nerated by braking and accelerating in the chicane area ; however, overall noise should be reduced due to lower speeds and fewer vehicles. Some parking is lost at the location of each chicane. There would be substantial delay to emergency vehicles if a ch icane is very long. Access to the entire street is maintained, however.
The islands created by one -way chicane s may be landscaped, but warning signs and reflectors would be required. Maintenance would be increased for landscaping, street sweeping and gu tter clearing. Criteria for the installation of a one way chicane include the following:
• Street must be at least 750 feet long.
• The speed limit may not be greater than 25 miles per hour. • The 85th percentile speed must be at least 32 miles per hour.
Figure 4.5 Chokers/Bulb-Outs
CITY OF RIALTO
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
March 2003
22 • The street must be a local street; it may not be a two lane (each direction ) roadway or a collector.
• A majority of the daily traffic on the street must be non -neighborhood or cut- through traffic as determined by the ITE Trip Generation Manual or a license plate survey.
• Adequate provision for emergency vehicles must be provided. • The street is not identified as an emergency response route by Rialto Fire Department.
Usage:
Simple removable one way chicanes are allowed, but are initially installed on a trial basis for a one -year period trial. This measure is more extreme than some of the other measures, and will require some evaluation to determine its appropriateness.
Approval:
With staff approval as to safety, technical feasibility and financial feasibilit y, an approval rate of 67 percent of responding residents with in 400 feet of the device, recommendation by the Transportation Commission, and City Council Approval.
Removal:
Upon request and within 24 months, 67 percent approval of the residents within 4 00 feet of the device can ask that the device is to be removed prior to the installation of a permanently installed chicane. This device qualifies for the additional condition of a five year waiting period should residents reverse themselves and wish to reinstall the device.
Cost:
For a chicane with two installations similar to chokers, the cost ranges from $5,000 for a simple berm to $80,000 for low maintenance/high aesthetic islands. City staff should determine and recommend the most appropriate type of restriction device. Temporary installation of designed construction type barriers, sometimes referred to as Jersey Barriers is considered less expensive and should be used for a trial demonstration process prior to the final permanent installation.
CITY OF RIALTO
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
March 2003
23 TRAFFIC SIGNALS
The purpose of traffic signals is to control the flow of traffic and to assign vehicular right of way. Traffic signals are similar to stop signs and should not be used as traffic calming devices. They are excessi vely expensive for traffic calming purposes and are inappropriate for this purpose. They do not decrease speeds or volume of traffic and, in fact, can actually increase the volume of traffic on certain roads as motorists divert to certain routes without signals to avoid other routes with signals. Signals also have many of the effects that stop signs have; they can cause quick starts from the signal and running of unwarranted signals.
Usage:
Traffic signals determine who has the right of way at an interse ction. They facilitate orderly flow, allow pedestrians to cross, and provide cross -street traffic a chance to cross or enter an intersection.
Traffic Signals are installed in accordance with City standards, State of California Department of Transportation Warrants and they must follow the City of Rialto’s Capital Improvement Plan.
Approval:
Recommendation from the Director of Public Works, recommendation from the City Engineer, recommendation from the Transportation Commission and an adopted Figure 4.6 One-Way Chicane
CITY OF RIALTO
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
March 2003
24 resolution by the City Council is required before installation. The signal location must be on the city traffic signal priority list established by the Capital Improvement Program.
This establishes locations based upon criteria developed from the traffic signal preordination program. Locations are evaluated from specific warrants and ranked against a point system established by city staff and consultants.
Removal:
Traffic signals are rarely removed once installed , and concerns for liability and safety result from the removal of any signal.
Cost:
Depending on the complexity of the signal, cost could range from $150,000 to $300,000 per signal location. Traffic signals would require a CIP budget request.
