Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/13/2004 SC minutes Director Deputy Director Glen R. Andler Sean P. Dorsey Mount Prospect Public Works Department 1700 W. Central Road, Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056-2229 MINUTES OF THE MOUNT PROSPECT SAFETY COMMISSION CALL TO ORDER The Regular Meeting of the Mount Prospect Safety Commission was called to order at 7:10 p.m. on Monday, December 13, 2004. ROLL CALL Present upon roll call: Chuck Bencic Chairman John Keane Vice Chairman Susan Arndt Commissioner Carol Tortorello Commissioner John Dahlberg Police Department Representative Buz Livingston Fire Department Representative Paul Bures Public Works Representative Matt Lawrie Traffic Engineer – Staff Liaison Absent: Kevin Grouwinkel Commissioner Mark Miller Commissioner Others in Attendance: Jeff Wulbecker Village Engineer APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Keane, seconded by Commissioner Tortorello, moved to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the Safety Commission held on November 8, 2004. The minutes were approved by a vote of 7- 0. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD No citizens came forth to discuss any topics that were not on the current agenda. Phone 847/870-5640 Fax 847/253-9377 www.mountprospect.org OLD BUSINESS None. NEW BUSINESS A) TRAFFIC PROGRAMS PRESENTATION 1) Background Information Traffic. To bring up this one word in a conversation can certainly spark emotion in people just like religion and politics can. Ask a long-time Chicago resident to talk about traffic and he/she might use words like gridlock, congestion and a host of expletives that shouldn’t be mentioned in a public document. Each year the Texas Transportation Institute issues its Annual Mobility Report that analyses traffic congestion in cities across the United States. In its most recent report, the Chicago area was ranked eighth in terms of annual delay per traveler and, as expected, traffic congestion is on the rise in most cities. While agencies like the U.S. Department of Transportation and IDOT look to reverse this trend on highways and arterials by repaving and widening roads, improving traffic signal coordination and promoting mass transit, communities such as Mount Prospect must deal with the repercussions on local streets. And like religion and politics, there are not always easy answers or solutions. Ask a long-time Mount Prospect resident to talk about local traffic concerns and he/she might discuss issues like speeding, cut through traffic, parking and disobedience to stop signs. Some of the problems are a result of motorists using local roads rather than arterial roads or highways because of congestion on the main roads but many are generated by residents themselves. The Police Department and Engineering Staff receives approximately 325 requests per year to address traffic-related issues in neighborhoods. This statistic seems to support the obvious belief that whether the issues are real or perceived, traffic is an important subject to our community. The Three E’s To tackle traffic safety issues, engineers often refer to the three E’s: education, enforcement and engineering. Education alerts residents to ways they can ease traffic problems such as slowing down when driving in a neighborhood and using other modes of transportation such as a bus or bicycle. Enforcement enlists the assistance of the Police Department and their resources such as the radar trailer, drone car and radar enforcement to be a presence in the neighborhoods and enforce the traffic laws. Engineering tools include installation of signs and striping as well as implementation of traffic calming measures to reduce vehicle speed or volume on a particular street and improve pedestrian safety. While Village Staff has done an excellent job in addressing traffic safety issues in our neighborhoods using the three E’s, the Engineering Staff has evaluated our efforts and begun to look for ways to improve. In reflection of how the Engineering Staff addresses traffic safety issues, we’ve determined the processes we’ve established to do so can be separated into two groups: a reactive approach and a proactive approach. Two Approaches Many traffic safety issues come to us from residents. Requests for stop signs, lower speed limits, parking restrictions, turn restrictions, etc. are made by residents to address various traffic-related Phone 847/870-5640 Fax 847/253-9377 www.mountprospect.org problems. Each request is given a cursory review to determine the appropriate course of action. Some requests require a detailed study followed by a decision from the Safety Commission and Village Board (engineering). Other requests are referred to the Police Department (enforcement). And some requests are resolved through a conversation with the resident (education). Whatever the case, the Engineering Staff reacts to the issue brought before us by someone else. While we would like to