MUNICIPAL POLICIES (Revised) Report Purpose 1. THAT ... · PDF fileReport Purpose To revise...

Document #34634: EEP Administration.0345

Council Meeting Date: June 12, 2007 Agenda Item #: 10.2 MUNICIPAL POLICIES (Revised) Report Purpose To revise four Strathcona County municipal policies. Recommendations: 1. THAT Council approve revisions to Municipal Policy SER-009-012 – Street Lighting. 2. THAT Council approve revisions to Municipal Policy SER-009-021 -

Installation of Traffic Signals and Pedestrian Crossings. 3. THAT Council approve revisions to Municipal Policy SER-009-027 – Traffic Noise 4. THAT Council approve revisions to Municipal Policy SER-009-017 – Traffic Control Devices. Council History August 20, 1984 - Council approved Policy SER-009-012 April 16, 1991 - Council approved Policy SER-009-021 December 8, 1992 - Council approved Policy SER-009-027 April 18, 1995 - Council approved Policy SER-009-017 February 20, 2007 - Council referred all the proposed revisions back to Administration for further action Background/Justification Strategic Plan: Governance x Community Well Being x Community Sustainability x Economic Viability Service Delivery x Stakeholder

Communication Resource

Management

Legislative/Legal: Pursuant to County policy, policies contained in the Municipal

Policy Handbook must be reviewed and evaluated to ensure that they are timely, effective and appropriate.

Economic: n/a Social: n/a Environmental: n/a Stakeholder: n/a Interdepartmental: Engineering and Environmental Planning, Transportation and

Agriculture Services, Planning and Development Services


Summary Policy SER-009-012 – Street Lighting is revised to reflect changes to standards, specifications and procedures. Policy SER-009-021 - Installation of Traffic Signals and Pedestrian Crossings is revised to reflect changes to standards, specifications and procedures. Policy SER-009-027 - Urban Traffic Noise is revised to include criteria for Urban Village. Policy SER-009-017 - Traffic Control Devices is revised to reflect changes to standards, specifications and procedures. Enclosures I SER-009-012 – Street Lighting - revised (Doc.#: EEP Admin.33414) II SER-009-021 - Traffic Signal and Pedestrian Crossing - existing (Doc #: MPH 152) III SER-009-021 - Installation of Traffic Signals and Pedestrian Crossings – revised

(Doc.#: EEP Admin.33415) IV SER-009-027 - Urban Traffic Noise - existing (Doc. #: MPH.157) V SER-009-027 - Traffic Noise - revised (Doc.#: EEP Admin.33417) VI SER-009-017 - Traffic Control Devices - existing (Doc #: MPH.138) VII SER-009-017 - Traffic Control Devices - revised (Doc.#: EEP Admin.33419) VIII Summary of Revisions, SER-009-021, SER-009-027, SER-009-017 (Doc# EEP. Admin.34810) Author: Ross Etches Date: May 22, 2007 Manager: Mike MacGarva, Engineering and Environmental Planning Legislative and Legal Services: Associate Commissioner, Division: Denise Exton, IPS Document #34634: (EEP Admin Library)


Strathcona County SER-009-012 Municipal Policy Handbook Street Lighting Date Approved by Council:

Resolution No:

Lead Role: Chief Commissioner

Replaces:

Last Review Date: 08/96 Administrative Responsibility: Engineering and Environmental Planning

Next Review Date: 2010

Policy Statement Where as it is necessary to provide adequate street lighting to allow safe and efficient use of the County roadway system and to reduce crime and vandalism within County rights-of-way, street lighting shall be provided for:

1. all urban roadways including hamlet residential streets;

2. County operated intersections with traffic lights; and

3. entrances to Major Industrial Developments. Capital costs for the street lighting shall be considered as part of the roadway construction cost, and are subject to negotiation of development agreements, if applicable. Street lighting will be provided in accordance with this policy to promote safe and efficient use of the Strathcona County Municipal roadway system. Guidelines A. Design Manuals and Guidelines

The listed publications will be referenced, along with good engineering judgement, to determine appropriate design of roadway lighting systems and installations: 1) Guide for the Design of Roadway Lighting" published by the Transportation Association of

Canada (T.A.C.) 2) "Illumination of Isolated Rural Intersections" published by T.A.C. 3) "American National Standard Practice for Roadway Lighting", published by the

Illumination Engineering Society of North America (IESNA).

B. Urban Service Area Lighting

All roadways developed to their ultimate standard will be illuminated on the basis of functional classification and as required by Strathcona County’s Engineering Servicing Standards.

C. Rural Service Area

1) New high density parcel development (lot size less than 0.15 Ha) will be illuminated as per IESNA criteria.

2) Other new rural service area developments (lot sizes 0.15 Ha and above) will be reviewed on a case by case basis.

Strathcona County SER-009-012 2 Municipal Policy Handbook


3) Grid roads are not typically illuminated however high volume intersections will be

reviewed based on T.A.C. criteria.

Procedures A. Capital, Operating and Maintenance Costs

1) The capital cost of roadway lighting for urban arterial road construction projects will be incorporated into the construction budget, then designed, built, owned and maintained by Strathcona County. Energy will be purchased from Strathcona County's energy supplier at the negotiated rate.

2) For all other roadway lighting, determination of ownership and cost responsibilities will be

evaluated at the initial project stages. 3) Where the specific arrangements as described in this sub-section require Strathcona

County to have a maintenance responsibility, the Transportation and Agriculture Services Department will play the lead role.

4) Dedication of budget funds for recommended lighting system improvements will follow the

prioritization steps within budget and business plan processes. B. Requests for Street Lighting

Stakeholder requests for new or improved street lighting installations will be reviewed by

the Engineering and Environmental Planning Department and evaluated in the context of this policy. Approvals will consider design guidelines and cost obligations.

C. Best Practices

Pursuit of best practices will consider technical, economic and environmental benefits.

Strathcona County SER-009-021 Municipal Policy Handbook

TRAFFIC SIGNAL AND PEDESTRIAN CROSSING Date of Approval by Council: 04/16/91 Resolution No. 325/91 Lead Role: Chief Commissioner Replaces: N/A Last Review Date: April 16, 1991 Next Review Date: Administrative Responsibility: Engineering & Environmental Planning Policy Statement Strathcona County will install traffic signals when warranted, in accordance with the standards and procedures approved by Alberta Transportation in its Manual, entitled "Traffic Signal Control Display Standardization and Guidelines". Additional guidance in this matter will be derived from signal warrant calculations based on the methods approved and adopted by the Council on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Canada and the Institution of Transportation Engineers (I.T.E.). The County will install pedestrian crossing facilities when warranted against the attached table and graph (Attachment A). These are based on the Alberta Transportation manual entitled "Traffic Signal Control Display Standardization and Guidelines", so far as signalized crossings are concerned, modified to distinguish between flashing amber, and red/amber/green signal heads based on the City of Edmonton's standards for local consistency. Procedures REGULATIONS A. TRAFFIC SIGNALS Strathcona County will monitor existing and potential traffic signalized intersections on a regular

basis (at least annually) to ensure that the appropriate level of service is provided and that signals are proposed through the budget process and grant system as required.

Work sheets will be prepared for each intersection considered for the installation of new signals

using the format as attached (Attachment B). These will be augmented as necessary by similar worksheets in the format used by the Council on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Canada and I.T.E.