RAISED CROSSWALKS:
Raised crosswalks should be placed at l ocations were there is evidence of heavy pedestrian activity. Raised crosswalks usually are placed at intersections around schools and at mid-block crosswalks. The following rules are recommended for adoption prior to the installation of any raised crosswalk:
• The street should be a local street. It may not be a collector or arterial. • The street is not part of the regional transit bus network area of travel.
Figure 4.7 Traffic Signal
CITY OF RIALTO
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
March 2003
25 • The street is not identified as an emergency response route by the Rialto Fire Department.
• The street must be 250 feet to 700 feet in length between controls, four -way intersections and/or curves with a radius of less than 250 foot radius. • The street must have an average daily traffic volume of at least 500 vehicles and not exceed 3,500 vehicles per day.
• The speed limit may not be greater than 25 miles per hour. • The 85th percentile speed must be at least 32 miles per hour (30 mph in school zones).
• At least 67 percent of the responding street residents must approve the raised crosswalk if they live within 500 feet of the device.
• Adequate provisions must be provided to both fire and police services.
Usage:
The raised crosswalks are used to define pedestrian crossings and can also be used as an alternative to slowing traffic and slightly decreasing the volume of traffic.
Approval:
At the Direction of the Director of Public Works, recommendation from the City Engineer, a voter approval of 67 percent of affected responding residents with in 500 feet of the device, recommendation from the Transportation Comm ission, and approval and authorization by resolution by the City Council.
Removal:
Upon request and within 18 months, 67 percent approval by the resident s within 500 feet of the device, along with recommendation from the Transportation Commission and the City Council.
Cost:
Cost estimates range from $2,500 to $5,000 for each raised crosswalk, including signing and striping.
CITY OF RIALTO
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
March 2003
26 TRAFFIC CIRCLES/ROUND ABOUTS/ISLANDS
Traffic circles are relatively small circular islands, usually land scaped, and placed in the center of the intersections of local residential streets. The purpose of traffic circles is to reduce speeds along a length of street, if used in a series, and to reduce accidents at problem intersections. Normally, they are used without stop signs; however, stop signs may be installed if they meet warrants. Some series of traffic circles have reduced traffic by up to 20 percent; however , a single traffic circle may have little effect on traffic volume. The location of a circle or circles in the center of the street creates the impression from a distance that the street is not through, thus having a psychological impact on the driver that may cause them to seek alternative routes.
Speed is reduced for about 100’ to 200’ before and after the circle, compared to no circle.
Circles can reduce speed fr om 2 miles per hour to 9 miles per hour, but smaller circles reduce speed less. Emergency access is also slowed , but does not block access completely. Emergency vehicles would have to slow at an intersection to pass through it anyway. Increased maintenance is required for landscaping, but there is no impact on drainage or street sweeping. Criteria for the installation of traffic circle are as follows:
• Must show documented accident problems.
• Traffic control signs, such as stop signs, consistently ignored or only partially obeyed.
Figure 4.8 Raised Crosswalk
CITY OF RIALTO
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
March 2003
27 • Shorter streets on a grid -type street system are more appropriate for installation of traffic circles as traffic circles are more effective at those locations.
• The speed limit may not be greater than 25 miles per hour. • The 85th percentile speed must be at least 32 miles per hour. • The street should be a local street, it may not be a two -lane street (each direction) roadway, collector or arterial.
• The street is not part of a regional transit system.
• The street is not identified as an emergency response route by Rialto Fire Department.
• The street must have an average daily volume of at least 600 vehicles and not exceed 3,500 vehicles per day.
• Adequate provision of access for emergency vehicles must be provided. • The street must be 250 to 700 feet in length between controls, four -way intersections and/or curves with a radius of less than 250 feet.
Usage:
Traffic circles may be used at locations that experience acc idents at a series of either uncontrolled intersections or at a series of intersections with sign controls. As traffic circles are unusual in California, a trial demonstration of a series of circles should be performed with temporary installation for at l east 120 days prior to permanent installation. Single circles may be also used at intersections with similar concerns.
