Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/14/1998 SC MinutesDirector Water/Sewer Superintendent Glen R. Andler MAINTAIN Roderick T. O'Donovan Deputy Director Streets/Buildings Superintendent Sean P. Dorsey -., Paul C. Bures Village Engineer ! 'U Forestry/Grounds Superintendent Jeffrey A. Wulbecker Sandra M. Clark Administrative Aide y� \ QQ Vehicle/Equipment Superintendent Dawn L. Wucki t9 Wy James E. Guenther Solid Waste Coordinator M. Lisa Angell Mount Prospect Public Works Department 1700 W. Central Road, Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056-2229 Phone 647/670-5640 Fax 647/253-9377 TDD B47/392-1235 MINUTES OF THE MOUNT PROSPECT SAFETY COMMISSION CALL TO ORDER The Regular Meeting of the Mount Prospect Safety Commission was called to order at 7:30 P.M. on Monday, September 14, 1998. ROLL CALL Upon roll call, each Safety Commission Member introduced themselves to the audience. Present upon roll call: Lee Beening Chuck Bencic Nancy Bobikewicz Joan Bjork Andy Mitchell Ted Adamczyk Buz Livingston Paul Bures Matt Lawrie Absent: Others in Attendance: APPROVAL OF MINUTES Chairman Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Police Department Fire Department Public Works Public Works/Engineering Division Phyllis Moliere Commissioner Jeff Wulbecker, Village Engineer See Attached List Commissioner Bencic, seconded by Commissioner Mitchell, moved to approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Safety Commission held on April 13, 1998. The Minutes were approved by a vote of 8-0. Commissioner Bjork, seconded by Commissioner Mitchell, moved to approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Safety Commission held on August 10, 1998: The Minutes were approved by a vote of 8-0. 1 Ci...+. ...I..J r1•.....- rl__a-J .. 'aL n.... 1_1. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD Mr. Bill Schmitt, 905 Whitegate, informed the commission that on southbound Route 83 on the west side of the road, immediately north of the railroad tracks there is a "No Left Tum" sign, restricting turns into the train station parking lot, which blocks the railroad gate crossing light. Mr. Schmitt also inquired about the status of a traffic signal at the intersection of Central Road and Cathy Lane. He believes one is needed there because of the anticipated increase in pedestrians crossing to access the new Park District Building. Chairman Beening stated that Central Road is under the jurisdiction of the State of Illinois and that Mr. Schmitt should contact the Illinois Department of Transportation. Mr. Chuck Litgen, 900 Cathy, stated he does not think a traffic signal should be installed at Central and Cathy because there is a sight problem for vehicles approaching from the west because of the hill at We -Go. OLD BUSINESS None. NEW BUSINESS A) STOP OR YIELD SIGN REQUEST AT THE INTERSECTION OF MEIER ROAD AND PRENDERGAST LANE 1) Background Information: Mr. Tom Tiano, 544 Lois Ct., requested a Stop or Yield sign on Prendergast Lane at Meier Road. Mr. Tiano has observed that vehicles travelling eastbound on Prendergast Lane do not always stop or yield to vehicles travelling southbound on Meier Road which creates the potential for an accident. Staff Observations: The Engineering Staff performed a Stop sign study. The firdings are as follows: a) Accidents A search of the accident reports indicated: Year 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 (Sept) Number of Accidents 0 0 0 0 0 0 The above accident records do not meet the Stop sign warrant (minimum five accidents per year) according to the Multi -Way Stop Sign Warrants. b b) Speed Study Representative speed surveys were performed on Meier Road south of Prendergast Lane and on Prendergast Lane west of Meier Road during the period of Wednesday, August 19, 1998 and Friday, August 21, 1998. The 85th percentile speeds are follows: Northbound Meier 35-36 mph Southbound Meier 35-36 mph Eastbound Prendergast 29-30 mph The speed limits on Meier Road and Prendergast Lane are 25 mph. Based on the results, there