Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/10/2002 SC minutes len R Andler M. Lisa Angell Mount Prospect Public Works Department 1700 W. Central Road, Mount Prospect, IlIinois 60056-222S Phone 847/870-5~40 Fax ~47/253-9377 TDD ~47/3S2-1235 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 7:35 p.m. on Monday, June 10, 2002. ROLL CALL Present upon roll call: Absent: Others in Attendance: Chuck Bencic Lee Beening John Keane Andy Mitchell Carol Tortorello Mark Bonner Buz Livingston' Paul Bures Matt Lawrie Chairman Vice Chairman Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Police Department Fire Department Public Works Public Works/Engineering Division Joan Bjork Commissioner See attached attendance sheet APPROVAL OF MI2q-UTES Commissioner Keane, seconded by Commissioner Tortorell0, moved to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the Safety Commission held on March 11, 2001. The minutes were approved by a vote of 8-0. ! Recycled Paper - Printed with Soy ink CITIZENS TO BE HE.42KD Mr. Norm Kurtz, 32 W. Busse Avenue, requested the Commission consider ways to make the downtown area more pedestrian friendly. With the development of the condos, restaurants and shops, lowering the speed limits and prohibiting right tums when pedestrians are present will make it safer according to Mr. Kurtz. Commissioner Bencic asked that Staff review the intersections in the downtown area and bring the issue back to the Commission for discussion at the next meeting. No further citizens came forth to discuss any topics that were not on the current agenda. OLD BUSINESS No old items were discussed by the Commission. NEW BUSINESS ^) REQUEST FOR PARKING P,~STRICTION CHANGES ALONG WILLE STREET AND HE}NrRy STREET 1) Backgound Information Ms. Annette Woods, 115 N'. Wille Street, .has requeste{ the No Parking.signs along the east side of Wille Street be removed. An unemployment office caused parking problems in the neighborhood which resulted in the parking restrictions. However, the unemployment office no longer exists. 2) Staff Study Within the last couple of years, the Mount Prospect National Bank was constructed where the unemployment office once stood. Ample parking is provided on the property. It is not believed the new development will cause similar traff~c safety concerns should the current parking restrictions be modified. Most of the streets in the neighborhood have parking restricted to two hours during the week. With the presence of the train station nearby, there is a concern of commuters potentially parking on Village streets during the day. The 2-hr Parking signs in the neighborhood have been in place for many years. The resident who requested the No Parking signs be removed was notified that should the Village support the request, it would still be necessary to have parking restrictions along the streets to deter commuters from parking in the neighborhood. The proposed 2-hour parking restrictions on the weekdays should be effective in preventing commuters from parking in the neighborhood. Commuter parking areas often become full near the train station and, therefore, less convenient for commuters. Rather than choosing to pay for commuter parking not close to the n-ain station, some motorists attempt to look for convenient on-street parking in the neighborhoods. This is why Village streets north and south of the commuter lots near the train station have parking restrictions. The proposed 2-hour parking, 3) 4) while still restrictive, does allow residents more opportunity to utilize the streets for parking. During the weekends when commuter parking is not as much of a concern, the parking restrictions would not be in effect. Finally, the proposed 2-hour parking would be consistent with the other streets in the neighborhood. 52 surveys were distributed to the residents that live adjacent to the proposed parking restrictions. In addition, a survey'was sent to the Mount Prospect National Bank. 18 surveys were returned to the Village. Of the returned surveys, I3 support the proposed changes. Recommendation Based on the sm~ty performed by Staff: The Village Traffic Engineer recommends approval of removing the No Parking 7am~6pm Monday-Friday signs and replacing them with 2-hr Parking 7am-6pm Monday-Friday signs along the east side of Wille Street between Central Road and Thayer Street, the north side of Henry Street between Pine Street and Emerson Street, and the south side of Henry Street between Wille Street and Main Street. Discussion Traffic Engineer Lawrie provided an overview of the report to the Commission. Commissioner Bencic opened up the discussion tq the audience. Mr. Ben Trapani, representing Mount Prospect National Bank, would prefer the parking restrictions on Henry Street near Main Street to remain as is. With vehicles turning onto and off of Main Street, a parked car on Henry Street would not create a safe situation. Mr. Norm Kurtz, 32 W. Busse Avenue, did not see a benefit in allo~ving parking on Henry Street between Main Street and Wille Street. With no more comments from the audience, Commissioner Bencic returned the discussion to the Commission. Commission Tortorello also expressed a concern with allowing parking on Henry Street between Main Street and Wille Street. Commissioner Mitchell questioned whether any of the parking restrictions on Henry Street should be modified. Captain Livingston said that keeping the intersection clear would allow for easy access for the Fire Department and would support not making any changes on Henry Street. Some general discussion took place regarding the width of the street and whether parking should be allowed on both Henry Street and Wille Street. The Commission weighed the benefits of allowing limited parking for residents versus the issue of traffic safety with vehicles parked on both sides of the street. Commissioner Keane, seconded by Commissioner Mitchell, moved to approve replacing the No Parking signs along the east side of Wille Street bet3veen Central Road and Thayer Street with 2-hr Parking signs and not make any changes to the parking restrictions along Henry Street. The motion was