Traffic Solutions MUTCD Compliance Dates & Systematic Upgrades Rick Mowlds State Sign Engineer Lynn Peterson Secretary of Transportation John Nisbet State Traffic Engineer Road & Street Maintenance Supervisors Conference Yakima, WA October 5, 203
Assessment/Management Method for Maintaining Sign Retroreflectivity (Compliance Date: June 3, 204) WSDOT s Approach: Currently our approach encompasses all sign types, not just regulatory and warning signs Our approach is a combination of assessment/management methods: Visual Nighttime Inspection (Review each sign every two years) Expected Sign Life Control Signs 2
Assessment/Management Methods for Maintaining Sign Retroreflectivity (Continued) Visual Nighttime Inspection: Typically a Two- Person Crew Preferred Vehicle is a Pick Up or SUV preferable with the newer headlight style (VOA, HID) The Crew Records Deficient Signs into the Department s Sign Inventory Database Traffic Sign Management System (TSMS) Traffic and Maintenance Personnel are able to generate a Needed Maintenance Report of the identified deficient signs 3
Assessment/Management Methods for Maintaining Sign Retroreflectivity (Continued) Visual Nighttime Inspection: (Needed Maintenance Report) 4
Assessment/Management Methods for Maintaining Sign Retroreflectivity (Continued) Expected Sign Life: Associated with Capitol or Preservation Projects WSDOT policy was to replace any existing sign that is 0 years or older within project limits 5
Assessment/Management Methods for Maintaining Sign Retroreflectivity (Continued) Control Signs: Currently tracking yearly retroreflectivity readings for STOP signs at four locations Planning on partnering with Thurston County to implement a Weathering Test Deck for Sheeting Types II, III, IV, VIII, IX, and XI and with colors of white, red, yellow, green, fluorescent yellow green, fluorescent yellow, blue, and brown. Sheeting Type White Red Yellow Fluorescent Yellow Green Brown Blue Fluorescent Yellow Green II NC NC NC III AV, NC * AV, NC * AV, NC IV AV, 3M* AV, 3M* AV, 3M AV, 3M VIII AV, NC AV, NC AV AV IX AV,3M AV,3M AV,3M XI AV, 3M 6
Assessment/Management Methods for Maintaining Sign Retroreflectivity (Continued) Issues: Funding Staff Levels 7
Crashworthiness of Sign Supports (Compliance Date: January 7, 203) Placed on roads with posted speed limit of 50 mph or higher WSDOT Approach: Department policy all sign supports installed on the state highway system have been crash tested and approved by FHWA, since the 980 s. Meets NCHRP 350 or AASHTO Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH) Hardware accepted under NCHRP Report 350 is appropriate for replacement and new installation. Retesting is not required. As of January, 20, all new products must be tested using MASH crash test criteria for use on the National Highway System (NHS). No Impact 8
One Way Signs (Compliance Date: December 3, 209) Placed on roads with posted speed limit of 50 mph or higher WSDOT Approach: Currently identifying needs Future coordination with city s over 25 K in population 9
Horizontal Alignment Warning Signs (Compliance Date: December 3, 209) The placement of a Large Arrow or Chevrons on curves where the difference between the speed limit and advisory speed is 5 mph or more. WSDOT Approach: Identify impacted curves Provide funding for three Regions each biennium Systematic approach of addressing curves that have higher serious injuries and/or fatal crashes first Currently approximately 30% of the identified curves have been addressed 0
Yellow Change and Red Clearance Intervals (Compliance Date: June 3, 207) Duration of yellow change and red clearance intervals shall be determined using engineering practices. The engineering practices are available in ITE s Traffic Control Devices Handbook and ITE s Manual of Traffic Signal Design WSDOT Approach: Consistent with Department policy If needed, addressing yellow change and red clearance intervals when timing adjustments are needed at individual intersection and/or corridor Continue dialogue with the six Region to ensure compliance date is meet
Pedestrians Intervals and Signal Phases (Compliance Date: June 3, 207) Pedestrian change interval shall not extend into the red clearance interval and shall be followed by a buffer interval of at 3 seconds. WSDOT Approach: When timing adjustments are needed at individual intersection and/or corridor adjustments are being made to bring the intervals into compliance Continue dialogue with the six Region to ensure compliance date is meet Follow up with City s that are operating Department owned signals to ensure compliance date is meet Currently, roughly 5% - 20% signals have been adjusted 2
