HomeMy WebLinkAboutWD-11-80 TOWN OF NEWCASTLE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Director' s Report to Public Works Committee.
Item: WD-11-80.
Date: January 24 , 1980.
Subject: Unwarranted Stop Signs.
Background:
The Public Works Committee of the Regional Municipality of
Durham, on November 6, 1979, adopted Report 259-79 relative to
fuel wastage associated with unwarranted STOP control signs.
Regional Council recommended that the Commissioner's Report be
forwarded to each area municipality for their review and, further,
the Region offered their assistance in the review of present
STOP control signing.
In Report No. 223 to the November 16, 1979, meeting of the
Town of Newcastle Public Works Committee, consideration was
given to the Regional Report rand, subsequently, Resolution
# W-271-79 was passed as follows:
"THAT By-Law 75-21. be reviewed by staff in
order to determine where there are unwarr-
anted STOP control signs within the Town of
Newcastle and, further, that, upon completion
of the research, a report be submitted to the
Committee. "
Report:
Under the Terms of The Highway Traffic Act, Chapter 202, Clause
33, Subsection 1 of Section 1, "Through Highway" is defined as:
' A highway or part of a highway designated as such by the
Minister or by by-law of a Municipality, and any such highway
shall be marked by a stop sign or yield right-of-way sign, in
compliance with the regulations of The Ministry' .
Under the Terms of the T111-oui;h highway By-Law the Town has the
right to erect the necessary S'L'OP signs and, if YIELD signs are
warranted, then a by-law in conjunction with the "Through Highway"
By-Law is necessary.
/ 2 . . .
2 -
Report, continued. . .
The Regional Municipality of Durham established criteria which
may warrant the use of YIELD !iJtpns in pince of STOP signs, and
this criteria is as follows:
(a) On a minor road at the entrance to an intersection
where it is necessary to assign right-of-way to the
major road, but where a stop is not necessary at all
times, and where the safe approach speed on the minor
road exceeds ten (10) miles per hour.
(b) On the entrance ramp to an expressway where an
acceleration lane is not provided.
(c) Within an intersection which a divided highway where
a stop sign is present at the entrance to the first
roadway adn further control is necessary at the ent-
rance to the second roadway and where the median width
between the two ro:always exceeds thirty (30) feet.
(d) Where there is a separate or channelized right-turn
lane without an adequate acceleration lane.
(e) Any intersection where a special problem exists and
where ;in enginecrhig study indicates the problem to
be susceptible to correction by use of a yield sign.
In addition to the above, it is also recommended that YIELD signs
should not ordinarily be placed against the major flow of traffic
at an intersection.
Using the foregoing criteria, a review of all the intersections
throughout the Town of Newcastle was undertaken, giving consid-
eration as to where YIELD sigtis may be justifiably employed. The
outcome of the review produced various observations relative to
this municipality:
(1) that, in most of the rural areas the existing STOP
control signs were required because:
i) higher rates of speed are common.
ii) there is a more relaxed atmosphere during
driving.
iii) of rough rerrai.n.
iv) some intersections have minimal sight distances.
/ 3 . . .
3 -
Report, continued. . .
(2) in urban areas many of the STOP control signs had
to remain because:
i) of the inability to approach an inter-
section at a speed of ten (10) miles per
hour.
ii) poor sight: lines due to inadequate dis-
tances and insufficient set-back of houses
or other buildings at intersections present
potentially hazardous driving conditions in
the area.
Analysis:
During the review of signs within the Town of Newcastle, By-Law
75 - 21 was re-examined and some roads which had not, hitherto,
been classified as "through highways" were considered for possible
re-classification. The investigation was undertaken in two
phases to assess Rural and Urban areas, the details of which are
given below:
Rural:
(a) Nash Road --
At the present time, motorists using Nash
Road, between Regional Roads 34 and 14 , are
required to stop a total of four (4) times.
It is felt_ that Nash Road should be desig-
nated as a "through highway" in consideration
of the fact that it carries the majority of
traffic in an east-west direction in comp-
arison to the volume of traffic experienced
by the north-south roadways.
(b) Trull's Road -
At the present Lime there is a four-way STOP
at Nash Road. it would be advantageous to
re-classify Trull's Road as a "through highway"
from Highway No. 2 to Concession 4, Darlington.
