CC 2013-01-22_11.a. Crosswalk at Fair Oaks and Station WayMEMORANDUM
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: TERESA McCLISH, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
BY: MIKE LINN, ASSISTANT CITY ENGINEER
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF CROSSWALK AND RECTANGULAR RAPID
FLASH BEACONS ON FAIR OAKS AVENUE AT THE STATION WAY
INTERSECTION
DATE: JANUARY 22, 2013
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Council:
1. approve the installation of a crosswalk, equipped with a Rectangular Rapid Flash
Beacon system, on the western leg of Fair Oaks Avenue at the Station Way
intersection;
2. Appropriate $13,000 from the unappropriated General Fund balance.
IMPACT ON FINANCIAL AND PERSONNEL RESOURCES:
The Community Development . Department estimates the construction cost to be
$25,500:
Rapid Flashing Beacon Assemblies
Crosswalk
ADA Ramp
Two Railed Barriers
Estimate
$15,000
$200
$8,000
$2,300
$25,500
The Lucia Mar Unified School District Superintendent has agreed to recommend to the
School Board that they pay 50% of the project costs. It is estimated that the project will
require between 20 and 40 hours of City staff time. This project is not currently
identified in the Critical Needs Action Plan.
BACKGROUND:
Representatives of the Lucia Mar School District recently expressed concerns to the
City about Arroyo Grande High School students crossing Fair Oaks Avenue to reach the
area of the Station Way intersection (see Attachment No. 1 ). The representatives
Item 11.a. - Page 1
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF A CROSSWALK AND RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASH
BEACONS ON FAIR OAKS AVENUE AT THE STATION WAY INTERSECTION
JANUARY 22, 2013
PAGE 2 OF 5
asked whether a crosswalk could be installed on Fair Oaks Avenue or other measures
implemented to better protect the students.
Station Way is a two lane minor arterial oriented north-south with its southern terminus
at its intersection with Fair Oaks Avenue (see Attachment No. 2). There is a stop sign
at the Station Way terminus, but there are no stops on Fair Oaks Avenue at the
intersection. Fair Oaks Avenue is a four-lane minor arterial street, 46 feet in width,
oriented east-west. A Caltrans US 101 southbound exit ramp terminates at Fair Oaks
Avenue and is offset approximately 60 feet to the east of Orchar.d Street. All legs of the
intersection at Fair Oaks Avenue and Orchard Street/US 101 exit ramp have stop
controls.
On April 16, 2012, the Traffic Commission considered a plan to install a crosswalk and
ADA ramps across Fair Oaks Avenue at the eastern leg of the Orchard Street/US 101
Exit Ramp intersection (see Attachment No. 3). The Traffic Commission reviewed the
information, accepted public comment, and recommended the installation of a
temporary crosswalk assembly on a trial basis during the Lucia Mar summer break 'in
2013.
On October 23, 2012, staff met with representatives of the Lucia Mar School District and
Caltrans to discuss both long term and short term traffic circulation issues along Fair
Oaks Avenue. Municipal Code Section 10.08.010 "Crosswalks" authorizes the Police
Chief to establish crosswalks when he or she believes that there is a danger to
pedestrians (see Attachment No. 4). When discussing the crosswalk issue, the Police
Chief objected to the installation of a crosswalk at the Fair Oaks Avenue and the
Orchard Street/US 101 exit ramp indicating that it would further complicate the decision
factors for vehicle drivers and pedestrians to negotiate the intersection. Caltrans
representatives also indicated they would not approve a crosswalk at that location.
After considerable discussion, the attendees agreed that the preferable solution was to
install a crosswalk on Fair Oaks Avenue at the Station Way intersection with flashing
warning beacon signs.
On November 26, 2012, staff presented the recommendations to the Traffic
Commission (Attachment No. 5). The Traffic Commission reviewed the information,
accepted public comment, and unanimously advised against the installation of a
crosswalk at the intersection.
ANALYSIS OF ISSUES:
School District personnel have observed a heavy volume of student activity crossing
Fair Oaks Avenue during morning and afternoon times, which results in safety concerns
given the level of traffic and lack of any protected or marked crossing area west of
Traffic Way until Valley Road. Caltrans staff recommended the crosswalk and flashing
beacon as an effective alternative to improve pedestrian safety at that location.
Normally, crosswalks are not recommended at uncontrolled intersections, but staff
Item 11.a. - Page 2
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF A CROSSWALK AND RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASH
BEACONS ON FAIR OAKS AVENUE AT THE STATION WAY INTERSECTION
JANUARY 22, 2013
PAGE 3 OF 5
believes the flashing beacons should provide the necessary warning to drivers at this
location.
