Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4.2 Central Road Pedestrian Crossing StudiesBoardDocs® Pro Agenda Item Details Meeting Jul 10, 2018 - COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE AGENDA Category 4. DISCUSSION ITEMS Subject 4.2 CENTRAL ROAD PEDESTRIAN CROSSING STUDIES WR =_ 1111111111101 R Type Discussion Public Content Page I of 3 In the 2018 Strategic Plan, pedestrian and bicyclist safety in high volume vehicular traffic corridors has been identified as a top priority. Specifically, the Village Board has recognized that many of the highways and arterial streets throughout the Village are difficult for peda-cyclists to traverse and, therefore, tend to isolate neighborhoods. To ameliorate this problem, staff has initiated a process of examining high volume traffic corridors with the intent of identifying opportunities to improve roadway crossing safety for pedestrians and bicyclists. These corridors include Central Road, Route 83 (Elmhurst Road/Main Street), Euclid Avenue, Wolf Road, Rand Road, Kensington Road, Northwest Highway, Golf Road, Algonquin Road, O. •'. Street, and Busse Road. The map in Attachment A depicts these streets. Last year, staff inaugurated this process by participating in two (2) safety engineering evaluations of the Central Road corridor. One study was initiated by the Village. It included an in-depth pedestrian safety analysis of thc corridor by the Ciorba Group (Ciorba). This report, entitled "Central Road Pedestrian Crossing Study", is enclosed as Attachment B. The second study was a "Road Safety Review" of Central Road conducted by the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) at the request of the Village. The scope of work included analysis of the roadway"s safety performance with an emphasis on pedestrian crossings. The full report is enclosed as Attachment C. Ce ri It- iiii�-°a RoadPedeslt-iii�-°i&iii.l S111111 The Central Road Pedestrian Study scope of work included field observations of existing facilities, vehicular and pedestrian crash analyses, traffic signal warrant analyses, and improvement recommendations. Generally, Ciorba reports that the number of crashes involving pedestrians or bicyclists and motor vehicles is low and does not, in and of itself, warrant specific crossing improvements. They also concluded that traffic signals are not warranted (pursuant to federal Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTDC) requirements) at the We -Go Trail, Cathy Lane, or Pine Street intersections. T- •' • •' - ! positioned too close to the existing traffic signals at Main Street/IL Route 83 to garner IDOT approval. Finally, Ciorba recommended eliminating existing school speed zones near We Go Trail and Saint Emily Catholic Church due to a lack of school -related pedestrian traffic. https://www.boarddocs.com/il/vomp/Board.nsf/Private?open&login 7/10/2018 BoardDocs® Pro Page 2 of 3 Arthur Avenue: Add marked crosswalks & pedestrian crossing signals on east & west legs of the intersection. (Note: This work, along with the installation of pedestrian crossing signals, will be performed in connection with IDOT"s planned resurfacing of Central Road later this year.) Busse Road: Add marked crosswalks & pedestrian crossing signals on the east leg of the intersection across Central Road. In addition, prohibition of right turn on red movements for northbound vehicles is recommended. We -go Trail: Install a 4" wide pedestrian refuge island in Central Road right-of-way. Also installoverhead pedestrian crossing signs and eliminate the sidewalk ramps on east leg of the intersection. Cathy Lane: Install a 4" wide pedestrian refuge island in Central Road right-of-way. Also installoverhead pedestrian crossing signs and eliminate the flashing yellow beacon system. Pine Street: Add a marked crosswalk & signs on west leg of the intersection. Construct a4" wide pedestrian refuge island and install overhead pedestrian crossing signs. Emerson Street: Construct a raised median refuge island across the west leg of the intersection and install overhead pedestrian crossing signs. In addition, eliminate northbound vehicular traffic by installing a right-in/right-out island in the Emerson Street right-of-way. A Road Safety Review is a safety examination of roadways conducted by representatives from IDOT Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering (IDOT BSPE) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). This assessment was requested by Village staff as part of an effort to collect and apply best practices for pedestrian safety on high volume streets. The scope of work included crash analyses, field observations, and improvement recommendations. Generally, the Road Safety Review team suggested that median refuge islands should be utilized at crosswalks throughout the corridor. They also recommended selecting a single, consistent crosswalk pavement marking style and reducing sign clutter/sight obstructions. Finally, even though there were no dences of nighttime