Highway at Cleveland Ave Traffic Operational Safety Review

REPORT TO: Council FOR: Regular
REPORT FROM: Community Planning & Infrastructure

PRESENTED: November 15th, 2016 FILE:
SUBJECT: Sea to Sky Highway at Cleveland Avenue Traffic Operational Safety Review
Recommendation:
That Council approve the following resolutions:
THAT the District of Squamish receive the report from ISL Engineering Ltd. for the Sea to Sky
Highway at Cleveland Avenue Traffic Operational Safety Review.
THAT the District of Squamish send correspondence to ICBC, MOTI and local MP/MLA for
support and resources to take immediate action on the recommendations in the report.
1. Executive Summary:
In 2016, the District of Squamish, ICBC and the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure
jointly funded a Traffic Operational Safety Review of the Highway 99 / Cleveland Avenue
intersection. The report is now complete and staff are bringing to Council for discussion and
next steps.
2. Background:
The District of Squamish identified the Highway 99 and Cleveland Avenue intersection as the
top crash site in Squamish and expressed concerns regarding the traffic operational and safety
issues. According to the latest Online Crash Map released by Insurance Corporation of British
Columbia (ICBC), the study intersection had almost three times the number of crashes as the
second highest crash site in Squamish (Highway 99 and Mamquam Road).
Note that this is a provincial highway, and the District of Squamish does not have jurisdiction
over intersection design or a decision to proceed with the recommendations in the report. We
must work closely with MOTI as the authority.
3. Project Information:
ISL Engineering Ltd. was retained through a Request for Proposal in the second quarter of 2016
by the District of Squamish, ICBC and MOTI. The objectives of the report were to review the
traffic conditions, evaluate the collision history, identify any existing and potential operational
and safety issues, and develop possible near-term and long-term countermeasures for the
study intersection.
4. Implications:
a) Budget:
There is not a budget request for this project currently.
b) Organizational Impact:
No implications are anticipated at this time.
c) Policy:
N/A
d) Environment:
No issues are anticipated at this time.
e) Council Priority and Strategic Plan Alignment:
1. Healthy Community: Prioritizing public safety.
2. Maximize the Built Environment: The built environment, including public and gathering
spaces, contributes to the health and well-being of our citizens.
f) Citizen Engagement
Public feedback and complaints from the HASTeBC and safe routes to school planning project
on file were sent to ISL to be incorporated in the report.
g) Implementation
5. Attachments:
1. Sea to Sky Highway at Cleveland Avenue Traffic Operational and Safety Review.pdf
6. Alternatives to Staff Recommendation:
THAT Council not accept the staff recommendation and provide further direction.
7. Staff Review
Prepared By:
Matt Simmons, Capital Projects Manager
Reviewed By:
Chris Wyckham P. Eng., Director of Engineering
Gary Buxton, General Manager of Community Planning and Infrastructure
Robin Arthurs, General Manager of Corporate Servies
CAO Recommendation:
That the recommendation of the Engineering Department be approved.
L. Glenday, CAO
RTC Highway 99 – Cleveland Intersection Report

Sea to Sky Highway at Cleveland Avenue
Traffic Operational and Safety Review
District of Squamish
Insurance Corporation of British Columbia
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ............................................................................................................. 1
1.0 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Background 1
1.2 Study Objectives and Methodology 1
1.3 Stakeholder Concern and Literature Review 2
1.4 Study Intersection 3
2.0 Traffic Characteristic ................................................................................................ 7
2.1 Traffic Volume Data 7
2.2 Intersection Operation 9
3.0 Collision Characteristic ...........................................................................................11
3.1 Claim/Collision Data 11
3.2 Collision Severity and Rate 11
3.3 Temporal Distribution 12
3.4 Direction of Collision 13
3.5 Collision Type and Contributing Factors 14
3.6 Collision Pattern 14
4.0 Identified Traffic Operational and Safety Issue ........................................................16
4.1 In-Service Road Safety Review 16
4.2 Identified Study Intersection Issue 16
5.0 Pedestrian/Bicycle Characteristic ............................................................................20
5.1 Pedestrian/Bicycle Crossing Pattern 20
5.2 Pedestrian-/Cyclist-Related Collision 21
6.0 Recommended Countermeasure ............................................................................22
6.1 Near-Term Recommended Countermeasure 23
6.2 Long-Term Countermeasures 25
7.0 Economic Evaluation ..............................................................................................26
7.1 Collision Modification Factor 26
7.2 Annual Collision Cost Saving 26
7.3 Cost Estimates 26
7.4 Economic Evaluation 27
APPENDICES
Appendix A TAC Field Observation Report
Appendix B Class D Cost Estimation
Appendix C Synchro Output
islengineering.com August, 2016

|
Project Number: 31587
TABLES
Table ES.1: Near- and Long-Terms Recommended Countermeasures ........................................ ES 3
Table ES.2: Economic Evaluation Summary ................................................................................. ES 5
Table 1.1: Existing Study Intersection Inventory .................................................................................. 4
Table 1.1: Existing Study Intersection Inventory (Continued) .............................................................. 5
Table 2.1: LOS Definition for a Signalized Intersection in HCM (Synchro/SimTraffic) ........................ 9
Table 2.2: Summary of 2016 (August) Peak Hour LOS (Sidra) ........................................................... 9
Table 3.1: Summary of ICBC Claims and MoTI CIS Data ................................................................. 11
Table 4.1: Identified Traffic Operational and Safety Issues ............................................................... 16
Table 4.1: Identified Traffic Operational and Safety Issues (Continued) ........................................... 17
Table 4.1: Identified Traffic Operational and Safety Issues (Continued) ........................................... 18
Table 4.1: Identified Traffic Operational and Safety Issues at Study Intersection (Continued) ......... 19
Table 5.1: Pedestrian/Bicycle Pattern ................................................................................................ 20
Table 5.1: Pedestrian/Bicycle Pattern (Continued) ............................................................................ 21
Table 6.1: Near-Term Recommended Countermeasures .................................................................. 23
Table 6.2: Long-Term Recommended Countermeasures ................................................................. 25
Table 7.1: CMF for Recommended Countermeasures ...................................................................... 27
Table 7.2: Economic Evaluation Summary ........................................................................................ 28
FIGURES
Figure ES.1: Study Intersection ..................................................................................................... ES 1
Figure ES.2: Near- and Long-Term Recommended Countermeasures ........................................ ES 4
Figure 1.1: Existing Roadway Signage and Traffic Signal Arrangement of the Study Intersection ..... 6
Figure 2.1: Hourly Distribution of 2016 Latest Peak Period Traffic Volumes ...................................... 7
Figure 2.2: 2016 August Estimated Peak Hour Traffic Volumes of the Study Intersection ................. 8
Figure 2.3: 2016 Forecasted Peak Hour LOS (Synchro/SimTraffic) ................................................. 10
Figure 3.1: Distributions of Collisions by Severity ............................................................................. 11
Figure 3.2: Temporal Distributions of Collisions by Year (2011 to 2015) .......................................... 12
Figure 3.3: Temporal Distributions of Collisions by Month (2011 to 2015) ........................................ 12
Figure 3.4: Temporal Distributions of Collisions by Day (2011 to 2015) ........................................... 13
Figure 3.5: Temporal Distributions of Collisions by Hour (2011 to 2015) .......................................... 13
Figure 3.6: Distributions of Collisions by Direction (2011 to 2015) .................................................... 13
Figure 3.7: Proportions of Collision Type and Contributing Factor (2011 to 2015) ........................... 14
Figure 3.8: Collision Diagram of the Study Intersection (2011 to 2015) ............................................ 15
Figure 6.1: Near- and Long-Term Recommended Countermeasures ............................................... 22
Figure 6.2: “Aussie” Design ............................................................................................................... 24
Figure 6.3: Nearby Accesses ............................................................................................................. 24