Document #: Municipal Policy Handbook.0342.152.1

Different traffic signal timing patterns will be provided at different times of the day to reflect the

different travel patterns observed. These change over time but are typically: Time Traffic Volumes Signal Operation 6:30 - 9:00 Peak Traffic A.M. Peak Plan 9:00 - 15:00 Off Peak Traffic Off Peak Plan or Intersection Flash Mode at selected intersections. 15:30 - 18:00 Peak Traffic P.M. Peak Plan 18:00 - 24:00 Off Peak Traffic Off Peak Plan or Intersection Flash Mode at selected intersections. 24:00 - 6:30 Low Traffic Main Street Green or Intersection Flash Mode at all or most intersections. In the "Main Street Green" mode of operation, the traffic signal remains green for the main street

traffic and changes only when activated by a car arriving on the side street. In the "Intersection Flash Mode" traffic on the main street faces a flashing amber indication and

must proceed with caution when approaching the intersection. The traffic on the side street faces a flashing red indication and therefore must come to a stop and, if the way is clear, may then proceed.

Where unusual traffic distributions such as extreme peak hour factors are observed in a situation,

which would not normally warrant the installation of traffic signals, signals may be considered for normal operation during extreme conditions and operation in the flashing mode throughout the remainder of the day.

The signal cycle times, green times splits and other detailed characteristics will be established from

an analysis of traffic date augmented by computerized techniques such as Transyt. Interconnection of all signals into a coordinated network will be effected as funding allows so as to minimize travel delays and the number of stops by vehicles in the network.

B. PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS Strathcona County will monitor high pedestrian activity crossings on a regular basis or as requested

by citizens and others to ensure that the appropriate level of protection. This is consistent with the Traffic Signal Control Display Standardization and Guidelines Manual which identifies whether or not pedestrian signals are warranted. Attachment A uses the City of Edmonton criteria to distinguish between the need for flashing yellow or red/amber/green pedestrian signals.



Attachment A Page 1 of 2 CROSSWALK, FLASHING AMBER, AND PEDESTRIAN SIGNAL IMPLEMENTATION WARRANTS

Min. No. of Ped/Hr. Min. No. of Veh/Hr. Cross Product Ped. Veh/Hr.

Level of Traffic Control

› 20 › 50 ›100

› 25 › 200 › 400

› 6000 › 250000 › 50000

No Control Crosswalk *Flashing Amber pedestrian crossing *Red/Amber/Green pedestrian crossing

Note: Both pedestrian and vehicle criteria to be met. * Compliance with Alberta Transportation Traffic Signal Control Display Standardization and

Guidelines required. TRANS\MISC\01.96\WARRANTS



Installation of Traffic Signals and Pedestrian Crossings Date of Approval by Council: Resolution No: Lead Role: Chief Commissioner Replaces: Last Review Date: April 16, 1991 Next Review Date: 2010 Administrative Responsibility: Engineering and Environmental Planning Special Notes: Cross Reference with Policy SER-009-017, Traffic Control Devices Policy Statement Traffic signals and pedestrian crossing facilities will be provided to enhance operational and safety service levels at locations where an evaluation indicates that the devices are appropriate and beneficial. Definitions A. Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE): An international educational and scientific association of

transportation professionals who are responsible for meeting mobility and safety needs. ITE facilitates the application of technology and scientific principles to research, planning, functional design, implementation, operation, policy development and management for any mode of transportation.

B. Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices: The Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD),

published by the Transportation Association of Canada (TAC) is the principle guiding reference for installing traffic control devices. Conformance with that document and ancillary TAC publications ensures uniformity across Canada.

C. Traffic Control Device: A traffic control device is a sign, signal, pavement marking or other device

placed upon, over or adjacent to the road, by a public authority or official having jurisdiction. Guidelines

A. The Role of Guidelines and Warrants

1) Guidelines provide information and background to assist in the decision making process and are necessarily general because they cannot cover all site-specific conditions. Warrants are established by nationally recognized engineering references and local/regional practice and attempt to quantify site characteristics so that a site evaluation can be compared with threshold levels to ensure consistent and appropriate application.



2) Reference to guidelines and warrants is the initial step in the evaluation process. Within any

decision process there will always be competing alternatives that must be considered to arrive at a “best” solution. Guidelines and warrants are an important part of the decision process but are not intended to be a substitute for good engineering judgement. The fact that warrant thresholds for a particular traffic control device are met is not conclusive justification for installation of the device, and vice versa. Where the word "warranted" or the word "unwarranted" is used in this policy, the decision making philosophy will be as described in this sub-section.

3) Road function and classification will be considered during the process of traffic signal and

pedestrian crossing evaluation to ensure an appropriate balance of through traffic and access accommodation. TAC guidelines will be referenced.

B. Unwarranted Devices

1) Installation of an unwarranted device is generally not recommended unless an engineering assessment indicates that the device can provide a significant measurable benefit in terms of efficiency and/or safety. Caution must be exercised when evaluating the need for new or upgraded facilities where warrant criteria have not been reached. The practice of installing unwarranted devices can:

a) Compromise the measurable criteria and justification for other warranted installations, b) Lead to a dilution of respect for warranted facilities, c) Detract from the importance of truly warranted & valuable installations, d) Needlessly reduce efficiency of the transportation network, e) Potentially have a negative impact on safety, f) Incur considerable expense with little or no benefit, and g) Misplace scarce capital away from locations that need it the most.

2) In addition, a proliferation of unwarranted pedestrian facilities can increase risk and have a

negative impact on pedestrian safety as overuse can cause motorists to be become complacent and fail to recognize the importance of warranted devices. Driver recognition of potential risk is critical at high volume / high activity pedestrian crossings and crossings with sightline restrictions, because pedestrians may make the assumption of driver attentiveness when entering the crossing.

C. Traffic Signal Installation

Traffic signals may be installed when warranted, in accordance with the standards and procedures outlined by Alberta Infrastructure and Transportation in its manual, entitled "Traffic Signal Control Display Standardization and Guidelines". Additional guidance will be derived from signal warrant calculations based on the methods detailed in the MUTCD and similar ITE documents and publications.



D. Pedestrian Crossing Installation

Pedestrian crossing facilities may be installed or upgraded when warranted as per the “Strathcona County Pedestrian Crosswalk Implementation Warrant Table” (Attachment A). Additional guidance will be derived from the TAC "Pedestrian Crossing Control Manual" and associated ITE publications and recommended practices.

Procedures A. General 1) Requests for Traffic Signals and Pedestrian Crossings

Requests from Council, Councillors and/or members of the public or other stakeholders for new or augmented devices, or for modifications to existing devices, will be reviewed by Engineering and Environmental Planning and evaluated in the context of this policy and where appropriate, discussed with the community at large, school authorities, other civic and external agencies, and Council prior to implementation or other action. The placement of traffic signals and pedestrian crossing control devices often involves competing alternatives and differing perspectives that must be considered and rationalized.

Requests from members of the public will be copied to the Ward Councillor as information.

2) Authority for Changes to Existing Devices

Proposals to change or augment existing devices will generally be approved and erected by direction of the Manager of Engineering and Environmental Planning, but will be referred to Council when: a) there is a history of public or Council involvement in recent times, b) the Department can foresee that the proposal will have a severe adverse impact

on another segment of the community, c) such changes lie outside the general guidance provided by this policy, or d) a resident, taxpayer or local interest group requests that the Department refer the

matter to Council in the event that normal process has failed to result in a mutually satisfactory resolution.

