Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/13/2006 SC minutes Director Glen R. Andler Deputy Director Sean P. Dorsey Mount Prospect Public Works Department 1700 W. Central Road, Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056-2229 MINUTES OF THE MOUNT PROSPECT SAFETY COMMISSION DRAFT CALL TO ORDER The Regular Meeting of the Mount Prospect Safety Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. on Monday, February 13,2006. ROLL CALL Present upon roll call: Chuck Bencic John Keane Carol Tortorello Marshall Petersen Buz Livingston Ken Lee Paul Bures Matt Lawrie Absent: Kevin Grouwinkel Mark Miller Others in Attendance: Al Schovanec APPROVAL OF MINUTES Chairman Vice Chairman Commissioner Commissioner Fire Department Representative Police Department Representative Public Works Representative Traffic Engineer - Staff Liaison Commissioner Commissioner 1112 Sycamore Lane Commissioner Keane, seconded by Commissioner Tortorello, moved to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the Safety Commission held on December 12,2005. The minutes were approved by a vote of 7-0. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD There was no one in attendance that spoke on an issue not on the agenda. Phone 847/870-5640 Fax 847/253-9377 www.mountprospect.org OLD BUSINESS None. NEW BUSINESS A) TRAFFIC STUDY AT THE INTERSECTION OF SYCAMORE LN & DOGWOOD LN 1) Background Information The intersection of Sycamore Lane and Dogwood Lane is uncontrolled. Petition information was forwarded to the owner at 1305 Dogwood Lane in July 2002, however, interest from the neighborhood was not generated and a petition was never returned to the Village to perform a study. A rollover crash occurred at this intersection in September 2005 which prompted a reaction from concerned residents to review this intersection for traffic control signs. A year ago the Village Board of Trustees had directed Staff to no longer present traffic control studies of individual intersections. Rather, a new program has begun that reviews intersection traffic control on a neighborhood-wide basis. Due to the severity of the recent crash and because this neighborhood will not be studied in the near future, Staff was instructed by the Manager's Office to perform a study and provide recommendations. The Village Board of Trustees recently allowed Staff to again study the traffic control at individual intersections with the understanding that any decisions would be an interim solution until the entire neighborhood could be reviewed. 2) Staff Study a) Crashes A search of the crash reports by the Police Department indicated: Year 2002 (Oct) 2003 2004 2005 Number of Accidents . o o o 1 The crash report indicated the eastbound driver accelerated through the intersection believing she could avoid a crash. The northbound driver did not see the other vehicle until right before impact. The northbound driver told police she had just stopped at a stop sign at the intersection one block prior. The cause of the crash was the eastbound driver failing to yield to a vehicle on the right. The northbound driver may have contributed by assuming she had the right-of-way and not paying attention before entering the intersection. b) Speed Data Representative speed studies were performed at the intersection between October 4th and 7th. The average and 85th percentile speeds are as follows: Northbound Sycamore Lane Southbound Sycamore Lane Eastbound Dogwood Lane Westbound Dogwood Lane average 23 mph 24 mph 21 mph 21 mph 85th % 29 mph 30 mph 29 mph 28 mph Phone 847/870-5640 Fax 847/253-9377 www.iTlountprospect.org The speed limit on Sycamore Lane and Dogwood Lane is 25mph. Based on the results, there doesn't appear to be an overall speeding problem. However, the data did show some motorists did drive above the speed limit as is evident on most residential streets. c) Volume Data Traffic volume data was gathered between October 4th and 7th. Based on the results, there are approximately 900 vehicles per day that enter the intersection. 700 vehicles travel on Sycamore Lane and 200 vehicles on Dogwood Lane. The peak hour of the day (typically 7am-8am) experiences approximately 80 vehicles that enter the intersection. d) Traffic Control Signs at Adiacent Intersections Traffic control signs adjacent to the intersection are as follows: Sycamore Lane & Cedar Lane (north) - uncontrolled Sycamore Lane & Greenwood Drive (south) - 4-way Stop signs Barberry Lane & Dogwood Lane (east) - uncontrolled Westgate Road & Dogwood Lane (west) - Stop sign on Dogwood Lane e) Sight Obstructions Based on an inspection of the area, the southwest corner has landscaping (bushes) close to the intersection. The bushes are taller than three feet and, therefore, would qualify per Village Code as a sight obstruction for motorists. Even though the bushes are not wide, they may make it difficult for eastbound motorists to see northbound vehicles and vice-versa. Since this intersection currently is uncontrolled, the safe approach speed on this street should be greater than the measured 85th percentile speed to remain uncontrolled. The safe approach speed is the speed at which a typical motorist when seeing an approaching vehicle on the cross street can safely stop their vehicle before reaching the intersection to avoid a crash. If