|
Executive Summary
The District of Squamish (the District) identified the Highway 99 (Sea to Sky Highway) and Cleveland
Avenue / Loggers Lane intersection as the top crash site and expressed concerns regarding the traffic
operational and safety issues. According to the latest Online Crash Map released by the Insurance
Corporation of British Columbia (ICBC), the study intersection almost had three times more number of
crashes than the second highest crash site in Squamish.
To improve traffic operations and road safety for all modes of travel (passenger vehicles, commercial
trucks, transit/school buses, walking, and cycling) at the Highway 99 and Cleveland Avenue / Loggers
Lane intersection (study intersection), the District along with ICBC and the Ministry of Transportation
and Infrastructure (MoTI) retained ISL Engineering and Land Services Ltd. (ISL) to undertake this
Traffic Operational and Safety Review (TOSR) for the study intersection. The study objectives are to
review the traffic conditions, evaluate collision history, identify any existing and potential issues, and
develop possible near-term and long-term countermeasures for the study intersection.
Latest public concerns of the study intersection were collected and referenced from general
comments, as provided by MoTI and the District during the Start-Up Meeting. District staff also
provided previous plans and studies related to the study intersection for review, while the suggested
improvement options and recommendations for all modes of travel at the study intersection have been
taken into consideration in this TOSR study.
As shown in Figure ES.1, Highway 99 has two through lanes with exclusive left-turn(s) (dual
northbound and single southbound) and right-turn lanes in each direction at the study intersection.
Cleveland Avenue is classified as an arterial road with dual left-turn and one through/right-turn shared
lanes at the approach with Highway 99, providing direct access to/from Downtown Squamish. Loggers
Lane is also identified as an arterial road, but it is currently functioning as a collector road. All right-turn
movements have channelized islands, but no dedicated acceleration lanes.
Figure ES.1: Study Intersection

| ES 1
According to the hourly traffic distributions of weekday (AM and PM) and weekend (Saturday and
Sunday), the intersection traffic patterns were similar, where PM peak volumes were relatively high
compared to AM peak volumes. Therefore, peak periods were found to be typically closer to late
afternoon or early evening during weekday and weekend. As identified in the literature review, it was
understood that August was the peak traffic month, exhibiting the highest average daily traffic – about
25% higher than the annual average daily traffic (AADT) volumes. Therefore, reflecting the worst traffic
conditions in a year, the peak traffic volumes were multiplied by 125% to estimate August volumes. In
addition to highway through traffic, traffic volumes were relatively high for the eastbound left-turn (dual
lanes), eastbound right-turn (yield-and-merge), northbound left-turn (dual lanes), and southbound
right-turn (exclusive lane and yield-and-merge). The Synchro results indicated that the overall study
intersection operates at Level of Service (LOS) D or better during all peak hours. Meanwhile, critical
turning movements (currently operating at LOS E) included eastbound/westbound approaches and
northbound/southbound left-turn/through movements. The Sidra results also indicated the provision of
roundabout (two-lane) will provide a poor capacity performance at the study intersection.
Based on the latest five-year ICBC claim data and MoTI crash data of the study intersection from 2011
to 2015, a total of 229 collisions were reviewed at the study intersection. In this five-year period, 98
collisions (43% of total collisions) were reported as casualty (fatality or injury) and 131 collisions (57%)
as property damage only. There were no fatal collisions reported between 2011 and 2015. The study
intersection averaged 45.8 collisions per year, while there were 60 collisions occurred in 2014. Traffic
volume used to determine the collision rate was based on the estimated AADT (37,500 vehicles per
day). The collision rate in terms of traffic volume was determined as 3.35 collisions per million entering
vehicles. Compared to the ICBC benchmarks for signalized four-leg intersection in smaller cities, the
collision parameters were higher than the average benchmark for collision frequency, collision rate,
and rear-end collision proportion.
Based on the collision patterns between 2011 and 2015, it was noted that:
 the majority (83%) of total collisions were associated with rear-end (152 out of 183 total
identified collisions); 80% of rear-end collisions were occurred as right-turn and 86% of right-
turn rear-end collisions were associated with eastbound movement; about 52% of eastbound
right-turn rear-end collisions was resulted as casualty;
 along Highway 99, rear-end collision was also the predominant type – 13 northbound and 7
southbound collisions; and,
 for eastbound and northbound dual left-turn movements, 8 collisions were found during and
immediately after the movement, all of which were related to improper movements such as
cutting in, turning too wide, and driving through instead of turning.
During the study, two ISL Road Safety Engineers conducted detailed in-service road safety reviews,
which included drive-through (driver’s perspective) and walkabout (pedestrian’s perspective) of the
study intersection. The field reviews were undertaken during the weekday PM peak period to observe
the relatively high turning movements as well as pedestrian/bicycle movements.
Based on the traffic operational analyses, collision data assessments, in-service road safety reviews,
as well as pedestrian/bicycle characteristic understanding, several operational and safety issues were
identified and categorized as geometric, roadside, operational, vulnerable users, and others.
Recommended countermeasures, near-term (within five years) and long-term (beyond five years),
were also developed to handle each identified issues (Table ES.1). Near- and long-term
recommended countermeasures were also illustrated in Figure ES.2.

| ES 2
Recommended countermeasures that were recently completed or to be completed prior to the Final
Report submission by the District or MoTI are also included in Table ES.1.
Table ES.1: Near- and Long-Terms Recommended Countermeasures
Economic Near-/Long-
Identified Issue Recommended Countermeasure
Evaluation Term
Geometric
Difficult to perform shoulder check Modify the eastbound and southbound
Yes Near-Term
for right-turn drivers channelized right-turn configurations
Difficult to judge stopping location Paint yield (edge) line pavement markings at all
No Near-term
for yield channelized right-turns [MoTI]
Wide right-turn channelized Repaint pavement markings around all
No Near-term
approaches channelized right-turn islands [MoTI]
High collision risk for eastbound Construct eastbound-southbound right-turn
Yes Long-Term
right-turn merge to highway traffic acceleration lane
Sharp horizontal alignment at east
Realign the geometry of the east leg No Long-Term
leg
Roadside
Limited visibility of traffic signal Enlarge all secondary and tertiary traffic signal
Yes Near-Term
heads head sizes
Improper signage location for right-
Relocate signage at channelized right-turns No Near-Term
turn drivers
Remove/relocate the tree at the southwest
Obstructed visibilities at No Near-Term
corner [District]
channelized right-turns
Trim foliage at northwest corner [District] No Near-Term
Limited visibility of advance warning Shift the poles to centre the northbound and
No Long-Term
signs southbound overhead advance warning flashers
Operational
Poor capacity performance at Construct dual eastbound right-turn with signal
Yes Near-Term
eastbound right-turn operations
Poor capacity performance and
Optimize traffic signal timing plan [MoTI] Yes Near-Term
long traffic queues
Unexpected weaving/blocking traffic Install a “Do Not Block Intersection” sign at the
Yes Near-Term
to highway commercial access
Missing northbound dual left-turn Paint northbound left-turn guiding line marking
No Near-Term
guidance [MoTI]
Illegal u-turn movement at east Coordinate with RCMP to increase u-turn
No Near-Term
approach enforcement at the east leg
Coordinate with RCMP to increase speed
High vehicular speed enforcements along the highway [District] No Near-Term
Review speed zone along the highway [MoTI]
Poor capacity performance and Add additional north-south lanes along the
No Long-Term
long traffic queues highway
Vulnerable Users
Install “Turning Vehicles Yield To Bicycles And
Yes Near-Term
Unexpected pedestrian/bicycle Pedestrians” signs at all channelized right-turns
crossing Add pedestrian crosswalk signs on west
Yes Near-Term
(eastbound and southbound right-turn) corners
Lack of bicycle facilities at/around Provide wayfinding signage around the study
No Near-Term
study intersection intersection
Missing pedestrian/bicycle Implement countdown timers with audio to all
No Near-Term
countdown timers pedestrian signals [MoTI]
Provide off-street bike lane along the southwest
On-street highway bike lanes No Long-Term
side of the highway
Lack of bicycle facilities at/around Improve bike facility at and around the study
No Long-Term

| ES 3
Figure ES.2: Near- and Long-Term Recommended Countermeasures

| ES 4
Table ES.2 shows the economic evaluation results of the selected recommended countermeasures
(near- and long- terms) for the study intersection. It is considered that some minor recommended
countermeasures would be part of the District/MoTI maintenance program; therefore, economic
evaluations are not considered for these improvements. It is expected that if recommended
countermeasure will be proceeded for the existing eastbound channelized right-turn lane, the
implementation would either be modifying the channelized island configuration (OPTION A) or
providing dual right-turn lane with signal operations (OPTION B).
Some recommended countermeasures are provided at a conceptual level and a detailed geometric
design will be required for the implementations. For example, it is understood that the provision of
eastbound right-turn acceleration lane countermeasure will require land acquisitions in the nearby area
and the land cost could not be included in cost estimate at this stage.
Using ICBC funding criteria, the estimated cost of the near-term recommended countermeasures only
(excluding eastbound right-turn acceleration lane) is $132,600 (OPTION A) or $200,100 (OPTION B)
of which ICBC may contribute $80,000 (OPTION A) or $147,500 (OPTION B), with a total annual
collision cost savings of $208,660 (OPTION A) or $267,470 (OPTION B). If the District was to
undertake a package of improvements, discussions with ICBC should occur to determine the resulting
Road Improvement Program contribution. With continued cooperation between the District and ICBC,
the study identifies opportunities to make the intersection safer for all road users.
Table ES.2: Economic Evaluation Summary
Annual Collision Potential ICBC Two-/Five-

