Best Practices for Management of Traffic Signs: Town of Clifton Park as a Case Study
1. Best Practices for
Management of Traffic Signs
Clifton Park as a Case Study
Wednesday January 18, 2012
Speakers:
John Scavo, Director of Planning
Town of Clifton Park
Timothy Stroth, Project Manager
Greenman-Pedersen, Inc.
2. Agenda
Introduction
The Town
Sign Inventory and GTSC Grant
Traffic Sign Inventory Survey
Sign Management Solution
Sign Retroreflectivity
Meeting FHWA Requirements
Summary and Questions
6. Town of Clifton Park
Mid-southern portion of Saratoga County
Approximately 47 square miles
2009 population estimate 36,469
School districts
Schenendehowa
Burnt Hills-Ballston Lake
Niskayuna
Highway Safety Committee
7. Planning Department
• Oversee long term planning
• Coordinate review process for pending
applications
• Assist applicants and consultants
• Advise Planning Board, Town Board, Zoning Board
of Appeals
• Support Planning Board and Supervisor's Office in
development review processes
• Provide status for current applications
• Overall project administration
• Assist with comprehensive plan implementation
• Implement the Open Space Program
8. Traffic Signs
Approximately 5,000 town signs
No comprehensive sign inventory
Signs maintained by Highway
Department
Maintenance budgets based on historical
needs
Need to implement comprehensive
approach to meet new sign requirements
9. GTSC Grant
Governor’s Traffic Safety Committee
Funding source to develop solution for
minimum sign retroreflectivity requirements
Grant application prepared
Program established to serve as model for
other municipalities
Project results to be made available to other
localities and Cornell Local Roads Program
10. Problem
The aging of our population
Approximately half of the fatal crashes on
the nation's highways occur at night
Must meet minimum retroreflectivity
standards established by FHWA
Compliance dates are approaching fast
No current inventory of town signs
11. Problem
What do we need to do?
Select method(s) to manage signs
Budget for the necessary effort
Implement selected method(s)
Budget for the future
Replace signs as required
12. Proposed Solution
Create a traffic sign inventory and a
process to measure the retroreflectivity
of the more than 5,000 traffic signs
located in the town
Create a process to meet federal
retroreflectivity requirements
Bring the Town’s signs into compliance
with the new National Manual of Uniform
Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) and the
NYS Supplement
13. Goals
Complete a prototype deployment of a
traffic sign inventory
Implement a system to maintain signs in
conformance with minimum
retroreflectivity requirements
Decrease nighttime crashes in the Town
of Clifton Park
14. Two Phase Approach
Phase 1
Confirm needs
Review available software applications
Select hardware
Integrate GIS and GPS
Field test system in a pilot area
Phase 2
Complete townwide sign inventory
Implement method to maintain minimum
sign retroreflectivity
15. Operational Plan
Conduct interviews with Town Highway
Department to establish existing practices
Identify key town technical personnel available
Identify required upgrades for Town GIS
Coordinate with Cornell Local Roads Program
Review currently available software products
Interview vendors
Purchase a commercial-off-the-shelf software
package or enlist the services of a vendor.
Develop and integrate a sign inventory database
with the Town’s existing GIS
16. Milestones
Literature review
Survey of Jurisdictions
Interviews with Town Highway Personnel
Develop concept
Develop user and system requirements
Select available hardware and software
Integrate equipment and software
Test system using sample data
17. Sign Management Practices
Highway Safety Committee conducted
fact finding initiatives
Limited current technical literature was
available
Several commercially available software
packages identified
Additional information sought
18. Survey of Sign Management
Practices
Supplement research
Determine current practices
Web-based survey tool – Survey Monkey
Over 100 responses, 24 states, 4
international responses
Towns 45%
Counties 21%
Aware of FHWA requirements – 91%
19. Results of Note
Field inventory of signs – 59%
Sign locations mapped – 47%
Inventory System
Commercial-off-the-shelf 16%
Locally Developed 37%
Paper based 26%
No system 21%
Photolog of Streets – 20%
Unique identifier for signs – 32%
21. Clifton Park as Case Study
NCHRP Project: Practices to Manage
Traffic Sign Retroreflectivity
Provide examples of successful practices
Illustrate different methods to meet
requirements
Assist with development and implementation
of sign assessment or management method
National Cooperative Highway Research Program
Synthesis Topic 42-12
22. Clifton Park Solution
Needs Assessment
Existing and desired sign management
methods
Town owned equipment and software
Staff capabilities
Current workflows for sign operations
Recommendations for method(s) to be
implemented based on key building blocks
23. Clifton Park Solution
Key Building Blocks
ESRI GIS software – desktop and mobile
Rugged Trimble tablet computer
Office and field staff capabilities
Staff enthusiasm
26. Clifton Park Solution
Inventory Program Development
Software upgrades to current versions
Sign data requirements
Workflow and data management
Daily planning efforts
Data check-in/check-out
Training and support
27. Clifton Park Solution
GPI Approach
Streamlined and simple – inventory based
Systematic inventory program
Recommendations for management of sign
assets using a combination of acceptable
methods
Blanket replacements
Expected sign life-cycle
29. Clifton Park Solution
Next Steps
Complete sign inventory
Long range planning and budgeting
Establish sign review process for conformity to
MUTCD and NYS Supplement requirements
Implement sign replacement schedule
Ongoing process fine tuning
33. Retroreflectivity Defined
“A property of a surface that allows a large
portion of the light coming from a point source
to be returned directly back to a point near its
origin.”