the safe approach speed is greater than the measured 85th percentile speed and there is not a history of crashes, it can be appropriate to leave the intersection uncontrolled. If the safe approach speed is greater than the measured 85th percentile speed but there are concerns such as crashes, Yield signs would be an appropriate solution. If the safe approach speed is less than the measured 85th percentile speed, Stop signs would be appropriate to define the right-of- way. These standards come from the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). Staffs measurements reveal that the bushes and houses limit the visibility for motorists approaching the intersection such that a vehicle must travel less than the measured 85th percentile speed in order to have enough time to make a safe decision. t) Evaluation All-Way Stop Signs- All-way Stop signs are normally warranted at intersections where there is a significant amount of vehicles and pedestrians, many crashes, or severely restricted view. They are typically placed at the intersection of two collector streets or two minor arterial streets. Sycamore Lane and Dogwood Lane are classified as local streets. The peak hour of the day experiences approximately 80 vehicles entering the intersection. In order to meet the criterion according to the MUTCD, the volume entering the intersection from the major street approaches (total of both approaches) is to average 300 vehicles per hour for any 8 hours of the day and 200 vehicles per hour for the same 8 hours from the minor street approaches. Therefore, it does not meet the volume criterion. There has been 1 recorded crash over the past 3 years. In order to meet the criterion for an all-way stop sign installation according to the MUTCD, there are to be 5 crashes in a 12- month period. It does not meet the crash rate criterion. Phone 847/870-5640 Fax 847/253-9377 wwvv. mountprospect. 0 ~'g Based on an inspection, the southwest corner has a small amount of landscaping close to the intersection that could limit the visibility for motorists to see vehicles on the cross street. While the landscaping is considered a sight obstruction per the Village Code regulations, Staff would not conclude the intersection as having a "severely restricted view" where it would necessitate motorists to have to stop in all four directions. Based on the data collected in the traffic study, Staff would not recommend all-way Stop signs at this intersection. One Street Stop Signs - Stop signs on one street are normally warranted at intersections where the criteria for an all- way Stop sign installation is not met but where a full stop is necessary at all times on one street in order to clarify the right-of-way. With this application Stop signs are typically installed on the minor street which, for this case, would be Dogwood Lane. When considering intersection traffic control other than all-way Stop signs, typical engineering practice is to first determine the safe approach speed for each direction. If a motorist must travel at a speed less than the measured 85th percentile speed when approaching an intersection because of a sight obstruction in order to have enough time to avoid a crash, Stop signs should be considered rather than Yield signs. Otherwise, an uncontrolled intersection or Yield signs should be considered depending on the crash history. For this case, the safe approach speed for all four directions is less than the measured 85th percentile speed. Therefore, leaving the intersection uncontrolled or adding Yield signs are not recommended. Trimming or removing the bushes at the southwest corner would improve the visibility but the safe approach speed would still be less than the measured 85th percentile speed because of the close proximity of the houses to the intersection. Therefore, Stop signs on the minor street are recommended to clarify the right-of-way. The recent crash also supports the need for traffic control. For the eastbound driver accelerating through the intersection, the limited sight distance may not have given her adequate time to make a safe decision and avoid a collision. For the northbound driver who stopped at a stop sign the intersection prior, she may have assumed she had the right-of-way since most of the 4-intersections in the neighborhood have some sort of traffic control. The addition of Stop signs on the minor street will address the limited sight distance issue and provide a higher level of standardization of traffic control in the neighborhood. This decision is also consistent with the evaluation process currently being used in the program to determine traffic control at intersections on a neighborhood-wide basis. 