Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/08/2003 SC minutes e~y A, Wulbeck~ M, Lisa Angel Rodedsk T, O'Oeno~an Paul G, 6ures Sandra M. Clark James E. Guenther Mount Prospect Public Works OePartment 1700 w. central Reed, Mount Prospect, Illinois IBOOSIB-222E) Phone 847/870-5640 Fax 847/253-9377 TDD 847/392-1235 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 7:05 p.m. on Monday, September 8, 2003. ROLL CALL Present upon roil call: Chuck Bencic John Keane Kevin Orouwinkel Carol Tortorello John Dahlberg Buz Livingston Jeff Wulbeeker Matt Lawrie ' Absenti Susan Amdt Joan Bjork Others in Attendance: None Chairman Vice Chai.rman Commissioner Commissioner Police Depa,tment Fire Department Public Works Public Works/Engineering Division Commissioner (arrived at 7:30pm) Commissioner :\PPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Tortor¢llo, seconded by Commissioner Keane, moved to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the Safety Commission held on July 14, 2003. The minutes were approved by a vote of 6-0. Commissioner GrouwinkeI abstained as he was not present at the previous meeting. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD No citizens came forth to discuss any topics that were not on the current agenda. ! Recycled Paper - Printed with Soy Ink LD BUS~NESS Al REQUEST FOR TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNS AT THE INTERSECTION OF COLUMBINE DRIVE, LARCH DRIVE & ONEIDA LANE .. Back~ound Information Per Mr. Jim DeMar's letter in 2002, he believes the new train station along Wolf Road south of Camp McDonald Road is the Source of increased traffic in the neighborhood. His neighbors have also voiced concern over vehicle speeds and lack of courtesy by motorists. This issue was first brought to the Safety Commission in September 2002. The request for stop signs was denied by the Safety Commission and Village Board but Staff was directed to restudy the issue in one year. Ail residents within 200 feet of this intersection including Mr. DeMar were informed that this issue would again be discussed at 7:00 p.m,, on Monday, September 8, 2003, at the Public Works Department. Staff' Study a) Accidents A search of the accident reports indicated: b) Year Number of Accidents Speed Study 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 (Aug) 0 0 0 0" 0 0 Representative speed surveys were performed at all three legs of the intersection fi'om August 15-22, 2003. The average and 85t~' percentile speeds are as follows: Northbound Columbine Dr. Eastbound Larch Dr. Westbound oneida Ln. 2002 2003 2002 2003 average average 85~l~ % 85~' % 20 mph 20 mph 24 mph 23 mph 21 mph 20 mph 26 mph 25 mph 18 mPh '18 mph 23 mph 24 mph The speed limit on alt three streets 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. 31 c) Traffic Volume d) Traffic volume data was gathered August 2003. Based on the results, there are approximately 755 vehicles per day that enter the intersection (up from 700 in 2002). 365 ' vehicles travel on Columbine Drive (350 in 2002), 125 vehicles on Larch Drive (I I0 in 2002) and 265 vehicles on Oneida Lane (240 in 2002). The peak hour of the day (typically 5pm-rpm) experiences approximately 75 vehicles that enter the intersection. Survey Results e) A total of I4 surveys were sent out in August 2003 to collect the residents~ comments on this restudy. 0 surveys (0%) were returned to the Village. Existing Traffic Control Signs Traffic control signs adjacent to the intersection are as follows: Columbine & Camp McDonald (south) - 2-way stop signs on Columbine Oneida & Rosetree (east) - uncontrolled Larch & Maya (west) - 2-way stop signs on Larch Sight Obstructions There are not any sight obstructions near the intersection that should interfere in alIowing a motorist to come to a full stop before reaching the inte~:section if necessary. The fact there hasn't been any accidents over the past 5 years supports this determination. ' Thru Traffic The petitioner claims many motorists are avoiding the traffic signals at Camp McDonald Road and Wolf Road during peak travel times. As a result, the neighborhood is experiencing cut through traffic. Based on the volume data and Staff observations, there doesn't appear to be a significant issue with cut through traffic. A No Thru Trt¢fic sign on Columbine Drive immediately north of Camp McDonald Road was installed by the Village last year as a result of the original study. Also, the Village contacted the City of Prospect Heights and requested that a similar sign posted on Alderman Avenue immediately east of Wolf Road. Upon a recent inspection, the City has not installed such a sign. Recommendations Ail-Way Stop Signs All-~vay Stop signs are normally warranted at intersections where there is a condition of severely restricted view, accidents or a significant amount of vehicles and pedestrians. Based on an inspection, there are not any sight obstructions immediately at the ii/terseation' that would cause a tk~ll stop to be necessary at ail times for all four directions. In addition, ·there have been'0 ~ accidents over the past 5 years. In order to meet the criterion for an all-way stop sign installation, there is to be 5 accidents in a 12-month period. Finally, the peak hour ofihe day experiences approximately 75 vehicles entering the intersection. In order to meet the criterion, the volume entering the intersection from the major street 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. Based on the new data, ail-way stop signs are not ~'arranted at this intersection. 