approved by a vote of 8-0. B) l) 2) REQUEST FOR PARKING RESTRICTIONS ALONG CATHY LANE Backgound Information Mr. Lou Ennesser of the Mount Prospect Park District brought this parking issue to the Village's attention after receiving complaints fi.om residents of the Miller Station Subdivision as well as visitors to the park district building. When vehicles are parked on both sides of the street, it is difficult to maintain two-way traffic. For motorists exiting the property, it is difficult to see southbound vehicles on Cathy Lane with vehicles parked on the west side of the street. Staff Study The Mount Prospect Park District opened a new facility at the northwest comer of Central Road and Cathy Lane in 2001. There are two driveways connected to Cathy Lane and none off of Central Road. 130 parking spaces were constructed in the parking lot and room left to add 19 more spaces in the future. The commercial property on the east side of Cathy Lane does not have access to Cathy Lane. Their driveway is connected to Central Road. To the west, Millers Lane is a right-in only from Central Road. Therefore, the residents of the Millers Station Subdivision must exit their neighborhood using Cathy Lane. Staff made observations of the parking situation at different times throughout the week. During the weekday, there are ample parking spaces available as it appears administration is the primary user of the spaces. No on-street parking was observed. During the evening hours, there is more vehicular activity. However, no vehicles were observed to be parked on the street on the days observations were made. The weekends saw the most activity. Vehicles were observed to be parked on both sides of the street (2-10 vehicles) at different times during the weekend. Again, however, ample parking spaces were available at the north end of the lot. It appears motorists are choosing to park on Cathy Lane out of convenience rather that necessity. The doors to the building are near the south end of the building. Rather than parking at the north end of the lot and walking a little farther, motorists choose a closer option since there are no parking restrictions on Cathy Lane. A survey was sent to the Millers Station Condominium Association to get their opinion on this issue. The survey was then distributed to the residents. The Village received 3 completed surveys. The primary concerns from the surveys are the difficulty in maintaining two-way traffic with cars parked on both sides of the street and the difficulty of motorists leaving the park district seeing southbound cars with cars parked on the west side of the street. 2) 4) The pr/mary issues are traffic movement and traffic safety. With vehicles parked on both sides of the street, two-way traffic cannot be maintained~ For this reason, at a minimum, vehicles should only be allowed to park on one side of the street. This would improve traffic movement. Also, prohibiting parking on both sides of Cathy Lane near Central Road should be maintained for access onto and off of Central Road. From a traffic safety standpoint, allowing parking on the west side of the street will allow children and adults to not have to cross the street to get to the park district building. However, prohibiting parking on the west side of the street will improve visibility of traffic on Cathy Lane for a motorist exiting the park district's parking lot. To address both safety issues, the best solution may be to prohibit parking on both sides of the street as long as the parking lot can meet the demands of the expected visitors. As par~ of construction of a development, sufficient parking spaces are to be provided on-site to relieve the burden of Village streets from handling parking. The number of existing parking spaces in the park district's lot meets the requirements of the Village Code. In addition, room has been provided at the north end of the property to add 19 more parking spaces in the future. Therefore, Village streets should not have to provide any parking for the park district. In the future, should there be a demand for more parking, the 19 spaces would be roughly equal to the number of spaces that could be provided by allowing parking on one side of Cathy Lane adjacent to the park district property. Since it appears motorists are simply choosing to park on Cathy Lane out of convenience and ample off-street parking is provided, it would be appropriate to prohibit parking on both sides of the. street adjacent fo the park dis'tri~t. This decision would address bo. th traffic movement and traffic safety issues. From an on-street parking standpo!nt, this slSohld not negatively affect residents of the Millers Station Subdivision. They would still be able to park on the street in front of their homes. If, in the future, the park district experiences a larger parking demand, the parking lot could be expanded. If there was still a demand for parking, the Village at that time could revisit the issue to consider allowing some on-street parking. Recommendation Based on the study performed by s~aff: The Village Traffic Engineer recommends approval of installing No Parking Any Time signs along the east and west sides of Cathy Lane for the first 500' north of Central Road. Discussion Traffic Engineer Lawrie provided an overview of the report to the Commission. Commissioner Bencic opened up the discussion to the audience. Mr. Dermis O'Meara, 105 N. Cathy Lane, President of the Millers Station Condominium Association, supports no parking on both sides of Cathy Lane in front of the park district building. He never sees the parking lot full and it is difficult for the residents to access Central Road with vehicles parked on the street. 5 Mr. Dan Frasco. 