Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report - February 19, 1986 (47)TRAFFIC SIGNAL PRIORITY STUDY RDCEIVED FOR FILING - INSi'ALLATiON PRIORI`T'IES SET Agenda item k-3 - "Review of Traffic Signal Priority Study" was introduced by City Manager Peterson and Public Works Director Ronsko. Council discussion followed with qu, :-ins being directed to Staff. City Clerk Reimche presented letters received €rcan the Rivergate Mokelumne Homeowners Association, Dale Geweke, 1352 Rivergate Drive, Dr. Melvin Escara, 1217 Rivergate Drive, Ms. Beth Grady, 1257 Rivergate Drive, O. E. Radtke, 1016 N. Lincoln Street, and Dr. Steven L. Mandel, P. O. Box 1028, Lodi, urging traffic signal installations at the intersection of Rivergate/Church and Turner. The City Clerk also presented a letter which had been received from the Lodi District Chamber of Commerce advising that their Board of Directors, at its February meeting, voted unanimously to support the recommendations of the Highway and Transportation Committee regarding the placement of a traffic signal at the intersection of Turner Road and Church Street. In addition they requested that the City of Lodi suggest to Cal Trans the placement of a signal at -the intersection of Victor and Cluff Avenue. Following discussion with questions being directed to Staff, Council took the following actions: On motion of Council Member Snider, Pinkerton second, Council received for filing the "Traffic Signal Priority Study", authorized the allocation of appropriate funds for the installation of traffic signals at the intersection of Ham and Lockeford and at Church and Turner, and directed Staff to connence work on the installation of traffic signals at Cluff and Victor. Following additional discussion regarding a "right turn only" median at Kettleman and Fairmont and traffic in general on Kettleman lane, it was proposed that this area be designated for a Shirtsleeve discussion topic at future meeting. a ACATY OF LOD! L CIL COMMUNICATION • • PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT TO: City Council FROM: City Manage; - DATE: February ti, 1986 SUBJECT: 1986 Traffic Signal Installations RECOMMENDED ACTION: That the City Council establish the intersections to be signalized with the funds allocated in 1986 Capital Improvement Program Budget. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Council has p-eviously received the Traffic Signal Priority Study dated December 1985 and the attached memo of February 4, 1986. It is our understanding that the Chamber of Commerce will be making a recom- mendation to the City Council on this subject. In addition, we have notified the citizens who have previously made formal or informal requests for signal installation L J ck . Ronsko ubli Works Director Attachment cc: Chamber of Commerce Concerned Citizens JLR/eeh THOMAS A. PETERSON, City Manager MEMORANDUM, City of Lodi, Public Works Department TO: City Manager City Council FROM: Public Works Director DATE: February 4, 1986 SUBJECT: Traffic Signal Installations The City Council has received the revised traffic signal study which includes the attached Table I. The table lists, in total points priority order, the 11 intersections meeting the Cal Trans warrants for signal installations. While staff does not intend to make specific recommendations on which inter- section should .receive a traffic signal in 1986, the following comments are offered for Council's consideration: Ham S Lockeford - This intersection has topped the priority list in 1979, 1982 and again in 1985 with the revised priority system. The City has installed five new signals since 1979. There may be a potential liability if this installation is again deferred in favor of other installations. Attached is the accident map (3 years) for this intersection. Victor & Cluff - Since this intersection is on a state highway, the lead time required for Cal Trans approval and design makes this a good candidate for budgeting in fiscal year 1987. If Council wishes to do this, Cal Trans could be notified now and the signal design could be ready for installation early in 1987. Turner S Church/Mills - Of these two locations on Turner Road which are essentially equal in priority, Church Street has higher volumes, speeds and accidents. After Turner Road is paved in the vicinity of Mills Avenue this spring, the street will be restriped with additional markings that will hopefully improve the accident record at this intersection. This in- stallation will help platoon traffic on Turner Road and will improve the ability of crossing Turner at California, which is also an intersection which warrants signals. Lower Sacramento S Lodi/Elm - Staff is preparing preliminary plans for minor widening on Lower Sacramento Road at these inter- sections. This will allow the installation of left turn lanes which will improve traffic flow and safety, particularly at Elm