CC RES 2002-002 RESOLUTION NO. 2002-02
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES ADOPTING A STOP SIGN
INSTALLATION POLICY
WHEREAS, California Vehicle Code Sections 21351, 21354 and 21355
grant local agencies the authority to place and maintain stop signs on local streets,
including the discretion to designate any intersection under the jurisdiction of a local
agency as a stop intersection; and
WHEREAS, the installation of stop signs or other traffic control devices
must be based upon a documented need for vehicle control; and
WHEREAS, the State of California Department of Transportation
("CalTrans") has established criteria for assessing the need for stop signs or other traffic
control devices at intersections (the "CalTrans warrant policy"); and
WHEREAS, the CalTrans warrant policy does not give sufficient
consideration to special circumstances applicable to particular local intersections in
determining whether stop signs or other traffic control devices are warranted at such
intersections; and
WHEREAS, the Traffic Committee determined that (i) the reliance on the
CalTrans warrant policy to determine whether to install stop signs at intersections of
local streets does not adequately address the actual conditions and development within
the City of Rancho Palos Verdes; and (ii) strict application of the CalTrans warrant
policy under such circumstances generally would result in stop signs not being installed
at intersections of local streets in Rancho Palos Verdes where stop signs are needed to
address unique local conditions; and
WHEREAS, the Traffic Committee, after careful study, developed a
proposed Stop Sign Installation Policy to supplement the CalTrans warrant policy; and
WHEREAS, the proposed Stop Sign Installation Policy, attached hereto as
Exhibit "A," reflects the needs of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes and its local
community for additional right-of-way control while retaining the integrity of the use of
stop signs through their judicious use; and
WHEREAS, the Traffic Committee reviewed and refined the proposed
Stop Sign Installation Policy at several public meetings; and
WHEREAS, at its August 27, 2001 meeting, the Traffic Committee
recommended that the City Council adopt the proposed Stop Sign Installation Policy in
the form attached hereto as Exhibit "A."
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
PALOS VERDES DOES HEREBY FIND., RESOLVE, DETERMINE, AND ORDER AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Findings. The City Council adopts the findings made in the
recitals of this Resolution and incorporates those findings herein by reference.
Section 2. Adoption of Stop Sign Installation Policy. The Stop Sign
Installation Policy attached to this Resolution as Exhibit "A" is hereby adopted. The
Stop Sign Installation Policy established by this resolution shall become effective
immediately.
Section 3. Required Review. No stop sign shall be installed in the City
unless the City Engineer has first reviewed and approved the request and made a
recommendation of approval to the Traffic Committee. The City Engineer shall evaluate
every request for the installation of a stop sign to determine whether the proposed
installation is safe at the location identified. Based upon the results of his or her review,
the City Engineer shall forward a recommendation to the Traffic Committee regarding
the appropriateness of installing a stop sign at the location identified in the request. The
Traffic Committee shall then review each request for the installation of a stop sign,
together with the Traffic Engineer's recommendation, at a duly noticed public meeting
and shall make a recommendation to the City Council regarding the appropriateness of
a proposed stop sign installation. The recommendations of the Traffic Engineer and the
Traffic Committee shall then be forwarded to City Council for consideration at a duly
noticed City Council meeting.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 12th day of January, 2002.
./t:r► ,/v A/14.
May
ATT ST: /7)
City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES )
I, JO PURCELL, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, hereby
certify that the above Resolution No. 2002-02 as duly and regularly passed and adopted
by the said City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on January 12, 2002.
•m1 ' #
City Clerk
Resolution No. 2002-02
Page 2 of 2
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
STOP SIGN INSTALLATION POLICY
This policy is intended to establish a set of guidelines for the purpose of
evaluating requests for stop signs in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes. The
policy is intended to supplement the Caltrans warrant system for the installation
of stop signs by specifically addressing a variety of situations with straightforward
criteria. The California Vehicle Code sections 21351, 21354 and 21355 provide
the authority for a local agency to place and maintain stop signs on local streets
including designating any intersection under its jurisdiction as a stop intersection
and to erect stop signs at one or more entrances. The policies presented are
intended to reflect the needs of the local community for additional right-of-way
assignment while retaining the integrity of the use of stop signs through their
judicious use. All requests for the installation of stop signs shall follow the review
procedure set forth below.