Approval:
Technical feasibility, financial feasibility and a safety evaluation must be proven first by city staff. Recommendation by the Public Works Director, City Engineer, Transportation Commission, and the adoption of an ordinance by the City Council will act as approval.
A vote of 67 percent of the affected residents located within 1,000 feet from the proposed location is also required.
Removal:
Upon request and within 24 months, 67 percent approval of the responding residents within 1 ,000 feet of all cros s streets for removal of the entire group of permanently installed traffic circles. This device qualifies for the additional co ndition of a five year waiting period should residents again reverse themselves and wi sh to reinstall the devices.
Cost:
The cost ranges from $4,000.00 for a small traffic circle constructed with simple berming to $30,000 for a large inland with landscapi ng. However, large islands are not recommended and will add considerable maintenance costs to the city.
CITY OF RIALTO
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
March 2003
28 E. Category V Measures
CUL DE SACS
Cul-de-sacs successfully reduce the volume of through traffic on neighborhood streets.
They may or may not reduce speed, depending on the length of the street. However, cul - de-sacs can rarely be created on neighborhood streets that do not impede some amount of circulation. Cul-de-sacs are the same technique as street closures. They are n ot recommended for implementation without careful consideration and study.
The installation and implementation must be viewed as a last phase step to deal with neighborhood traffic issues that may have no other solution.
Usage:
Cul-de-sacs should be used only in circumstances where other measures have failed to adequately address the problems and issues.
Approval:
The option must be recommended by all staff, the Transportation Commission, Planning Commission, and adopted by resolution by the City Council.
Figure 4.9 Traffic Circle
CITY OF RIALTO
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
March 2003
29 Removal:
Once installed, removal is not an option.
Cost:
The estimated cost to implement a neighborhood cul-de-sac will range fr om $80,000 to $200,000, if land purchase is required.
FORCED TURN CHANNELIZATION (DIVERTER)
Forced-turn channeli zation consists of one or more traffic islands designed to prevent traffic from making certain movements at an intersection. A diagonal diverter usually forces all traffic onto the intersecting streets, thus breaking up through routes and making travel th rough a neighborhood more difficult. Speed may also be reduced, especially near the intersection, and reduces or eliminates drivers that formerly used the route as a cut-through. Noise is also lessened due to fewer vehicles on the street. Emergency vehicles may not be able to continue through the intersection, depending upon the type of device used to channelize traffic. A potential decrease in response time could result.
Before proceeding with this traffic control device, a turn restriction sign shoul d be implemented for a minimum nine -month trial period. The turn restriction sign is much less expensive and may be effective enough to alleviate the problem. A trip diversion of about 10 percent on each adjacent neighborhood street should be expected.
Criteria that must be met to implement this time include:
• A turn restriction sign must have failed, or reasonably be expected to fail, to alleviate the problem of excessive cut-through traffic on the affected street. • Excessive cut through or nonresident tr affic as calculated from the expected generation based upon the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Handbook or an origin and destination study. • A detailed traffic study to model the likely effects on traffic volumes on streets in the surrounding area.
• Adequate provisions of access for emergency vehicles.
Usage:
Forced-turn channelization is used in circumstances where other measures, such as turn restrictions signs, have failed to adequately address the problem of speed and volume.
Approval:
With City Staff recommendation as to safety, technical feasibility and financial feasibility. An approval of 67 percent of the effected residents within 1 ,000 feet of the device, recommendations from the Transportation Commission , and a resolu tion of approval by the City Council.
CITY OF RIALTO
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
March 2003
30 Removal:
Upon request and within 18 months of installation, 67 percent approval of the responding residents within 1000 feet of the device shall be required.
Cost:
Costs range from $1,000 , for a simple berm , to $50, 000 for a low -maintenance landscaped island.