In the event that a proposal is referred to Council, a recommendation will be made by the Manager of Engineering and Environmental Planning along with an explanation of alternatives including the merits and drawbacks of each alternative. Council may consider the recommendation and alter it as deemed appropriate.



3) Removal of Existing Devices

Where a control device no longer fulfills a need, or the device contravenes the intent of this policy, consideration will be given to removal or replacement with an appropriate device as the situation dictates. Where removal of a device is expected to create significant public response, the item will be referred to County Council. Unwarranted and nonconforming devices will be removed as funding allows or in conjunction with a roadway improvement project when feasible.

4) New Technologies

Review and evaluation of new technologies will be the responsibility of Engineering and Environmental Planning. New technologies that have been shown to improve safety and/or efficiency will be considered for new or retrofitted installations as they become available, cost-effective and practical to implement.

B. Traffic Signals

1) Monitoring Engineering and Environmental Planning will monitor existing unsignalized intersections on a regular basis to ensure that existing control provides an acceptable level of service and safety. Priority work sheets will be prepared for each intersection under consideration for new signals using the format outlined in the "Traffic Signal Control Display Standardization and Guidelines" augmented as necessary by a similar worksheet in the MUTCD. When intersections approach the warrant threshold for signal installation and engineering judgement indicates that traffic signals are appropriate, an item will be brought forward in the budget process for County Council approval.

2) Operation

Engineering and Environmental Planning will monitor existing signalized intersections on a regular basis to ensure that signal sequences and timings maximize the objectives of level-of-service, efficiency, safety, and progressive flow between adjacent signals. To facilitate the maximizing process, traffic signal timing patterns will be varied over the course of the day to reflect the different travel patterns. Likewise, coordination of traffic signal timing plans between adjacent signals will be optimized, and varied over the course of the day, to promote progressive flow in the peak hour direction during peak hours, and to promote adequate progression in both directions during off-peak hours.



Good two-way progression along an arterial road is generally difficult to attain due to the relationship between signal spacing, signal sequencing, cycle times and operating speed. The signal spacing that facilitates two-way progression is roughly twice the distance needed to provide adequate access to adjacent lands, and that relationship is further confounded by complex signal sequencing and the accompanying reduction in arterial green time to facilitate multi-phase signal operation. Interconnection of traffic signals to build on the existing communication network will be introduced in conjunction with roadway construction and improvement projects. Ongoing operation, maintenance, repair and upgrading of traffic signals will be the responsibility of the Engineering and Environmental Planning Department. Routine maintenance will occur twice annually, repair will occur as required but usually as a result of damage caused by third-parties, natural events or equipment failure, and upgrading will generally be triggered by the introduction of new technologies, new standards or aging of existing infrastructure.

C. Pedestrian Crossings

1) Monitoring

Engineering and Environmental Planning will monitor high pedestrian activity crossings on a regular basis or as requested by citizens and others to ensure that the appropriate level of protection is provided and that improvements are proposed though the budget process when warranted and deemed appropriate.

2) Operation

Engineering and Environmental Planning will establish and introduce operating parameters at pedestrian crossings that recognize local practice and conform to ITE and TAC standards. Ongoing operation, maintenance, upgrading and repair of signalized pedestrian crosswalks follow the process for signalized intersections. Maintenance of signed and marked crosswalks is the responsibility of Transportation and Agricultural Services.



Attachment A STRATHCONA COUNTY PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALK IMPLEMENTATION WARRANT TABLE Number of Pedestrians (Ped/Hr)

Number of Vehicles (Veh/Hr)

Cross Product (Ped/Hr x Veh/Hr)

Level of Traffic Control Warranted

>20 >25 >6,000 Signed Crosswalk

>40 >200 >25,000 Flashing Amber pedestrian crossing

>60 >400 >50,000 Red/Amber/Green pedestrian half-signal

Note: Each of the criteria (Ped/Hr., Veh/Hr., and Ped/Hr. x Veh/Hr.) must be met to justify a specific level of traffic control. Good engineering judgement is intended to compliment the initial warrant evaluation.


Strathcona County SER-009-027 Municipal Policy Handbook Urban Traffic Noise Date Approved by Council: 12/08/92

Resolution No: 1079/92


Replaces: N/A

Last Review Date: 12/92 Administrative Responsibility: Engineering & Environmental Planning

Next Review Date: 12/96

Policy Statement Attenuation of Traffic Noise for Proposed New Residential Development A Noise Impact Assessment, satisfactory to the County Engineer is required for all residential development to be constructed within the vicinity of existing and proposed major roadways. The vicinity is deemed to be a depth of two residential lots and will be the nearest residential lots to the roadway regardless of commercial, light industrial or green space screening. The assessment must address background noise levels, the impact of current traffic levels and the impact of traffic at projected road design capacity. The assessment will identify the attenuation measures necessary to meet the approved maximum noise standards. The recommended maximum outdoor noise level criterion will be 60dBA* 5 metres from the rear facade of the dwellings. Developers will be required to provide an initial design for a 55 dBA maximum noise level. The County Engineer, at his sole discretion, may relax the design in the interests of practicality, however, under no circumstances shall the attenuation measures as designed permit greater than 60 dBA at design road capacity 5 metres from the facade of the nearest dwellings. The Developer shall construct or provide funds for the construction of the attenuation measures to meet the presently foreseen ultimate road operating at capacity. If the Developer chooses to provide funds for future attenuation to meet the ultimate design, the developer must construct the appropriate combination of berms and attenuation barriers to achieve the attenuation needed for the 15 year horizon as established by the County Engineer. *All noise levels quoted refer to Leq (24 hr.) values. The developers of any multi-storey residences planned for "the vicinity" of a major roadway must provide effective attenuation to the eave line of the building ie. .5 metres above the top of the upper most windows. The minimum attenuation measure acceptable for the 15 year horizon is a 2 metre high close boarded fence. At the sole discretion of the County Engineer this may be relaxed in circumstances where the vicinity of the house is screened from the roadway by sufficient vegetation to provide a design noise level no greater than 55 dBA 5 metres from the nearest dwelling's facade. The screening property must be municipal reserve, environmental reserve, public utility lot or other such designation or use that would not reasonably be expected to change during the design life of the dwellings. Where berms are required in the ultimate design they must be constructed as part of the initial measures prior to the issuance of building permits for any phase of the affected development.

Strathcona County SER-009-027 2 Municipal Policy Handbook Unless the major road is otherwise designated the developer should plan for the construction of a berm in accordance with County Engineering Standards and said berm is to be used as the base for any additional attenuation measures required. Wherever possible absorptive will be preferred over reflective noise attenuation measures. Achievement of C.M.H.C. recommended noise levels inside buildings is not controllable by the County. Home owners concerned about these noise levels are expected to take their own mitigative measures. If requested, the County Engineer may authorize home interior testing for the determination of the building attenuation measures required. All measures necessary to meet these standards will be the responsibility of the developer. Attenuation of Traffic Noise for Existing Residential Areas Where the County is providing retrofit noise attenuation for residential neighbourhoods no measures will be undertaken until the measured noise levels 5 metres from the rear facade of the dwelling exceed 65 dBA No protection will be provided for second or subsequent storeys of houses unless such protection can be achieved by a maximum of a 2.5 metre wall on the existing grades at the road right-of-way limit. In areas where the 65 dBA noise level is exceeded, Council will consider the construction of such noise attenuation measures as deemed appropriate by Administration in such priority as is consistent with the availability of funds. Residents may, in accordance with the Municipal Taxation Act, petition for the construction of noise attenuation measures at any time on a 100% local improvement charge basis. The residents will be assisted by County staff in the determination of the design and estimated cost of such an attenuation device. As part of the petition, all residents adjacent to the property line on which the facility will be constructed must sign a working easement agreement prior to implementation of the project. Procedures Reduction Of Traffic Noise For Proposed New Residential Development Background The Strathcona County Traffic Noise Policy for the urban service area has been based on a consultant study undertaken by Associated Engineering Ltd. and Bolstad Engineering Associates Ltd. completed in 1991. The study was commissioned in order to determine the appropriate level of noise attenuation measures to be expected of developers and to be expected for the mitigation of noise for existing residents.In the past, Alberta Transportation's Basic Capital Grants have been used to support the construction of noise attenuation devices. Noise attenuation is not fundable when it is required on a road which: a) falls within the known arterial network and b) will consist of the number of basic lanes ie. four or six, as was intended by the known arterial network. Where future noise attenuation construction is fundable, Administration will recommend what percentage if any of the cost should be grant supported consistent with the need to firstly maintain our existing transportation infrastructure and services, and secondly to provide infrastructure in support of development.