does appear to be a speeding problem on Meier Road. Staff will request the Police Department to perform selective speed enforcement along Meier Road in order to reduce the speed of motorists. c) Traffic Volume The minimum traffic volume according to the Multi -Way Stop Sign j Warrant is 500 vehicles per hour for an eight hour period (500 x 8 = 4000 vehicles/8 hrs). Considering a four-way intersection, this would be 1000 vehicles per 8 hours from each direction. The traffic volume at this intersection from all three directions (2128 vehicles/8 hrs) is approximately 53% of the Stop sign warrant. It should be noted that the combined volume for northbound and southbound Meier Road alone recorded over 2000 vehicles per 8 hours. This can be interpreted to mean that even though the warrant has not been met for a four-way Stop sign intersection, the north/south direction meets the volume requirement to install Stop signs in the east/west direction d) Survey Results A total of 12 surveys were sent out in August 1998 to collect and analyze the resident's opinion. 4 surveys were returned to the Village. 2 residents favored and 2 residents were against a Stop sign on Prendergast Lane at Meier Road. e) Existing Traffic Control Signs Existing traffic control signs near this intersection are shown on the attached map. Stop Sign At an unmarked intersection, the vehicle to the right has the right-of-way. Therefore, southbound Meier Road traffic has to yield to eastbound Prendergast Lane traffic should the vehicles arrive at the intersection at the same time. 3 However, because of the T -intersection and high volume on Meier Road, it is perceived Meier Road traffic has the right-of-way. According to the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices, a Stop sign is warranted when a less important road intersects a main road and the application of the normal right-of-way is unduly hazardous. Since Meier Road experiences high volume and the normal right-of-way rule may be misunderstood, it is recommended that a Stop sign be installed on Prendergast Lane. Yield Sign Normally, a study will show that Stop signs are not warranted at the intersection. However, because of the unique configuration and high volume along Meier Road, a Yield sign is not recommended in this instance. Staff Recommendation: Stop Sign Request A Stop sign is warranted when a less important road (Prendergast Lane) intersects with a main road (Meier Road) and the application of the normal right- of-way rule is unduly hazardous. Therefore, ,j The Village Traffic Engineer recommends: a Stop sign on Prendergast Lane at Meier Road be installed. Yield Sign Request Because of the unique characteristics of the intersection, The Village Traffic Engineer recommends: a Yield sign on Prendergast Lane at Meier Road not be installed. 3) Discussion: Notification was given to residents within 200' of this intersection, per the notification policy. However no residents were present concerning this Issue. Commissioner Mitchell stated that since Meier Road is a collector street it is appropriate that a Stop sign is installed on Prendergast Lane which carries much less volume. Commissioner Mitchell suggested that a Stop sign should also be installed on Chris Lane at Meier Road for the same reason. Chairman Beening stated that the residents on Chris Lane were not given notification concerning this Stop sign and that staff should notify the residents before it is approved. 