TEO Signal Committee Meeting Minutes Meeting Date: 05/19/2009

Waters Edge Conference Rm 176 Meeting Time: 9:00am - Noon

Meeting Attendees: Kile Holm Sue Zarling Curt Krohn Mike Schroeder Tim Bangsund Jeff Knofczynski Mike Wolf Peter Skweres Mike Gerbensky Jerry Kotzenmacher Linda Heath Les Bjerketvedt Jim Deans Mike Posch Bob Emineth Ed Andrajack Tod Becker Tom Dumont Old Business- Battery Backup – New prototype should be completed in about 2 weeks. This cabinet will be called type SSB or (Signal Service Battery Backup) cabinet. EVP lamp – The halogen lamp currently used by ESU for maintenance replacement EVP lamps will now be used on new signal design. The lamp has been proven in the field for the past two years. This smaller halogen lamp doesn’t have the bulkiness that the flood lamps have, therefore do not shake as much as the larger flood lamps. 60’ to 80’ mast arm – The consultant has been chosen and is currently working on preliminary design of mast arm lengths between 60’ and 80’. Progress meetings have been held with a completion date of June 30, 2009. Preliminary design highlights: 1) Foundation depth for the larger poles will likely be between 24’ and 35’ deep. 2) Spread footing may be an option. 3) Soil borings will be required for the larger foundations. 4) Weight of the pole will be 10,000 and 20,000 pounds requiring a crane to place. 5) Cost estimates between $40,000 to $80,000 just for material for one pole/mast arm. 6) The arm will look similar to our current double truss arm, only round. These preliminary numbers reflect the range of mast size between 60’ and 80’. The numbers are substantially higher because we will meet the current 2001 AASHTO ratings. Our current mast arms (15’ to 55’) do not meet the 2001 AASHTO ratings but have been grandfathered in because of a proven track record of no known fatigue failures in the past several decades. Snow Shields – No conditions existed over the snow season for any conclusive recommendation. No other problems reported. Mike Shroeder still has a few in the shop that can be placed in the field. Contact Mike if you want to place a couple in your district. ADA Pedestrian accommodations – A preliminary tech memo is currently being routed with APS installation recommendations for new and major re-construction of traffic signals. APS Tech Memo 09-08T 01 will be officially posted soon. This memo will state MN/DOTs current practice for APS installations.

The APS study sponsored by OTST for each district is nearing completion. Many districts have already received there intersection and approach rankings for the APS. Just Metro and Willmar remain incomplete. Completion date of the project is expected before the end of June. The ranking numbers do not have a threshold to install the APS, but only reflect how each signal is ranked relative to other signals in each district. Each district will determine which signal will get APS depending on funding availability. An estimated cost for a full 8 button system is about $5700. This cost does not include any other related cost such as ped stations or ramps but only the buttons and APS controller. Single APS buttons currently cost around $400. This cost does not include the APS controller unit that must be installed in the cabinet when using APS buttons. The APS control unit which goes inside the cabinet costs around $2200. This cost must be included on any number of buttons installed at a signal, even if only 1 button is installed. Pedestrian guidelines attached. Enforcement light – The TEO Executive Committee has recommended that the light be utilized when requested. MN/DOT recommendations and guidelines will be as follows:

1) Will consider all requests 2) No blanket installations 3) Light should be wired to overlap or concurrent phase (phase 9) 4) Agreement/memo of understanding will be written 5) Signal Staff and enforcement agency must meet 6) MN/DOT funding based on availability 7) Light color should be blue.

Guidelines will be posted on the OTST website once there is agreement on installation/maintenance costs and agreement language. Fortran Bracket – The manufacturer will not modify the bracket to meet our needs. The bracket will be available for maintenance use only and will not be used on new design. Flashing Yellow Arrow – Surveys are being conducted with other state agencies to see how they are using the FYA. Cost Agreements – A sub committee was established at the 2-10-09 Signal TEO Meeting. The following was written in the meeting minutes: Battery backup systems/ batteries – A sub committee will meet to discuss battery backup systems and the cost/maintenance issues involved with batteries. Members will be, Sue Z(chair), Ben O, Linda H, Mike G, Tom D, Jim D, Jeff K, Bob, Mike P. The committee will decide the best direction for maintenance and cost agreements for battery backup systems and report back to the signal committee. New Business – Tomar EVP – The committee discussed the issues with regard to limited range sensitivity. The TEO signal committee recommends the following requirements for the product: 1. Effective immediately all new products sold in Minnesota must have the new long tube lens.