(c) Bloor Street -
A STOP is presently required at Maple Grove
Road and it is felt that Bloor Street should
be a ' through highway" from Regional Road 34
to Highway No. 2.
/ 4 . . .
4 -
Report, continued. . .
Analysis:
Urban:
In the urban sections of the municipality it was
found that, in older areas of the community, YIELD
signs did not meet the warrant due to excessive
approach speeds and visibility restrictions; how-
ever in newer areas, such as the Waverley Gardens
Subdivision, it was found that several of the STOP
signs could be replaced because drivers experience
good intersection-approach and sight distance con-
ditions.
Detailed below is a list of intersections where
YIELD right-of-way signs may be advantageous, not
only for the fueld consumption aspect but also to
improve the general flow of traffic.
Town of Bowmanville:
(a) Roser Crescent & Roser Crescent.
(b) Roser Crescent & Chantel Court.
(c) Doreen Crescent & Doreen Crescent.
(d) Rhonda Boulevard & Rosalynne Crescent (south)
(e) Rhonda Boulevard & Rosalynne Crescent (north)
(f) Parkway Crescent & Parkway Crescent.
(g) Parkway Crescent & Parkway Avenue (west)
(h) Parkway Crescent & Parkway Avenue (east)
( i ) Flett Street & Parkway Crescent:.
(j) Hetherington Dr1.ve & Holgate Crescent (west)
(k) Hetherington Drive & Holgate Crescent (east)
(1) Hillier Street & Quinn Drive.
(m) Strike Avenue & U the Court.
(u) Little. Avenue & Cole Avenue.
(u) Hobbs Drive & Hailey Court.
(p) Meadowview Boulevard & Shoreview Court.
(q) Shoreview Drive & Sunnicrest Avenue.
(r) Vanstone Court & Sunset Road.
(s) Carruthers Drive & Loscombe Drive (west)
(t) Carruthers Drive & Loscombe Drive (south)
Village of Newcastle:
(a) Lakeview Load & Sunset Boulevard (west)
(b) Lakeview Road & Sunset Boulevard (east)
(c) Graham Court & Orchard Heights Boulevard.
(d) Oatley Court & Orchard Heights Boulevard.
/ 5 . . .
Report, conLinued. .
Analysis: Urban:
(iii) Village of Orono:
(a) Station Street & Cobbledick Street.
(b) Rowe Street & Station Street.
(c) Church Street & Victoria Street.
(d) Church Street & Churchill Avenue.
(e) Andrews Crescent & Davids Crescent (north)
(f) Andrews Crescent & Davids Crescent (south)
(g) Davids Crescent & Peter's Pike.
(h) Robin's Road & Davids Crescent.
(iv) Hamlet of Hampton:
(a) Division Street & Temperance Street.
(b) Liberty Street & Division Street.
(c) Washington Street & Division Street.
(d) Perry Avenue & Elgin Street.
(e) Perry Avenue & Simpson Avenue.
(v) Hamlet of Newtonvi.11e:
(a) Rose Crescent & Jones Avenue.
(vi) Hamlet of Kendal:
(a) Church Street & Monck Street.
(b) King Street & Water Street.
(c) Dickey Street & Water Street.
(d) Dickey Street & Monck Street.
(e) Queen Street & Monck Street.
(vii) Township of Darlinton:
(a) Westmore Street & Jane Avenue.
(b) Westmore Street & Lynwood Avenue.
(c) Sherry Lane & Trull's Road.
Summary:
The review of the Through Highway By-Law and the existing signing
throughout the municipality signified that there are forty-six
(46) different locations wherein it would appear there are
unwarranted STOP signs.
In areas where new development is under construction the STOP
and YIELD sign warrants will merit review at the time of the
assumption of the Subdivisions by the Town of Newcastle; at that
Lime the by-laws currently in existence would be amended accord-
ingly.
/ 6 . . .
6 -
Sunmiary. . . Costs:
The estimated costs for implementation of the
changes, as herein described, would be $1,500.
(One Thousand Five Hundred Dollars) ; this figure
includes the supply and installation of the signs.
Recommendation:
WHEREAS the Regional Municipality of Durham
identified the Fuel Wastage associated with
unwarranted STOP Control Signs, it is hereby
recommended that this Report be adopted subject
to the concurrence of the Regional Municipality
of Durham.
JF:vh