Grade Crossing (Crossbuck) Signs and Supports (Compliance Date: December 3, 203) Retroreflective Strip on Crossbuck sign and Support WSDOT Approach: The responsibility lies with the Railroad owner since the sign assembly is when Railroad right of way 3
Crossbuck Assemblies with Yield or Stop Signs (Compliance Date: December 3, 203) The use of STOP or YIELD signs with Crossbuck signs at passive grade crossings WSDOT Approach: The responsibility lies with the Railroad owner since the sign assembly is when Railroad right of way 4
Systematic Approach Strategic Items to consider when upgrading existing traffic control devices: Crash History, especially severe crash locations Reduce Risk Liability Roadway Classification Traffic Volumes Geometrics (Lane and Shoulder Widths) Existence of Horizontal and Vertical Curves 5
Systematic Approach Example: WSDOT ASSESSMENT GUIDE FOR REPLACING SIGNS - August 203 Note: This guide illustrates the range of potential consequences and likelihood that may be associated with key department risk areas. Judgment is required to assess the consequences and likelihood of a risk event (both before and after effective risk treatment action). STEP Determine the Severity Level for each Major Risk Area (Score the Risk Severity for each Key Area that is applicable) Severity Score Quantities & Costs Regulatory Warning Guide Informational Sign Fab Number Major Risk Areas for Signs # R-Series, R3-, R3-2, R3-4, W-Series, W2-Series, W3- E4-50, E6-0, E- Series R3-8, R5-, R5-A, R6-, R6- Series, W3-2 Series, W3-2 Series STEP 2 Estimate the Risk Impact ( Score the Likelihood and determine the Level of Risk) Risk Levels Not Applicable Low Medium High Appendix A - Priority Matrix Risk Severity for Signs High (Level One) Medium (Level Two) 7* 2 Total # of Signs 24,790 20,49,664 0 Average Daily Traffic Square Feet 73,962 49,678 72,92 0 Retroreflectivity Fair Marginal Low Estimate Replacement Cost $3,479,240 $2,993,560 $6,96,840 $0 Likelihood Score 0 2 5 R2-Series, R4-Series, R5-2 S-, S3- Series, S4-3, W3- D-Series, D3-Series, D5- Series, R5-000 Series, R6-3 through W3-50, W4- Series, D8-Series, D0-Series, Series, R8-Series, R9-Series, Series, W5- through W5-3, E-Series, E3-0, E4-30, E5- R0-Series, R- Series, R2- W6-Series, W7- through W7- Series, E6-2, E8-Series, E2- Sign Fab Number Series, R3-Series, R4-4E, W8-Series, W9-Series, Series, M- thru M-70, M3- Series, R5-Series, R6- W0-Series, W-Series, Series, Series, R8-0, R8-20, S-W2- Series, W4-Series, through S5-2 W5-Series, W6-Series I2-40, I2-50, I7-40, I7-7 thru I7-702, I8-0 thru I8-70, I8-90, I8-00, I25-Series, I35-0 Total # of Signs 9,536 25,97 44,879,779 Square Feet 64,98 6,657 637,39 23,0 Estimate Replacement Cost $4,925,940 $3,233,40 $9,9,570 $462,020 See Table below for Average Daily Traffic Score Tier 2 Tier 2 Tier 2 Low (Level Three) Sign Fab Number R3-6, R3-7, R7-Series, R8- W5-4, W7-5, W7-30 D4-Series, D6-Series, D7-Series, D9-Series, D-, D2-Series, D3-, E2-A, E7-, E9-, E3- Series, M-8, M-9, M2-Series, M4-Series, M5-Series, M6- Series, M7-Series, M8-Series I-Series, I2-0 thru I2-30, I2-60, I2-70, I3-Series, I4- Series, I5-Series, I6-Series, I7-30, I7-60, I8-7 Series, I8-80, I8-804, I9-0, I20- Series, I30-Series, I35-02, Ride Share signs Total # of Signs 2,698 7 7,99 0,234 Tier 3 Tier 3 Tier 3 Square Feet 7,505 22.00 27,983 82,742 Estimate Replacement Cost $50,00 $440 3,99,575 $,654,840 Level of Risk Definitions: Consequences threaten the effective the ability of WSDOT to carry out its mission and strategic plan - existing controls must be effective and requires additional action to High be managed at the executive management level. Consequences threaten completion of a critical WSDOT function - existing controls must be effective and possibly additional action implemented - action to be managed Medium at Division level. Risk is managed by current practices and procedures - consequences are dealt with by routine operations at Director/Office level - monitor routine practices and Low procedures for effectiveness. Adapted from "Risk Management Procedure PN 224P", version., Governance Branch, Roads and Traffic Authority, NSW, Australia. STEP 3 Develop the Risk Response Plan (Develop the Risk Strategy & Remedial Actions) # If an existing sign is more than 5 years add one point to the final score. * - For Level One Signs with a low retro-reflectivity receives a score of 7; signs with a marginal retroreflectivity receives a score of 5; signs with a fair retroreflectivity receives a score of 3. ) The Estimate Replacement Cost does not include the replacement cost of support structures. Risk Levels Average Daily Traffic <500 500-2500 250-4000 >4000 Likelihood Score 2 3 4 6
Questions? Rick Mowlds mowldsr@wsdot.wa.gov (360) 705-7988 7