reduce the number of issues we must react to, we understand it will never go away. We know that we will always have to react to issues raised by others and will continue to address them as best we can. In contrast, the proactive approach is an area where the Engineering Staff has more control over and thus caused us to give much thought as to how we can improve. From Staff discussions a Traffic Proposal was created that outlines five new programs that are a proactive approach in addressing traffic safety issues. The Fourth E Over the years, Staff has applied the three E’s: education, enforcement and engineering to address traffic safety issues in the Village. With the idea of the five new programs, we have considered a fourth E: expectation. Even though there are differences from neighborhood to neighborhood, street to street, and block to block, there are often similarities that cause motorists to expect consistent traffic regulations. For example, one street may have a posted 20mph speed limit and the adjacent street with similar characteristics may have a posted 25mph speed limit. Without a certain level of standardization, the expectation of a motorist may not be met which can, in this case, reduce a sign’s effectiveness over time and lead to a high rate of disobedience. One primary goal, therefore, is to provide a higher level of standardization (when appropriate) in order to achieve greater obedience by motorists. This concept has been incorporated into some of the new programs as well as recently completed programs. Recent Accomplishments Even before the five proposed programs were conceived, the Engineering Staff developed and implemented three traffic safety programs in recent years that provided this higher level of standardization. The Weight Limit Ordinance passed in 2001 is a comprehensive ordinance that provides a consistent weight limit on our local streets. In addition, the School Crossing Sign Program had Staff identify key street crossing points of school children. After developing a sign location plan for each school, it was systematically implemented between 2000 and 2003. Not only is there standardization now at each of the schools with the locations of the signs but they have all been replaced with the new standard fluorescent green color as well. Finally, the Crosswalk Program had Staff develop a master layout plan for the entire Village that considered both the design and appropriate locations of crosswalks. This plan was implemented in 2003 and 2004. Proposed Programs In an effort to further our proactive approach in addressing traffic safety issues, below are five new programs that the Engineering Staff wishes to present for consideration: ??Residential Speed Limit Program ??Residential Intersection Traffic Control Program ??Village Code Review ??Education Program ??Traffic Calming Program Phone 847/870-5640 Fax 847/253-9377 www.mountprospect.org As part of the Residential Speed Limit Program, Staff would review existing speed limits neighborhood by neighborhood using today’s engineering principles in an effort to provide an expected pattern of speed limits on our local streets thus creating a higher level of standardization and safety. As part of the Residential Intersection Traffic Control Program, Staff would review each intersection under the Village’s jurisdiction neighborhood by neighborhood using today’s engineering principles to determine the appropriate traffic control (stop signs, yield signs, uncontrolled). As part of the Village Code Review, Staff would update Chapter 18 (Traffic) as well as its Appendix that contains all the traffic regulations (speed limits, stop signs, yield signs, turn restrictions, parking restrictions, etc.) to make sure it is consistent with actual signage in the field. As part of the Education Program, the Engineering Staff would partner with other departments such as Police, Fire and Community Development to come up with creative ways in getting the public involved in addressing traffic safety issues in neighborhoods and providing information to ease traffic concerns and enhance safety. As part of the Traffic Calming Program, Staff would determine the appropriate criteria to warrant and process to follow when considering traffic calming measures as a means of addressing traffic safety issues. Staff has done a significant amount of research in the past on traffic calming and made a presentation to the Village Board on the issue in 2000. We have also experimented with temporary measures and have implemented a couple of permanent measures in neighborhoods. Before considering additional projects, however, Staff believes a detailed program is necessary so that the players (Staff, residents, business owners, motorists, Village Board) have the same understanding as to how traffic calming will be dealt with in Mount Prospect. Safety Commission Presentation Even though each of the programs are outlined in the Traffic Proposal, only the Residential