502 See-Gwun Avenue, visits the park district on a regular basis and believes it is difficult to find parking spaces in the winter months during hockey season. Most of the time, however, there is plenty' of space in the lot. Mr. Lou Ennesser of the Mount Prospect Park D/strict says there have been times when the parking lot becomes full and vehicles park on the street. With the Village Board meetings now coming to the park district building, he is concerned vehicles would begin to park on Cathy Lane in the residential area if the proposed parking restrictions passed. There was some general discussion between the audience and Commission members regarding the pros and cons of limiting parking to one side of the street. Two-way traffic can still be maintained with parked vehicles on one side of the street. However, pedestrians must cross the street to get to the park district building ;vhen parking on the east side. Visibility is reduced for vehicles exiting the park district building with vehicles parked on the west side. With no more comments from the audience, Commissioner Bencic returned the discussion to the Commission. Commissioner Beening asked if there were any conditions of if and when the additional parking spaces could be installed. Mr. Ennesser responded that he was not aware of any conditions that had to be met other than when it becomes apparent the parking demand exceeds the availability. There was some additional discussion about prohibiting parking to one side of the street only. In the interest of safety, the comrmssion members concluded it would be appropriate to prohibit parking on both sides of the street. Mr. Bures, seconded by Commissioner Mitchell, mo~,ed to approve installing No Parking Any Time signs along the east and west sides of Cathy Lane for the first 500~ north of Central Road. The motion was approved by a vote of 8-0; Commissioner Bencic asked that Staff monitor the parking situation through the upcoming winter and if there is a demand for more parking spaces, require the park district.to install the 19 spaces. A review of the parking restrictions along Cathy Lane could also be done to determine if on- street parking is also needed. c) i) TRAFFIC-RELATED ISSUES ALONG SEE-GWUN AVENUE Background Information Mr. Jim Sheehy, 708 See-Gwun Avenue, submitted a petition of 44 homes along See-Gwun Avenue to the Safety Commission at their March meeting. The issues were the excessive amount of vehicies traveling See-Gxvun Avenue and the excessive speeding along the street. At the time, the Commission asked Staff to review the traffic conditions along the street and report back at the next meeting. Below is a summary of Staff's report. 6 2) See-Gvrun Avenue is defined as a collector street in the Village Code. The street runs between Golf Road (major arterial) and Lincoln Street (collector). It is the only north-south street between Busse Road and Route 83 that has a bridge over Weller Creek. Between Golf Road and Lonnquist Boulevard, See-Gwun Avenue is 31' wide (back-of-curb to back-of-curb). This portion of the street is relatively fiat and straight. Between Lonnquist Boulevard and Lincoln Street, See-Gwun Avenue is 26' wide (back-of-curb to back-of-curb). The low point for this portion of the street is at the bridge. Also, the street has slight curves in the road north of Lonnquist Boulevard and north of Go-Wando Trail. Sidewalk exists along both sides of See-Gwun Avenue except for a few locations on the west side of the street: in front of the golf course, near the bridge and at 700 and 716 See-Gwun Avenue. See-Gwun Avenue between Golf Road and Lonnquist Boulevard is scheduled to be resurfaced by the Village in 2002. At the time of the study; intermittent curb repair had taken place but the road surface was intact. Between Lincoln Street and Council Trail, See-Gwun Avenue is scheduled to be resurfaced in 2004. Finally, the portion of See-Gwun Avenue between Council Trail and Lonnquist Boulevard is currently not on the Village's 5-year resurfacing plan. The Illinois Department of Transportation has begun a resurfacing project along Golf Road. At the time of the study, curb repair had been completed and concrete patch work of the roadway had begun. The roadway has been reduced to one travel lane in each direction. This project is expected to be completed August 2002. Mount Prospect Golf Course is located at the southwest comer of See-Gwun Avenue and Shabonee Trail. The golf course has a driveway off of both streets. The g01f course is quite busy during the summer months. Lincoln Junior High School and St. Raymond's School are both located along Lincoln Street near See-Gwun Avenue. The Village previously gathered speed and volume data along See-Gwun Avenue at three locations in July of 2000 during the Route 83 Reconstruction Project..Average speeds varied between 27-30mph and volume varied between 2000-3000 vehicles on a daily basis. The Village has received some complaints over the years about the speeding and amount of traffic along See-Gwun Avenue. The Police Department has provided selective speed enforcement in the past along the street to address the speeding concern. Staff Study Traffic volume - Traffic counters were set out at 5 locations from May 6th to 13th to gather volume data. Daily volume along See-Gwun Avenue varied between 850-1800 vehicles. This is considerably less when compared to the results of July 2000 when Route 83 was under construction. Also, the volume, compares to other collector streets in the Village. 7 Street Cross Street Daily Volume Burning Bush Lane Burr Oak Drive 1900 Emerson Street Milburn Avenue 2600 Meier Road Mark Terrace 3800 See-Gwun Avenue Sunset Road 850 See-Gw'an Avenue Council Trail 1800 See-Gwun Avenue Lincoln Street 1000 Vehicle speed - Traffic counters were set out at 5 locations from May 6th to 13th to gather speed data. Average speeds along See-Gwun Avenue varied between 26-28mph. These speeds are slightly less when compared to the results of July 2000. Speed data was also collected on Wa-Ta Avenue, one block east of See-Gw~n Avenue as a comparison. Street Cross Street Burning Bush Lane Emerson Street Na-Wa-Ta Avenue See-G~vun Avenue See-Gxvun Avenue See-Gvean Avenue Average Speed (mph) Speed Limit (mph) Burr Oak Drive 27 25 Milburn Avenue 28 20 Sunset Road 25 20 Sunset Road 26 25 Council Trail 28 25 Lincoln Street 26 25 nd Turning movements - On May 22 , turning movement data was gathered at 3 intersections along See-Gwun Avenue for a 1-hour period in the morning and 1-hour period in the afternoon. The purpose