2. Mn/DOT will now be testing all installations to verify the 1800 foot sensitivity requirement. 3. If the geometries of the intersection support the 1800 foot range requirements and the product does not perform it will be rejected. 4. Any sensitivity issues must be resolved with the Contractor, Brown Traffic and Tomar. 5. Mn/DOT will no longer be able to provide resources to solve any future problems as they relate to sensitivity issues. 6. If the sensitivity issue is not completely solved Tomar will be removed from the Mn/DOT Approved Products List (APL) for Signals until such time Tomar can demonstrate that standard product meets all of MN/DOT's requirements. 7. Something in writing from Tomar on how to handle upgrading all in place systems that have the "defective" lenses. 8. A complete list of vehicle mounted optical emitters that have been used to test and pass the 1800 foot sensitivity require. All districts should be checking the range of all currently installed sensors and work with the vendor/manufacturer to replace defective lenses. Any unresolved problems should be reported to OTST. Tests must be completed by a properly mounted vehicle emitter. For new signals, a key time to address any range issue is at the signal turn on. The contractor is responsible (along with the manufacturer) to meet minimum range requirements. Mast arm mid mount re-location - What generally initiates the need to re-locate mid-mounts is a signal mast arm length change after fabrication. Millerbernd has in the past, agreed to credit the cost of the original mast arm and replace it with the revised mast arm with minimal re-stock and re-work charges applied. As new orders are entered, there is an attempt to use the re-stock mast arms on the new orders. Mast arms that do not require re-work are chosen if available. The manufacturer tries to avoid the re-work as much as possible, but at some point, as these re-stock mast arms accumulate, a re-work is necessary. With the old painted mast arms, the plugged area of the re-located mount would not be noticeable once re-painted. With the new galvanized mast arms this will not be the case. Although structurally sound, the plugged area will show up cosmetically after galvanizing. The weld area tends to attract more galvanizing and will often result in a slightly different coloration than the surrounding material especially when freshly galvanized. The manufacturer’s concern is that this may cause rejection of the mast arm by the project engineer. It is also thought that the cosmetic coloration will diminish as the mast arm ages/weathers. The manufacturer has asked that the signal committee consider this option and advise them of committee decision. If this option and practice is acceptable, they would appreciate a letter stating the conditions. If this is not acceptable, the manufacturer will no longer issue credit for mast arm changes after fabrication. The committee recommends that the current practice continues and has no issues with the modification and relocation of the mid arm mounts. No mast arms will be rejected based on the relocation of the mid arm mounts. These meeting minutes serves as official notice of acceptance of these modified mast arms. Signal and Lighting certification/inspection – The current class instructors (Howard Lee, Marlin Renardy, Mike Wolf) have given notice of their intent to discontinue as class instructors after the 2010 class offerings. A meeting will be held June 22 to determine the

direction of the class. The committee believes the class to be worth while and to continue the class with new instructors after the current instructors depart. On a related note, certifications are not always being checked which leads other certified contractors to complain on the non certified contractors getting signal work. Sue will get the certification issue on the MN/DOT construction agenda for them to be aware of the issue. A current list of names and certification expiration dates is on the OTST web site. Solar Pedestrian Crossing - D7 has installed a solar powered ped crossing in Waseca. It uses a microwave and infa red detection. The sign has imbedded LED’s along the perimeter of the sign. The system components cost $7400. Contact Bob or Tod for more information. Optically Programmed Signal Indication - With limited use of this type of signal indication, the performance spec will be omitted from the 2010 standard specifications for construction book. When required or needed, the indications will be state furnished. EVP Detectors On Wood Poles – EVP detectors on span wires have diminished range, likely from the movement the span wires create. Its recommended that the sensors be placed on the pole when practical. The conformation light should be shown on the span wire. The wood pole span wire detail has been updated and posted on the OTST web site. On short term wood pole systems, installation of EVP systems should be questioned. Round Robin: Jerry – HAWK System – The first HAWK system will be installed in St Cloud on TH 23/Division Street. Mike W – Any comments for the new 2010 spec book, send to Mike. Ed A. – Metro is adding additional conduit to the cabinet pad detail. A 1 ½” conduit for fiber and another for the battery backup Tom D. – Bus priority should be paid by the local bus company. Mike S. stated that it is not an issue to put the cost on the controller purchase. Cost sharing may be difficult to work out. EVP lights for hearing impaired pedestrian – A pedestrian within D3 requested EVP conformation lights to aid her when an emergency vehicle was approaching. The committee recommended that the pedestrian should be advised to use the pedestrian indications, not EVP conformation lights. Next meeting: Waters Edge Conference Room 323 September 24th, 2009 9:00 am to 12:00 noon. Send agenda items to Jerry K. Attachment: Pedestrian Guidelines