Speed Limit Program has been developed in detail thus far. The Engineering Staff has spent a considerable amount of time developing this program and received the Village Board’s concurrence th at the September 28 Committee-of-the-Whole Meeting to begin gathering the necessary data to implement the program. In addition, we will plan on touching on the other four programs in our presentation to the Safety Commission to further facilitate discussion. The Village Code Review and Education Program are long-term goals and have not been developed in detail yet. We have begun to develop the Residential Intersection Traffic Control Program and Traffic Calming Program but many questions have surfaced during discussion among the Engineering Staff. We will be introducing these topics but will request a workshop be set for a future Committee-of-the- Whole Meeting where the Safety Commission is invited to attend. The purpose of the workshop will be for Staff to present the programs in greater detail, raise questions regarding the development of the programs and receive input and direction from the Village Board and Safety Commission. 2) Discussion Chairman Bencic asked Traffic Engineer Lawrie to make the presentation prepared by Staff to the Safety Commission. Traffic Engineer Lawrie discussed the current approach to dealing with traffic issues, highlighted some recent accomplishments, and presented the five proposed programs in a twenty-minute presentation to the Safety Commission. Chairman Bencic opened discussion to the Safety Commission. Phone 847/870-5640 Fax 847/253-9377 www.mountprospect.org Chairman Bencic asked about the effectiveness of the Weight Limit Ordinance passed a few years ago. Traffic Engineer Lawrie said the ordinance still allows overweight vehicles with legitimate business to use Village streets but prevents cut thru traffic. The Police Department can better track overweight vehicles in the Village and ticket unwarranted vehicles. Chairman Bencic questioned whether the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices is better suited for major roads rather than neighborhood roads when it comes to stop sign warrants. Traffic Engineer Lawrie said the manual still applies and Staff supplements it with information from Northwestern University that is applicable to neighborhood roads. There was some general discussion about the Traffic Control Program. It was noted that some intersections with existing stop signs may not meet currents warrants and the Safety Commission and Village Board will need to decide how to handle this situation. Fire Captain Livingston expressed a concern with the use of speed humps as a traffic calming device. He believes they will have a negative effect on emergency response. Mr. Bures said that speed humps would be difficult for snow plows to negotiate. There was some more general discussion about traffic calming. Chairman Bencic thought it would be more efficient to present the speed limit recommendations on a Village-wide basis versus zone-by-zone. There was general consensus that one or a few meetings should be held rather than one for each zone. Chairman Bencic asked Traffic Engineer Lawrie to consider not designating Meier Road from Lincoln Street to the cul-de-sac as a collector street. Also, he questioned whether Westgate Road should be a collector street. Traffic Engineer Lawrie said he would review it. Village Engineer Wulbecker told the Safety Commission that Staff has developed a lot of questions and their input will help direct Staff and help the Village Board make decisions. The information presented tonight is to prepare the Safety Commission for the workshop. Commissioner Tortorello suggested using the Village newsletter as a source of communicating the Speed Limit Program. There was general support for this idea. Deputy Police Chief Dahlberg does not want to see zone-by-zone meetings. He suggested having three meetings (north, central, south) showing the proposed changes. The meetings would be used to educate the residents as opposed to getting their approval. Village Engineer Wulbecker reminded the Safety Commission that with whatever avenue is decided, there would still need to be notification to the residents. There was some discussion about the workshop and there was consensus that a Tuesday night would be acceptable as it would be easier for the Village Board. Monday night would also be acceptable. Chairman Bencic closed the discussion on the issue. COMMISSION ISSUES No other Safety Commission items were brought forth at this time. Phone 847/870-5640 Fax 847/253-9377 www.mountprospect.org ADJOURNMENT With no further business to discuss, the Safety Commission voted 7-0 to adjourn at 8:20 p.m. upon the motion of Mr. Bures. Commissioner Tortorello seconded the motion. Respectfully submitted, Matthew P. Lawrie, P.E. Traffic Engineer x:\engineering\traffic\safecomm\recs&min\ded04min.doc Phone 847/870-5640 Fax 847/253-9377 www.mountprospect.org