Recommended Countermeasure Cost Estimate
Cost Saving Contribution Year IRR
Near-Term
Modify the eastbound channelized right-turn
$ 58,810.00 $ 36,500.00 $ 36,500.00 127%
configuration (OPTION A)
Modify the southbound channelized right-turn
$ 7,470.00 $ 60,900.00 $ 8,300.00 50%
configuration
Enlarge all secondary and tertiary traffic signal
$ 31,730.00 $ 23,400.00 $ 23,400.00 99%
head sizes as well as add yellow blackboards
Construct dual eastbound right-turn with signal
$ 117,620.00 $ 104,000.00 $ 104,000.00 82%
operation (OPTION B)
Optimize traffic signal timing plan $ 21,150.00 $ 6,500.00 $ 6,500.00 301%
Install a “Do Not Block Intersection” sign at the
$ 2,790.00 $ 700.00 $ 700.00 376%
commercial access
$ 69,330.00 $ 2,600.00 $ 2,600.00 2656%
Pedestrians” signs at channelized right-turns
Add pedestrian crosswalk signs on west corners $ 17,380.00 $ 2,000.00 $ 2,000.00 853%
Total
Total - with OPTION A $ 208,660.00 $ 132,600.00 $ 80,000.00 -
Total - with OPTION B $ 267,470.00 $ 200,100.00 $ 147,500.00 -

Long-Term
Construct eastbound-southbound right-turn
$ 61,690.00 $ 498,300.00 $ 107,100.00 50%
acceleration lane

| ES 5
THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.

| ES 6
1.0
Introduction
1.1 Background
As one of the major intersections connecting to the Sea to Sky Highway (Highway 99) within the
District of Squamish boundary, the signalized intersection at Highway 99 and Cleveland Avenue /
Loggers Lane provides significant volumes in vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle traffic. In addition to
being the main route between Downtown Squamish and Highway 99 (to/from Vancouver and
Whistler), Cleveland Avenue is a commercial transport route, BC Transit route, emergency response
route, as well as multi-modal use route to nearby retail/services/institutional areas, west of Highway
99. Meanwhile, Loggers Lane is a multi-modal use route to nearby recreational/lodging areas, east of
Highway 99.
The District of Squamish (the District) identified the Highway 99 and Cleveland Avenue / Loggers Lane
intersection (study intersection) as the top crash site and expressed concerns regarding the traffic
operational and safety issues. According to the latest Online Crash Map (2014) released by the
Insurance Corporation of British Columbia (ICBC), the study intersection almost had three times more
number of crashes than the second highest crash site in Squamish.
To improve traffic operations and road safety for all modes of travel (passenger vehicles, commercial
trucks, transit/school buses, walking, and cycling) at the study intersection, the District along with
ICBC and the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure (MoTI) retained ISL Engineering and Land
Services Ltd. (ISL) to undertake this Traffic Operational and Safety Review (TOSR) for the study
intersection.
1.2 Study Objectives and Methodology

The study objectives are to review the traffic conditions, evaluate collision history, identify any existing
and potential operational and safety issues, and develop possible near-term and long-term
countermeasures for the study intersection. As discussed with the District, ICBC, as well as MoTI
during the Start-Up Meeting, the project methodology was established as follows:
 performed data collection (traffic/collision data) and literature review (plan/study documents)
 collect stakeholder concerns on operational and safety matters (through the District and MoTI)
 undertook in-service road safety review (physical and operational checklists)
 conducted collision analysis (ICBC claims and MoTI collisions) for the period of 2011 to 2015
 conducted capacity analysis (Synchro/SimTraffic and Sidra) for the existing traffic condition
 focused on pedestrian and bicycle safety review
 completed identification and analysis of traffic operational and safety issues
 developed near- and long-term countermeasures
 submitted progress report to summarize all study findings before finalizing recommendations
 arranged Progress Meeting (teleconference) with the District, ICBC, and MoTI staff
 completed economic evaluation (Class D cost estimates)
 arranged Briefing Meeting with the District, ICBC, and MoTI staff
ISL summarized all study findings, including assumptions and analyses, and recommendations to this
TOSR study.

| Page 1
1.3 Stakeholder Concern and Literature Review

Latest public concerns to the study intersection were collected and referenced from the following
general comments as provided by the District and MoTI during the Start-Up Meeting:
The District:
 long delays and illegal u-turn movements at the westbound approach;
 short left-turn time with long queue for the eastbound movements; and,
 lack of wayfinding for existing cycling route (underpass).
MoTI:
 reports of delays for eastbound left turn movements; and,
 highest incident rate is the right turn movement.
District staff provided previous plans and studies related to the study intersection for review, while the
suggested improvement options and recommendations for all modes of travel at the study intersection
have been taken into consideration in this TOSR study.
1.3.1 Downtown Squamish 2031 Transportation Plan (2009)
Study Findings:
 forecasted significant impacts on the future transportation network as the majority of travel
demand will be between the various neighbourhoods of Squamish and Highway 99
 concluded summer Friday afternoon peak hour will continue to be the dominant hour of the
week and time of year for Squamish
 determined 52% of the northbound traffic at Shannon Falls and 41% of the southbound traffic
at Alice Lake had a destination within Downtown Squamish during the design hour
 observed the use of either a car or truck to enter and exit Downtown Squamish is
overwhelmingly the preferred transport for the majority – about 90% to 93% overall
Study Recommendations:
 adopt transport mode targets by increasing transit trips from 1.5% to 10%, bicycle trips from
1.6% to 5%, and walk trips from 3.4% to 7% entering and exiting Downtown Squamish
1.3.2 2031 District Wide Multi-Modal Transportation Study (2011)
Study Findings:
 expected most intersections in Squamish to operate at acceptable levels, except for the Friday
and Sunday PM peak periods in August and February
 understood significant latent demand for commuting options as over 30% of the Squamish
workforce locating outside of the District and approximately 90% of trips made by vehicles
 found Highway 99 experienced heavy afternoon traffic during weekday afternoons, featuring
turning movements on and off the highway with volumes up to and exceeding 400 vehicles
 identified the Highway 99 and Cleveland Avenue / Loggers Lane intersection as the location
with the highest collision frequency within Squamish since 1996

| Page 2
Study Recommendations:
 complete a downtown entrance study in the near term to reconcile issues such as community
gateway, emergency access, and multi-modal network needs
 improve local transit service to increase level of service and annual ridership as well as meet
the community’s needs
 upgrade and expand pedestrian infrastructure along with existing policies and practices to
encourage pedestrian improvements on established road networks
 upgrade and expand cycling infrastructure to solve limited route coverage and lack of
continuity that discourage cycling as a viable transportation alternative
 ensure safe routes to school to be a primary consideration when establishing pedestrian and
cycling priorities
Study Recommendations for Highway 99 Intersections (General):

 Widen existing roads
 Collect wildlife travel patterns
 Modify channelized right-turns
 Improve delineation and signing of right-turn acceleration lanes
 Increase speed enforcement
 Relocate advance warning flashers and review timing
 Upgrade pavement markings
 Optimize signal timing plans
 Provide open-graded pavement treatment
1.4 Study Intersection

Highway 99 is a southeast-northwest roadway at the study intersection, while Cleveland Avenue and
Loggers Lane are the side streets. For consistency of the study intersection with skewed orientations,
Highway 99 approaches were assumed as northbound and southbound, while Cleveland Avenue and
Loggers Lane running east and west. Therefore, on Highway 99, southbound carries traffic heading to
Vancouver, while northbound carries traffic heading to Whistler.
Highway 99 has two through lanes with exclusive left-turn (s) (dual northbound and single southbound)
and right-turn lanes in each direction. Cleveland Avenue is classified as an arterial road with dual left-
turn and one through/right-turn shared lanes at approach with Highway 99, providing direct access
to/from Downtown Squamish. Loggers Lane is also identified as an arterial road, but it is currently
functioning as a collector road. All right-turn movements have channelized islands, but no dedicated
acceleration lanes. River Road and commercial accesses (west of the highway) are located in close
proximity to the study intersection; however, they were not included in this TOSR study.
The study intersection directly serves Squamish Station (retail/services areas at the southwest
quadrant), Squamish Adventure Centre (northeast), Squamish Adventure Inn & Hostel and
retail/services area (southeast), while indirectly serves local schools (west) and District’s parks (east).
Both Highway 99 and Cleveland Avenue are commercial truck route and emergency response route.
BC Transit service (Route 3: Valleycliffe) travels through the study intersection with eastbound right-
turn and northbound left-turn bus movements, while a closest bus stop located on the far side of
Cleveland Avenue (westbound). Sidewalks are provided at all corners of the study intersection, while
grassed / treed boulevards are provided on the west side of Highway 99. Roadside barriers and
fences are provided, south of the study intersection. Marked on-street bike lanes are provided along
Highway 99 and a multi-modal use (walking and cycling) underpass is located at about 300 metres
south of the study intersection.