Strathcona County SER-009-027 3 Municipal Policy Handbook The following procedures relate to the method by which the policy shall be implemented. Definitions 1. Sound Level Descriptor

The sound level descriptor to be used in all assessments will be the 24 Hour Energy Equivalent Sound Level or Leq (24 Hour) expressed in A-weighted decibels or dBA. Forecast traffic noise will be determined directly in terms of Leq (24 hour), for a minimum of 15 years in the future, and compared to the Outdoor Criterion Sound Level.

2. Determination of Traffic Noise Level

Traffic noise levels will be estimated using the Strathcona County Traffic Noise Prediction Model. When traffic noise predictions are made, print-outs from the model containing the input data and predicted sound levels will be attached to the Noise Impact Statement for consideration and acceptance by the County. Electronic "reports" will also be acceptable if compatible with County equipment and systems. The traffic volumes used for the noise prediction will be the ultimate traffic capacity of the roads envisaged in the County Transportation Plan. Percentages of medium and heavy trucks for use in the model will be based on existing traffic counts.

3. Outdoor Criterion Levels are as follows: Design objective 55 dBA*

* Under extenuating circumstances and at the discretion of the County Engineer, the design noise level may be relaxed; however, it will not be permitted to exceed 60 dBA.

Procedures 1. County Engineering staff will identify, based on traffic projection models, truck route designations and the noise attenuation formula, those major roadways for which noise attenuation measures will be required prior to initial residential construction. 2. Developers at the ASP stage are required to provide, as part of their Transportation Study, a Noise Impact Assessment and preliminary design of both initial and ultimate noise attenuation measures. Where such assessments have not yet been provided as part of an Area Structure Plan they must be provided prior to the approval of any further subdivisions that have a boundary within 300 metres of an existing or proposed major roadway right-of-way. 3. When the Transportation Study and Noise Impact Analysis are acceptable to the County Engineer the collector roadway designation and preliminary noise attenuation plan will be approved subject to the zoning being consistent with the design. 4. The Land Development Coordinator will ensure that the noise attenuation measures including all berms and such other measures as necessary for the initial 15 year horizon are constructed prior to the issuance of any development permits within 300 metres of the boundary of a major roadway. When the noise attenuation measures can not be constructed due to seasonal delay, the County Engineer may recommend that permits be issued provided the construction of such noise attenuation measures are committed for the beginning of the following season. 5. When land development precedes the construction of the arterial road, the Land Development Coordinator will ensure that securities are retained for the cost to construct the 15 year horizon requirement and the ultimate design.

Strathcona County SER-009-027 4 Municipal Policy Handbook Procedures Reduction Of Traffic Noise For Existing Residential Areas 1. By June 1993, Strathcona County Public Works staff will complete the predictor model analysis for each block adjacent to an existing major roadway for both existing traffic and the 15 year projected horizon. Noise tests will be conducted where existing predicted noise levels are in excess of 65 dBA. The noise levels 5 metres from the rear facade of a dwelling will be calculated and the noise levels at the point calculated will be measured to determine the effectiveness of existing attenuation features. If the measured values adjusted for annual average daily traffic (AADT) are greater than 65 dBA, Public Works staff will prepare a design based on site characteristics, effectiveness of various measures, present and future noise levels and daily noise level distribution for implementation dependent on the availability of funds. 2. Where residents would prefer a noise attenuation facility in advance of the County's ability to provide it, they may petition for same on a local improvement charge basis under the Municipal Taxation Act. 3. Where residents would prefer a more expensive attenuation measure than that proposed by the County, they may petition on a local improvement charge basis to pay the difference in cost for the enhanced facility.


Strathcona County SER-009-027 Municipal Policy Handbook Traffic Noise Date Approved by Council:

Resolution No:


Replaces: N/A

Last Review Date: 12/92 Administrative Responsibility: Engineering & Environmental Planning

Next Review Date: 2010

Policy Statement A consistent framework is necessary for the assessment and, as necessary, the attenuation of forecasted or actual traffic noise in residential neighborhoods. Definitions A. Outdoor Criterion Sound Level for new residential development - 55 dBA.

B. Outdoor Trigger Criterion Sound Level for existing residential development - 65 dBA C. Receiver location - 5 metres from the rear facade of the dwelling and 1.5 metres above the ground

elevation at that point D. Road Design Capacity – For the purpose of this Policy, projected traffic volumes to be used for the

calculation of projected noise levels on arterial roads are:

• 4 lane arterial road - 27,000 vehicles per day • 6 lane arterial road - 40,000 vehicles per day

E. Sound Level Descriptor - The sound level descriptor to be used in all assessments will be the 24

Hour Energy Equivalent Sound Level or Leq (24 Hour) expressed in A-weighted decibels or dBA. All sound levels in this policy are Leq (24 Hour).

F. Vicinity - the depth of 2 residential lots and will be the nearest residential lots to the roadway

regardless of commercial, light industrial or green space screening G. Residential Urban Village - compact, walkable, mixed-use neighbourhoods, as designated in the

Area Concept Plans and Area Structure Plans. Guidelines A. Attenuation of Traffic Noise for Proposed New Residential Development

1) A Noise Impact Assessment, satisfactory to the Manager of Engineering and Environmental Planning, is required for all residential development to be constructed within the vicinity of existing and proposed major roadways.

2) The assessment must address background noise levels, the impact of current traffic levels

and the impact of traffic at projected road design capacity. The assessment will identify the attenuation measures necessary to meet the Outdoor Criterion Sound Level.



B. Attenuation of Traffic Noise for Existing Residential Areas

1) No measures will be undertaken for residential neighbourhoods until the measured noise levels 5 metres from the rear facade of the dwelling and 1.5 metres above the ground elevation at that point, exceed 65 dBA.

2) No protection will be provided for second or subsequent storeys of houses unless such

protection can be achieved by a maximum of a 2.5 metre wall on the existing grades at the road right-of-way limit.

C. Attenuation of Traffic Noise for Residential Urban Villages

1) A Noise Impact Assessment, satisfactory to the Manager of Engineering and Environmental Planning, is required for all residential development to be constructed within the vicinity of existing and proposed major roadways.

2) Noise attenuation will be provided through building orientation and privacy walls and fences.