The Rectangular Rapid Flash Beacons (RRFB) has been installed by Caltrans at a
number of locations throughout the State (see Attachment No. 6). Unlike the in-
pavement lighting system installed on East Branch Street, they use two poles, one at
each end of the crosswalk, that emit pulsating "flashes" back and forth between the
poles. The lights are solar powered, easily installed, and are equipped with light
emitting diodes (LED). As a result, they are more economical than the in-pavement
systems, easier to maintain, and are more visible during daytime hours.
A stop sign is not recommended given the level of traffic congestion during school start
and dismissal times. The flashing beacons will be manually activated. Therefore, they
are an effective option for this location since they will not be flashing when not in use
during the majority of the remainder of the day and traffic can continue uninterrupted
during those times.
Staff also discussed with Caltrans representatives the potential for installation of a traffic
signal at the offramp and the Orchard Street intersection, which would allow for the
installation of crosswalk. Results of a prior study were reviewed, which demonstrated
that this would not be an effective measure due to the misalignment of the offramp and
Orchard Street.
The Traffic Commission recommended against the proposal for the following reasons:
o High School students do not always follow the conventional pathways of travel;
• the Lucia Mar School District would have to educate the students to operate the
flashing lights correctly;
• crosswalks may give pedestrians a false sense of security and they may not pay
attention when crossing; and
o it may actually be safer for students to cross the street without a crosswalk.
In response to their concerns, two additional proposed measures are included:
• The School District has committed to providing a crossing guard at the beginning
and end of the school sessions. The crossing guard can help ensure the
pedestrian activity utilizes the crosswalk. The crossing guard can also help
regulate the frequency of pedestrians crossing the street in order to prevent
constant interruption of vehicle traffic.
• The Police Department has recommended blocking the sidewalk at the north side
of the Highway 101 bridge (see Attachment No. 7). This will help ensure the
student pedestrian activity crossing the street is concentrated at the crosswalk.
Given this additional measure, the Police Chief also supports the
recommendations.
Item 11.a. - Page 3
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF A CROSSWALK AND RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASH
BEACONS ON FAIR OAKS AVENUE AT THE STATION WAY INTERSECTION
JANUARY 22, 2013
PAGE 4 OF 5
Staff intends to continue efforts to study other more comprehensive future solutions.
Among potential measures to be studied is the installation of a roundabout at the
freeway offramp. However, this would be a much more costly and long-term option.
ADVANTAGES:
Given the concerns that have been identified at this location regarding pedestrian
crossings, staff believes some action is warranted. There is no ideal solution.
However, based on all the options evaluated, staff believes the recommendations
present the best alternative available. It is the most cost effective, can be implemented
relatively quickly, will have the least potential impact on traffic flow, and will not involve
any impact on vehicle travel during the remainder of the day when pedestrian traffic is
not an issue.
DISADVANTAGES:
The recommendations require an unbudgeted expenditure. Additionally, while staff
believes it will have the least impact on existing traffic flow of available options, the
actual impact is difficult to project.
ALTERNATIVES:
The following alternatives are provided for the Commission's consideration:
Approve staff's recommendations;
Modify staff's recommendation to install the facilities on a temporary trial basis;
Request additional analysis;
Deny any short-term measures and direct staff to focus efforts on study of long-
term potential options;
Approve funding and direct staff to contract for study of a traffic signal at the Fair
Oaks Avenue offramp and Orchard Street intersection; or
Provide direction to staff.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The project is categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15301 (c).
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMENTS:
The Agenda was posted in front of City Hall on Thursday, January 17, 2013. The
Agenda and report were posted on the City's website on Friday,. January 18, 2013. No
public comments were received.
Item 11.a. - Page 4
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF A CROSSWALK AND RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASH
BEACONS ON FAIR OAKS AVENUE AT THE STATION WAY INTERSECTION
JANUARY 22, 2013
PAGE 5 OF 5
Attachments:
1. 1111113 Letter-Lucia Mar School District to City
2. Vicinity Map-Fair Oaks Avenue
3. 4116112 Proposed Layout-Crosswalk at Fairs Oaks I Orchard
4. Municipal Code Excerpt-Chapter 10.08.010 "Crosswalks"
5. 11126112 Proposed Layout-Crosswalk at Fair Oaks I Station Way
6. FHWA Publication-Rectangular Rapid Flash Beacon
7. Photograph -Two Rail Barrier
Item 11.a. - Page 5
~ ~~
LUCIA MAR UNIFIED
SCHOOL DISTRICT
Eng:1gc. Challcngc.lnspi rc.