crashes involving pedestrians, they opined that safety could be improved by increasing illumination directly over marked crosswalks. More specifically, the Road Safety Review team suggested that the Village consider the following pedestria crossing improvements: i Weller Lane: Install white "stop" lines on pavement 30" from crosswalk. Also, install a double white lane line, to prohibit drivers from switching lanes, for a 50" distance from each stop line. In addition, the team recommended painting the median refuge island curb yellow to increase visibility, modify (offset) refuge island to facilitate a two (2) stage crossing, and install rectangular rapid flash beacons (RRFBs) overhead. We -go Trail: Add a marked crosswalk on the east leg of the intersection and widen the existing crosswalk to better accommodate disabled sidewalk users. Cathy Lane: Remove existing flashing yellow beacon system and add a reflective strip on the existing crosswalk warning sign posts to increase visibility. Main Street (IL Route 83): Update traffic control signals and widen sidewalk ramp area on the northwest corner of the intersection. Emerson Street: Construct a raised median refuge island across the west leg of the intersection and install overhead pedestrian crossing signs. In addition, eliminate northbound vehicular traffic by installing a right-in/right-out island in the Emerson Street right-of-way. The analyses and recommendations presented in these reports offer guidance to improve pedestrian and bicyclist crossing safety on Central Road. They do not impute regulatory or legal requirements to construct. Rather, they are submitted as applications of best practices for the Village"s consideration with the intent of improving safety and negating the barrier effect of a high volume traffic corridor. https://www.boarddocs.com/il/vomp/Board.nsf/Private?open&login 7/10/2018 BoardDocs® Pro Page 3 of 3 In addition, staff has taken the liberty of compiling these, and other pedestrian crossing treatments, into a compendium, or "toolbox" of ideas that can be applied to uncontrolled crossings on other high volume streets in the Village. This "toolbox" of ideas is included as Attachment D. It is intended to be applied in conjunction with the Federal Highway Administration Research Report #FHWA-ICT-16-016 Establishing Procedures and Guidelines for Pedestrian Treatments at Uncontrolled Locations, the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), and IDOT highway design standards. Staff will facilitate discussion of these report findings and present pedestrian safety improvement concepts for thc Village Board's consideration. IIS iir iii ,A III ---1Iii gIIS V6Vtene 1iii- affk: Ciii- iii -idiii -sIIID IIG IIG)df 34- IIS III::3) (: C 1�Zoad Safe-�.:-y 1�Zeview df (215 95 K[::3) &n"� i - a :)ed ,,ri)-�.:udy flinaIII �-:Xff: K[13) A� a( 1 0' Ib o xIIG,d f: 1 8 9 IIS III3) Administrative Content Executive Content https://www.boarddocs.com/il/vomp/Board.nsf/Private?open&login 7/10/2018 1 C II:W:WIIII: L � � i�<llCV' •� �cV Lu—iiiiiiii LlNussuwj ■ ■ � 11111111111 ����111111� 111111ILI 11111111111111 � 1� 1111 rr� 11111■� Ll� ei :.'iiiii�� t��ll�l . 11/��111111 ���► `�� 111 / 111'�Illl�t ■g1� M■■■41 11 —�. � .11111 ■11.._111■ �! ��� 111 InJ1111�Ln 11111 �� ��`!■i.. it o■i M 1 TI: WT E CeiTr'al Road Pedestrian Crossing Study September 2017 illage of Mount Prospect 5507 N. Cumberland Avenue, Chicago, IL 60656 Phone: 773.775.4009 1 www.ciorba.com Quality Engineering Solutions for the Community ExecutiveSummary ................................................................................................................................................2 Purpose....................................................................................................................................................................3 BackgroundInformation.......................................................................................................................................3 Field Observations at Intersections......................................................................................................................3 Crash Analysis - Pedestrians and Bicyclists.........................................................................................................6 TrafficSignal Warrant Analysis..............................................................................................................................8 SchoolSpeed Limit Analysis................................................................................................................................10 SafetyToolbox Options........................................................................................................................................13 FHWAPedestrian Study.......................................................................................................................................16 PotentialFunding