| Page 3
Based on the District Plan and Study (as indicated in Section 1.3), the MoTI Sea to Sky Highway
Improvement Project As-Built Drawing (2009), as well as recent site visit, the existing study
intersection inventory of road classification information, intersection approach photographs, and traffic
signal head configurations were summarized and could be found in Table 1.1. Similarly, the existing
roadway signage and traffic signal arrangement of the study intersection are shown in Figure 1.1. The
observations indicated that 300-millimetre diameter lenses are provided for primary signal heads;
however, smaller size (200-millimetre diameter) are generally used for secondary and tertiary signal
heads.
Table 1.1: Existing Study Intersection Inventory
Road Classification Information
Highway 99 (north and south legs):

 Truck route
 Sidewalk (north/south legs) with roadside barriers (south leg) and fences (south leg)
 Marked on-street bike lanes
 Posted speed limit of 70 kilometres per hour
Cleveland Avenue (west leg):
 Arterial and truck route
 Sidewalk on both sides
 Proposed cycle route
 Bus stop on westbound
Loggers Lane (east leg):
 Classified as arterial and functioning as collector
 Existing commuter cycle route with trails
Study Intersection:
 Gateway to Downtown Squamish,
 Gateway to commercial, tourist, institutional, and services areas
 Gateway to potential central transportation hub and park-and-ride lot
 Entrance to existing multi-use trails (northeast quadrant) – potential extension further south
from Loggers Lane to existing grade seperated (underpass) crossing

| Page 4
Table 1.1: Existing Study Intersection Inventory (Continued)
Traffic Signal Head Arrangement

Signal Head Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
300/300/300 (YB) 300/300/300/300 (YB) 300/300/300 (YB) 300/300/300 (YB)
Primary
300/300/300 (YB) 300/300/300 (YB) 300/300/300 (YB) 300/300/300 (YB)
200/200/200/300 200/200/300 200/200/300
Secondary 200/200/300
300/300/300 (YB) * 200/200/200 * 200/200/200 *
200/200/200 200/200/200
Tertiary 200/200/200 200/200/200
200/200/200 (YB) 200/200/200 (YB)
Note: (YB) - Yellow Blackboard and * - Near-Side Traffic Signal Head Location
###/###/###/### - Diameter of Red/Yellow/Green/Green Left-Turn Arrow Lens
Intersection Approach Photograph
Highway 99 – Northbound Approach Highway 99 – Southbound Approach
Cleveland Avenue – Eastbound Approach Loggers Lane – Westbound Approach

| Page 5
Figure 1.1: Existing Roadway Signage and Traffic Signal Arrangement of the Study Intersection

| Page 6
2.0
Traffic Characteristic
2.1 Traffic Volume Data

Latest traffic volume data for the study intersection in 2016 were collected and reviewed from the
following turning movement counts as provided by MoTI and the District:
 MoTI Intersection Traffic Counts – from Feburary 11th to 23rd and from May 22nd to 25th
 District Eastbound Right-Turn Traffic Counts – from May 20th to 26th
Existing traffic volumes were identified, extracted, and averaged based on the MoTI intersection traffic
counts during February. It was found that the eastbound right-turn volumes were not included in the
February data; therefore, eastbound right-turn volumes for the study intersection were estimated
based on proportations of the MoTI intersection traffic counts (loop) betweeen February and May. The
resultant volumes were also verified based on the District eastbound right-turn traffic counts (tube
count) in hourly intervals. Based on the MoTI Annual Vehicle Count Summary (2016) of Highway 99,
heavy vehicle percentage in the recent five-year period was averaged to be about 20% along Highway
99 and the other movements were assumed to have between 2% and 5% heavy vehicle percentages
in peak hours.
According to the hourly traffic distributions of weekday (AM and PM) and weekend (Saturday and
Sunday) (Figure 2.1) of the study intersection, the entering traffic patterns were similar, where PM
peak volumes were relatively high compared to AM peak volumes. Therefore, based on the typical
traffic conditions in Squamish, peak periods were found to be typically closer to the late afternoon or
early evening during weekday and weekend.
Figure 2.1: Hourly Distribution of 2016 Latest Peak Period Traffic Volumes
As identified in the literature review, it was understood that August was the peak traffic month,
exhibiting the highest average daily traffic. Based on the District Study as indicated in Section 1.3, the
August traffic volumes were about 25% higher than the annual average daily traffic (AADT) volumes.
Therefore, to reflect high traffic conditions in a year, the February/May traffic volumes were multiplied
by 125%. The 2016 turning movement counts for four peak periods (weekday AM, weekday PM,
Saturday, and Sunday) are estimated and shown in Figure 2.2.

| Page 7
Figure 2.2: 2016 August Estimated Peak Hour Traffic Volumes of the Study Intersection

| Page 8
Based on Figure 2.2, in addition to highway through traffic, traffic volumes were relatively high for the
following movements:
 Eastbound left-turn (dual lanes)

 Eastbound right-turn (yield-and-merge)
 Northbound left-turn (dual lanes)
 Southbound right-turn (exclusive lane and yield-and-merge)
2.2 Intersection Operation

2.2.1 Synchro/SimTraffic
Traffic operational performance for the study intersection was analyzed using Synchro/SimTraffic
version 9 software, which is based on the standard methods of the latest Highway Capacity Manual
(2010) (HCM). In HCM, measures of effectiveness were developed including control delay (in second
per vehicle), level of service (LOS), volume-to-capacity ratio (v/c ratio), and 95th percentile queue (in
metre). LOS is defined based on the average control delay. LOS definitions for a signalized
intersection in HCM can be found in Table 2.1. In traffic operation analysis, LOS D or better is
generally considered as the acceptable LOS. Synchro outputs can be found in Appendix C.
Table 2.1: LOS Definition for a Signalized Intersection in HCM (Synchro/SimTraffic)
Traffic Control LOS A B C D E F

Signalized Delay 0-10 10-20 20-35 35-55 55-80 >80
Note: Delay - in seconds per vehicle
Using the MoTI Signal Timing Sheet (2012), estimated traffic volumes, and existing geometrics
(referenced to the MoTI Drawings), the resultant operation performances are illustrated in Figure 2.3.
The Synchro results indicated that the overall study intersection operates at LOS D or better during all
peak hours; however, critical turning movements (currently operating at LOS E) could be found at
eastbound/westbound approaches and northbound/southbound left-turn/through movements.
2.2.2 Sidra
To confirm if the study intersection is a potential candidate for a modern two-lane roundabout as an
alternative traffic control, the roundabout option was assessed using Sidra 6.1 software. Using the
double-lane roundabout parameters, the Sidra results (Table 2.2) indicated that the overall study
intersection will operate at LOS F during all peak period with average delay of 240.6 seconds per
vehicle, v/c ratio of 1.699, and queue of 1,137.4 metres (about 137 vehicles) in Saturday peak hour.
As a result, poor capacity performance is expected to consider for a roundabout operation.
Table 2.2: Summary of 2016 (August) Peak Hour LOS (Sidra)
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound

Peak Hour Overall
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Weekday AM C C C C C B F F F E E E F
Weekday PM F F E C C B F F F F F F F
Saturday F F F C C B F F F F F F F
Sunday F F F C C B F F F F F F F
Note: L - Left, T - Through, and R - Right

| Page 9
Figure 2.3: 2016 Forecasted Peak Hour LOS (Synchro/SimTraffic)

| Page 10
3.0
Collision Characteristic
3.1 Claim/Collision Data
Latest five-year ICBC claims data and MoTI Collision Information System (CIS) data of the study
intersection, from January 1st, 2011 to December 31st, 2015, was collected, filtered, and assessed. As
shown in Table 3.1, 22 irrelevant claims/collisions (out of 251 total claims/collisions) were removed,
involving collisions out of study corridor and duplicated among the data set – resulting in a total of 229
collisions for review at the study intersection.
Table 3.1: Summary of ICBC Claims and MoTI CIS Data
Data Type ICBC Claims MOTI CIS Total

Total 223 28 251
Irrelevant
Out of Study Area 3 - 3
Duplicated 2 17 19
Relevant
Remaining 218 11 229
3.2 Collision Severity and Rate