3) Recommendation Based on the traffic study, Staff recommends: h installation of Stop signs on Dogwood Lane at Sycamore Lane 110 trimming or removal of the bushes at the southwest corner of the intersection 4) Discussion Al Schovanec, 1112 Sycamore Lane, commented on speeding vehicles along Sycamore Lane. He was appreciative of the study and suggested the Village also review the intersection of Sycamore Lane and Barberry Lane. Chairman Bencic asked Traffic Engineer Lawrie to present the study and recommendations to the Safety Commission. Traffic Engineer Lawrie reviewed both studies since the intersections are adjacent to each other. Phone 847/870-5640 Fax 847/253-9377 www.mountprospect.org Commissioner Petersen commented that the vehicles involved in the recent crash appeared to be speeding based on the results. He also agreed that the bush at the southwest corner could be trimmed to improve the visibility. This prompted a discussion of sight obstructions at other intersections in the neighborhood. Commissioner Keane, seconded by Mr. Bures, moved to approve the recommendations of the Village Traffic Engineer. The motion was approved by a vote of 7-0. B) TRAFFIC STUDY AT THE INTERSECTION OF SYCAMORE LN & CEDAR LN 1) Background Information The intersection of Sycamore Lane and Cedar Lane is uncontrolled. With the recommendation to install Stop signs on Dogwood Lane at Sycamore Lane, this would be the only 4-leg intersection in the area that would be uncontrolled. This intersection is similar in characteristic to Sycamore Lane and Dogwood Lane. By installing traffic control signs at one intersection and not reviewing the adjacent uncontrolled intersection, there is the potential for increasing crashes at the only remaining uncontrolled intersection in the neighborhood. To provide a higher level of standardization and to better meet driver expectation, this study is being done simultaneous to the traffic study at Sycamore Lane and Dogwood Lane. 2) Staff Study a) Crashes A search of the crash reports by the Police Department indicated: Year 2002 (Oct) 2003 2004 2005 Number of Accidents o 2 1 '0 All three crashes were right angle crashes indicating limited sight distance may have been a factor. This would result in insufficient time to avoid a collision. b) Speed Data Representative speed studies were performed on Cedar Lane between May 17th and 20th as part of the program reviewing residential speed limits and on Sycamore Lane between October 4th and 7th. The average and 85th percentile speeds are as follows: Northbound Sycamore Lane Southbound Sycamore Lane Eastbound Cedar Lane Westbound Cedar Lane average 23 mph 24 mph 22 mph 20 mph 8Sth% 29 mph 30 mph 29 mph 27 mph The speed limit on Sycamore Lane and Cedar Lane is 25mph. Based on the results, there doesn't appear to be an overall speeding problem. However, the data did show some motorists did drive above the speed limit as is evident on most residential streets. Phone 847/870-5640 Fax 847/253..9377 wwvv.mountprospecl.org c) Volume Data Traffic volume data was gathered on Cedar Lane between May 17th and 20th and on Sycamore Lane between October 4th and 7th. Based on the results, there are approximately 850 vehicles per day that enter the intersection. 700 vehicles travel on Sycamore Lane and 150 vehicles on Cedar Lane. The peak hour of the day (typically 7am-8am) experiences approximately 80 vehicles that enter the intersection. d) Traffic Control Signs at Adiacent Intersections Traffic control signs adjacent to the intersection are as follows: Sycamore Lane & Barberry Lane (north) - Stop sign on northbound Sycamore Lane Sycamore Lane & Dogwood Lane (south) - uncontrolled Barberry Lane & Cedar Lane (east) - uncontrolled Barberry Lane & Cedar Lane (west) - uncontrolled e) Sight Obstructions Based on an inspection of the area, the northwest corner has low-lying landscaping close to the intersection. The ground cover is shorter than three feet and, therefore, would not qualify per Village Code as a sight obstruction for motorists. There is, however, an evergreen tree and bush a little further from the intersection at the same corner that may make it difficult for eastbound motorists to see southbound vehicles and vice-versa. The southeast corner has a four foot tall fence and bushes near the house that may limit visibility as well. Since this intersection currently is uncontrolled, the safe approach speed on this street should be greater than the measured. 85th percentile speed to remain uncontrolled. The safe approach speed is the speed at which a typical motorist when seeing an approaching vehicle on the cross street can safely stop their vehicle before reaching the intersection to avoid a crash. If the safe approach speed is greater than the measured 85th percentile speed and there is not a history of crashes, it can be appropriate to leave the intersection uncontrolled. If the safe approach speed is greater than the measured 85th percentile speed but there are concerns such as crashes, Yield signs would be an appropriate solution. If the safe approach speed is less than the measured 85th percentile speed, Stop signs would be appropriate to define the right- of-way. These standards come from the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). Staffs measurements reveal that the evergreen tree, bushes, fence and houses all contribute to limiting the visibility for motorists approaching the intersection such that a vehicle must travel less than the measured 85th percentile speed in order to have enough time to make a safe decision. f) Evaluation All-Way Stop Signs- All-way Stop signs are normally warranted at intersections where there is a significant amount of vehicles and pedestrians, many crashes, or severely restricted view. They are typically placed at the intersection of two collector streets or two minor arterial streets. Sycamore Lane and Cedar Lane are classified as local streets. The