4 Traffic Engineer Lawrie stated that there are no sight obstructions at this intersection, but there is a speeding problem on Meier Road. Mr. Lawrie indicating that a request will be made to the Police to provide speed surveillance of this street. Sergeant Adamczyk stated that this route is used as a shortcut route and that speeding can be a problem from time to time. Commissioner Mitchell, seconded by Commissioner Bencic moved to approve installing a Stop sign on Prendergast Lane at Meier Road. The motion was approved by a vote of 8-0. Commissioner Mitchell, seconded by Commissioner Bjork, moved to approve installing a Stop sign on Chris Lane at Meier Road. The motion was approved 7-1. B) STOP OR YIELD SIGNS REQUEST AT THE INTERSECTION OF CATHY LANE AND WHITEGATE DRIVE 1) Background information: Mr. William Schmitt, 905 Whitegate Drive requested Stop or Yield Signs at Cathy Lane and Whitegate Drive. Mr. Schmitt expressed a concern that most drivers on Cathy Lane believe they have the right-of-way because Whitegate Drive is not a busy street. This dangerous situation was made more aware to him when two cars collided in July of 1998. With the improvements to the Park District on the north side of Central Road at Cathy Lane to begin soon, now would be a good time to correct this situation. Staff Observations: The Engineering Staff performed a Stop sign study. The findings are as follows: a) Accidents A search of the accident reports indicated: Year 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 (Sept) Number of Accidents 0 0 0 0 0 1 The above accident records do not meet the Stop sign warrant (minimum five accidents per year) according to the Multi -Way Stop Sign Warrants. The police accident report is attached. 5 b) C) d) e) Speed Study Representative speed surveys were performed on Cathy Lane north of Whitegate Drive and on Whitegate Drive west of Cathy Lane between Monday, August 17,1998 and Wednesday, August 19, 1998. The 85th percentile speeds are follows: Northbound Cathy 23-24 mph Southbound Cathy 23-24 mph Eastbound Whitegate 29-30 mph Westbound Whitegate 25-26 mph The speed limits on Cathy Lane and Whitegate Drive are 25 mph. Based on the results, there doesn't appear to be a speeding problem at this intersection. Traffic Volume The minimum traffic volume according to the Multi -Way Stop Sign j Warrant is 500 vehicles/hour for an eight hour period (500 x 8 = 4000 vehicles/8 hrs). The traffic volume at this intersection (535 vehicles/8 hrs) is approximately 13% of the Stop sign warrant Survey Results A total of 14 surveys were sent out in August 1998 to collect and analyze the resident's opinion. 10 surveys were returned to the Village. 6 residents favored and 4 residents were against Stop signs at Cathy Lane and Whitegate Drive. Existing Traffic Control Signs Existing traffic control signs near this intersection are shown on the attached map. Stop Signs Even though there is a majority of residents who favor Stop signs, it is recommended they not be installed. Stop signs are not warranted based on the accident history, speed study and traffic volume at the intersection. Yield Signs The study has shown Stop signs are not warranted at the intersection. It is not recommended to install traffic control signs on Cathy Lane since the intersection is only approximately 120 feet from Central Road and vehicles should not be stacked between Whitegate Drive and Central Road. However, because a 2 majority of the traffic is on Cathy Lane, Yield signs in the easttwest direction are recommended in order to clarify the right-of-way. Staff Recommendation: Stop Sign Request Because the intersection of Cathy Lane and Whitegate Drive does not meet any of the Multi -Way Stop Sign Warrants and even though there is resident support for the Stop signs, The Village Traffic Engineer recommends: Stop signs at the intersection of Cathy Lane and Whitegate Drive not be installed. Yield Sign Request To clarify the right-of-way at this intersection, The Village Traffic Engineer recommends: 2 -way Yield signs on Whitegate Drive at Cathy Lane be installed. 