STREET CLOSINGS (PERMANENT OR DURING CERTAIN HOURS ONLY) A street closure is a complete closure of a street at an intersection or mid -block, and may be permanent or during designat ed hours only. If the closure is permanent, it will result in the creation of a cul -de-sac. Access for emergency vehicles can be provided through certain styles of closures. Response time could be impacted. Bicycle and pedestrian access usually is main tained. This device is the most extreme traffic calming measure, but can be the most effective measure at reducing the volume of traffic. It may also have an impact on the speed of traffic. Some on street parking may be lost to closure. The street closure will reduce noise and traffic accidents in the immediate vicinity. Signage is required and the aesthetics of the closure will depend upon the type of closure installed.
Figure 4.10 Forced Turn Channelization
CITY OF RIALTO
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
March 2003
31 A criterion that must be met to implement this item includes:
• A turn restriction sign must have failed, or reasonably be expected to fail to alleviate the problem of excessive cut-through traffic on the affected street. • Excessive cut through or nonresident traffic as calculated from the expected generation based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Handbook, or an origin or destination study. • A detailed traffic study to model the likely effects on traffic volumes on streets in the surrounding areas.
• Adequate provisions of access for emergency vehicles. • The street must have a turnaround at some location along its length if the street is greater than 150’ long. This requirement is necessary so that fire trucks may turn around once they entered a dead-end or cul-de-sac street. The street must be 40’ at the f ace of the curb and at least 50’ at the property line for fire trucks to turn. Streets also may not be greater than 700’ in length. • Fire Department and Police Department must concur with the closing and in the closing design.
Usage:
Initially, only simple removable street closures should be allowed , and are installed on a trial basis for a one -year period. This measure is more drastic than the other measures and will require close evaluation.
Approval:
With City Staff approval, Fire Department recommend ation, Police Department recommendation, Transportation Commission recommendation and an approval of 67 percent of the responding residents who live within 1 ,000 feet of the closure , along with an approved resolution by the City Council.
Removal:
Upon req uest and within 24 months, 67 percent approval from the responding neighborhood residents within 1 ,000 feet of the device for removal of permanently installed street closure. This device qualifies for the additional condition of a five -year waiting period if residents again reverse themselves , and wish to reinstall the device or a similar device.
Cost:
Approximate cost ranges from a low of $1,000 for a simple removable bollard to $50,000 for a landscaped island closure. City staff should determine the mo st appropriate type of permanent closure. Temporary installation of freeway or construction type barriers,
CITY OF RIALTO
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
March 2003
32 sometimes referred to as Jersey rails, is considerably less expensive and is recommended for trial demonstration.
TURN RESTRICTION SIGNS
The purpose of turn restriction signs is to prohibit certain turning movements to block short cutting traffic on residential streets. The success of these signs depends on abeyance by the drivers and the level of enforcement by the Rialt o Police Department.
These signs are often ignored, just as are the speed and warning signs. Traffic volume reduction is potentially significant, but a high violation rate reduced their effectiveness.
Speed and noise may or may not be reduces with these prohibitions. A trip diversion of about 10 percent on each of the adjacent neighborhood streets should be the expected maximum. Criteria that must be met to implement this time include the following:
• Excessive cut -through or nonresident traffic (above 25 percent of the total street traffic as calculated from the expected generation s and based upon the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Handbook or the origin and destination study.
Usage:
Regulatory sig ns inform highway users of traffic laws or regulations , and are erected ONLY when and where they are needed to fulfill this purpose. State laws and local ordinances regulate the placement and use of these signs. Regulatory signs are classified Figure 4.11 Street Closing
CITY OF RIALTO
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
March 2003
33 in the following groups: Right -of-Way series (Stop and Yield), speed series, movement series, parking series, pedestrian series, and miscellaneous series. The warrants for each series will vary , and are extensive in nature for each application. Turn restriction signs may be installed based upon the established criteria described above.