Procedures A. Attenuation of Traffic Noise for Proposed New Residential Development

1) Developers will be required to provide a design for a 55 dBA maximum noise level. The Manager of Engineering and Environmental Planning, at his sole discretion, may relax the design in the interests of practicality, however, under no circumstances shall the attenuation measures as designed permit greater than 60 dBA at design road capacity 5 metres from the facade of the nearest dwellings and 1.5 metres above the ground elevation at that point.

2) Traffic noise levels will be estimated using the Strathcona County Traffic Noise Prediction

Model. When traffic noise predictions are made, print-outs from the model containing the input data and predicted sound levels will be attached to the Noise Impact Statement for consideration and acceptance by the County. Electronic "reports" will also be acceptable if compatible with County equipment and systems.

3) The traffic volumes used for the noise prediction will be the Road Design Capacity traffic

volumes. Percentages of medium and heavy trucks for use in the model will be based on existing traffic counts.

4) The Developer shall construct or provide funds for the construction of the attenuation

measures to meet the road design capacity. 5) Where the predicted noise levels are below the 55 dBA level without the provision of a

attenuation facility, the minimum requirement acceptable is a 1.8 metre high double board wood fence. At the sole discretion of the Manager of Engineering and Environmental Planning this may be relaxed in circumstances where the vicinity of the house is screened from the roadway by sufficient vegetation to provide a design noise level no greater than 55 dBA, 5 metres from the nearest dwelling's facade and 1.5 metres above the ground elevation at that point. The screening property must be municipal reserve, environmental reserve, public utility lot or other such designation or use that would not reasonably be expected to change during the design life of the dwellings.



6) Wherever possible absorptive materials will be preferred over reflective noise attenuation

measures. Developers are encouraged to explore the availability of alternative construction material for the construction noise attenuation facilities and use vegetation in the development for screening of the arterial from the residence.

7) Achievement of C.M.H.C. recommended noise levels inside buildings is not controllable by

the County. Home owners concerned about these noise levels are expected to take their own mitigative measures and should refer to Part 11 of the Alberta Building Code that specifies the use of sound insulation for the interior living areas. If requested, the Manager of Engineering and Environmental Planning may authorize home interior testing for the determination of the building attenuation measures required.

8) The developers of any multi-storey residences planned for "the vicinity" of a major roadway

must use sound insulation for the interior living areas that conform to Part II of the Alberta Building Code.

B. Attenuation of Traffic Noise for Existing Residential Areas

1) In areas where the Outdoor Trigger Sound Level Criterion of 65 dBA noise level is exceeded, Council will consider, on a priority and availability of funds basis, the construction of such noise attenuation measures that are determined by Administration to have the desired attenuating effect.

2) Where residents would prefer a more expensive attenuation measure than that proposed by

the County, they may petition on a local improvement charge basis to pay the difference in cost for the enhanced facility.

3) Where residents would prefer a noise attenuation facility in advance of the County's ability to

provide it, in accordance with the Municipal Government Act, RCA 2000, M-26, they may petition for the construction of such noise attenuation measures at any time on a 100% local improvement charge basis.

4) The residents will be assisted by Engineering and Environmental Planning staff in the

determination of the design and estimated cost of such noise attenuation measures. In conjunction with the petition process, all residents adjacent to the property line on which the facility will be constructed must sign a working easement agreement prior to implementation of the project.

C. Attenuation of Traffic Noise for Residential Urban Villages

1) Developers will be required to provide a design for a 55 dBA maximum noise level to the outdoor amenity area and deck areas.

2) Traffic noise levels will be estimated using the Strathcona County Traffic Noise Prediction

Model. When traffic noise predictions are made, print-outs from the model containing the input data and predicted sound levels will be attached to the Noise Impact Statement for consideration and acceptance by the County. Electronic "reports" will also be acceptable if compatible with County equipment and systems.

3) The traffic volumes used for the noise prediction will be the Road Design Capacity traffic

volumes. Percentages of medium and heavy trucks for use in the model will be based on existing traffic counts.

4) Developers must use sound insulation for the interior living areas that conform to Part 11 of the

Alberta Building Code.



SUMMARY OF REVISIONS Policy Statement The revised policy shortens the content to focus more on purpose. Details previously in the Policy Statement have been moved to the Guidelines and Procedures section of the revised policy. Definitions The revised policy includes additional definitions. Definitions serve to give the reader an understanding of the terminology. Guidelines and Procedures The revised policy retains consistent criteria on sound level thresholds as compared to the existing policy. Fence standards and multi-story residence information have been updated to reflect current practices. A Residential Urban Village category has been added to address new development trends. The policy title has been changed to reflect the application of this policy to “urban type” developments on both the rural and urban areas of the Municipality.



Traffic Control Devices Date of Approval by Council: Sept 30/86, Apr 18/95 Resolution No: 833/86, 314/95 Lead Role: Chief Commissioner Replaces: 60-62-018 Last Review Date: April 18, 1995 Next Review Date: 04/98 Administrative Responsibility: County Engineer Special Notes: See By-law 79-93 Policy Statement A1 Intent of the Policy This policy is designed to provide guidance to the Administration and to the community on the

placement and maintenance of traffic control devices throughout the County to regulate, warn and guide both vehicular and pedestrian traffic.

A2 Placement of Traffic Control Devices Traffic control devices (consisting of regulatory, warning and informational traffic signs, traffic signals,

railway crossing signs and signals, pavement markings and community information signs) will be placed and maintained in accordance with the several laws (principally the Municipal Government Act, the Highway Traffic Act, the Public Highways Development Act and the Planning Act) impacting this matter and with appropriate technical manuals, reports and informational publications.

The relative priority between traffic streams and between vehicular and pedestrian traffic will be defined

at all intersections and at all other locations where this is necessary. Plans will be prepared and implemented to eliminate or minimize the need for reduced speed zones and

an hierarchy of pedestrian crossing facilities will be implemented, having regard to nationally accepted criteria.

A3 Records of Traffic Control Devices The Planning and Engineering Services Department will maintain a record of all traffic control devices

throughout the County. This record will be the subject of a major update on an annual basis and a minor update in the form of an addendum every two months. The record and its updates will be approved and signed by the County Engineer.

A4 Authority for Placement of Traffic Control Devices Traffic control devices will be approved and erected by direction of Council or by direction of the County

Engineer under County By-law, as appropriate.



Proposals to change or augment existing Traffic Control Devices will be referred to Council: a) where there is a history of public or Council involvement in recent times, b) where the Department can foresee that the proposal will have a severe adverse impact on another

segment of the community, c) where such changes lie outside the general guidance provided by this policy, or d) where a resident, taxpayer or local interest group requests that the Department refer the matter to

Council for determination in the event that discussions have failed to result in a mutually satisfactory resolution.

A5 Implementation Strategy for Changes in Traffic Control An implementation strategy will be developed for each change in traffic control, providing for prior

Council notification where appropriate and advance publicity and warning signs. The Municipality will normally bear all costs of traffic control devices placed under this policy. However

petitioners will normally be expected to bear all costs for devices erected on an exceptional basis. A6 Temporary Conditions Temporary conditions (including temporary roads, lanes, accesses or traffic control devices) will be

treated in accordance with this policy except for road construction undertaken by the County, contractors, or other agencies which will be governed by a separate specific policy.

A7 Sizes of Traffic Control Devices The size of sign, where alternatives are available, e.g., Stop and Yield signs, will be selected from those

available having regard to the functional classification of the road in question, traffic flows, accident rate, visibility at the site and other site specifications.