January 11, 2013
Mr. Steven Adams, City Manager
City of Arroyo Grande
3 00 East Branch Street
Arroyo Grande, CA 93420
Attachment No.1
Lucia Mar Unified School District
602 Orchard Street
Arroyo Grande, CA 934 20
www.lmusd.org
Ph 805.474.3000 ext 1070
Fax 805.474.3903
Re: Development of New Pedestrian Crossing at Orchard Avenue & Fair Oaks Avenue
Dear Mr. Adams,
The Lucia Mar Unified School District greatly appreciates the recent conversations with you and
other City staff regarding the need to provide a crosswalk near the intersection of Orchard
A venue and Fair Oaks A venue. Our district is very concerned with the lack of a designated safe
crossing location in this area due to the high frequency of use by many of our 2,128 Arroyo
Grande High School students. In fact, Fair Oaks A venue serves as the primary crossing location
for Doughnut Delight, which is a popular doughnut shop for AGHS students.
The lack of a controlled crossing location also puts drivers at risk due to the uncertainty of
crossing patterns and locations. It is not uncommon to see pedestrians dash across the street at
multiple locations in an effort to avoid oncoming traffic. Therefore, it is of the utmost
importance that we provide a new crosswalk by the end of spring break, which is April 8, to
ensure the safety of our students and the community as a whole. I am very afraid that one of our
students is going to get hit by a car if we do not act decisively, and we cannot let that happen.
As evidence of our commitment, Lucia Mar Unified School District is willing to provide a
crossing guard at the new crosswalk during the school year in the morning and afternoon to help
control the flow of students crossing the street. The goal would be to direct the flow of students
in such a manner that it ensures the new street crossing location is always used and that vehicular
traffic is minimally impacted due to controlled timing of student crossings.
We sincerely appreciate the City's partnership with Lucia Mar Unified School District and look
forward to continuing our efforts to support student and community safety.
Respectfully,
~ogeb om, Superintendent a:i~~ar Unified School District
Item 11.a. - Page 6
Item 11.a. - Page 7
Pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
Cr
o
s
s
w
a
l
k
-
A
p
r
i
l
1
6
,
20
1
2
Tr
a
f
f
i
c
Co
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
Me
e
t
i
n
g
Fa
i
r
Oa
k
s
Av
e
n
u
e
at
Or
c
h
a
r
d
I
US
10
1
Ex
i
t
Ra
m
p
In
s
t
a
l
l
Co
n
t
i
n
e
n
t
a
l
St
y
l
e
Cr
o
s
s
w
a
l
k
Item 11.a. - Page 8
10.08.010
Chapter 10.0
TRAFFIC ADMINISTRA TIO
AND REGULATIO
tions:
10.0 .010
10.0 .020
10.08.030
10.08.040
10.0 .050
10.08.060
10.08.010
uthorized
De ignntioo of one-way
str t .
Truck rout .
Prohibition of olicitatioo
at entrance to
commercial park!Jig area
and upon public right-of-
way areas.
Cro wal .
The chief of police is authorized and re-
quired to establish and maintain upon the sur-
face of the roadway, by appropriate devices,
marks, or lines, eros walks approximately
equal in width to the adjacent sidewalk at all
Intersections where, in his or her opinion,
there is particular danger to pedestrians cross-
ing the roadway. (Prior code§ 4-3.09)
10.08.020 Display of unauthorized
lgn .
lt i unlawful for any person to place, main-
tain or display any device, mark or sign, other
than an official warning or direction signal
erected by competent authority, upon or in
view of a street, which device, mark or sign
purports to be, or is, an imitation of, or resem-
bles, an official warning or direction sign or
signal, or which attempts to direct or control
the movement of traffic, or the parking of ve-
hicles, or the actions of operators. Any such
prohibited device or sign shall be a public nui-
252
Attachment No . 4
sance, and the chief of police may remove it
or cause it to be removed, without notice.
(Prior code § 4-3.1 0)
10.0 .030 Prohibit d turn .
The council, from time to time, by resolu-
tion may limit or restrict turning movements
by vehicle in specified locations . The chief of
police and city engineer shall determine and
install appropriate signs to provide notice of
such restrictions. After the installation of such
signs, no person may operate a vehicle in vio-
lation of the provisions of such signs. (Prior
code § 4-3.18)
10. .040 D I nation of one-way
stree .