Approval:
Approval is at the discretion of the City Engineer, and with concurrence of the Public Works Director. The effected residents within 400 feet of the device must vote and have an approval rate of 67 percent of responding affected residents.
Removal:
Upon request and within 18 months, 67 percent approval of responding residents within 400 feet of the device.
Cost:
The cost is about $150.00 per new sign.
WOONERF (Living Yard)
A woonerf, com mon in Europe and Japan, is an area in which all vehicular travel and pedestrian activities are merged, with no grade changes or separations. In the Netherlands, about 2,700 residential streets were converted to Woonerven between 1976 and 1983. Through t raffic is permitted, but landscaping and street furniture make impossible to drive fast. The street clearly indicates entry into a residential precinct.
Pavement treatment may be specialized. The street may be only wide enough for traffic in one directi on at a time, although tw o-way traffic is allowed. The street is used as a play space for children as well as for transportation uses. This concept is generally not seen in the United States and is one measure that is currently not on the list of identif ied measures for traffic calming by the Institute of Traffic Engineers at this time.
Figure 4.12 Turn Restriction Sign
CITY OF RIALTO
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
March 2003
34 Usage:
This alternative is not utilized on existing neighborhoods at this time. Should other measures fail, then Woonerven could be investigated further, assuming that more information would be available. Woonerven are a possibility for new developments as they can be constructed as part of the entire development. They are also a possibility for private streets, whether they are retrofitted or installed during construction.
Approval:
Approval will only be with recommendations from city staff, Transportation Commission and an approved resolution from the City Council.
Removal:
Removal is not an option once installed,
Cost:
Estimates from the Netherlands and Japan are approximately $25,000 to $45,000 per site.
Figure 4.13 Woonerf Figure 4.14 Woonerf
CITY OF RIALTO
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
March 2003
35 V. CONCLUSION
This Neighborhood Traffic Management Program is designed to assist the residents and businesses in the City of Rialto in dealing with on going and short term traffic issu es.
This program is designed to be an educational tool along with the development of a process that solicits public input and professional consultation in solving these problems.
The use of Warrants, Federal, State and Local laws is an important part o f developing a plan will address the problems that are created with growth and traffic. This document is designed to serve as a living document that will allow for change and for policy development. Evaluation of the program and the policies will be a yearly requirement.
CITY OF RIALTO
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
March 2003
36 Appendix A
Typical Traffic Problems and Studies
Complaint Investigation/Study
Speeding Radar Trailer, Speed study using radar or
tube detectors
Cut-Through Traffic Origin-Destination Study
Excessive Traffic Volume 24-hour count, Origin-Destination Study Stop Sign Violation Violation rate study
Pedestrian Safety Speed Study, Pedestrian Count
Parking in traffic lanes and on sidewalks Enforcement
CITY OF RIALTO
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
March 2003
37 Appendix B
Resident Polling Procedure
Affected residents are those people living on streets where traffic volumes are predicted to change. Some measures have an effect only over a limited area (such as in the case of a speed hump)k and the eligible voter swill be limited accordingly. Other measures might be linear (such as a series of circles or a closure) and will have a wider range of eligible voters There shall be only one vote per household.
Category I and II devices do not require a vote.
Category III devices require approval of affected residents who are defined as living o any property within 500 feet of the traffic control device, measured in all directions along the street centerlines.
Category IV and V devices require approval of affected residents who are defined as living on any property on streets within 1,000 feet of the device, and those that City Staff determine to be the affected area by observations of volumes, speeds and origin- destination patterns, including, if necessary, traffic modeling analyses. City staff would then prepare a report based on these observations for consideration by the neighborhood and approval by City Council.
Polling Procedure for All Category III, IV and V Traffic Measures:
Any measures intended to provide permanent traffic control measures, other than signs and striping, require 67% approval of those affected residents who respond to the ballot.
Polling shall conform to the following:
• Ballots shall be mailed via certified mail, returned receipt required, with a return postage-paid envelope for the completed ballot.