1 -Way or 2-Way Stgp Signs 1-way or 2-way stop signs are normally warranted at intersections where the criteria for an ail- 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. As stated above, there are not any sight obstructions fmmediately adjacent to the intersection that would cause a motorist to have to come to a full stop in order to safely proceed through the intersection. Also, there is not a significant amount of traffic at the intersection. A routine motorist may become accustomed to not seeing any traffic at the legs of the intersection. This, in turn, may result in disobedience of a full stop by motorists 'creating a potential safety concern for other motorists and pedestrians. Motorists may also feet the need to make up for "lost" time after stopping at the intersection resulting in higher speeds at tl~.c mJdblock. Based on the existing conditions, 1-w~y or 2-way stop signs are not recommended at this intersection. Yield Signs At intersections where a full stop is not necessary at all times, consideration should be given to using less restrictive measures such as y/eld signs. Yield signs assign right-of-way to traffic when the normal right-of-way rule appears to not be effective. 0 accidents in the past 5 years appears to reveal that motorists are safely negotiating driving through the intersection without stop or yield signs. Based on the speed data, motorists appear to have sufficient clear vision to come to a full stop before reaching the intersection if necessary. Based on the existing conditions, yield signs are not recommended at this intersection. The Village Traffic Engineer recommends: denial of stop or yield signs at the intersection. Discussion Traffic Engineer' Lawrie provided an overview of the report to the Commission. Chairman Bencic opened up the discussion to the commission members. Commissioner Keane visited the area earlier in the day and counted 20 vehicles 'pass through the intersection during a one-hour period. Deputy Police Chief Dahlberg mentioned that Mr. DeMar, the original petitioner, participated in a "ride along" with a police officer last year and watched radar. Some tickets were issued at the ime but they were for stop sign violations. This education process may have addressed Mr. DeMar's concerns. Chairman Bencic asked about the ..No. Thrit T?affic signs that were' discussed at last Year's meeting. Traffic Engineer Lawrie said the Village of Mount Prospect installed a sign on Columbine Drive north of Camp McDonald Road last September and asked that the City of Prospect Heights install a similar sign at Alderman Avenue at Wolf Road: However, they have not installed a sign. Commissioner Keane, seconded by Commissioner Tortorelto, moved to approve the recommendations of the. Village Trattic Engineer.. The motion to deny stop or yield signs was approved by a vote of 7-0. }.'t ) ..VO TUR.V ON RED SIGNS IN DOWNTOWN Background Information Tine Safety Commission asked that Staff inspect the dow'ntown area and inventory the number of No Dtrn on Red signs. Also, Staff was asked to determine if all signalized intersections iri the downtown area sho~41d have suqh signs. No action was taken at the time but Staffwas directed to bring the issue back in one year. Staff Study No Dtrn on Red signs are typic, ally installed at intersections where there is inadequate sight distance of vehicles approachlng from the left. IDOT has installed these signs for northbound and southbound Route 83 at Northwest Highway and eastbound Northwest Highway at Route 83 for this reason. The Village installed a similar sign for westbound Prospect Avenue at Route 83 to prevent vehicles from possibly stacking on the railroad tracks. No other No Turn on Red signs exist in the downtown area. Based on Staff's inspection, it doesn't appear that additional Nc) Tttr, o~t Red signs are necessary at this time because of sight distance issues. When there are pedestrian conflicts with right-mm-on-red maneuvers, signs that state ~Vo D~r~ o, l~c(I Whe~z Pedestrians In Cross~.valk, No Turn on Red When Pedestrians Are Preseal or Turning 7'vaf.'