of this information is to see if there is a consistent traffic pattern(s) along the street. Fr6m Staf?s observations, mosbmotoris~s 'ti~ing See-Gwun Avenue appeal .to no~t be cutting through the neighborhood. In the morning, many neighborhood residents use See-Gwun Avenue to get to Lincoln Junior High School or St. Raymond's School. Most northbound vehicles had turned left onto See-Gwun Avenue from eastbound Lonnquist Boulevard to get to one of the schools. There were not a lot of vehicles coming from Golf Road north on See-Gw-an Avenue. In the afternoon, there was activity in and out of the golf course. In addition, both northbound and southbound See-Gwun Avenue sa~v an equal amount of vehicles as motorists were either using the street to get to the golf course or access their homes in the neighborhood. Again. a majority of the motorists using See-Gwun Avenue that live in the neighborhood appear to live west of See-Gwun Avenue based on our observations. More than likely, it appears residents east of See-Gw-un Avenue choose Route 83 as a primary north-south route to get over the creek. Overall, though, there was much more traffic on Lincoln Street and Lonnquist Boulevard than See-Gwun Avenue. Accident history - Staff contacted the Police Department and requested copies of all accident reports over the past five years for each intersection along See-G~vun Avenue between Golf Road and Lincoln Street. Below' is a summary of the number of accidents at each intersection relevant to this study. 8 1997 1998 1999 2000 200I 2002 (May) (Ma,/') Intersection Golf Road 0 0 0 3 1 0 Sunset Road 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lormquist Boulevard 0 1 0 0 0 0 Council Trail 0 0 0 0 0 0 Shabonee Trail 0 0 0 0 0 0 Go-Wando Trail 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lincoln Street 0 1 0 0 0 0 Sight obstractions - Staff' inspected each of the intersections to determine if there are any sight obstructions that may be a potential hazard for motorists and pedestrians. Of the seven intersections inspected, three appear to have landscaping near the comers that may be a potential hazard. First, at the intersection of See-Gwun Avenue and Golf Road there exists a 4' tall bush at the northeast comer on private property. While it is only a single bush, it lies within the sight triangle. Also, the northwest comer has multiple bushes varying between 5' and 12' tall. Again, some of the bushes, though on private property, are located within the sight triangle. Second, at the intersection is See-G~vun Avenue and Council Trail exists trees that line the bank of the creek making it difficult for motorists on Council Trail to see northbound vehicles. While the rail on the bridge also partially restricts the view, removing the landscaping will allow motorists on Council Trail to see northbound vehicles coming doxvn the hill before the bridge. Finally, the southeast comer of See-Gwun Avenue and Lincoln Street has a small bush near the intersection. Again, it lies within the sight tria,ngle e,,v?n though it is a single bush. Letters will be sent to the homeowners at G01f Road and at Lincoln Street as well as the park district (jurisdiction over creek) requesting that the bushes and trees be trimmed or removed, thus eliminating the sight obstructions. Road layout - Staff inspected the roadway and parkways to identify any improvements that may be necessary to improve safety for motorists and pedestrians. Between Golf Road and Lonnquist Boulevard, See-Gwun Avenue will be resurfaced this year. The work includes a new asphalt road, spot curb repair and replacing sidewalk that is considered a trip hazard. Also, each of the intersections has a street light and handicap sidewalk ramps. The portion of the road is straight and flat. Between Lormquist Boulevard and Council Trail, the roadway narrows 5' to 26' wide and sidewalk exists adjacent to the back-of-curb. The curb is a standard mountable curb for a residential area. Side~valk is missing along the frontage of 700 and 716 See-Gwun Avenue and also along the west side of the street near the bridge and along the park district frontage. Again, each of the intersections has a street light and handicap sidewalk ramps. The roadway is in fair condition. See-Gwun Avenue between Council Trail and Lincoln Street is showing signs of deterioration and is scheduled to be resurfaced in 2004. Sidewalk exists on both sides of the street and handicap ramps are at each of the intersections as well as street lights. The roadway north of Lonnquist Boulevard has slight curves and a hill south of the bridge. Finally, with the Golf Road work, the curb along the center mm lane will be removed and an improved mm lane on Golf Road xvill be installed making it easier and safer for eastbound motorists to turn onto northbound See-Gwun Avenue. Survey - 98 surveys ~vere sent to each of the homes along See-Gwun Avenue. Of the 98 surveys distributed, 42 were completed and sent back to the Village. Most received comments related to excessive speeding and volume issues. A few comments mentioned the concern for pedestrian 9 safety because of missing sidewalk or sidewalk adjacent to the curb. Also, a few comments raised the concern of a sight obstruction at the intersection of See-Gwun Avenue and Council Trail. Options Stop/Yield Signs - The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices recently released an updated version and has slightly modified the requirements to warrant multi-way stop signs. At the intersections of Lincoln Street and Golf Road with See-Gwun Avenue, a stop sign exists only on See-Gwun Avenue. There is a 4-way stop at the intersection of Lonnquist Boulevard and See- Gwun Avenue. The other intersections with See-Gwun Avenue have stop signs only on the minor streets. Based on the volume data and accident history, additional stop signs are not warranted at any of the intersections along See-Gwun Avenue. Even though some residents have insisted on installing stop signs along See-Gwun Avenue to control the speeding concern, Staff does not believe stop signs are an appropriate measure to address this issue. Also, since each of the