In this recent five-year period, out of 229 total collisions, 98
collisions (43% of total collisions) were reported as casualty
(fatality or injury) and 131 collisions (57%) as property damage
only (PDO), as illustrated in Figure 3.1, yielding a collision
severity index of 4.85. There were no fatal collisions reported
between 2011 and 2015. Casualty collisions represented about
56% of all collisions in 2013, which was higher than the five-year
average.
The study intersection averaged 45.8 collisions per year. Traffic

volume used to determine the collision rate was based on the
estimated AADT (37,500 vehicles per day). The collision rate in
terms of traffic volume was determined as 3.35 collisions per Figure 3.1: Distributions
million entering vehicles. of Collisions by Severity
As identified in the literature review, the collision frequency at the study intersection has continued to
slightly increase and remained the highest in Squamish since 1996 (before and after the Sea to Sky
Highway Improvement Project). Based on the summary of ICBC Claims Data (2006-2010) as provided
by the MoTI, it was found that the total number and proportion of casualty collisions in the previous
five-year period were similar. Based on the MoTI Provincial Average Collision Rates, Number of
Collisions and Collision Severity by Service Class and Traffic Volume Range (2015), it was understood
that the collision rate at the study intersection (3.35) is generally higher compared to the average
collisions rates, usually less than 1.00 for signalized intersections.

| Page 11
Compared to the ICBC Claims Data Benchmarks for Road Safety Engineers (2007) for signalized four-
legged intersection in smaller cities, the following collision parameters were higher than the average
benchmark for:
 Collision frequency (45.8) –compared to about 7.6 collisions per year

 Collision rate (3.35) – compared to about 1.82 collisions per million entering vehicles
 Rear-end collision proportion (83%) – compared to 41.93%
3.3 Temporal Distribution

The temporal patterns of five-year collisions at the study intersection were identified as follows:
 2014 had the highest number of collisions – 60 collisions, followed by 2015 – 55 collisions. As
shown in Figure 3.2, the annual number of collisions in the recent five-year period ranged
from 36 to 60. The PDO collisions were generally higher than casualty collisions except 2013.
 Summer season (June, July, and August) had the highest number of collisions – 67 collisions
(29%) in total, followed by winter season (December, January, and February) – 60 collisions
(26%). As shown in Figure 3.3, collision frequency is generally higher during the summer and
winter seasons, which might be due to the increase in traffic volumes at high tourist and
recreational seasons as well as poor road surface conditions such as wet, icy, and snowy.
 Friday had the highest number of collisions – 45 collisions (20%), followed by Saturday – 36
collisions (16%). As shown in Figure 3.4, a higher number of collisions occurred closer to the
weekend, which might be due to an increase in traffic volumes during the weekends.
 The hour of 1400 to 1500 hours had the highest number of collisions – 31 collisions (14%),
followed by 1700 to 1800 hours – 26 collisions (11%), which might be due to the potential high
traffic volume in the afternoon peak periods (rush hour). As shown in Figure 3.5, a total of 121
collisions (53%) were reported between 1300 to 1800 hours. According to the latest traffic
volume data as well as the District Study (indicated in Section 1.3), the hourly distribution of
reported collisions corresponded with the hourly distribution of traffic volumes.
Figure 3.2: Temporal Distributions of Collisions by Year (2011 to 2015)
Figure 3.3: Temporal Distributions of Collisions by Month (2011 to 2015)

| Page 12
Figure 3.4: Temporal Distributions of Collisions by Day (2011 to 2015)
Figure 3.5: Temporal Distributions of Collisions by Hour (2011 to 2015)
3.4 Direction of Collision

In addition to temporal distribution of collisions, collisions by direction were also identified, as shown in
Figure 3.6. Eastbound direction (Cleveland Avenue) experienced the highest number of collisions –
118 collisions (63%) in total, followed by southbound direction (Highway 99) – 28 collisions (15%). The
majority of collisions involved with vehicles exiting Downtown Squamish through Cleveland Avenue.
Figure 3.6: Distributions of Collisions by Direction (2011 to 2015)

| Page 13
3.5 Collision Type and Contributing Factors

The collision types and contributing factors of five-year collisions at the study intersection are both
shown in Figure 3.7 and identified as follows:
 Rear-end right-turn was the predominant collision type – 66%, followed by rear-end – 17%,
summing up to a total of 83% related to rear-end. A high number of right-turn rear-end
collisions may mainly be related to high vehicle speed and stop-go condition traffic volume. As
mentioned, the percentage of rear-end collisions at the study intersections were higher than
the average ICBC benchmark for signalized four-leg intersection in smaller cities.
 “Following Too Closely” was the most dominant contributing factor recorded – 72%, which is
heavily associated with rear-end collisions, particularly right-turn rear-end due to difficulty in
shoulder checking as well as assuming the vehicle ahead has merged at the channelized
right-turn. “Improper Movement” was the second highest number reported factor – 11%, which
primarily involved sideswipe left/right collisions.
 One collision involving a cyclist was reported and was discussed in the later section.
Figure 3.7: Proportions of Collision Type and Contributing Factor (2011 to 2015)
3.6 Collision Pattern

Review of the descriptions of ICBC claim data, the collision diagram with identified location/type was
undertaken as shown in Figure 3.8. The following observations of the collisions shown were noted:
 the majority (83%) of total collisions were associated with rear-end (152 out of 183 total
identified collisions); 80% of rear-end collisions were occurred as right-turn and 86% of right-
turn rear-end collisions were associated with eastbound movement; about 52% of eastbound
right-turn rear-end collisions was resulted as casualty;
 Along Highway 99, rear-end collision was also the predominant type – 13 northbound and 7
southbound collisions
 For eastbound and northbound dual left-turn movements, 8 collisions were found during and
immediately after the movement, all of which were related to improper movements such as
cutting in, turning too wide, and driving through instead of turning.

| Page 14
Figure 3.8: Collision Diagram of the Study Intersection (2011 to 2015)

| Page 15
4.0
Identified Traffic Operational and Safety Issue
4.1 In-Service Road Safety Review

On Monday, May 2nd, 2016, two ISL Road Safety Engineers conducted detailed in-service road safety
reviews, which included drive-through (driver’s perspective) and walkabout (pedestrian’s perspective)
of the study intersection. The field reviews were undertaken during the weekday PM peak period (rush
hour) to observe the relatively high turning movements as well as pedestrian/bicycle movements. The
Transportation Association of Canada (TAC) Field Observation Reports for the study intersection were
completed, summarized, and included as Appendix A. The field reports include physical and
operational checklists, covering road safety issues that are both related to transportation infrastructure
and traffic operation. Photographs, videos, and notes of the observed/identified issues were also
taken.
4.2 Identified Study Intersection Issue

Based on the traffic operational analyses, collision data assessments, as well as in-service road safety
reviews, traffic operational and safety issues along with the associating photographs are identified and
shown in Table 4.1.
Table 4.1: Identified Traffic Operational and Safety Issues
Difficult to Perform Shoulder Check for Right-Turn

Drivers
Difficult for channelized right-turn drivers to check

over their shoulders to judge gaps with incoming
traffic for merge, particularly for eastbound and
southbound drivers and/or seniors, may generate
right-turn rear-end, sideswipe, and pedestrian-/cyclist-
related collision risk.
Cleveland Avenue – Eastbound Right-Turn
Difficult to Judge Stopping Location for Yield
Difficulty for drivers to judge the stopping location at

channelized right-turns for merge as well as for
following drivers to anticipate vehicle ahead stopping
area may generate right-turn rear-end, off-road, and
pedestrian-/cyclist-related collision risk.
Cleveland Avenue – Southbound Right-Turn

| Page 16
Table 4.1: Identified Traffic Operational and Safety Issues (Continued)
Wide Right-Turn Channelized Approaches
Wide lane widths along with faded pavement

markings at channelized right-turns may allow
vehicles to cut in and/or speed up on the curve,
especially for eastbound and southbound vehicles,
and may generate right-turn rear-end, off-road,
sideswipe, and pedestrian-/cyclist-related collision
risk.
Limited Visibility of Advance Warning Signs
Limited visibility of Advance Warning (“PREPARE TO

STOP” When Amber Flashing) signs along the
highway due to signage location and wide
approaches, especially for northbound traffic with five-
lane approach, may generate rear-end collisions risk.
Highway 99 – Northbound Through
Limited Visibility of Traffic Signal Heads
Limited visibility of secondary and tertiary traffic signal

heads with smaller lenses and lack of yellow
blackboards, possibly due to wide intersection and/or
heavy vehicles may generate rear-end collision risk.
Highway 99 – Westbound Through
Improper Signage Location for Right-Turn Drivers
Improper location of Yield signs may confuse right-

turn drivers, such as eastbound right-turn drivers’
expectation of the availability of an acceleration lane,
and may generate right-turn rear-end collision risk.