The city council may, by resolution, desig-
nate any portion of any local city street as a
one-way treet. The chief of police and city
engineer shall determine and install appropri-
ate signs to provide notice of such restrictions.
After the installation of such signs, no person
may operate a vehicle in violation of the pro-
visions of such signs. (Prior code § 4-3.19)
10.0 .050 Truck rout .
A . Whenever ny resolution of the city
designates and describes any street, or portion
thereof, as a street the use of which is permit-
ted by any vehicle exceeding a maximum
gro s weight limit of three tons. the city engi-
neer is authorized to designate such street by
appropriate signs (''truck routes") for the
movement of vehicles exceeding a maximum
gross weight limit of three tons.
B. When any such truck routes are estab-
lished and designated by appropriate signs. the
operator of any vehicle exceeding a maximum
gro weight limit ofthree tons shall drive on
such routes and none other, except that noth-
ing in this section shall prohibit the operator
Item 11.a. - Page 9
Item 11.a. - Page 10
U.S.Depor1menl of Tronspor1o1ion
Federal Highway Admin i stration
This summary is one in a series
describing Innovative Interse c tion
Safe yTreatments . e summaries
identify new technolo ies and
techn1q u es to i mprove Interse c t io n
safety developed s1nc e N C HRP
Report 500 , Volumes 5 and 1 2,
were published in 2003 and 2 004 ,
respectively . These tr e a t m en t s
show promise for impr ov in g saf e t y
but comprehens1ve eff ec tiv e ne ss
evaluations are not yet availabl e.
Cs afe Roads for a Safer future
~ lnwrl•tnlln rud-f uftiiJ •••tr ll•n
Rectangular Rapid Flash Beacon
(RRFB)
Purpose
According to the National Highway Traffic Sa ety Adm1n1s rat1on, here were a tota l of
14,340 pedestr·an fata l ities and 193,000 pedestrian injuries resulting from pedest r ian-
vehic l e crashes nationwide dunng the 2004-2006 per1od Rectangu l ar Rap1d F l ash
Beacons (RRFB) can enhance safety by reduc1ng crashes between vehic l es and
pedestrians a uns1gnalized intersec t ions and m1d-bl ock pedes t rian crossings by
increasing driver awareness of potentia l pedestnan confl1cts.
Alternative Names
L1gh Em1tt1ng D ode (LED) Rap1d-Fiash System, Stuner Flash or LED Beacons
Operation
RRFBs are user-actuated amber LEDs that supp l ement warnmg s1gns at uns1gna l 1zed
mtersect,ons or m1d-block crosswa l ks. They can be activated by pedes mans manually by
a push button or pass1vely by a pedestnan detection system
RRFBs use an 1rregular flash pattern that IS s1m1lar to emergency flashers on police veh1cles.
RRFBs may be InStalled on e1 her two-lane or mult1-lane roadways
Potential Benefits
RRFBs are a l ower cos a l ernanve to traffic s1gnals and hybrid s1gnals that are shown to
mcrease dnver y1e l d1ng behav1or at crosswa l ks Significantly when supplementing standard
pedestrian crossmg warnmg s1gns and mark1ngs
An offic,a l FHWA-sponsored exper mental mp l ementa 10n and eva l uation conducted 1n
St. Pe e sburg, Flonda found tha: RRFBs a pedestrian crosswa l ks are dramatiCally more
effect1ve a 1ncreas1ng dnver yie l d ng rates to pedestr ans than trad1 10nal overhead beacons
The novelty and un1que nature of the stutter flash may eliot a greater response from dnvers
than trad1t1onal methods
The add1 10n of '{RFB may also mcrease the safety effectiveness of other treatmen s, such as
he use of advance y1e l markings w1th Y I ELD (or STOP) HERE FOR PEDESTRIANS s1gns These
s1gns and markings are used to reduce the modence of mu lt ip l e-threat crashes a t crossw al ks
on mu l ti-l ane roads (ie., crashes where a veh1cle 1n one l ane stops to a ll ow a pedestrian to
cross the street wh1 l e a veh1cle 1n an adjacent lane, rave l mg 1n the same d1rect1o . stnkes the
pedestnan), but alone they only have a small effect on overa ll drover y1eld1ng ra es.