intersections have stop signs to clarify the right-of-way, yield signs are not recommended to replace them. Adding Sidewalk - Sidewalk exists along most of See-Gwun Avenue. A large area where sidewalk does not exist is along the west side of the street near the bridge and in front of the golf course. The park d/strict ~s planning to rehabilitate the clubhouse and parking lot in the near future. As part of the project. ~r would be an opportunity to add sidewalk m the area. The other areas where sidewalk does not ex~st is m front of 700 and 716 See-Gwun Avenue. While this year's budg¢t would prevent the Village from installing sidewalk in 2002. these two areas could be considered for nexf y~ar's' sidewalk program as long as' the Village Board supports the program for another year. Relocating Sidewalk - With respect to relocating exisnng sidewalk, some residents have expressed a concern for pedestrian's safety because sidewalk is adjacent to the curb along the 700 block of See-Gw'an Avenue. This same situation exists along many of our streets including much of the downtown area such as Route 83 and Northwest Highway. Also. many neighborhood streets have sidewalk adjacent ro the curb such as portions of Lonnquist Boulevard, Ma-Na-Wa Avenue, Wa-Pella Avenue. I-Oka Avenue, Hi-Lusi Avenue and Sunset Road. A senior police officer has stated he is not aware of any vehicle-pedestrian accidents over the past 15 years as a result of a vehicle striking a pedestrian on a sidewalk. See-Gwun Avenue has a 66' right-of-way. Relocating the sidewalk to the right-of-way line would provide approximately 15' of parkxvay. However. of the 16 homes that would be affected, only 3 does not have landscaping or private lighting that would be ~n conflict with a new sidewalk. And should the residents agree to such work. the Village would not be able ro use Village funds solely. With the l{mited funds allocated each year. the Village focuses on handicap ramps, trip hazards and new sidewalk where no sidewalk exists. Resident participation (possibly 100%) would be necessary to relocate the sidewalk in the near future. Replacing Curb - One of the issues raised by the residents concerning pedestrian safety is the ability of vehicles to easily "hop" the curb onto the sidewalk along the 700 block of See-Gwun Avenue. A solution to this concern is to replace the mountable curb with a barrier curb. However, the Village resurfacing projects normally only provide for intermittent curb repair in order to keep costs down. Replacing the entire curb would be very expensive. The Village has many streets that have mountable curb with sidewalk adjacent to the street. Replacing the entire 10 curb for one street would set a precedent for all the other streets. The Village's current policy is to replace mountable curb with mountable curb and not install barrier curb along the entire street. The 700 block of See-Gwun Avenue is not scheduled to be resurfaced within the next 5 years. When the road is put into the system for resurfacing, Staff will be able to revisit the issue to see if funds may be available to replace the entire block with barrier curb. Remove Sight Obstructions - By taking measurements and inspecting each of the intersections, a few sight obstructions in the form of shrubs have been identified. Removing the sight obstructions will allow motorists to better see vehicles on the cross street before proceeding through the intersection. For those sight obstructions on public property, the Village will require the shrubs to be trimmed or removed by the homeowner. If the work is not done, the Village w/Il remove the shrubs. For those sight obstructions on private property, the Village will request the homeowner thru or remove the shrubs for the safety of motorists and pedcstr/ans at the intersection. Close Br/dge - In order to reduce'the traffic volume on See~GWUn Avenue, some residents have suggested closing the bridge. Not only would this force motorists' to find other alternatives and possibly create traffic issues on other streets, emergency vehicle response could be negatively affected. Add Bridge - Some residents have suggested constructing a second bridge across WeIler Creek between See-Gwun Avenue and Route 83 in order to reduce the traffic volume on See-Gwun Avenue. A second bridge along Candota Avenue or Hi-Lusi Avenue may cost on the order of $300,000 for con?ruction only. This does not include costs related to property acquisition, permittir~g and retaining the services ora consultant for design{md inspection. Considering See- Gwun Avenue near Council Trail experiences 1800 vehicles per day, it may be a reasonable expectation that 600 of these vehicles would'use another bridge if available. This assumption is based on the fact that most vehicles both in the morning and afternoon turning onto See-Gwun Avenue from either Lincoln Street or Lonnquist Boulevard are coming from the west. It, therefore, makes sense that most would continue to use See-Gwun Avenue since it would be their first opportunity to cross the creek. Also, the golf course experiences a lot of vehicular activity during the summer months. Most golfers would continue to use See-Gwun Avenue to cross the creek and ge!: to the golf course. Based on the data and the costs associated with a second bridge, there doesn't appear to be a significant benefit. The current volume on See-Gwun Avenue is reasonable given the fact it serves two schools and a golf course. The volume is actually less than other comparable collector streets. Therefore, it cannot be expected that a second bridge will have a significant impact on traffic volume or vehicle speed. In addition, Staff does not believe residents along Candota Avenue or Hi-Lusi Avenue would be supportive of adding any traffic to their streets. A whole set of new problems could possibly be created with adding a second bridge. Lower Speed Limit - The current speed limit on See~Gwun Avenue is 25mph. Staff believes this is a safe speed for the street. Lowering the speed limit will not significantly affect motorists' speeds. As seen in the table above, whether the speed limit is 20mph or 25mph, average