• There shall be one ballot sent per household, regardless of household size. • No proportioning of votes shall be done.
CITY OF RIALTO
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
March 2003
38 Appendix C
Glossary
85th Percentile The speed at or below which 85 percent of vehicles surveyed travel. This measurement is one criterion used to set speed limits on roadways.
Access The ability to enter and/or exit a property, street or neighborhood; includes both ingress and egress.
ADT Average daily traffic, or the number of vehicles that travel a roadway in one 24-hour weekday period.
Chokers and Bulb-Outs An extension of the curb towards the center of the street either in the mid-block or a t the intersection, used to narrow the roadway to slow traffic.
Chicane An artificial curve added to an otherwise straight street.
CIP The City’s Capital Improvement Program, used to schedule and budget major capital projects.
Cul-de-sac A dead-end street.
Forced Channelization Similar to a diverter; used to force traffic to right or left.
General Plan The City General Plan is the planning document for Rialto.
It contains several chapters that describe and discuss various important aspects of the City and sets goals, policies and actions. The Circulation Chapter applies to traffic and transportation.
Grade A vertical incline; can be either uphill or downhill.
ITE Trip Generation Handbook The Institute of Transportation Engineers professional manual that compiles surveys of the amount of vehicle trips generated by land use type.
Ingress and Egress The ability to enter (ingress) and exit (egress) a property, street, or neighborhood, such as a driveway into a parking lot.
CITY OF RIALTO
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
March 2003
39 Mid-Block Any point between successive intersections along a street.
Necked Intersection Similar to a choker or a bulb-out placed at an intersection; used to narrow the intersection to slow traffic.
NTMP Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
One-Way Entrance and Exit Similar to a diverter; used to prohibit entrance or exit into or out of a street or neighborhood.
Prima Facie Speed Limit The apparently obvious speed limit on a street with no posted speed limit, such as 25 miles per hour on a local residential street.
Rumble Strips Lines of small ceramic bumps used to slow traffic or alert drivers to certain road conditions.
Safe Stopping Distance Also safe sight distance. A distance of sufficient length such that a driver can avoid striking an unexpected obstacle on the roadway.
Speed Humps Often referred to as speed bumps or undulations. Speed humps are placed across the street and used to slow traffic.
Approved speed humps are 3” to 4” in height and 7 to 12 feet long.
Speed Survey A survey of vehicles performed with radar to determine the speed at which they are traveling. The 85th percentile speed is commonly used as the indicator of the appropriate
roadway speed (see 85th Percentile). Radar may be used to enforce a speed limit set with a radar survey.
Speed/Warning Signs Speed limit signs and signs warning motorists of traffic conditions, such as speed humps or schools.
Sight Distance The maximum distance at which a driver can clearly see an oncoming vehicle, a stopped vehicle or an obstacle in the roadway; this distance is often reduced by the vertical and horizontal alignment of a roadway.
CITY OF RIALTO
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
March 2003
40 Traffic Calming A technique for reducing the speed and volume of traffic on residential streets that uses various traffic control devices.
Traffic Control Devices A general category of physical devices used to direct and slow traffic, such as speed humps or traffic circles.
Turn Restriction The prohibition of right and/or left turns from one street to another by means of signage, diverters, or forced
channelization.
Traffic Circle A landscaped or hardscaped circular median island placed in the center of an intersection used to slow traffic by requiring a maneuver around the circle. Also known as roundabouts and islands.
Warrant Requirements such as traffic speeds, volumes, or turning movement s that must be met to justify a traffic control device. Warrants can be minimum (not less than) or
maximum (not more than).
Woonerf Means “Living Yard.” Is a traffic calming measure implemented in Europe and Japan, and beginning in the U.S. to make pedestrian activities the primary function of streets (usually residential), reducing traffic volumes and speeds, while promoting neighborhood activities.