Procedures B1 General The following documents (copies of which will be maintained in the Planning and Engineering Services

Department) provide guidance on placement of traffic control devices and where appropriate provide warrants for the installation of various control devices. They will be used to evaluate existing and proposed traffic control devices in order to ensure consistency throughout the County.

Uniform traffic control devices for Canada (UTCDC) published by the Council on Uniform Traffic Control

Devices for Canada Traffic signal control display standardization and guidelines by Underwood McClellan Ltd and published

by Alberta Transportation Highway capacity manual published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Canadian capacity guide for signalized intersections published by the Roads and Transportation

Association of Canada (RTAC) Various handbooks such as the handbook of Traffic engineering practice for small cities prepared for the



State of Illinois Department of Transportation by consultants and those published from time to time by the Roads and Transportation Association of Canada and the Institute of Transportation Engineers. The cardinal principle for the placement of traffic control devices is that they must:

• fulfil a need • command attention • convey a clear, simple meaning • command respect of road users • give adequate time for proper response

B2 Review and Upgrading of Traffic Control Devices The Planning and Engineering Services Department will review existing and potential sites of traffic

control devices on an annual basis or as required in order to accommodate changing traffic and other conditions. In addition, staff of the Transportation branch of the Department will be instructed specifically to monitor traffic conditions and to assess the adequacy of existing traffic control devices or the need for upgrading on an ongoing basis.

Requests or petitions from members of the public for additional or revised traffic control devices will be

reviewed by the Planning and Engineering Services Department and where appropriate, discussed with the community at large, school authorities, other civic and external agencies and County Council prior to implementation or other action.

Where a traffic control project is undertaken which warrants, necessitates or facilitates the correction of

any existing undesirable or inappropriate conditions, changes will be initiated immediately; otherwise the inappropriate traffic control devices will be reviewed and brought to Council if necessary with a view to having the inappropriate devices phased out or changed two years from the date of implementation of this policy.

In determining when traffic control devices are undesirable or inappropriate the following criteria will be

considered. Accident Exposure and Intensity of Activity Is the risk of accidents and the intensity of activity significantly higher at the site proposed for the Traffic

Control Devices than average conditions for which road user behaviour is prescribed in law? Will the devices convey a meaningful message throughout the bulk of the day, i.e., from 8:00 a.m. to

10:00 p.m., for example? Economics Is the cost of implementation greater than the expected benefit? Logistical Will the placement of the proposed traffic control devices (other than regulatory devices) generate

additional demands such that the devices would be required at unacceptably close intervals, thereby rendering the devices ineffective through overuse and unduly onerous on the Municipality and the community at large to maintain and operate?

Administrative



Will the placement of the proposed traffic control devices place unreasonable administrative burdens on

the municipality in establishing the ongoing legitimacy and currency of the traffic control devices? Community Impacts Will the placement of the traffic control devices, or their real or anticipated spread through the effects of

precedents, create significant adverse community impact when compared with the expected benefits? Will the sign create a real or false sense of safety?

Site Specific Conditions Are there any site specific conditions which would warrant the proposed traffic control devices? Under certain circumstances the Department would seek to remove unwarranted 3 or 4 way stop

controlled intersections, or ineffective signs (such as “Children Playing” or “Local Traffic Only” and also to standardize “No Parking” or “No Waiting” regulations over a section of road, for example.

The signs exemplified above may be warranted under special circumstances. Approved playground and

school zones are one example of such circumstances and group homes, schools or institutions for the handicapped are also seen as such.

When a request is received for signs of this nature, it will be assessed in the light of these criteria and

approval for the proposed works will be sought from County Council. B3 Definition of Priority by Appropriate Traffic Control Devices The relative priority between traffic streams shall be defined at all intersections by one of the following

three devices. 1) Traffic signals 2) Stop signs 3) Yield signs Traffic signals shall be installed if it can be shown that the installation will reduce vehicular delays, and if

the UTCDC and ITE warrants are satisfied. Frequent stop sign control results in delay and irritation to motorists and shall not be used in urban areas

where a yield sign will suffice. Stop signs shall not be used as speed control or traffic diversion devices. In rural areas stop signs only will be used for, although yield sight distances are frequently created, rapid

natural growth often reduces sight distance faster than the clearance can be maintained. Stop signs shall generally be installed if traffic signals are not warranted and one of the following

conditions exists: 1) a minor street approach to an arterial roadway; 2) a minor street approach with inadequate sight lines to the major street; 3) a minor street approach to an intersection where three or more right angle collisions per year have

occurred; and 4) an approach opposite an approach with stop sign control. In urban areas yield signs shall be installed on all minor street approaches to another street if traffic

signals or stop signs are not warranted.



In rural areas stop signs will be installed at all unsignalized railway crossings except for crossings on

upgraded secondary highways which will be reviewed on a site-specific basis for signage and/or automatic signals at the time of upgrading.

“Stop Ahead” warning signs will be placed in advance of stop signs when: the visibility of the stop sign is

obscured, when the time available for a driver approaching the stop sign at the legal speed limit is inadequate for the driver to stop or when the accident situation indicates that advance warning is desirable. The location of the “Stop Ahead” sign will be determined from onsite observations.

B4 Sizes of Signs Where Options are Available The following sign sizes will be used under normal conditions: Stop sign - at arterial roads 90 cm sign - at collector roads 75 cm sign - at local roads 60 cm sign Yield sign - normal conditions 75 cm sign

- at Engineer s discretion 90 cm sign

Street names - normal conditions 150mm lettering - on arterials roads 150 mm lettering - high speed or high volume arterial roads 200mm lettering Existing street name signs will be upgraded to the above standards when replacement is required. Variations to the above may be employed to correct for poor visibility, higher than expected accident

frequencies or rates, adverse road curvature and other such detrimental circumstances. B5 Pedestrian crossings An hierarchy of pedestrian crossing facilities will be established as required by traffic, pedestrian and

other factors in accordance with the following general criteria. Road, Vehicular & Pedestrian Crossing Traffic Conditions Control Devices 1. Local or collector road, low “deemed" pedestrian pedestrian generation, no crossings at sidewalk significant parking or continuations circulation problems 2. Local or collector road, moderate marked and signed pedestrian generation, minor problems with pedestrian/vehicular conflict, parking and/or circulation 3. Collector or arterial road high overhead flashing yellow pedestrian generation, moderate signals problems with pedestrian/vehicular parking and/or circulation 4. As per 3 plus severe road curvature Normal traffic signals



or visibility problems with pedestrian push button operation 5. Arterial road, high pedestrian Normal traffic signals generation, severe problems with with pedestrian push pedestrian/vehicular conflict button operation parking and/or circulation The degree of pedestrian/vehicular conflict will be compared with published criteria to determine the

appropriate control devices. Such parking or circulation problems as exist should be minimized by normal TSM measures prior to the

implementation or upgrading of pedestrian crossing controls. B6 School and Playground Zones Schools (and other like generators of pedestrian and vehicular traffic) often require special consideration

and treatment in determining appropriate traffic control devices to balance the needs of pedestrian and vehicular traffic and to maintain the highest levels of safety.

Pedestrian crosswalks are deemed to exist in law at the continuations of existing sidewalks across a

road intersection.



Existing school sites will be reviewed by the Planning and Engineering Services, the School Board,

school representatives and the R.C.M.P. to prepare TSM plans for approval as required and implementation. Proposed school sites will be reviewed by the Planning and Engineering Services and the School Board representatives during the planning phase to ensure conformity with the above concepts.