speeds are comparable. Motorists will tend to drive at a speed that they feel comfortable given certain driving conditions. A winding road, narrow road, vehicles parked on the street, rain and snow tend to slow down motorists. A wide road that is straight and fiat gives the motorist the feeling that they can drive safe at a faster speed. Lowering the speed limit will make more safe drivers in noncompliance with the law. Staff's study has not identified a problem with the speeds a majority of motorists are driving at that would warrant lowering the speed limit. Those motorists that are excessively driving above the speed limit would most likely not reduce their speed because of a lower speed limit. Turn Restrictions - Installing turn restriction signs attempt to deter motorists from using a street that should not be normally used. The signs attempt to keep motorists on the main road rather than cutting through a neighborhood. While'these signs can be effective in addressing a cut through issue on a particular street, other ~ssues can arise. Turn restriction signs could possibly push the traffic volume ~ssue to an adjacent street. Also, residents along the street would be affected by such signs. Based on Staff's study, the traffic volume is reasonable for the street and a vast majority of those traveling on See-Gwun Avenue appear to use it for neighborhood access to Lincoln Junior High School and St. Raymond's School, access to the golf course and access to those residents who live in the neighborhood. One-Way Street - Similar to ir~stalling mm restriction signs, mal(mg See-G~vun Avenue a one- way street would be an attempt re reduce traffic volume. Again, however, it would reduce the ability of motorists who have legitimate reason for traveling on See-Gwun Avenue to access the neighborhood. Also. for those residents who live along See-Gwun Avenue. a one-way street would be less convenient to access homes. Finally, a one-way street may lead to a false sense of security for residents who become accustomed to assuming all traffic will come from one direction. A motorist nor familiar with the area or a motorist choosing to disobey the signs creates safety concerns for other motorists and pedestrians. Police Enforcement - Attached is a memo from the Police Department outlining their involvement in addressing the,speeding ~oncem raised by. the residents. It appears the degree ro which speeding occurs ~s no different than other neighborhood streetg and the *'problem" is a few habitual speeding motorists. The use of the radar trailer and a police drone car'along with actual enforcement can be effective measures in slowing down motorists. However, the Police Department cannot patrol the street everyday and will not be able to puli over every speeding motorist. Periodic enforcement is necessary to keep the trend to speed down. Else. motorists who tend to habitually speed will most likely remm to driving at higher speeds believing a police officer is not momtorzng the street. Some residents have claimed speed enforcement by the Police Department has been ineffective. However, police officers are issuing tickets and speeds are comparable to most neighborhood streets in the Village. Since SCe-Gw~n Avenue does experience more traffic than other north-south streets in the neighborhood, the number of motorists exceeding the speed limit is more than other streets but the percentages are similar. Staff reviewed the recorded speed data and found the highest average speeds are occurring between the hours of I lpm and 3am. The highest average speeds during the day where there are higher volumes appear to be between the hours of 5pm and 7pm. Average speeds during these hours during the week vary between 25 and 3 Imph. Traffic Calming - A relatively new option in addressing traffic volume and vehicle speed issues on neighborhood streets is traffic calming. Median barriers, diverters and cul-de-sacs are measures that control traffic volumes. Traffic circles, chicanes and speed humps are measures that affect vehicle speed. Curb extensions and pedestrian refuges are intended to improve pedestrian safety. The Village has only recently begun to become familiar with concept of traffic calming. As you may remember, the Safety Commission previously reviewed curb extensions along Council Trail in front of Lions Park Elementary School. For this particular location, a significant benefit was not observed and there was much opposition from residents and parents. 12 4) I2 the end, the temporary curb extensions were removed. The Village Board is still open to considering traffic calming measures in areas where a problem is defined and observed, and where significant results can be expected. Traffic calming measures are penmanent, can be costly and can come with liability. Therefore, such a project should be carefully considered. Recommendations With construction along Golf Road underway during the study, the traffic volume along See- Gwun Avenue between Golf Road and Lonnquist Boulevard may have been affected. Some motorists who normalIy travel Golf Road may be choosing Lonnquist Boulevard or Lincoln Street during construction. Also, with construction along See-Gwun Avenue near Golf Road at the beginning stages during the study, vehicle speeds may have been affected between Golf Road and Lonnquist Boulevard. Finally, the weekend of the study was very rainy. As a result, the golf course did not see a Iot of activity. This may have caused lower traffic volume along See-G~xn2n Avenue when compared to a weekend that has more favorable weather. Based on the above factors, it is recommended that volume and speed data be collected again in the fall when the road construction projects are completed, school is back in session and the golf course is still active· The purpose of the additional data would be to determine if multi-way stop signs may be warranted or possibly other measures such as traffic calming. The park district is planning to rehabilitate the clubhouse and parking lot at the golf course in the near future. The Village has already recommended to the park district to relocate the