1. TRAFFIC CONTROL ORDERS DOWNTOWN MIDLAND January 23, 2017

2. Downtown Traffic Control Orders
History:
October 3, 2016 – Joint City Council and Downtown Development Authority Meeting, at the library.
Initial information presented on All-Way Stop Control (AWSC)
October – City Council approved Downtown Midland Streetscape Redevelopment Plan

3. Downtown Traffic Control Orders
Plan Recommendations:
Use of All-Way Stop Control (AWSC) along Main Street at the intersections of Ashman, McDonald and Rodd Streets
Engineering Study of AWSC requirements in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices
All-Way Stop Control trial study to help assess the recommendation

4. Downtown Traffic Control Orders

5. Downtown Traffic Control Orders
AWSC trial study began in November 2016
Signals set to all-way red flash
Stop signs installed
Revised pavement markings
Required parking removal on side streets for visibility

6. Downtown Traffic Control Orders

7. Downtown Traffic Control Orders
Traffic Control Order Resolutions:
4 resolutions presented are related to the parking spots
1 resolution to remove traffic signals and the intersections operate as All-Way Stop Control
Parking

8. DLZ Presentation of ASWC

9. Test Study Implementation
Midland Main Street Streetscape Design Rodd, McDonald, and Ashman Intersections
All Way Stop Control
Test Study Implementation
Engineering Study
1/23/17

10. AWSC Test Study Methods
Methods presented at 10/23/16 City Council Meeting
Methods memo (dated 10/19/16)
Compare various metrics for signal control and AWSC
“Before” video data – 4/26/16
“After” video data – 12/10/16 (Holly Jolly Days Festival)

11. Test Study Metrics Crash data Auto delay Auto queuing
Auto compliance with “rules of road”
Pedestrian delay
Pedestrian illegal crossing movements
Pedestrian/Auto “near misses”

12. AWSC Implementation November 10, 2016 - fully implemented
Signals turned off/covered
Added/adjusted signs
Removed parking near intersections
Changed pavement markings to remove center left turn lanes

13. Test Study Results Crash data Auto delay Auto queuing
Before: 2.8 crashes/year (total all intersections)
After: no intersection crashes through 1/5/17
Auto delay
Before: overall avg = 9.5 seconds
After: overall avg = 11.0 seconds
Auto queuing
Before: max queue = 4 to 6 cars
After: max queue = 3 to 4 cars

14. Test Study Results Auto compliance with “rules of road”
Before: NA
After: 2% did not comply
Pedestrian delay
Before: 5.4 seconds
After: 2.5 seconds
Pedestrian illegal crossing movements
Before: 28.6% of crossings
After: 12.5% of crossings
Pedestrian/Auto “near misses”
None for either scenario

15. Test Study Conclusions
No meaningful difference:
Crash data
Auto delay
Auto queuing
Pedestrian/Auto “near misses”
AWSC performed better:
Pedestrian delay
Pedestrian illegal crossing movements
AWSC – good compliance with “rules of road”
Consider optimal stop bar/crosswalk locations

16. AWSC Engineering Study
Document compliance with MMUTCD 2B.07
Justify use of AWSC/Support TCO
Similarities to signal warrant analysis
Factors considered (only need to meet one):
Crashes
Traffic volumes/operations
Left turn conflicts
Vehicle/pedestrian conflicts
Restricted sight distances

17. AWSC Engineering Study
All three intersections demonstrate need to control vehicle/pedestrian conflicts (Criterion B)
These locations generate high pedestrian volumes
Number of peak hour pedestrian crossings:
Date
Ashman
McDonald
Rodd
4/26/16 55
119 51
12/10/16
250
203

18. AWSC Engineering Study
Conclusions:
AWSC does meet requirements of MMUTCD Section 2B.07
Meets Criterion B
Justifies TCO’s for AWSC
Documentation created

19. The End