| Page 17
Table 4.1: Identified Traffic Operational and Safety Issues (Continued)
Obstructed Visibilities at Channelized Right-Turns
Obstructed visibilities for drivers’ views of

pedestrians/bicycles waiting to cross at the eastbound
channelized right-turn due to nearby tree/foliage and
Yield sign, and at southbound channelized right-turn
due to foliage, especially at shady areas or during
dark periods, may generate right-turn rear-end and
pedestrian-/cyclist-related collision risk.
Missing Northbound Dual Left-Turn Guidance
Missing northbound dual left-turn guiding line

pavement marking, which existed previously, at the
study intersection, may generate sideswipe and off-
road collisions risk.
Highway 99 – Northbound
Illegal U-turn Movement at East Approach
Illegal u-turn movements at the east leg by

northbound vehicles to go westbound or eastbound
vehicles to go northbound, both avoiding long left-turn
delays and queues, may generate head-on and
sideswipe collision risk.
Loggers Lane – Westbound Through
Unexpected Weaving/Blocking Traffic to Highway
Unexpected weaving/blocking vehicles from the

commercial access (northwest side of the highway) to
the highway through bike lane and right-turn bay,
particularly of pass-by vehicles from Petro-Canada /
7-Eleven, may generate sideswipe, rear-end, and
cyclist-related collision risk.
Highway 99 – Southbound Through

| Page 18
Table 4.1: Identified Traffic Operational and Safety Issues at Study Intersection (Continued)
Lack of Bicycle Facilities at/around Study Intersection
Bicycle sharing with high volumes of vehicles on

arterial roadway lanes, especially eastbound during
peak periods, may generate cyclist-related collision
risk.
Cleveland Avenue – Eastbound Through
Potential Off-Road Vehicle-Pedestrian Conflict
The combination of possible high vehicular speed and

minor vertical slope (such as westbound approach)
for channelized right-turn vehicles may generate off-
road and pedestrian-/cyclist-related collision risk.
Loggers Lane – Westbound Right-Turn
Other Identified Traffic Operational and Safety Issues:
 Poor Capacity Performance and Long Traffic Queues: With the exception of westbound traffic,
heavy traffic volumes, poor capacity performance, and long traffic queues in peak periods at
other intersection approaches may generate rear-end and sideswipe collision risk.
 High Vehicular Speed: High vehicular speed with 70 kilometres per hour speed limit along the
highway for both northbound and southbound traffic may create difficulty for vehicles to
stop/yield as well as generate rear-end, off-road, and pedestrian-/cyclist-related collision risk.
 Unexpected Pedestrian/Bicycle Crossing: Unexpected pedestrian/bicycle crossing for right-
turn drivers may generate rear-end, pedestrian-/cyclist-related, and off-road collision risk.
 Missing Pedestrian/Bicycle Countdown Timer: Missing countdown timers for overall crossing
pedestrians/bicycles may generated pedestrian-/cyclist-related conflict.
 Unexpected Crossing Wildlife: East-west crossing wildlife, mainly from the east side of the
study intersection, may generate animal-related collision risk, especially for northbound
vehicles in the evening.
 Sharp Horizontal Alignment: Sharp horizontal curve, at the east leg along with lack of
pavement markings while being in close proximity to a north-south roadway, may generate off-
road and rear-end collision risk.
 On-Street Highway Bike Lanes: On-street highway bike lanes may generate cyclist-related
conflicts with high speed vehicles.

| Page 19
5.0
Pedestrian/Bicycle Characteristic
5.1 Pedestrian/Bicycle Crossing Pattern

Based on the site visit, pedestrian and bicycle crossing patterns along with the associated
photographs of the study intersection were observed, identified and shown in Table 5.1.
Table 5.1: Pedestrian/Bicycle Pattern
Cleveland Avenue – Marked Crosswalk (Southwest) Highway 99 – Bike Lane (North)
Some eastbound right-turn drivers were Unexpected eastbound right-turn vehicles

observed to ignore crossing pedestrians/cyclist, exiting from the access may create cyclist-
especially during high traffic volumes and long related collision risk.
queues, which may be due to aggressive driving
and/or visibility issues.
Grade Separated (Underpass) Crossing (South) Cleveland Avenue – Marked Crosswalk (Southwest)
Pedestrians/cyclists might not be aware of or Eastbound drivers might fail to anticipate cyclist
familiar with the availability of an exsting grade movements due to lack of cycling facility, which
seperated (underpass) crossing, 300 metres may generate vehicle-bicycle conflicts.
south of the study intersection.

| Page 20
Table 5.1: Pedestrian/Bicycle Pattern (Continued)
Loggers Lane – Island (Southeast) Loggers Lane – Roadway (East)
Excessive pedestrian push buttons on the Lack of pedestrian/cyclist facility and shoulder
northeast and southeast islands might confuse pavement marking may create cyclist-related
the general public. collision risk.
Pemberton Avenue – Westbound Highway 99 – Roadway (North)
Lack of proper multi-use pathways to encourage Jaywalking on a high vehicle speed highway
active transportation and safe route to school. may generate severe pedestrian-related
collisions.
5.2 Pedestrian-/Cyclist-Related Collision

Based on both ICBC Claims and MoTI CIS data (2011-2015), pedestrian-/cyclist-related collisions
were also reviewed. One cyclist-related collision was reported in 2011 occurring at the southbound
channelized right-turn. In addition, it was indicated that two eastbound right-turn rear-end collision has
been reported due to crossing pedestrians – vehicular collisions indirectly caused by crossing
pedestrians.

| Page 21
6.0
Recommended Countermeasure
The near-term and long-term recommended countermeasures, in the categories of geometric,
roadside, operational, vulnerable users, etc., and were developed for the identified traffic operational
and safety issues and illustrated as follows (Figure 6.1):
Figure 6.1: Near- and Long-Term Recommended Countermeasures

| Page 22
6.1 Near-Term Recommended Countermeasure

Near-term countermeasures (within five years) below are recommended for the study intersection
(Table 6.1). It is assumed that some minor countermeasures would be part of the District/MoTI
maintenance program; therefore, economic evaluations were selected for the major improvements.
Recommended countermeasures that were recently completed or to be completed prior to the Final
Report submission by the District or MoTI are also included.
Table 6.1: Near-Term Recommended Countermeasures
Economic
Evaluation
Geometric
Difficult to perform shoulder Modify the eastbound and southbound
Yes
check for right-turn drivers channelized right-turn configurations1
Difficult to judge stopping location Paint yield (edge) line pavement markings at all
No
for yield channelized right-turns [MoTI]
Wide right-turn channelized Repaint pavement markings around all
No
approaches channelized right-turn islands [MoTI]
Roadside
Limited visibility of traffic signal Enlarge all secondary and tertiary traffic signal
Yes
heads head sizes2
Improper signage location for
Relocate signage at channelized right-turns No
right-turn drivers
Remove/relocate the tree at the southwest
Obstructed visibilities at No
corner [District]
channelized right-turns
Trim foliage at northwest corner [District] No
Operational
Poor capacity performance and Construct dual eastbound right-turn with signal
Yes
long traffic queues operation3
Poor capacity performance and
Optimize traffic signal timing plan4 [MoTI] Yes
long traffic queues
Unexpected weaving/blocking Install a “Do Not Block Intersection” Sign at the
Yes
traffic to highway commercial access5
Missing northbound dual left-turn Paint northbound left-turn guiding line marking
Yes
guidance [MoTI]
Illegal u-turn movement at east Coordinate with RCMP to increase u-turn
No
approach enforcement at the east leg
Coordinate with RCMP to increase speed
High vehicular speed enforcements along the highway [District] No
Review speed zone along the highway [MoTI]
Vulnerable Users
Unexpected pedestrian/bicycle Yes
Pedestrians” signs at all channelized right-turns6
crossing
Add pedestrian crosswalk signs on west corners7 Yes
Lack of bicycle facilities at/around Provide wayfinding signage around the study
No
Missing pedestrian/bicycle Implement countdown timers with audio to all
No
countdown timers pedestrian signals [MoTI]