clubhouse and access to the golf course to Busse Road. This would help to reduce traffic volume along See-Gw,an Avenue. However, the park district has indicated they do not plan on relocating the clubhouse. In lieu of the .park district's decision, when construction plans are submitted for permit, Staff will look to relocate the driveway off of See-Gwun Avenue south to line up with Council Trail. This will help to reduce left-mm conflicts. Also, Staff would be willing to again review the intersection to determine if 4-way stop signs are warranted. As part of the golf course improvements, Staff will also recommend sidewalk be installed along the entire frontage of See-Gwun Avenue and Shabonee Trail. This will necessitate moving the parldng stalls off the public right-of-way and meandering the sidewalk around existing trees and landscaping. Pedestrian crossing signs and crosswalks may also be recommended at See-Gw,an Avenue and Council Trail as part of the improvements. With respect to relocating sidewalk, Staff does not see it necessary to move the sidewalk along the 700 block of See-Gwun Avenue. However, if there is general interest from the residents, Staff would be willing to send a survey to the affected homeowners to determine if they are in favor of moving the sidewalk away from the curb to the right-of-way line. They would have to agree to remove or relocate any landscaping or private lighting that may be in conflict with a new sidewalk. Also, the homeowners would have to agree to participate in the cost (possibly 100%) of the work. Only if there were support and the residents agreed to the conditions would the Village consider such a project. Also, if such a project were to move forward, the Village would consider providing design services and construction management at no additional expense to the residents. Most likely a project would take place no sooner than 2003. If there is opposition to relocating the sidewalk, Staff would consider installing new sidewalk along the frontage of 700 and 716 See-Gwun Avenue in 2003 as long as the Village Board 13 allocates funds for sidewalk in next year's budget. This work would be included in the Village's annual new sidewalk program at no cost the homeowners. The Village's standard for road resurfacing projects is to replace existing mountable curb ~vith the same. However, Staff will consider allocating sufficient funds to replace the curb with a barrier curb where sidewalk exists behind the curb along See-Gwun Avenue when the street is resurface& Staff recommends that letters be sent to those homeowners that have shrubs on or adjacent to their property that are creating a sight obstruction for motorists and pedestrians. Staff also recommends that the Village work with the park district in removing the trees and brush that line the creek near the bridge that are creating a sight obstruction for motorists on Council Trail. Emergency response is a primary concern when considering removing the bridge. Based on the Fire Department's input, Staff does not recommend removing the bridge. Staff also does not recommend constructing a second bridge across Weller Creek. Based on the recorded traffic volume and observing the traffic patterns in the neighborhood, Staff does not believe it would provide significant "relief" to the amount of traffic on See-Gwun Avenue. The current traffic volume is less than most collector streets in the Village and the cost to do such a project outweighs the assumed benefit to the neighborhood. A whole set of new traffic issues could be raised in the neighborhood while not making a significant impact to the traffic volume on See-Gwun Avenue. S{afPs observations showed that SeeA3~zn Avenue-se~es the neighborhoo0 by allowing access across the creek. The neighborhood has 2225 properties in it. Comparing this figfire with the 850-1800 vehicles traveling on See-Gwun Avenue on a daily basis indicates the volume is reasonable given the characteristics of the neighborhood. Even Staff observed little cut through traffic as part of the Study. Also; a majority of motorists are driving at a safe speed and the speeds are comparable to other Village streets. TherefOre, Staff does not recommend lowering the speed limit, installing turn restrictions or making See-Gwun Avenue a one-way street. To assist the Police Department in providing effective speed enforcement, it is helpful to provide them information as to when the speed violators are traveling on the street. Based on our data, the optimum hours to patrol the street would be between the hours of 5pm and 7pm on weekdays. During this time, hourly volumes are above average and there is more pedestrian activity. Staff recommends that the Police Department continue to provide speed enforcement, particularly during the evening hours, and do so on a regular basis as appropriate in an attempt to control excessive speeding. Traffic calming measures can affect traffic volume and vehicle speed. As stated above, the recorded traffic volume along See-Gwun Avenue is reasonable. Also, it appears a vast majority of the traffic has legitimate reason to be traveling on the street. Therefore, traffic calming measures affecting traffic volume are not recommended by Staff. Traffic calming measures affecting vehicle speed should only be considered once a speeding problem has been clearly defined and the proposed measures are expected to provide significant results. Average speeds along See-G,~nan Avenue vary between 26-28mph. This data is comparable to most Village streets and within an acceptable range. Traffic calming measures are not intended to address the few motorists who are driving well in excess of the speed limit. Rather, traffic calming measures 14 look to address an issue if the majority of drivers are driving in excess of a reasonable speed. Based on the data collected, Staff does not recommend pursuing traffic calming measures along See-Gwun Avenue at this time. However, Staff recommends that the topic of traffic calming be revisited during the review of the new data that will be gathered in the fall. Should the nexv data reveal a speeding problem, possible traffic