M ay 2009
F HWA·S A-®-009
Item 11.a. - Page 11
Figure 1 : Ac vated, solar pow red RRFB on
a enter sland at an unsig'l<l l l.red 'nter~t,on
bed ·on~ flash usrng an ,rreg~;lar flash pattern that
rs srmrlar to emergency nashers on po l iCe vehiCles
Figure 3 : Combr'led road1ide and median sysr m
of solar-powered RRF B
Learn More
Michael Frederick , S Peter s b u r g e rgh b orhood
rans p o rtat Of" M a'1ager
727 .893.7843
michael .freder i ck @ stpete .org
Ed Rice, lntersec:r on Safe y Team L e a d e r
rHWA Office of S a fety
202 .366 .g064
ed .rice @ dot.gov
See Also :
http ://mutcd .fhwa .dot.gov /resource s/
i nterim _approvaVia11 /stpetersburgrptlintro .htm
http ://www .stpete.org /pdf /i te _paper Ol .pdf
Agency Experience
"An Ana l ysts of the Effects of Stu ter Flash L ED Beacons to Increase Yielding to Pedestnans
Using Multilane Crosswalks ." along w1 h "T he Use of Stutter Flash LED Beacons o Increase
Yeld ,ng to Pedes na'ls at Crosswalks ." presented at the TransportatiOn Research Board
Annua l Meeting 1n 2008, summarized the results of two stud i es on the effects of RRFBs
when used to supplement standard pedes nan cross,ng warning s1gns at crosswalks .
The former found that go1ng from a n o -beaco'l arrangement o a two-beacon system ,
mounted o n the supplementary warnmg s1gn on the right side of the cross1ng, 1ncreased
y1e l ding from 18 percent to 81 percent. There was a further increase in yie l d1ng behavior,
w1th a four-beacon system (with two beacons on both the right and left s1de of the
cross t ng) to 88 percent "An Analysts of he Effects of Stut er Flash LED Beacons to Increase
Y i eld 1 ng to P edestrians Us1ng Multilane Crosswalks ' also eva l ua ed he si es over a 1-year
period , and found hat here was little to no decrease in yielding behavior over t 1 me
Implementation Considerations
lncludtng RRFBs 0'1 the roads t de 1 ncreases driver yie l dtng behav1or Significantly . lnclud1ng RR F Bs
on a center 1s l and or med1an as well can fur her increase driver yie l ding behavio r , a lt hough with
a l ower marginal benefit than roadside beacons .
RRFBs can use manual push-buttons or automated pass1ve (e.g ., v t deo or 1nfrared) pedes rian
detect t on , and should be unlit when not actlva ed.
RRFBs typically rece1ve power by s andalone solar panel uni s . but may also be wired to a
trad t t ona l power source
Manua l on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) Specifications
The MUTCD gave ntenm approval to R FBs for opt1onal use n lim t ted orcumstances 1n July
2008. The inter i m approval allows for usage as a warning beacon to supp l ement standard
pedestrian cross1ng warn1ng s1gns and mark1ngs at e1ther a pedestrian or schoo l crossing ; where
he crosswalk approach is not controlled by a yie l d sign , stop s i gn, or raffic-control signa l ; or a
a crosswa l k at a roundabout
The M U TCD intenm approval memo also c ontains other provrs1ons or the 1 mplementa ion of
the device and should be rev i ewed (http //muccd fhwa doc .gov /resources/incenm_approval li a II /
fhwamem o hem )
Costs
Cost is approximate l y S 10,000 to S 15,000 for purchase and msta ll at1on of two units (one on
e1 her side of a stree ) Th1s includes solar panels for powering he uni s, pad lighting, i'ld t cat i on
untts (for bot h s i des of street) with RRFBs in he back and front of each untt, signage on
bo h approaches . al l posts . and either pas si ve t nfrared de ection or push buttons Wtth audio
m _ ru e 1 o ns .
C o s s would be proportionately higher fo' additional un1ts placed on a med1an t sland , etc.
T~e·.vo ".v• • des t e·fal~werebo "cord ed F rda one Ma-6eacha•dt•e rS Pe mbt.rg Thtvare
5/lerb~:· P ~ n lio"' ~ and 5 Turner !In Ara o' r•e tHt'Ct, of StL.lil?' flo LED Beacon r ncea e Yield nq roPedes "IO"S !J nq
e'~ trlarr e ra1spor 'ato liewar·hfioardA1nua Meet g. WastmqrOfl OC 'XI8
ra" Houten R R E r~ Jr.d t VJr"' e a r~e Use f ruuer Ralh LED Beoco ' cease Yield ng to Pedesruans ar ri)li.va! • Presen1ed or
helrarsi!O'FOI on Rele ~Board Aroua M pr nq Wo:./1 gr n {)( 1008
Item 11.a. - Page 12
Item 11.a. - Page 13
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Item 11.a. - Page 14