Sources...................................................................................................................................17 Recommendations...............................................................................................................................................18 Appendix 1 -Crash Analysis Appendix 2 -Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Appendix 3 - Pedestrian Traffic Counts Appendix 4 -Recommended Improvements Appendix 5 - Pedestrian Facility Studies Appendix 6 - Coordination Appendix 7 - Funding Sources Appendix 8 - Central Road, Northwest Highway and Prospect Avenue Pedestrian Crossing CFORBA GROUP Consulting Engineers The Village of Mount Prospect commissioned Ciorba Group to establish consistent guidelines to improve safety for pedestrians and bicyclists crossing Central Road. The goal is to promote a safe walking and bicycling environment within the community. Field observations were performed at the Central Road intersections between Arthur Avenue and Wolf Road to identify any issues or inconsistencies. Information gathered included existing marked crosswalk and crosswalk signing locations, type of intersection traffic control, location of existing school speed limit zones, and intersection sight distance problems. A crash analysis was completed concentrating on vehicular accidents involving pedestrians or bicyclists to identify any patterns or problem locations requiring corrective actions. The crash analysis did not identify any patterns or trends in the accidents involving pedestrians and bicyclists that would indicate the need to implement any specific safety improvements for those locations. A Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis was performed to determine if traffic signals should be installed at the unsignalized Central Road intersections with Emerson Street and Pine Street. These two intersections were singled out for analysis due to the perceived heavy pedestrian volumes crossing Central Road. The analysis indicated that a new traffic signal was not justified at the Central Road/Pine Street intersection. A new traffic signal could have potentially been justified at the Central Road/Emerson Street intersection based on Warrant 7, Crash Experience. IDOT, however, indicated that a new traffic signal would not be allowed at this location due to its proximity to the Central Road and Main Street/IL 83 intersection. A review of the two existing school speed limit zones along Central Road was performed to determine if they are properly located and justified. The review also investigated the need for any additional zones along Central Road. The review concluded that no additional school speed limit zones are needed and that the Village should contact local schools to discuss the potential for eliminating the existing speed limit zones. There are a variety of federal aid programs administered by the Illinois Department of Transportation available that could potentially assist in funding pedestrian and bicycle safety improvements along the Central Road corridor. There are many ways that pedestrian and bicyclist safety can be improved along Central Road. Options include: • Public Education • Enforce Traffic Laws • Improve Intersection Sight Distance • Improve Existing and Add New Crosswalk Treatments • Other Recommendations o Replace downtown intersection tactile areas with ADA compliant tiles. o Eliminate the right turn on red maneuver at specific intersections that exhibit consistent conflicts between vehicles and pedestrians and bicyclists. Central Road Pedestrian Crossing Study 1 2 CIORBA GROUP Consulting Engineers Within the Village of Mount Prospect, Central Road is often viewed as a barrier for pedestrians and bicyclists. High traffic volumes and vehicle speeds can make it difficult to cross the roadway. At the Village's request, Ciorba Group prepared a pedestrian and bicycle crossing study of Central Road from Arthur Avenue to Wolf Road. The goal of this study is to evaluate the Central Road corridor to establish best practices that provide consistency and enhance safety for the pedestrians and bicyclists. These best practices will help promote walking and biking within the community. The study will include: • Gathering and collating information on the status of crosswalks and pedestrian signals at the existing intersections within the corridor; • Crash Analysis of the corridor that concentrates on accidents involving pedestrians and bicyclists; • Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis at the Central Road intersections with Pine Street and Emerson Street: • School Speed Limit Analysis to determine if school speed limit locations are appropriate and consistent. Central Road is a minor arterial road with typically two lanes of traffic in both the eastbound and westbound direction. The Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) has jurisdiction of Central Road between Arthur Avenue and Rand Road (US 12). From Rand Road to Wolf Road, Central Road is under the Village's jurisdiction. The