Street. Kett]eman/Fairmont - It is recommended that the "right turn only" medians described in the priority study be installed this year. City Manager S City Council February 4, 1986 Pa ge 2 Kettleman/Central - The south side of Kettleman Lane at this location is the site of a new shopping center. The de- veloper has offered to contribute funds toward the in- stallation of a signal. It is recommended that citywide development fees for traffic improvements be discussed. "Jac L. RAnsko Pu, i orks Director J_,J ments cc: Chamber of Commerce City Attorney JLR/eeh TABLE 1 PRIORITY SYSTEM POINTS Accidents Coordinated Special Location Volume Points 1985* Speed Movement Conditions Total HAM LANE/LOCKEFORr 292 57 0 0 -50 25 324 VICTOR ROAD/CLUFF 124 12 1 150 0 25 311 TURNER ROAD/CHURCH 160 12 0 96 0 0 268 TURNEP ROAD/MILLS 124 6 0 58 0 75 263 LOWER SACRAMENTO/LODI 229 30 1 0 0 0 259 LOWER SACRAMENTO/ELM 45 6 0 150 0 50 251 KETTLEMAN LANE/FAIRMONT 132 96 3 70 -65 0 233 KETTLEMAN LANE/MILLS 30 0 0 150 0 45 225 TURNER ROAD/CALIFORNIA 62 60 2 96 0 0 218 LODI AVE/MILLS AVE 160 36 2 0 0 0 196 KETTLEMAN LANE/CENTRAL 48 6 0 112 0 0 166 * Number of accidents that can be corrected by signal installations 1 z6KF-Fm 7 ST -'r I M0. DATE TIM[ • 1. 6-1S-12 1334 • 2. 2.16.82 1600 3. 7.20_82 0120 4. 9.11-82 1425 • S. 4-28-83 1533 • 6. 10.23-63 1800 7. 1-23-84 1328 8. 2-17-84 . 1316 ► 9. 3-26-64 2050 •10. 4-03.84 1107 X33. 4-03-84 1630 12. S-03.84 II09 13. 10-08.64 m5z •14. 12-I:-84 0805 1s. S -3c -E5 1171 16. 10.12-85 1557 17. 10.14-65 1705 at6estrtan accldrnt OAA=t IRIUREO APPARENT CAUSE L E `G E N 0 PATH OF MOVING VEH!CLE REAR END COLLISION ---► FIXED OBJECT PARKED VEHICLE SIDESWIPE � .1 I ••A. Failure to yield ./. t0 pedestrian Mtn -Mtn 0 A. Failure to stop Ma 0 A. Failure to follow stges I A. Failure to rt de pike close to rt curb Mod -MDQ 0 A. Unsafe it 't Mod-Ms,1 0 A. Failure to stop Mtn ' 0 A. Inattentive driver/Oefecttve brake syst. Mtn -Mtn 0 A. Unsafe left turn MM -Mtn 0 A. Under influence - MW Maj-Ma1 1 A. fallvre to stop , Mtn -Mtn 0 IMttentton (bot. 6rt.ers) MDd-Maj 0 A. Failure to y"" r/. Mtn•M/n O A. Failure 10 artre r<tnln 1aM Mod -Mod I A. Fttlun to yield Mop -Mtn O A. Faits. to erlrr or It 117 of rota IfD�lectu Sr1ru•e: M1n_M1. 0 A. Failure to y+ela r!. 1Ht.Moc 0 A. Failure to De clow as posDl. to rt curb L E `G E N 0 PATH OF MOVING VEH!CLE REAR END COLLISION ---► FIXED OBJECT PARKED VEHICLE SIDESWIPE � .1 -d` ivergate M-okeii, mne -Homeowners Association r� February _7, 2986 L t i ')v City Council 221 West Pine Street Call Box 3006 Lodi, California, 95241-1910 Re: Traffic Signal Installations . Turner and Church Lady & Gentlemen: The homeowners of Rivergate appreciate the extra surveillance of police enforcement regarding the speed limit, however, the intersection of Rivergate/Church & Turner Road has six lanes of traffic to watch which include four regular lanes of traffic and two turn lanes. The only other intersection on Turner Road to have the same criteria is Turner Road and Ham Lane by Lakewood School. In view of the safety of the children, senior citizens, and other residents on the north side of Turner Road as well as anyone from the south side of Turner wishing to cross Turner Road to_�the north, the following reasons are presented to you for your special consideration: 1. There are no cross walks or stop signs to permit the children, senior citizens or other residents from the north side of Turner Road to cross safely to go to. the shopping center, the library or in the case of senior citizens to visit other .friends who might be in other senior citizen homes on or off of Church Street. 2. Traffic from 99 Highway 'coming from the underpass would have to stop for a signal; 'thereby establish- ing that Turner Road is a residential area and that the speed limit is only 35 miles per hour. 3. Trying to cross .urner Road from Church or Rivergate is extremely difficult when a driver has to watch six lanes of traffic. 4. It is even more difficult for a driver going north Post Office Box 791, Lodi, CA 95241-0791 on Church Street and trving to cross to Rivergate or turning west onto Turner Road when the driver approach`- ing from the east on Turner Road turns on their right - turn signal indicating they plan to turn into Church Street, but instead they were planning to turn into the shopping center. 5. The fog creates an extremely hazardous condition for crossing. 6. The wooden fence at Rivergate and Turner tends to make s; a blind spot in crossing Turner Road and with'the speed of the cars, as well as no other place for cars to stop on Turner Road except on Ham Lane, it is next to impossible to cross, especially during peak hours. Very truly yours, Thoma u e s "'�--• President TRS/sm f_ r t '{ M IN g1 fj� t3`-Liarf»F.i r � I/f L'vl�c LJZJ //Cr lfv%lt �J e r, n Iytj d r V\-11-4A411� Ck, AkA X) - Mr.& Mrs. Larry Geweke 1650 Edgewood Drive Lodi, CA* 95240 co I