The number and extent of school zones with the associated 30 kph speed zone will be reduced to the

minimum necessary to ensure pedestrian safety. 30 kph speed zones will normally be reserved for elementary schools.

Schools will be encouraged to maintain properly trained school crossing guards. The R.C.M.P. will be

encouraged to assist in this training and will monitor school sites to enforce discipline in both pedestrians and drivers. The Planning and Engineering Services Department will assist as required in the training of school crossing guards and will monitor traffic and pedestrian activities at these sites.

Pedestrian pathways within the school site or other generators are to be integrated with the

road/sidewalk system. Cooperative action will be initiated by the Planning and Engineering Services Department with appropriate County staff and external agencies as required for each specific situation.

The use of pedestrian pathways will be encouraged where necessary by means of physical barriers

such as landscape features or fencing as appropriate. Playground zones will be treated in a manner similar to that prescribed above for school zones.



Traffic Control Devices Date of Approval by Council: Resolution No: Lead Role: Chief Commissioner Replaces: Last Review Date: April 18, 1995 Next Review Date: 2010 Administrative Responsibility: Engineering and Environmental Planning Special Notes: Policy SER-009-021, Installation of Traffic Signals and Pedestrian Crossings addresses specifics of those noted devices. Policy Statement This policy is designed to provide guidance to Administration and to the community on the placement and maintenance of traffic control devices, throughout the County to regulate, warn and guide both vehicular and pedestrian traffic. While referenced in this policy, specifics of traffic signals and pedestrian crossing installations are addressed in policy SER-009-021 Installation of Traffic Signal and Pedestrian Crossings.

Definitions

A. Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices: The Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD),

published by the Transportation Association of Canada (TAC) is the principle guiding reference for installing traffic control devices. Conformance with that document and ancillary TAC publications ensures uniformity across Canada.

B. Traffic Control Device: A traffic control device is a sign, signal, pavement marking or other device,

placed upon, over or adjacent to the road, by a public authority or official having jurisdiction.

Guidelines

A. General

The objective of this section is to provide an overview of the operating parameters for traffic control devices in general and to additionally highlight the installation warrants, applications and guidelines for the more commonly used and topical traffic control devices. It would be beyond the scope of this policy to delve into a detailed discussion of each and every traffic control device. Information on specific devices that are not covered in the following text may be obtained by referencing the MUTCD.

B. Traffic Control Device Objectives

Traffic control devices constitute a system for conveying messages to the road user. The objectives of these messages are to advise of traffic regulations to enable observance of the law, warn of road



characteristics, road hazards and temporary conditions, and provide the information necessary for route selection. Meeting these objectives improves safety, serves the convenience of the road user, and promotes the efficient movement of people and goods and the orderly flow of traffic. Simplification of the driving task through uniformity in the design and application of traffic control devices is necessary to accomplish these objectives.

C. The Role of Guidelines and Warrants

1) Guidelines provide information and background to assist in the decision making process and are necessarily general because they cannot cover all site-specific conditions. Warrants attempt to quantify site characteristics so that a site evaluation can be compared with threshold levels to ensure consistent and appropriate application.

2) Reference to guidelines and warrants is the initial step in the evaluation process. Within any

decision process there will always be competing alternatives that must be considered to arrive at a “best” solution. Guidelines and warrants are an important part of the decision process but are not intended to be a substitute for good engineering judgement. The fact the warrant thresholds for a particular traffic control device are met is not conclusive justification for installation of the device, and vice versa. Where the word "warranted" or the word "unwarranted" is used in this policy, the decision making philosophy will be as described in this sub-section.

D. Conformance with Governing Acts, Regulations and Guidelines

Traffic control devices (consisting of regulatory, warning and informational traffic signs, traffic signals, railway crossing signs and signals, pavement markings and community information signs) will be placed and maintained in accordance with applicable Provincial Acts and corresponding regulations, (principally the Municipal Government Act, the Traffic Safety Act, the Public Highways Development Act and the Planning Act) and with relevant technical manuals, reports and informational publications.

E. Traffic Control Device Placement The cardinal principle for the placement of traffic control devices is that they must:

fulfill a need command attention convey a clear, simple meaning command respect of road users give adequate time for proper response

F. Intersection Control by Appropriate Traffic Control Devices

The relative priority between traffic streams will be defined at all intersections by one of the following three devices.

1) Traffic signals 2) Stop signs 3) Yield signs

Other intersections “non-device” treatments, like grade separations and round-a-bouts (traffic circles) are available options addressed in Strathcona County’s Engineering Servicing Standards.



G. Traffic Signals

Traffic signals will be installed if it can be shown that the objectives of Policy SER-009-021 are met. H. Yield Signs

1) Yield signs are the preferred control at unsignalized intersections because stop sign control can result in unnecessary delay and irritation to motorists. Stop signs will not be used in urban areas where a yield sign will suffice.

2) However, on the higher speed rural road grid network, priority control will generally be restricted

to stop signs unless traffic signals are warranted. High operating speeds on the rural road grid network, coupled with sightline restrictions, preclude the use of yield control.

3) In urban areas, hamlets and country residential subdivisions, yield signs will be installed on the

minor street approaches at all intersections where traffic signals or stop signs are not warranted.

I. Stop Signs

1) Stop signs will be installed where traffic signals are not warranted and yield control is inappropriate. Stop signs will not be used for speed control or traffic diversion devices.

2) In addition, stop signs will be installed at all unsignalized railway crossings. The need to

upgrade railway crossing protection will be reviewed on an ongoing basis to determine if revisions are required in accordance with Transport Canada guidelines.

J. "Stop Ahead” Signs

1) “Stop Ahead” warning signs will be placed in advance of stop signs if visibility of the stop sign is obscured or when collision experience indicates that advance warning is desirable.

2) The location of the “Stop Ahead” sign will be determined from onsite observations but, as a

minimum, be placed beyond the stopping sight distance for the legal speed limit. K. All-Way Stop Control

1) All-way stop control may be used at intersections where traffic signals are not warranted and minor street traffic experiences undue delay or the collision experience at the intersection is excessive. All-way stop control will only be considered when the warrants prescribed by the MUTCD are met.

2) All-way stop control will not be introduced as a traffic-calming measure. Research has shown

poor compliance at unwarranted all-stop locations, which in turn has a negative impact on safety and makes regular police enforcement a necessity.



L. Pedestrian Crosswalks

1) Pedestrian crosswalks are deemed to exist in law at the continuations of sidewalks across road intersections. At locations with concentrated pedestrian activity, it is desirable to clearly identify crosswalks and aid pedestrians in making their presence known to motorists.

2) A hierarchy of pedestrian crossing facilities has been established to ensure that resources for

crosswalk control are placed where they are of greatest value, and to avoid randomly introducing facilities on a widespread basis without regard for actual need thereby fostering disrespect for warranted facilities.

3) Crossing protection hierarchy is dependant on traffic volume, pedestrian volume and other

factors as described in the "Installation of Traffic Signal and Pedestrian Crossing" policy, SER-009-021.

M. School and Playground Zones

1) Traffic control in new school zone areas and playground areas will be evaluated based on the merits of consistency with the existing zone and speed reduction philosophies and practices in place in the community and with new and emerging standards and specifications such as the Province of Alberta document, “Guidelines for School and Playground Zones and Areas”. Where a change in philosophy is recommended, Council may consider the recommendation and alter it as deemed appropriate.

2) Any recommended changes to the signing and/or speed reduction to existing zones based

on professional or industry standards, guidelines or practices will follow the steps described in the Procedures section within this Policy.