land uses along this corridor are mostly residential with commercial properties clustered around most major intersections. Parks, schools and churches are also located along the corridor. The Union Pacific Railroad crosses Central Road at -grade just west of Northwest Highway (US 14). The Central Road speed limit is 40 mph from Arthur Avenue to Busse Road, and 35 mph from Busse Road to Wolf Road. The IDOT Website indicates the 2014 average daily traffic (ADT) along Central Road is: • 23,100 Arthur Avenue to Busse Road • 21,300 Busse Road to Northwest Highway • 17,700 Northwest Highway to Rand Road • 12,600 Rand Road to Wolf Road Ciorba Group contacted IDOT to discuss potential safety improvement alternatives along Central Road. We were informed that IDOT is developing their own Central Road Pedestrian Crossing Study which at the time of this report is incomplete. According to IDOT officials, their study results will not be released until the study has been finalized at some future date. Ciorba Group performed a field visit to the corridor and reviewed all intersections along Central Road within the project limits. Information gathered included the presence of existing crosswalks, crosswalk signage, school crossing signs, and pedestrian signals as well as identifying any sight distance issues. The Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) has programmed future improvements along Central Road which will include new sidewalk ramps at all intersections to satisfy the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) guidelines. Therefore, existing sidewalk ramp grades were not measured in the field. There are north/south marked crosswalks at 12 intersection locations on Central Road between Arthur Avenue and Wolf Road. The five arterial cross roads (Busse Road, Northwest Highway/US 14, Main Central Road Pedestrian Crossing Study 1 3 CIORBA GROUP Consulting Engineers Street/IL 83, Rand Road/US 12 and Wolf Road) have marked crosswalks and traffic signals with pedestrian heads. The three collector roads crossing Central Road are Arthur Avenue, Emerson Street and Mount Prospect Road. The Arthur Avenue intersection has a traffic signal but only has east/west crosswalks. Emerson Street does not have a traffic signal, but has a marked crosswalk on the west leg of the intersection. The Mount Prospect Road intersection has a traffic signal with crosswalks on all four legs. There are 29 local roads that intersect Central Road within the project limits. Of these, the Prospect Avenue and Owen Street intersections with Central Road have traffic signals with crosswalks while three local roads with no stop control on Central Road (Weller Lane, We Go Trail/Lancaster Street and Cathy Lane) have north/south crosswalks. The other 24 local roads that intersect Central Road within the project limits do not have north/south crosswalks. Apart from the intersection of Central Road and Prospect Avenue, all marked crosswalks at collector and local roads were adjacent to community buildings, schools, or parks. A detailed list of the existing crosswalk conditions per roadway classification is provided in Table 1. Table 1. Existinq Crosswalk Conditions � � c 3 3 Main St (IL 83)► N rn HCA m CA O H Trees to the west p O H U U rn N s Wolf Rd Q too) Z Q N -he Q _ C _� N C O Arthur Ave LU U 4 N N HO N O N N V H O O 0 U U 0 U a in Sight Distance Issue Comment Q N 1800 W Central Rd Busse Rd * (D * 0 Q �► 0 (D a Shrubs to the east Northwest Highway (US 14) Main St (IL 83)► Trees to the west Rand Rd (US 12) �►j Q Wolf Rd Q Q Q Arthur Ave 4 Q Trees and light poles to the east Emerson St} Trees to the west, fence to the east Mt Prospect Rd Q 1800 W Central Rd ©} �► Central Park East (Arlington Heights) m w �y w Weller Ln Q Trees and power poles to the east Kenilworth Ave a Shrubs to the west, trees to the east Waverly PI} ►�} Lancaster St/ We Go Trail Trees to the east and west Millers Ln}} Trees to the east Central Road Pedestrian Crossing Study 1 4 CIGRBA GROUP Consulting Engineers * N/S Crosswalk at Busse Road is on west leg only. Central Road Pedestrian Crossing Study 1 5 CIORBA GROUP Consulting Engineers � � c 3 3 N rn H m P O H p O H U U Z N Q C N C O w U p in N N H N O O N N V H O O 0 U U 0 U a in Sight Distance Issue Comment N 4 Cathy Ln Q a Trees to the east and west, Sign to the east Wa Pella Ave ►} © [r� Prospect Ave Ridge Ave} Elmhurst Ave + Post Office Sign to the east Pine St Q Building to the west, trees to the east Wille St d Q Parking lot and fence to the west, trees to east Maple St * Q Fence to the west, trees to the east Elm St} r(� School St Q Q Owen St a Q► Shrubs to the east and west William St Q% a Trees to the east Louis St Q Shrubs to the west and south Edward St ® Q George St {{ ` a a Shrubs to the west Albert St Q Shrubs to the west and north, parking lot east Westgate Rd Marcella Rd }► Shrubs to the east and west Horner Ln►( Shrubs to the west Patricia Ln (Des Plaines) Stevenson Ln { © Shrubs to the west Nelson Ln (Des