Source: MUTCD, 2009 Edition, Section 1A.13 Definitions of
Headings, Words, and Phrases in this Manual
34. Minimum Retroreflectivity
Standard (i.e. mandatory practice):
“Public agencies or officials having jurisdiction shall
use an assessment or management method that is
designed to maintain sign retroreflectivity at or above
the minimum levels in Table 2A-3.”
Source: MUTCD, 2009 Edition, Section 2A.08 Maintaining
Minimum Retroreflectivity
35. Minimum Retroreflectivity
Assessment and Management Methods
to maintain minimum levels
A. Visual Nighttime Inspection
B. Measured Sign Retroreflectivity
C. Expected Sign Life
D. Blanket Replacement
E. Control Signs
F. Other Methods
Source: MUTCD, 2009 Edition, Section 2A.08
37. Minimum Retroreflectivity
Current Milestones for maintaining
minimum levels
Jan. 22, 2012: Implement Methodology to
maintain minimum levels
Jan. 22, 2015: Regulatory, Warning, Ground
Mounted Guide Signs
Jan. 22, 2018: Street Name Signs, Overhead
Guide Signs
Source: MUTCD, 2009 Edition, Table I-2
38. Minimum Retroreflectivity
Proposed Revisions
Extend Compliance Date for implementing an
assessment or management method to
maintain sign retroreflectivity at or above the
established minimum levels
New date to be 2 years after effective date of
Final Rule for this revision
Limit to regulatory and warning signs only
Eliminate other milestones
Source: Federal Register, August 31, 2011
39. Minimum Retroreflectivity
What does this mean?
Jurisdictions are expected to upgrade signs over
time to meet new requirements utilizing a systematic
upgrading program
Agencies can prioritize and schedule based on
relative safety needs, resources, etc
Agencies can decide to wait until non-compliant
signs reach serviceable life and replace with
compliant signs
40. Meeting MUTCD Requirements
Twofold Requirement
Systematic approach to maintain minimum
retroreflectivity
Compliance with other standards in both the
National MUTCD and NYS Supplement
New sign sizes
Advance posting distances
Signs no longer in use
45. Meeting MUTCD Requirements
Is a sign inventory required?
A comprehensive sign inventory is not required
Sign inventory is recommended
Conformance to overall sign requirements
Budgeting considerations
Long range planning
46. Meeting MUTCD Requirements
Is measuring retroreflectivity
required?
No – minimum retroreflectivity levels can be
maintained without establishing measured values
Typically achieved using combination of acceptable
management methods
Expected Sign Life
Blanket Replacement
Control Signs
47. Sign Sheeting and Life Cycle
Sheeting Types
Engineering Grade – 7 year warranty
High Intensity Prismatic – 10 year warranty
Diamond Grade (DG3) – 12 year warranty
Source: 3M
Resource for selection:
NYSDOT Standard Specifications, Section 645 - Signs
49. Summary
Two Phase Approach
Phase 1: Confirm needs
Review available software applications
Select hardware
Integrate GIS and GPS
Field test system in a pilot area
Phase 2: Complete townwide sign inventory
Implement method to maintain
minimum sign retroreflectivity
50. Summary
Why did Clifton Park choose this
solution?
Findings from our research
Availability of equipment and software
Staff capabilities
Operational needs
Budgetary considerations
Schedule for implementation
51. Summary
How we will manage our sign assets
Confirm our intended approach
Establish budget requirements
Complete Phase 2
Implement systematic sign replacement
program
Maintain sign data
52. Summary
Resources
Cornell Local Roads Program
www.clrp.cornell.edu
NYSDOT
Funding issues – Regional offices
Technical issues – Main office, Sally Olsen
solsen@dot.state.ny.us
Federal Highway Administration
www.fhwa.dot.gov/retro
Trade organizations
American Traffic Safety Services Assoc.
www.atssa.com
55. Summary
Speakers
John Scavo, Director of Planning
Town of Clifton Park, NY
jscavo@cliftonpark.org
Timothy Stroth, Project Manager
Greenman-Pedersen, Inc.
tstroth@gpinet.com