2) Discussion: Mr. William Schmitt passed out a map (attached) showing the traffic signs at streets in the area of Cathy and Whitegate. Mr. Schmitt is concerned that vehicles coming off of Central Road onto Cathy feel they have the right-of-way at Whitegate because of the comparative traffic volumes and the speed with which they come off of Central. Mr. Schmitt feels it is important to let all vehicles approaching the intersection know that the vehicles on Cathy do have the right-of-way by installing Stop signs on Whitegate. Mr. Schmitt stated that Yield signs would not have the same impact as Stop signs because many motorists ignore Yield signs. Mr. Schmitt also explained that Cathy Lane is used by a considerable amount of traffic as a cut through route. Mr. Chuck Litgen, 900 Whitegate, stated that he is not opposed to Stop signs on Cathy Lane but would be opposed to four way Stop signs on Cathy and Whitegate. Mr. Litgen however, does not think that Stop signs are esthetically beautiful Chairman Beening and Traffic Engineer Lawrie discussed the warrants for Stop signs and that this intersections does not meet any of the warrants. Mr. Lawrie stated that there is a need for clarification of which vehicle has the right-of-way at this intersection and that installing Yield signs on Whitegate would be the most appropriate action. 7 Sergeant Adamczyk explained that unwarranted Stop signs cause motorists to feel the need to make up for lost time and will accentuate a speeding problem. Commissioner Bjork stated that a Stop sign is not warranted and that a Yield sign should be placed there. Mr. Schmitt and Mr. Litgen requested that the same criteria that was used for the installation of the existing Stop signs on Whitegate at We -Go (the intersection directly west of Whitegate and Cathy) should be applied to this intersection and that Stop signs should be installed on Whitegate at Cathy. Traffic Engineer Lawrie . stated that there are differences between the two intersections. At Whitegate and We -Go the east and west legs of the intersection are offset and that there is a large pine trQe causing a sight obstruction. Commissioner Mitchell, seconded by Sergeant Adamczyk, moved to approve installing a Yield sign on Cathy Lane at Whitegate Drive. The motion was approved by a vote of 8-0. Commissioner Beening indicated that these recommendations would be presented to the Village Board agenda at the October 6, 1998 Village Board Meeting. Adjournment With no further business to discuss, the Safety Commission voted 8-0 to adjourn at 8:25 p.m. upon the motion of Commission Bjork.. Commissioner Bencic seconded the motion. x:vleslengineer\safecommt atficlrecs8minlsep98min.doc Respectfully submitted, ulbecker Village Engineer 9 LAWRENCE LN 601 600 603 I 602 j 605 604 607 606 W9 606 611 610 613 612 613 614 w Q U W U 1- 6 801 wa 1 Z oz Z W t_um 0 503 605 607 wo all 610 613 612 615 614 PRENDERGAST LN ! 701 $ o o o I N N N N N N 703 I 705 I. 707 709 CHURCH 711 700 713 715 EXISTING 1—WAY STOP SIGN 625 635 a W W 645 701 P, n 712 J N 713 714 -L 715 U 716 T717 710 747 LONNOUIST BLVD RECOMMENDED STOP SIGN LOCATIONS HOLMES JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL DIST. NO. 59 XISTING 1—WAY TOP SIGN MEIER ROAD / PRENDERGAST LANE LOCATION IAP z 20d CD E U ECL tll 0 a W_ 9O6 QCT 0 Q W 9Q 0 4 Z 0 LL. z O � LAJ n 41Z O Q U U W O � LAI W N rost,66 �r l06 002 202 f06 sod too 904 1.06 404 E06 OW «6 zi4 M tl4 IM 4l4 Lis 4i4 SO O lhi os 3M Q (A CN N Z Z Cn (A O X F— a w V) m Q tIM AV Vlaa NNO 1)RESSER OR IN N Z Z � F- U) -U O X F— Q W a 20d otL E U ECL tll a 9O6 QCT 2tL Q ltL 9Q Z 4 Q U' 0 �? Z&) 0: ttL LAJ n 41Z X F- t16 X � LAI 4tL 3 c OU Ltz ZU OSL � i2L M .lH1V� W N rost,66 �r l06 002 202 f06 sod too 904 1.06 404 E06 OW «6 zi4 M tl4 IM 4l4 Lis 4i4 SO O lhi os 3M Q (A CN N Z Z Cn (A O X F— a w V) m Q tIM AV Vlaa NNO 1)RESSER OR IN N Z Z � F- U) -U O X F— Q W a 20d too a 9O6 W f— (Q� we Z W = Q U' OLS �? Z&) F= -D_ U) O AE X F- t16 W N rost,66 �r l06 002 202 f06 sod too 904 1.06 404 E06 OW «6 zi4 M tl4 IM 4l4 Lis 4i4 SO O lhi os 3M Q (A CN N Z Z Cn (A O X F— a w V) m Q tIM AV Vlaa NNO 1)RESSER OR IN N Z Z � F- U) -U O X F— Q W a lhi os 3M Q (A CN N Z Z Cn (A O X F— a w V) m Q tIM AV Vlaa NNO 1)RESSER OR IN N Z Z � F- U) -U O X F— Q W a 2 3. R I$ 7 I n. SAFETY COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 14, 1998 7:30 P.M. NAME SIGN -IN SHEET qeS 1'-j 4 ii e- "/ /j2 /0 9o,o c3� .4 er� ,P-, N�fi Q10- g75t Public Works Department Mount Prospect, Illinois Sq�plpl SSP w tv �3usne'"'1 ST -0e Sly» s a-aw�t '90S V 1 TO VA