Plaines) * N/S Crosswalk at Busse Road is on west leg only. Central Road Pedestrian Crossing Study 1 5 CIORBA GROUP Consulting Engineers A crash analysis was conducted that concentrated on vehicular accidents involving pedestrians or bicyclists. The most recent 5 years (2012 to 2016) of crash reports involving pedestrians and bicyclists along the Central Road corridor were obtained from the Mount Prospect Police Department. This information was analyzed to identify any locations with a high pedestrian and bicycle crash frequency. A crash analysis was also done for traffic signal warrant analysis at the Central Road intersections at Pine Street and Emerson Street. Figure 1. Location of Pedestrian and Bicycle Crashes 0 Location ish Location Pedestrian Crashes There were two crashes involving pedestrians on Central Road within the project limits from January 2012 to December 2016 with one incident resulting in a pedestrian injury. These crashes occurred at separate intersections, so there are no concentrated crash locations involving pedestrians. Central Road and Main Street - 02/24/2012. The pedestrian was crossing Central Road from the northwest to the southwest corner within the crosswalk. A vehicle traveling eastbound was stopped at the traffic signal. The pedestrian crossed while the pedestrian signal indicated "Do Not Walk." When the eastbound traffic signal turned green, the vehicle began moving and struck the pedestrian. This resulted in the pedestrian sustaining a Type B injury. A Type B injury is considered not incapacitating and could include lumps on the head, abrasions, bruises or minor lacerations. Central Road and Maple Street - 01/25/2012. The pedestrian was crossing Maple Street from the southeast corner to the southwest corner within the crosswalk. The motorist was driving northbound on Maple Street, halted at the stop sign and then struck the pedestrian while attempting to turn left onto Central Road. There were no injuries with some property damage only. IDOT's crash statistics for the Village from January 2011 to December 2015 reveal that vehicular accidents caused a total of 4 pedestrian fatalities and 15 pedestrian Type A injuries. None of the fatalities or Type A injuries occurred along Central Road within that timeframe. A Type A injury is Central Road Pedestrian Crossing Study 1 6 CIORBA GROUP Consulting Engineers considered incapacitating where the injured person is not able to walk or perform the activities that could be performed prior to the injury. There were 683 pedestrian fatalities and 4,895 pedestrian Type A injuries in Illinois during 2011 to 2015. Bicycle Crashes There were nine crashes involving bicycles on Central Road between Arthur Avenue and Wolf Road from January 2012 to December 2016. Two of the crashes resulted in pedestrian fatalities while two others resulted in injuries. Apart from two crashes at the Busse Road intersection, all the other crashes occurred at separate intersections. Even with two crashes at the Central Road/Busse Road intersection, no concentrated crash locations involving bicyclists are considered to exist. Both crashes at the Busse Road intersection involved a driver making a right turn on red. Central Road and Busse Road - 08/24/2012. The bicyclist was traveling westbound in the crosswalk on the south side of the intersection. The driver hit the rear wheel on the bicycle while turning right on red. There were no injuries, property damage only. Central Road and Busse Road - 05/26/2015. The bicyclist was traveling eastbound on the sidewalk on the north side of the road. The driver was turning right on red from the north leg to go westbound on Central Road when he struck the bicyclist. There were no injuries or reported property damage. Central Road east of Weller Lane - 06/09/2016. The bicyclist intended to cross Central Road northbound to Melas Park. The bicyclist activated the RRFB signal and proceeded north within the crosswalk. Vehicles in the eastbound outside lane stopped for the RRFB signal but an eastbound vehicle travelling in the inside lane did not stop and struck the bicyclist. This crash resulted in a fatality. Central Road and Northwest Highway - 04/29/2013. The bicyclist was traveling eastbound in the left turn lane. An eastbound vehicle backed up and struck the bicyclist, causing the bicyclist to fall. There were no injuries. Central Road and the Union Pacific Railroad Tracks west of Northwest Highway - 09125113. The bicyclist was traveling eastbound across the tracks. Witnesses state that the gates were down and the lights were flashing. The train was unable to stop before striking the bicyclist. This crash resulted in a fatality. Central Road and Elmhurst Avenue - 0311512013. The bicyclist was traveling eastbound in the crosswalk on the north side of the intersection. A vehicle heading southbound on Elmhurst Avenue halted at the stop sign, then proceeded and hit the bicyclist while attempting to turn onto Central Road. There were no injuries, property damage