Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/19/1995, 7 - MARSH STREET PAVING PROJECT, SPECIFICATION NO. 95-32 - PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALK ����NI� I�IIIII��IIIIIIIIUIII city f TEo san lugs oBispo MP'/�-:qs COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ITEM NUMBER: FROM: Michael D. McCluskey, Public Works Director*?-R4 - Prepared by: Wayne Peterson, City En"< SUBJECT: Marsh Street Paving Project, Specification No. 95-32 - Pedestrian Crosswalk RECOMMENDATION: By motion, 1) Direct staff to complete the project as designed. 2) Direct staff to monitor the activities at the crosswalk and report back in a year. DISCUSSION: On February 28, 1995 Council authorized the Marsh Street Reconstruction project. At that meeting the concern for the future need of a signal at the mid-block crosswalk was raised. Council decided that an underground conduit linking the two sides of the street should be installed such that if a future signal was warranted no street work (traffic disruption) would be necessary. Council directed that after completion of the project the crosswalk, its affects on traffic and vice versa should be monitored. The contract as awarded provides for this conduit. On May 23, 1995 Council authorized design of the project be awarded to a consultant as staff was busy with flood-related projects. The issue of the need for signals at the crosswalk was again raised. Council felt that the conduit placement and the requirement for a monitoring period was adequate. On July 25, 1995 Council acted to authorize bidding on the construction plans. The issue of the need for signals was again raised. Council directed that the monitoring period be formalized and directed staff to report back to the Council six months after completion of the project. On August 25th the City Council met in special session to consider the award of the contract for resurfacing Marsh Street. As a part of the discussion the Council again considered the need for signalization, either with a flashing light or a stop light, of the crosswalk planned mid-block between Morro and Chorro Streets. The Council was concerned that if a signal system was needed in the future the construction would disrupt and significantly damage the improvements being installed at this time. Staff was asked to report back on the cost and pros and cons of installing foundations for a future signal system as a part of the current project. Staff has reviewed the location, the existing plans for improvements, and potential designs for signalizing the mid-block crosswalk. A signal standard base could be placed within the planter on the right side of the street. Prior to its use it would be covered within the planter. The pole, when installed, would not affect sidewalk usage. A street light on the left side of the street could be relocated to a point near the new curb in the bulb-out and be connected by conduits to pull boxes in the sidewalk and be used as a future support for the second light necessary for signalization of the crosswalk. This will also have little impact on the sidewalk and plans for this area. Conduits would be installed to provide electricity for the street light that could in the future be used to provide power to the traffic light. A traffic signal controller would have to be installed adjacent to the street light when a traffic light is installed. The controller would displace planned bike rakes for 7�� 111111111111WVcity of San WIS OBISpo Mii% COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT this area. A traffic box could be placed in the sidewalk to terminate the necessary conduits and become the location for the controller. Staff has reviewed the benefits and liabilities of installing a traffic flasher or signal at this location and of installing the infrastructure for a signal at this time. Traffic engineers do not normally support the idea of mid-block crosswalks except in cases where large volumes of pedestrians must cross the street. The preferred crossing location should be a comer with full traffic control. In this case the Council has made a finding that the existing large volumes of pedestrians should be redirected to cross the street at mid-block and have directed the installation of a marked and textured crosswalk. Traffic engineers do not normally recommend signals unless they will promote a safer situation. In this particular case pedestrians have been crossing the street safely without benefit of a crossing control or a marked crosswalk. A flashing light would normally be installed to bring attention to an intersection where it is not easily apparent to motorist approaching. According to the Caltrans traffic manual the effectiveness of flashing lights has been inconsistent from one location to another and the decision whether to install must be determined based on individual circumstances. In this case the City is installing bulbed out sidewalks and a textured crosswalk. Both of these items should draw attention to the crossing location and make it more visible to motorists. Flashing lights do not cause cars to stop and may or may not add to the safety of the situation. They may increase the risk to pedestrians because they become one more thing to ` compete for the motorists' attention. Traffic lights will cause cars to stop and leave a definite opening for pedestrians to cross the street. Both systems can be designed to rest on green when pedestrian activity is not occurring and when other traffic controls are needed for special activities. PROS: An advantage of installing the substructure portions of the signal now are savings in the saw cutting, removal, and replacement of some sidewalk on either side of the street in the future. An advantage of doing the installations now will be one of appearance. If concrete is removed and replaced in the future, the color of the replaced concrete will never exactly match the old. CONS: The disadvantage of doing it now are: 1) it may never be needed; 2) changes in standards and materials may make the current design obsolete. Several bike parking places will be lost from the bulb out. A Council mandated change order puts the City in a very poor negotiating position with the contractor. Experience on Higuera has shown no problems with pedestrians crossing the same number of traffic lanes and a similar width of street. Note the most recent pedestrian accident involving the mid-block crosswalk on Higuera Street occurred while the signals were still in place. vZ city of san lues OBispo COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT No need for signals has been demonstrated. Money expended now for features that are never used is lost forever. Maintenance staff is already over-extended maintaining existing signals. If lights are installed there is the ongoing expenditure for energy and maintenance. FISCAL IMPACT: Staff has requested a price from Madonna Construction to install the substructure parts of a signal system at the bulb out. The price will be made available to the Council as soon as it is received. Funding would be drawn from the generalized signal improvement Capital Improvement Project. 9.,\c1p\sUdtM953211te 73 EETING AGENDA N DATEf-I2- - ITEM # MEMORANDUM September 18, 1995 From: Michael D. McCluskey^413* 01 Via: John Dunn J*/f-u./ To: City Council Subject: Marsh Street Reconstruction Project, Specification No. 95-32 September 19, 1995 Agenda Business Item 7 The City has received a cost estimate of $6,000 for the installation of conduits and foundations for a future signalized pedestrian crossing between the Downtown Centre and the driveway to the Marsh Street Parking Garage. There is no indication at this time the work will delay the contractor. This situation could change if adverse field conditions are encountered. A delay could add another $2,500 to $5,000 to the work to compensate for lost bonus money. i COUNCIL ❑ CDD DIR CAO ❑ FlNDIR N9 ACAO ❑ qE CHIEF ATTORNEY PW DIR CLERWORICi 13 POLICE CHF Q MGMT TEAM ❑ REC DIR g FILE O UTIL DIR " 0 PERS DIR