calming measures can be discussed by the Safety Commission and proposed to the residents. In summary, the Village Traffic Engineer recommends: Immediate Actions · Remove sight obstructions · Continue speed enforcement by Police Department, particularly during evening hours Future Actions · Perform traffic volume and speed study in the fall · Re-evaluate 4-way stop signs at See-Gwun Avenue & Council Trail based on new data · Re-evaluate traffic calming options based on new data · Relocate golf course driveway to line up with Council Trail · Consider adding sidewalk where none exists · Consider replacing mountable curb with barrier curb when street resurfaced No Actions · Do not install additional stop/yield signs at this time · Do not remove bridge · Do not construct second bridge in neighborhood · Do not lower speed limit · Do not add turn restrictions · Do not make street one-way · Do not consider traffic calming measures at this time Discussion Traffic Engineer Lawrie summarized the data that was collected, the different options Staff considered based on the results and the recommendations. Commissioner Bencic opened up the discussion to the audience. There ~vas discussion regarding the locations of where the speed and volume data were gathered. Some of the residents believed the average speeds are higher than what was recorded. Traffic Engineer La~vr/e responded that construction in the area may have influenced the speed data. It xvas requested that data also be collected along the 500 block of See-Gwun Avenue in the fall. There was some discussion about adding or relocating sidewalk along the 700 block of See- Gwun Avenue. Only one person from the 700 block was in attendance and she did not provide her opinion on the options. Traffic Engineer Lawrie suggested that there may be the possibility of adding sidewalk in front of 700 and 716 See-Gwun Avenue this year if there was support from the residents. Some of the residents raised the concern of a sight obstruction at the intersection of See-Gwun Avenue and Council Trail. Trees and brush line the creek making it difficult to see northbound vehicles from Council Trail. One resident said the bridge rail also is a sight obstruction. Commissioner Bencic did not believe the bridge rail is a sight obstruction and felt removing some of the landscaping would improve the situation. One resident asked if the portion of See-Gwun Avenue between Council Trail and Lonnquist Boulevard could be moved up on the schedule to be resurfaced in order to replace the mountable curb with barrier curb. Traffic Engineer Lawrie said he would discuss this with Staff bu.t could not commit to changing the schedule. One resident questioned how the Police Department could assist in slowing down vehicles. Officer Bonner explained the use of the drone car, speed trailer and actual enforcement as options the Police Department has used along See-Gwun Avenue and will continue to do so as necessary. Commissioner Bencic requested the Police Department to document the number of speeding tickets written over the next few months and see how many live in the neighb6i-hood. One resident requested the speed limit be lowered to 20mph. A lengthy discussion took place on whether it would appropriate to lower the speed limit based on the speed data and road layout. Comparisons were made to other streets in the Village with lower speed limits. Traffic Engineer Lawrie tried to explain lowering speed limits does not necessarily affect drivers' behavior and 25mph seemed to be an appropriate speed limit for See-Gwun Avenue. It was requested by a resident and supported by Commission members that a review of the speed limit would be done as part of the study in the fall. Also, the Commission asked the Police Department to not perform any speed enforcement during the fall study Mr. Bures addressed the audience on the warrants necessary to instaI1 stop signs and explained why they were not recommended along See-Gwnn Avenue. He reiterated that Staff is willing to restudy the traffic conditions later this fall because construction may have influenced the results. With no more comments from the audience, Commissioner Bencic returned the discussion to the Commission. Commissioner Keane and Commissioner Beening pointed out that speeding concerns in neighborhoods have become a growing issue in the Village and that See-Gwun Avenue was similar to other streets. Based on the results of the study, no drastic measures or significant changes were warranted. Commissioner Beening was disappointed that out of 98 surveys sent to residents, less than half were returned and only 5 residents were in the audience. There was some discussion as to whether any of the recommendations should not be done or if other measures should be considered. ommissioner Keane, seconded by Commissioner Beening, moved to approve the recommendations of the Village Traffic Engineer inclnding removing the sight obstructions at intersections, continuing speed enforcement by the Police Department and restudying the traffic conditions in the fall. The motion was approved by a vote of 8-0. COMMISSION ISSUES Commissioner Torrorello asked the Commission members if they would want to consider moving the start time of the meetings from 7:30pm to 7:00pm. Each member said his or her schedule would allow chan~ng the start time. They questioned whether the Village Board needed to approve the change. Traffic Engineer Lawrie was asked to find out. Commissioner Tortorello, seconded by Commissioner Beening, moved to approve moving the start time of the Safety Commission meetings to 7:00pm. The motion was approved by a vote of 8-0. The Commission agreed the next meeting would begin at 7:00pm unless formal action would be necessary by the Village Board. No other Safety Commission items were brought forth at this time. ADJOURNMENT With no further business to ~scuss, the Safety Commission voted 8-0 to adjourn at 9:45 p.m. ' upon the motion of Mr. Bures. Commissioner Mitchell seconded the m6tion. Respectfully submitted, Matthew P. Lawrie, P.E. Traffic Engineer x:\files\en gineerXsa feco mm\tra ffi c',rec s &min\june02min~doc 17