only. Central Road and Emerson Street - 04/28/2015. The bicyclist was traveling westbound in the crosswalk on the south side of the intersection. A vehicle heading northbound on Emerson Street was turning right onto eastbound Central Road. The driver claims they were blinded by the sun and did not see the bicyclist. This crash resulted in a Type B injury for the bicyclist. Central Road and Mount Prospect Road - 06/24/2014. The bicyclist was traveling southbound in the crosswalk on the west side of the intersection. The bicyclist was struck by a vehicle on the north leg turning right onto westbound Central Road. The driver stated that they saw the bicyclist, but did not expect the bicyclist to reach the intersection that quickly. The report indicated that the bicyclist received a Type C injury. A Type C injury could include momentary unconsciousness, limping, complaints of pain, nausea or claims of injuries not evident. Central Road and Rand Road - 07/01/2013. The bicyclist was traveling westbound on the north sidewalk parallel to Central Road. When crossing Rand Road in the crosswalk the bicyclist was struck by a vehicle turning right from westbound Central Road to Rand Road. There were no injuries, property damage only. Central Road Pedestrian Crossing Study 1 7 CIORBA GROUP Consulting Engineers IDOT's crash statistics for the Village from January 2011 to December 2015 reveal a total of one bicyclist fatality (on Cenfral Road) and four bicyclist Type A injuries (none on Cenfral Road). There were 140 bicyclist fatalities and 2,150 bicyclist Type A injuries in Illinois during this same timeframe. Conclusion The crash analysis did not identify any patterns or trends in the accidents involving pedestrians and bicyclists that would indicate the need fo implement any specific safety improvements for those locations. A Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis is performed to justify installing a new or maintaining an existing traffic signal at an intersection. The Cenfral Road intersections with Pine Street and Emerson Street were identified as potentially high pedestrian traffic locations. A Traffic Signal Warrant analysis was conducted for these intersections to determine if a traffic signal installation is justified to improve crossing safety. Background The Manual on Uniform Traffic Confrol Devices (MUTCD) is a document prepared and issued by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to specify the standards for the usage, design, and installation of traffic signals, pavement surface markings, and roadway sign. Chapter 4C of the MUTCD describes the nine characteristics or warrants of an intersection to justify the use of a traffic signal. According to the MUTCD, a traffic signal should not be installed unless one or more of the warrants are met. An engineering study analyzing the warrants will indicate whether installing a traffic signal will improve the overall safety and/or operation of an intersection. Current Conditions At Cenfral Road, Pine Street has stop signs on the north and south legs of the intersection. A popular business, Capannari Ice Cream, is located on the west side of Pine Street just south of Cenfral Road. Capannari is known to attract a significant amount of pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular traffic in the summer. Pine Street north of Cenfral Road is residential. At Cenfral Road, Emerson Street has stop signs on the north and south legs of the intersection. The Mount Prospect Public Library, Village Hall and fownhomes are located on Emerson Street south of Central Road. The library can generate a significant amount of pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular traffic. Emerson Street north of Cenfral Road is residential. Data Collection The traffic volumes were collected at both intersections using Miovison which provides traffic counts using video recording equipment. 12 -hour traffic counts classified as car or truck along with pedestrian and bicycle counts were obtained at both intersections. The data was collected simultaneously on Tuesday, May 16, 2017 from 6am-6pm. The traffic volumes and crash frequency were entered info McTrans HCS software which is a program that aids in determining if one or more of the nine traffic signal warrants are met. Traffic Signal Warrant Descriptions There are nine traffic signal warrants identified in the MUTCD. These warrants include: 1. Warrant 1- Eight -Hour Vehicular Volume • Traffic volumes per hour exceed a threshold provided by the MUTCD for at least 8 hours a day for the major and minor street. 