peak hour of the day experiences approximately 80 vehicles entering the intersection. In order to meet the criterion according to the MUTCD, the volume entering the intersection from the major street approaches (total of both approaches) is to average 300 vehicles per hour for any 8 hours of the day and 200 vehicles per hour for the same 8 hours from the minor street approaches. Therefore, it does not meet the volume criterion: Phone 847/870-5640 Fax 847/253-9377 WW'N. rno untprospect.org There have been 3 recorded crashes over the past 3 years. In order to meet the criterion for an all-way stop sign installation according to the MUTCD, there are to be 5 crashes in a 12- month period. It does not meet the crash rate criterion. Based on an inspection, the northwest and southeast comers have landscaping that could limit the visibility for motorists to see vehicles on the cross street. While the landscaping is considered a sight obstruction per the Village Code regulations, there is not any immediately adjacent to the intersection. Therefore, Staff would not conclude the intersection as having a "severely restricted view" where it would necessitate motorists to have to stop in all four directions. Based on the data collected in the traffic study, Staff would not recommend all-way Stop signs at this intersection. One Street Stop Signs - Stop signs on one street are normally warranted at intersections where the criteria for an all- way Stop sign installation is not met but where a full stop is necessary at all times on one street in order to clarify the right-of-way. With this application Stop signs are typically installed on the minor street which, for this case, would be Cedar Lane. When considering intersection traffic control other than all-way Stop signs, typical engineering practice is to first determine the safe approach speed for each direction. If a motorist must travel at a speed less than the measured 85th percentile speed when approaching an intersection because of a sight obstruction in order to have enough time to avoid a crash, Stop signs should be considered rather than Yield signs. Otherwise, an uncontrolled intersection or Yield signs should be considered depending on the crash history. For this case, the safe approach speed for all four directions is less than the measured 85th percentile speed. Therefore, leaving the intersection uncontrolled or adding Yield signs are not recommended. Trimming or removing the evergreen tree and bushes at the northwest and southeast corners would improve the visibility but the safe approach speed would still be less than the measured 85lh percentile speed because of the close proximity of the houses to the intersection. Therefore, Stop signs on the minor street are recommended to clarify the right- of-way. The recent crashes also support the need for traffic control. With all three being right angle crashes, the limited sight distance may not give adequate time to make a safe decision and avoid a collision. The addition of Stop signs on the minor street will address the limited sight distance issue and provide a higher level of standardization of traffic control in the neighborhood. This decision is also consistent with the evaluation process currently being used in the program to determine traffic control at intersections on a neighborhood-wide basis. If approved, Stop signs on Cedar Lane and Dogwood Lane at their intersections with Sycamore Lane would be installed allowing for 800' of uninterrupted flow along Sycamore Lane from Barberry Lane to Ironwood Drive. Staff does not believe this is a long length that promotes a cut through route. Rather, it defines the right-of-way along a street (Sycamore Lane) that has four to five times the amount of traffic compared to the minor streets. By controlling the minor street at these intersections, Staff anticipates a greater adherence to the Stop signs as opposed to installing the signs on Sycamore Lane. 3) Recommendation Based on the traffic study, Staff recommends: '" installation of Stop signs on Cedar Lane at Sycamore Lane Phone 847/870-5640 Fax 847/253-9377 www.mountprospect.org 4) Discussion Traffic Engineer Lawrie presented the study to the Safety Commission concurrently with the previous item. Officer Lee commented that he thought the recommendations were a great idea. There was no further discussion. Commissioner Keane, seconded by Commissioner Tortorello, moved to approve the recommendations of the Village Traffic Engineer. The motion was approved by a vote of 7-0. COMMISSION ISSUES Traffic Engineer Lawrie told the Safety Commission that next month's meeting will be held at Lincoln Junior High School. The See-Gwun Avenue speed hump project will be the only item on the agenda. He also mentioned that the Open Houses for the neighborhood program will be held at Prospect High School at the end of March or early April. The exact dates will be confirmed in the coming weeks. ADJOURNMENT With no further business to discuss, the Safety Commission voted 7-0 to adjourn at 7:30 p.m. upon the motion of Commissioner Keane. Commissioner Petersen seconded the motion. Respectfully submitted, ~ Matthew P. Lawrie, P .E. Traffic Engineer h:\engineering\traffic\safecomm\recs&min\feb06min.doc Phone 847/870-5640 Fax 847/253-9377 WVV\tV .11'10 U ntprospeGtor~1