REVIEW PROCEDURE
No stop sign shall be installed in the City unless the City Engineer has first
reviewed and approved the request and made a recommendation of approval to
the Traffic Committee. The City Engineer shall evaluate every request for the
installation of a stop sign to determine whether the proposed installation is safe
at the location identified. Based upon the results of his or her review, the City
Engineer shall forward a recommendation to the Traffic Committee regarding the
appropriateness of installing a stop sign at the location identified in the request.
The Traffic Committee shall then review each request for the installation of a stop
sign, together with the Traffic Engineer's recommendation, at a duly noticed
public meeting and shall make a recommendation to the City Council regarding
the appropriateness of a proposed stop sign installation. The recommendations
of the Traffic Engineer and the Traffic Committee shall then be forwarded to City
Council for consideration at a duly noticed City Council meeting.
GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
Stop signs are used to establish right-of-way at an intersection, reduce delays
and decrease accidents. The installation of stop signs or other traffic control
devices must be based upon a documented need for vehicle control.
Documenting the need for stop sign installation should incorporate the warrants
established by the State of California and the criteria set forth in this policy.
Satisfaction of a warrant is not a guarantee that a stop sign is needed. Nor is the
fact that a warrant is not satisfied an assurance that stop sign control would not
be beneficial. With the warrants serving as the basis for evaluation, sound
engineering judgment and all pertinent facts should be considered in decisions
related to the installation of stop signs.
When being considered, it should be noted that stop signs can create
unnecessary vehicular stops, increased delay, and add to fuel consumption and
air pollution if used improperly. The installation of stop signs can also increase
undesirable noise in residential neighborhoods, create an illusion of safety and
result in increased disregard for traffic controls.
Additionally, stop signs are generally not considered effective speed control
devices on local streets. Rather, stop signs are intended to assign right-of-way
to traffic. This is a common misconception, as often people believe stop signs
will help to control speeds.
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS
In certain cases, conditions may exist which are not adequately addressed by the
criteria presented hereafter. In these cases, special consideration should be
given to the applicability of stop sign controls to the intersection. However, other,
less restrictive measures should be considered before installing all-way stops.
Examples of conditions warranting special consideration include:
1. Extreme pedestrian visibility problems.
2. In new developments where a traffic signal installation may be under
consideration but not yet approved.
3. A street that is in proximity to a school, fire department, church, park or
any area of high public use.
4. Steep curves or inclines that could be considered an additional restriction
to visibility
5. Other considerations as may be deemed appropriate by engineering or
technical studies.
CRITERIA
The following presents the definition of terms and guidelines for the evaluation of
locations within the City of Rancho Palos Verdes for stop sign control. As
appropriate, separate criteria are presented to address residential neighborhood
and local street situations versus locations along arterial roadways.
Typical Locations
3-Legged or "T" Intersection — An intersection typically comprised of one
through street and a terminating street. Often the terminating street is referred to
as "the stem of the T". In this case, typically only one-way stops (stopping traffic
approaching on the terminating street) and all-way stops are considered.
4-Legged Intersection (Arterial Street/Local Street) — An intersection
generally comprised of a major through street (typically a collector arterial or
Resolution No. 2002-02
Exhibit "A"
Page 2 of 5
higher arterial) and a minor intersecting street. In this case, typically only two-
way stops (stopping traffic on the minor street approaches) are considered.
4-Legged Intersection (Local Street/Local Street) — An intersection generally
comprised of two minor streets with neither street necessarily considered a
through street. In this case, typically either two-way or all-way stops are often
considered.