2. Warrant 2 - Four -Hour Vehicular Volume • Traffic volumes per hour exceed a threshold provided by the MUTCD for at least 4 hours a day for the major street and one direction of the minor street. Central Road Pedestrian Crossing Study 1 8 CIORBA GROUP Consulting Engineers 3. Warrant 3 - Peak Hour • Traffic volumes per hour exceed a threshold provided by the MUTCD for one hour a day for the major street and one direction of the minor street. This is typically applied at locations such as office complexes, manufacturing plants, industrial complexes, or high -occupancy vehicle facilities which experience large volumes of vehicles over a short time. 4. Warrant 4 - Pedestrian Volume • Traffic volumes on a major street are heavy enough that pedestrians experience excessive delay in crossing the major street. Pedestrian volumes must exceed a threshold provided by the MUTCD. 5. Warrant 5 - School Crossing • This is to be applied in cases where heavy traffic volumes do not allow for adequate gaps in traffic allowing school children to cross. Pedestrian volumes must exceed a threshold provided by the MUTCD. 6. Warrant 6 - Coordinated Signal System • This applies to intersections within an existing Coordinated Signal System to maintain proper grouping of vehicles through the coordinated intersections. 7. Warrant 7 - Crash Experience • Intersections where the severity and frequency of crashes are the principal reasons to consider installing a traffic control signal. Minimum traffic volumes must be met and there must 5 or more crashes within a 12 -month period. Crash types must be correctable with a traffic control signal (angle crashes). Rear end crashes are not considered correctible with a traffic signal. Warrant 8 - Roadway Network • An intersection where a traffic control signal might be justified to encourage concentration and organization of traffic flow on a roadway network. Warrant 9 - Intersection Near a Grade Railroad Crossing • This is intended for use at a location where the center of a railroad track is within 140 feet of the stop line for an intersection. Crash Analysis A crash analysis was conducted at each intersection to determine if Warrant 7 could be satisfied and justify a new traffic signal installation. The results of the analysis are as follows: Central Road/Pine Street Intersection A crash analysis was performed at the Pine Street intersection with reports obtained from January 2012 to December 2016. During this period, there were 17 crashes at the intersection. The primary crash types were rear end (41.2%), right angle (23.5%), and overtaking (17.6%). These crashes occurred during daylight in clear weather conditions. Crash Summaries and Collision Diagrams are provided in Appendix 1. Central Road/Emerson Street Intersection A crash analysis was performed at the Emerson Street intersection with report obtained from January 2012 to December 2016. During this period, there were 35 crashes at the intersection. The primary crash types were right angle (54.3%) and rear end (14.3%). Eighty percent of these crashes occurred during daylight, 88.6% occurred during clear weather conditions. Crash Summaries and Collision Diagrams are provided in Appendix 1. Warrant Analysis Summary Details of the warrant analysis and traffic counts for each intersection are provided in Appendix 2. Pedestrian Traffic Counts are provided in Appendix 3. Central Road at Pine Street Intersection. No warrants were satisfied to justify a new traffic signal installation for the Central Road and Pine Street intersection. Central Road Pedestrian Crossing Study 1 9 CIORBA GROUP Consulting Engineers Central Road at Emerson Street Intersection. Warrant 7, Crash Experience was partially met to justify a traffic signal installation for the Central Road and Emerson Street intersection. The three criteria to satisfy this warrant are: The intersection must have five or more reported crashes during a 12 -month period. The crash types must be susceptible to correction by a traffic control signal (such as a right-angle crash). o These criteria are satisfied since the intersection had 8 crashes of this type within a 12 - month period during 2015. The traffic volumes must meet volume requirements provided by the MUTCD. o These volumes have been met (see Appendix 2 for traffic counts). The volume requirements are 720 vehicles per hour on the major street (total of both directions) and 80 vehicles per hour on the minor street (one direction) for the same 8 -hour periods of the day. An adequate trial of alternatives with satisfactory observance and enforcement has failed to reduce crash frequency. o A potential alternative is to improve the sight distance at this location. If seems that there are sight distance issues at each corner of the intersection. This may be difficult since most of the sight distance issues are caused by fences or frees located on private property. The sight distance on the south side of the west leg of the intersection could be improved with the removal of some frees in planters within the parkway. Unfortunately, in a phone conversation with IDOT we were informed that a traffic signal at this intersection will not be permitted due to its proximity to the Central Road and Main Street/IL 83 intersection. Two other Central Road intersections, We Go Trail/Lancaster Street and at Cathy Lane, were previously evaluated by Ciorba Group for the installation of a new traffic