/JC ~¥[~tSt Yield To Pedestrians can be installed. Other communities in the Chicagoland area such as the Village of Arlington Heights have posted such signs in their downtown area. With the presence of the train station and many new businesses, downtown Mount Prospect has a significant amount of pedestrians on any given day. For their protection while in the crosswalk, motorists should be made aware that they are to yield to pedestrians when attempting to turn right on red. The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), a resource the Engineering Staff often refers to when studying traffic issues, mentions signs that state turning traffic must yield to pedestrians should be posted when right turn on red is permitted and pedestrian crosswalks are marked. Recommendations Ilased on this information, tile Village Traffic Engineer recommends that No Tum on Red I-lChen Pedestrians .In Cross}valk signs be installed at the following intersections: Route 83 & Northwest Highway Route 83 & Prospect Avenue Northwest Highway & Emerson Street The existing No Turn on Red signs at the above intersections would remain as is and not be altered. New si~s along Route 83 and Northwest Highway would be installed by IDOT as they have jurisdiction of these streets. Prospect Avenue and Emerson Street are under the Village's j c:risdiction. Discussion Tmf'fic Engineer Lawrie provided an overview of the report to the Commission. Chairnaan Bencic said it appears a majority of the iigns' Would have to be installed by IDOT. Traffic Engineer explained that if the Safety Commission supports installation of the signs, the Village would request 1Z)OT to also agree and instalI all the signs. If IDOT would not install any signs facing a Village street, we would ask if the Village could so. Commissioner Keane asked if the existing No Turn on Red signs would be modified to include the supplemental Ir~hen Pedestrians Are Present. Traffic Engineer La~wie said it would be Staff's recommendation to not modify the existing ~igns unless IDOT thought it appropriate. Deputy Chief Dahlberg supported the supplemental I~7:en Pedestrians In Crosswalk because it is more specific than/4/her, Pedestrians Are Present. '['here was some additional discussion on the issue. Commissioner Keane, seconded by Deputy Police Chief Dahlberg, moved to approve the rcc~}mmendations of the Village Traffic Engineer. The motion was approved by a vote Of 7-0. C) UI>DATE ON PARKING SITUATION AROUND PROSPECT HIGH SCHOOL Background Information Tt~e Safety Commission and Village Board of Trustees voted earlier this summer to enact additional parking restrictions around Prospect High School as a result of problems experienced the previous school year. The Village Board also granted authority to the Village Manager to take immediate action if necessary at the beginning of the school year should new problems arise. Both the Police Department and Engineering Staffwere present the first day of class on Tuesday. :\ugust 26"' to monitor student parking. Approximately 50 cars were seen parked on 'Village streets that do not have parking restrictions. Tickets were issued to students disobeying posted signs, parking on the ~ass, and blocking driveways and fire hydrants. Per the direction of the Village Manager, additional parking restrictions will be going into affect shortly. The streets included Date Avenue, MacArthur Boulevard, Oak Avenue and Fairview Avenue between Gregory'Street and Isabella Street as well as Isabella Street from Dale Avenue to Oak Avenue. The Village will be continuing to monitor this issue throughoui the school year and is prepared to enact additional parking restrictions, if necessary, until student parking problems on Village streets are resolved. Also, the Engineering Staff will be meeting with the \qltage of Arlington Heights in an atfempt to work together on this issue. The latest parking restrictions will .be formally presented to. the Village Board in October. No I'm'mai vote by the Safety Commission is necessary. Discussion 'l"ra ~Tic Engineer Lawrie provided an overview of the report to the Commission. Chairman Bencic asked why the east side of Oak Avenue was not included in the latest parking restrictions. Traffic Engineer Lawrie said there is a dedicated parking lane along Oak Avenue and the student parking has not compromised safety or Village services along this block. Chairman Bencic asked if the parking restriction~ along the west side of Fairview Avenue would interfere with any elementary school activities. Traffic Engineer LawHe said he believed they would not. Commissioner Tortoretlo inquired about the availability of parking spaces in' the school lo~.' Traffic Engineer Lawrie said at the beginning of the school year there were many unused spaces but the school has continued to issue parking permits in an attempt to fill the lot. However, the 150 spaces blocked off for band practice will not be opened until November. Commission Tortoretlo asked if any students were parking in the Prospect Meadows Subdivision. Village Engineer Wulbecker said there were four or five cars seen on a daily basis on Fores~ Avenue and that Staff was monitoring the situation. There was some additional discussion on this issue. No vote was t~ken. NEW BUSINESS No new items were discussed by the Commission. '~)M.\I ISSION ISSUES Commissioner Tortoretlo indicated that there was a problem with the timing of the traffic si~als at the intersection of Euclid Avenue and the Randhurst Shopping Centerl Traffic Engineer Lawrie said he would took into it. ADJOURNMENT. With no further busihess to discuss, the Safety Commission voted 8-0 to adjourn at 7:50 p.m. upon the motion, of Village Engineer Wulhecker. Commissioner Keane seconded the motion. ,.: :'!'.cs cngir~c~.'r~,:sal~conm¥.trafficxa'ecs&minX$¢ptO3min.do~