N. Non-Standard Signs

The use of the Canadian MUTCD standard signs is recommended to ensure consistency and conformity with regional and national standards. However, in some situations there is no MUTCD standard sign that adequately conveys an intended message. In these instances, signs conforming to American MUTCD will be considered and used as a first option, and as a second option, signs conforming to local practice.

O. Pavement Line Marking 1) In the Rural Service Area, line marking decisions will consider:

Road width Posted speed Site specific conditions

Rural roads with posted speeds of 80 km/hr or more and widths of less than 8.0 m are not normally good candidates for centre-line pavement marking. Under special circumstances centre-line marking may be considered without shoulder marking where the surface width is a minimum 7.5m.



2) In the Urban Service Area, centre-lines may be marked on:

Urban roads wider than 11.5m when parking is permitted on both sides, Urban roads wider than 9.0m when parking is permitted on one side only; Urban roads wider than 7.0m when parking is not permitted; Collector roadways; Roadway bends that conform to the above width requirements plus 1m; Intersection approaches to major roadways; Railway crossing approaches.

3) Centre-line marking may be appropriate in conjunction with traffic-calming initiatives or at other

locations where collision experience suggests that a centre-line is desirable.

P. Temporary Conditions

Temporary conditions (including temporary roads, lanes, accesses or traffic control devices) will be treated in accordance with this policy. Road construction and other construction on municipal road right-of-ways undertaken by the County, contractors, or other agencies are to conform to the requirements of the current versions of the Occupational Health and Safety regulations, and Part D – “Temporary Conditions” of the MUTCD.

Procedures

A. Authority for Placement of Traffic Control Devices

Traffic control devices will be approved and erected by direction of the Manager of Engineering and Environmental Planning or by direction from County Council.

B. Installation of Traffic Control Devices

Installation of approved traffic control devices may be undertaken, as the situation dictates, by Transportation and Agricultural Services, contractors employed by the County, or developers. The ultimate responsibility for placement and conformance with this policy rests with the Manager of Engineering and Environmental Planning.

C. Requests for Traffic Control Devices

1) Requests from Council, Councillors and/or members of the public or other stakeholders for new or augmented traffic control devices, or for modifications to existing devices, will be reviewed by Engineering and Environmental Planning and evaluated in the context of this policy and where appropriate, discussed with the community at large, school authorities, other civic and external agencies and County Council prior to implementation or other action. Within any technical process, such as placement of traffic control devices, there will be competing alternatives and differing perspectives that must be considered and rationalized.

2) Requests from members of the public will be copied to the Ward Councillor as information.



D. Authority for Changes to Existing Traffic Control Devices

1) Proposals to change or augment existing traffic control devices will generally be approved and erected by direction of the Manager of Engineering and Environmental Planning, but will be referred to Council when:

a) there is a history of public or Council involvement in recent times, b) the Department can foresee that the proposal will have a severe adverse impact on another

segment of the community, c) such changes lie outside the general guidance provided by this policy, or d) a resident, taxpayer or local interest group requests that the Department refer the matter to

Council in the event that normal process has failed to result in a mutually satisfactory resolution.

2) In the event that a proposal is referred to Council, a recommendation will be made by the

Manager of Engineering and Environmental Planning along with an explanation of alternatives including the merits and drawbacks of each alternative. Council may consider the recommendation and alter it as deemed appropriate.

E. Removal of Traffic Control Devices

1) Where a traffic control device no longer fulfills a need, or the device contravenes the intent of this policy, consideration will be given to removal or replacement with an appropriate device as the situation dictates. Specific examples would include stop signs that were installed instead of yield control to address sightline issues that have been resolved and all-way stop control installed to address speeding issues contrary to this policy.

2) Where removal of a device is expected to create significant public response, the item will be

referred to County Council as outlined in "Procedures, Section D". 3) Unwarranted and nonconforming devices will be removed as funding allows or in conjunction

with a roadway improvement project when feasible.

F. Review and Upgrading of Traffic Control Devices

The Engineering and Environmental Planning Department will monitor traffic levels and site conditions on an ongoing basis to assess the adequacy of existing traffic control devices or the need for upgrading.

G. Records of Traffic Control Devices Engineering and Environmental Planning will maintain records of all signalized installations. Transportation and Agricultural Services, with support from Engineering and Environmental Planning,

will maintain a record of all traffic control signs and pavement markings throughout the County.



H. Maintenance of Traffic Control Devices

Maintenance of traffic signs and pavement markings will be the responsibility of Transportation and Agricultural Services. Operation and maintenance of traffic signals and other signalized traffic control devices will be the responsibility of Engineering and Environmental Planning.

Document #: EEP Administration.0345.34810.1

Summary of Revisions

SER-009-021 SER-009-027 SER-009-017


SER-009-021

Policy Statement The revised policy shortens the content to focus more on purpose. Details of warrants and manuals are moved to the “Guideline” section of the revised policy.

Definitions This is new to the revised policy. Definitions serve to give the reader an understanding of

terminology. Guidelines and Procedures The existing policy has no “Guidelines” section but rather a “Procedures” section. The existing policy covers a number of subjects:

- regular monitoring of service levels - budget process - reference to manuals - details on timing patterns - warrant tables/worksheets

The revised policy uses an updated format that includes “Guidelines” and Procedures” sections. The “Guidelines” section elaborates on the use of warrants as an initial evaluation supplement by professional judgement reflecting unique situations. The “Procedures” section of the revised policy is more comprehensive than the existing policy by including subjects of:

- requests - authority - removal - new technologies

The warrant table in the revised policy has been corrected (row 2) and some of the worksheets/tables have been removed .


SER-009-027

Policy Statement The revised policy shortens the content to focus more on purpose. Details previously in the Policy Statement have been moved to the Guidelines and Procedures section of the revised policy. Definitions The revised policy includes additional definitions. Definitions serve to give the reader an understanding of the terminology. Guidelines and Procedures The revised policy retains consistent criteria on sound level thresholds as compared to the existing policy. Fence standards and multi-story residence information have been updated to reflect current practices. A Residential Urban Village category has been added to address new development trends. The policy title has been changed to reflect the application of this policy to “urban type” developments on both the rural and urban areas of the Municipality.


SER-009-017 Policy Statement The revised policy shortens the content to focus more on purpose. Details previously in the “Policy Statement” area have been moved to the “Guidelines” and “Procedures” section of the revised policy. Definitions This is new to the revised policy. Definitions serve to give the reader an understanding of the terminology. Guidelines and Procedures

The existing policy used “Policy Statement” and “Procedures” sections to organize the information. The revised policy uses an updated format that uses an updated format that uses a “Guidelines” and “Procedures” sections. The subjects included in the existing policy of:

- Placement - Records - Authority - Changes - Temporary conditions - Sizes - Manuals - Decision making criteria - Device priority - School and playground zones

are addressed in the revised policy directly or by reference. The revised policy makes a number of improvements:

- Clarifies that policy SER-009-021 addressing traffic signals and pedestrian crossings specifics

- Elaborates on use of warrants as an initial evaluation supplemented by professional judgement reflecting, unique situations

- Adds a sub-section on pavement line markings - Discusses railway crossings

MUNICIPAL POLICIES (Revised) Report Purpose 1. THAT ... · PDF fileReport Purpose To revise...

Documents

Transcript of MUNICIPAL POLICIES (Revised) Report Purpose 1. THAT ... · PDF fileReport Purpose To revise...