Intersections With More Than 4 legs — A special case location that generally
has more than two streets intersecting at the same point. This type of
intersection often requires unique analysis to evaluate the conditions and provide
appropriate recommendations. Specific criteria for this situation are not included
in this policy in recognition of the special circumstances.
General Criteria
Two different terms are used to describe roadways in the context of these
guidelines. The following definitions apply:
Local Street — This term refers to a roadway that carries relatively low volumes
of traffic and is not considered an arterial street. This classification includes
those streets that meet strict residential street definitions (per the California
Vehicle Code) and streets that do not meet this strict definition but are not
included in the City's arterial street system.
Arterial Street — Refers to the functional classification of the roadway based on
the General Plan designation of the roadway. All of the following roadways are
considered to be arterials in increasing functional order: collector arterial, minor
arterial, major arterial and principal arterial.
One-way Stop Control (T-Intersections)
If any one of the following criteria is satisfied, a one-way stop should be
considered:
1 a) (Local/Local) On the terminating street at its intersection with a
through street where application of the normal right-of-way rule is
unduly hazardous as evidenced by accidents susceptible to
correction with stop signs.
1b) (Arterial/Local) On the minor street at its intersection with a through
arterial.
2. On a city street at its intersection with a state highway (State
responsibility).
3. On a street where the safe approach speed to the intersection is less than
10 miles per hour.
Resolution No. 2002-02
Exhibit "A"
Page 3 of 5
Two-way Stop Control (4 or More Legged Intersections)
If any one of the following criteria is satisfied, two-way stop control should be
considered:
1. When available sight distance is less than that dictated by the
prevailing traffic speeds (sight distance triangle, as defined by state
law).
2. Three or more accidents of a type susceptible to correction by a
two-way stop sign installation within a twelve-month period.
3. The total peak hour intersection volumes exceeds 100 vehicles
All-way Stop Control (3 or More Legged Intersections)
All-way stop control is most effective when applied to intersecting streets with
close to equal traffic volumes. Special consideration should be given to locations
that have significant unusual visibility or physical conditions. All-way stops
should only be installed after all less restrictive methods of traffic control or
modifications are deemed ineffective or unfeasible. All streets considered should
have as close to equal traffic volumes as possible. Generally, 4-legged
intersections should have no less than a 60/40 split and 3-legged intersections
no less than a 70/30 split. An all-way stop should be considered when any of the
following criteria are satisfied:
1. Where a traffic signal is justified and the need for traffic control at
the intersection is urgent, all-way stop control can be used as an
interim device while arrangements are being made to install a traffic
signal.
2. Available sight distance is less than that dictated by the prevailing
traffic speed (sight distance triangle, as defined by state law) for
pedestrians and vehicles crossing the higher volumes street
3. Five or more reported accidents of a type susceptible to correction
by the installation of an all-way stop have occurred within a twelve-
month period. Types of accidents susceptible to correction include
broadside and left-turn collisions.
4. Volume Warrant— Local Streets
a) Total vehicular volume entering the intersection from all
approaches must average 180 vehicles per hour for any 8
hours of an average day: and,
b) The vehicular volume entering the intersection from the
minor street for the same 8 hours must average at least 72
vehicles per hour.
5. Volume Warrant—Arterial Streets
Resolution No. 2002-02
Exhibit "A"
Page 4 of 5
a) The total vehicular volume entering the intersection from all
approaches must average at least 500 vehicles per hour for
any eight hours of an average day; and,
b) The combined vehicular and pedestrian volume from the
minor street or highway must average at least 200 units per
hour for the same eight hours with an average delay to minor
street vehicular traffic of at least 30 seconds per vehicle
during the peak hour.
c) When the 85th percentile a pp roach speed of the major street
exceeds 40 miles per hour, the minimum vehicular volume
warrant is 70 percent of the above requirements.
6. Any unusual physical or geometric conditions that cannot be
effectively addressed by less restrictive methods.
Resolution No. 2002-02
Exhibit "A"
Page 5 of 5