| Page 23
Note for Near-Term Recommended Countermeasures with Economic Evaluation:
1
Modify both the eastbound and southbound channelized right-turn configurations as per the
“Aussie” Design (Figure 6.2) in ISL Right Hand Turn Geometry at Urban Arterial Intersections
in Edmonton: Guidelines for Application of Different Geometric Treatments for Different
Conditions (2004) with 20 metres of radius and 6 metres of curb face.
2
Enlarge all secondary and tertiary traffic signal head sizes by increasing radius of lenses from
200 to 300 millimetres (8 to 12 inches) as well as adding yellow blackboards for all secondary
traffic signal heads.
3
Construct dual eastbound right-turn with signal operations by reconfiguring the lane use along
the eastbound approach, including lane destination signs replacement on Cleveland Avenue.
It is found that with the proposed intersection layout and signal operation, the overall
intersection performances will still fail to LOS E (weekday PM and Sunday peak hours) and
LOS F (Saturday peak hour) based on the traffic analyses. It is also found that individual
performances of eastbound left- and right-turn movements will improve from LOS E or F to
LOS C or D; however, the other movements (westbound, northbound left-turn, and
southbound through) will experience worse conditions from LOS D or E to LOS E or F. As a
result, poor capacity performance could still be expected for signalized dual eastbound right-
turn operation. Synchro outputs can be found in Appendix C.
In addition, three eastbound vehicle lanes to be provided in the east leg to allow dual
eastbound right-turn. With the existing access operations (Figure 6.3), lots of weaving traffic
will be expected in a short distance even with the potential road widening. Therefore, it is
expected traffic operation and safety concerns will be raised with dual eastbound right-turn
lanes at this intersection.
4
Optimize traffic signal timing plan of the study intersection for different timing periods.
Cleveland Avenue – Eastbound
(vehicular access from the northwest quadrant)
(vehicular access from the southwest quadrant)
Figure 6.2: “Aussie” Design Figure 6.3: Nearby Accesses

| Page 24
5
Install a “Do Not Block Intersection” Sign at the commercial access as per R-106 in the MoTI
Manual of Standard Traffic Signs and & Pavement Markings (MSTSPM) (2000).
6
Install “Turning Vehicles Yield To Bicycles And Pedestrians” signs at all channelized right-
turns as per RB-38 in the TAC Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Canada
(MUTCD) (2014).
7
Add pedestrian crosswalk signs on west (eastbound and southbound right-turn) corners as per
RA-4L or RA-4R in the TAC MUTCD similar to the existing one at the northwest corner.
6.2 Long-Term Countermeasures

Similarly, long-term countermeasures (beyond five years) below are recommended to consider for the
study intersection (Table 6.2). For long-term countermeasures, the economic evaluation for the
eastbound right-turn acceleration lane is provided in the Section 7.0. Recommended countermeasures
that were recently completed or to be completed prior to the Final Report submission by the District
are also included.
Table 6.2: Long-Term Recommended Countermeasures
Economic
Evaluation
Geometric
High Collision risk for eastbound Construct eastbound-southbound right-turn
Yes
right-turn merge to highway traffic acceleration lane1
Sharp horizontal alignment at
Realign the geometry of the east leg No
east leg
Roadside
Limited visibility of advance Shift the poles to centre the northbound and
No
warning signs southbound overhead advance warning flashers
Operational
Poor capacity performances and Add additional north-south lanes along the
No
long traffic queues highway
Vulnerable Users
Provide off-street bike lane along the southwest
On-street highway bike lanes No
side of the highway
Lack of bicycle facilities at/around Improve bike facility at and around the study
No
Note for Long-Term Recommended Countermeasures with Economic Evaluation:
1
Construct eastbound-southbound right-turn acceleration lane by replacing the existing
sidewalk / road barriers / bike lane with a larger right-turn channel, 150 metres (65 metres of
taper) of laneway as per MoTI B.C. Supplement to TAC Geometric Design Guide (2007), and
Added Lane sign as per MoTI MSTSPM.

| Page 25
7.0
Economic Evaluation
ICBC has indicated that funding may be available if investment opportunities exist to reduce the
number of collisions at the study intersection. Economic evaluations were conducted based on
collision modification factors, annual collision cost savings, cost estimates, and the ICBC investment
criteria.
7.1 Collision Modification Factor

For each recommended countermeasure, a Collision Modification Factor (CMF) has been estimated to
determine the reduction in collisions after the improvements are implemented. Several sources for
CMFs were used including:
 U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration Crash Modification

Factors Clearinghouse (online)
 MoTI Collision Modification Factors for British Columbia Manual (2008)
 Engineering Judgment.
Each of these CMFs applied to a set of target collisions, specified by collision severity, type, and
direction. It was noted that 46 reported claims out of the total 229 reported claims have unknown type,
direction, and/or description. For more accurate calculations, these collisions were also taken into
account based on the proportions of the known categories. Furthermore, it is assumed that about 25%
of the eastbound and southbound right-turn rear-end vehicle-vehicle collisions were indirectly involved
crossing pedestrian/bicycles based on collision review as well as site observation.
Using the methodology defined in the MoTI CMF Manual, the CMFs were adjusted to estimate the
overall collision modification factors at the study intersection, rather than representing the reduction in
only the target collisions. Each recommended countermeasure (for near- and long-terms) and their
respective overall CMFs can be seen in Table 7.1.
7.2 Annual Collision Cost Saving

The overall CMFs were applied to the annual average claimed collisions between 2011 and 2015 to
determine the estimated annual reduction in collisions following the implementation of the respective
improvements. Using the average cost of a casualty (fatality or injury) collision as $31,000 and of a
PDO collision as $2,900, the annual cost savings related to these countermeasures were estimated.
7.3 Cost Estimates

Cost estimates (Class D) were developed for each of the recommended countermeasures based on
the latest unit rates for construction materials and devices. Details regarding the cost estimates can be
seen in Appendix B.

| Page 26
Table 7.1: CMF for Recommended Countermeasures
CMF for Target Collision Parameter Number of Target Collisions

Recommended
Target Crash Crash
Countermeasure Crash Type Total Casualty PDO
Collisions Severity Direction
Near-Term
Modify the eastbound
channelized right-turn 0.85 All All Eastbound 114 58 56
configuration
Modify the southbound
channelized right-turn 0.85 All All Southbound 18 7 11
configuration
Enlarge all secondary and
tertiary traffic signal head sizes
0.70 All All All 37 15 22
as well as add yellow
blackboards
Construct dual eastbound right-
0.70 All All Eastbound 114 58 56
turn with signal operation
Optimize traffic signal timing

0.80 Rear-end All All 37 15 22
plan
Install a “Do Not Block
Intersection” sign at the 0.85 Rear-end Casualty Southbound 3 3 0
commercial access
Install “Turning Vehicles Yield Rear-end /
to Bicycles And Pedestrians” 0.85 pedestrian- All All 138 68 70
signs at channelized right-turns related
Rear-end /
Add pedestrian crosswalk signs
0.85 pedestrian- All All 35 17 18
on west corners
related
Long-Term
Construct eastbound-
Eastbound /
southbound right-turn 0.85 All All 118 61 57
southbound
acceleration lane
7.4 Economic Evaluation

Using the estimated cost of each countermeasure and annual collision cost savings related to each of
the improvements, the potential ICBC contributions to these countermeasures were determined, using
an Internal Rate of Return (IRR) of 50% over 2 years. For long-term and high construction cost project,
such as eastbound right-turn acceleration lane. ICBC will consider using an IRR of 50% over 5 years.
Table 7.2 shows the economic evaluation of the recommended countermeasures (near- and long-
terms) for the study intersection.

| Page 27
Table 7.2: Economic Evaluation Summary
Annual Collision Potential ICBC Two-/Five-

Recommended Countermeasure Cost Estimate
Cost Saving Contribution Year IRR
Near-Term
Modify the eastbound channelized right-turn
$ 58,810.00 $ 36,500.00 $ 36,500.00 127%
configuration (OPTION A)
Modify the southbound channelized right-turn
$ 7,470.00 $ 60,900.00 $ 8,300.00 50%
configuration
Enlarge all secondary and tertiary traffic signal
$ 31,730.00 $ 23,400.00 $ 23,400.00 99%
head sizes as well as add yellow blackboards
Construct dual eastbound right-turn with signal
$ 117,620.00 $ 104,000.00 $ 104,000.00 82%
operation (OPTION B)
Optimize traffic signal timing plan $ 21,150.00 $ 6,500.00 $ 6,500.00 301%
Install a “Do Not Block Intersection” sign at the
$ 2,790.00 $ 700.00 $ 700.00 376%
commercial access
$ 69,330.00 $ 2,600.00 $ 2,600.00 2656%
Pedestrians” signs at channelized right-turns
Add pedestrian crosswalk signs on west corners $ 17,380.00 $ 2,000.00 $ 2,000.00 853%
Total
Total - with OPTION A $ 208,660.00 $ 132,600.00 $ 80,000.00 -
Total - with OPTION B $ 267,470.00 $ 200,100.00 $ 147,500.00 -

Long-Term
Construct eastbound-southbound right-turn
$ 61,690.00 $ 498,300.00 $ 107,100.00 50%
acceleration lane
It is expected that if recommended countermeasure will be proceeded for the existing eastbound
channelized right-turn lane, the implementation would either be modifying the channelized island
configuration (OPTION A) or providing dual right-turn lane with signal operations (OPTION B).
Some countermeasures are provided at a conceptual level and a detailed geometric design will be
required for the implementations. For example, it is understood that the provision of eastbound right-
turn acceleration lane countermeasure will require land acquisitions in the nearby area and land cost
could not be included in cost estimate at this stage.
The estimated cost of the near-term recommended countermeasures (excluding eastbound right-turn
acceleration lane) only is $132,600 (OPTION A) or $200,100 (OPTION B) of which ICBC may
contribute $80,000 (OPTION A) or $147,500 (OPTION B), with a total annual collision cost savings of
$208,660 (OPTION A) or $267,470 (OPTION B). If the District was to undertake a package of
improvements, discussions with ICBC should occur to determine the resulting Road Improvement
Program contribution. With continued cooperation between the District and ICBC, the study identifies
opportunities to make the intersection safer for all road users.

| Page 28
Appendix A
TAC Field Observation Report

|

|

|
Appendix B
Class D Cost Estimation

|
Recommended Countermeasure Extent Unit Unit Price Total

Modify the Eastbound Channelized Right-Turn Configuration
Roadside Barrier Relocation 50 metre $50.00 $2,500.00
Concrete (Island) Removal 25 square metre $20.00 $500.00
Curb and Gutter Removal 20 metre $20.00 $400.00
Concrete (Island) Installation 50 square metre $150.00 $7,500.00
Course Levelling 7 tonnes $115.00 $805.00
Curb and Gutter Installation
(Island) 40 metre $65.00 $2,600.00
(Sidewalk) 25 metre $110.00 $2,750.00
Catch Basin Removal 2 each $1,000.00 $2,000.00
Catch Basin Replacement 2 each $3,000.00 $6,000.00
Roadway Sign Relocation/Installation 4 each $500.00 $2,000.00
Pavement Marking and Eradiction 1 lump sum $1,000.00 $1,000.00
Total $28,055.00
Total (30% Contigency [Rounded]) $36,500.00
Modify the Southbound Channelized Right-Turn Configuration
Concrete Removal
(Island) 30 square metre $20.00 $600.00
(Sidewalk) 50 metre $20.00 $1,000.00
Pavement Removal 60 square metre $12.00 $720.00
Curb and Gutter Installation
(Island) 50 metre $65.00 $3,250.00
(Sidewalk) 60 metre $110.00 $6,600.00
Sidewalk Installation 85 square metre $120.00 $10,200.00
Pavement Marking and Eradication 1 lump sum $1,000.00 $1,000.00
Catch Basin Adjustment 1 each $500.00 $500.00
Utility Adjustment 3 each $500.00 $1,500.00
Planting 1 lump sum $1,000.00 $1,000.00
Total $46,870.00
Enlarge All Secondary and Tertiary Traffic Signal Head Sizes
Signal Head Lense Enlargement 12 each $1,000.00 $12,000.00
Yellow Blackboard Installation 6 each $1,000.00 $6,000.00
Total $18,000.00
Optimize Traffic Signal Timing Plan
Signal Timing Optimization 1 lump sum $5,000.00 $5,000.00
Total $5,000.00

|
Recommended Countermeasure Extent Unit Unit Price Total

Construct Dual Eastbound Right-Turn with Signal Operation
Pavement Marking and Eradication 1 lump sum $1,000.00 $1,000.00
Concrete Removal 15 square metre $20.00 $300.00
Curb and Gutter Removal 18 metre $20.00 $360.00
Concrete Installation 50 square metre $150.00 $7,500.00
Curb and Gutter Installation 37 metre $65.00 $2,405.00
Asphalt (Island) Infill 13 tonnes $120.00 $1,560.00
Delineator Posts Installation 5 each $75.00 $375.00
Signal Poles/Heads Installation 1 lump sum $60,000.00 $60,000.00
Signs Replacement 3 each $500.00 $1,500.00
Signal Timing Optimization 1 lump sum $5,000.00 $5,000.00
Total $80,000.00
Install a “Do Not Block Intersection” Sign at the Commercial Access
Roadway Sign Installation 1 each $500.00 $500.00
Total $500.00
Total (30% Contigency [Rounded]) $700.00
Install “Turning Vehicles Yield To Bicycles And Pedestrians” Signs at all Channelized Right-Turns
Roadway Sign Installation 4 each $500.00 $2,000.00
Total $2,000.00
Add Pedestrian Crosswalk Signs on West Corners
Roadway Sign Installation 3 each $500.00 $1,500.00
Total $1,500.00
Consider Constructing Eastbound-Southbound Right-Turn Acceleration Lane
Pavement Marking 1 lump sum $1,000.00 $1,000.00
Roadside Barrier Relocation 200 metre $50.00 $10,000.00
Asphalt Removal 900 square metre $12.00 $10,800.00
Concrete (Sidewalk) Installation 60 square metre $120.00 $7,200.00
Select Granular Sub-Base Provision 400 cubic metre $60.00 $24,000.00
Well-Graded Base Provision 400 cubic metre $80.00 $32,000.00
Clearing And Grubbing 0.04 hectare $5,000.00 $200.00
Asphalt Provision 400 tonne $120.00 $48,000.00
Concrete (Island) Removal 25 square metre $20.00 $500.00
Embankment 200 cubic metre $10.00 $2,000.00
Retaining Wall Installation 350 square metre $600.00 $210,000.00
Concrete (Island) Curb Installation 40 metre $65.00 $2,600.00
Total $383,300.00

|
Appendix C
Synchro Outputs

|

|

|

|

|

|

|

|
31587
|

Highway at Cleveland Ave Traffic Operational Safety Review

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Highway at Cleveland Ave Traffic Operational Safety Review

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

REPORT TO: Council FOR: Regular

REPORT FROM: Community Planning & Infrastructure

RTC Highway 99 – Cleveland Intersection Report

islengineering.com August, 2016

islengineering.com August, 2016

Figure ES.1: Study Intersection

islengineering.com August, 2016

islengineering.com August, 2016

Table ES.1: Near- and Long-Terms Recommended Countermeasures

islengineering.com August, 2016

Figure ES.2: Near- and Long-Term Recommended Countermeasures

islengineering.com August, 2016

Table ES.2: Economic Evaluation Summary

Annual Collision Potential ICBC Two-/Five-

Total - with OPTION B $ 267,470.00 $ 200,100.00 $ 147,500.00 -

islengineering.com August, 2016

THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.

islengineering.com August, 2016

1.2 Study Objectives and Methodology

islengineering.com August, 2016

1.3 Stakeholder Concern and Literature Review

1.3.1 Downtown Squamish 2031 Transportation Plan (2009)

1.3.2 2031 District Wide Multi-Modal Transportation Study (2011)

islengineering.com August, 2016

Study Recommendations for Highway 99 Intersections (General):

1.4 Study Intersection

islengineering.com August, 2016

Road Classification Information

Highway 99 (north and south legs):

islengineering.com August, 2016

Table 1.1: Existing Study Intersection Inventory (Continued)

Traffic Signal Head Arrangement

Intersection Approach Photograph

Highway 99 – Northbound Approach Highway 99 – Southbound Approach

Cleveland Avenue – Eastbound Approach Loggers Lane – Westbound Approach

islengineering.com August, 2016

islengineering.com August, 2016

2.1 Traffic Volume Data

islengineering.com August, 2016

islengineering.com August, 2016

 Eastbound left-turn (dual lanes)

2.2 Intersection Operation

Table 2.1: LOS Definition for a Signalized Intersection in HCM (Synchro/SimTraffic)

Traffic Control LOS A B C D E F

Table 2.2: Summary of 2016 (August) Peak Hour LOS (Sidra)

Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound

islengineering.com August, 2016

Figure 2.3: 2016 Forecasted Peak Hour LOS (Synchro/SimTraffic)

islengineering.com August, 2016

Table 3.1: Summary of ICBC Claims and MoTI CIS Data

Data Type ICBC Claims MOTI CIS Total

3.2 Collision Severity and Rate

The study intersection averaged 45.8 collisions per year. Traffic

islengineering.com August, 2016

 Collision frequency (45.8) –compared to about 7.6 collisions per year

3.3 Temporal Distribution

Figure 3.2: Temporal Distributions of Collisions by Year (2011 to 2015)

Figure 3.3: Temporal Distributions of Collisions by Month (2011 to 2015)

islengineering.com August, 2016

Figure 3.4: Temporal Distributions of Collisions by Day (2011 to 2015)

Figure 3.5: Temporal Distributions of Collisions by Hour (2011 to 2015)

3.4 Direction of Collision

Figure 3.6: Distributions of Collisions by Direction (2011 to 2015)

islengineering.com August, 2016