signal. No warrants were satisfied at either intersection to justify a new traffic signal installation. A review of the two existing school speed limit zones along Central Road was performed to determine if they are properly located and justified. The review also investigated the need for any additional zones along Central Road. The MUTCD has established guidelines for signing a school speed zone along with signing for school crossings outside of a school speed zone. The MUTCD does not provide specific criteria to establish school speed zone boundaries, however, the limits of school speed zones should be set under State or local statute. Section 713.09 of the Illinois Supplement to the MUTCD states that school speed zones should be limited to locations where elementary through high school buildings or grounds devoted primarily to normal school day activities are adjacent to the highway or where groups of children cross the highway in route to and from a school not adjacent to the highway. Figure 2 shows the locations of the schools along Central Road and the zones in which reduced school speed limits exist. Central Road Pedestrian Crossing Study 1 10 CIORBA GROUP Consulting Engineers GREGORY n u W sell 11 [ 1 r `Jul JLJI_'; w" JLJUI_'' 11JIJI �1kN- Westbrook an�� CENTRAL RD School+ �Woi ��C a SDE all Saint Emily Saint Paul � a Catholic Schaaf lthJeranScho`o�JE ll I �JEHU L—J LJ U EC c o l ri��r ai "� y School Speed Limit Zone Locations J�� ILJIILJj School Locations FHA z nn� 7_= Figure 2. Mount Prospect School Map and School Speed Limit Zones There are five schools located along or near Cenfral Road within the study limits. Two existing school speed zones are established on Cenfral Road. One zone is located between approximately Waverly Place and Miller Road while the other is in front of Saint Emily Catholic School. Westbrook School's baseball field is adjacent fo Cenfral Road just east of Busse Road. A right-in/right out access drive on Cenfral Road fo the school's parking lof was added in the summer of 2015. The school does not have a reduced speed zone along Cenfral Road, however, there is a school speed zone along Busse Road. IDOT stated that adding a reduced school speed zone along Cenfral Road for Westbrook School would require the RRFB just east of Weller Lane fo be activated only during school hours, on school days. The RRFB would not be allowed fo operate on weekends or during the summer when school is closed. Since the crosswalk east of Weller Lane is a main access point fo Melas Park, we believe that the school speed limit zone on Cenfral Road should not be added so the RRFB is maintained of all times of the year. Lincoln Middle School has a reduced 20 mph school zone speed limit on Cenfral Road between Waverly Place and Millers Lane. There is a marked crosswalk and school crossing signs at We Go Trail/Lancaster Street which is within this school speed zone. This crosswalk is located 0.6 miles north of Lincoln Middle School and 0.3 miles from Westbrook School. Pedestrian counts at this crosswalk were taken on Thursday, November 3, 2016 between 6:00 AM and 6:00 PM. The count showed a maximum of two pedestrians per hour crossing at this location and these were classified as not school related. Therefore, a reduced school zone speed limit may not be necessary for Lincoln Middle School. Fairview Elementary School, located 0.5 miles north of Cenfral Road, does not have a school speed limit zone along Cenfral Road. There are marked crosswalks, pedestrian signals, and school crossing signs at Cenfral Road and Northwest Highway. Discussions could be held with District 57 officials Central Road Pedestrian Crossing Study 1 11 CIORBA GROUP Consulting Engineers about eliminating the school crossing signs and reverting the intersection to a standard pedestrian crossing. Saint Paul Lutheran School does not have a reduced speed limit along Central Road. There are marked crosswalks, pedestrian signals, and pedestrian crossing signs at Central Road and Owen Street 0.2 miles northeast of the school. With the signalized and marked crosswalk at Owen Street, a school speed limit zone along Central Road was not investigated. Saint Emily Catholic School is directly adjacent to Central Road and has a reduced 20 mph school zone speed limit between Marcella Road and Clayton Lane/Horner Lane. There are no marked crosswalks across Central Road at these non -signalized intersections. Pedestrian and vehicle counts were obtained at the Central Road and Clayton Lane/Horner Lane intersection from 8:00 AM to] 0:00 AM and from 2:00 PM to 4:00 PM on Tuesday, May 16, 2017. The maximum hourly number crossing Central Road at this intersection was three pedestrians/bicyclist between 8:00 AM to 9:00 AM. These crossings were classified as not school related. There are marked crosswalks, pedestrian signals, and school crossing signs at the Central Road intersections with Rand Road and Wolf Road. These crossings are approximately 0.3 miles west and 0.3 miles east of the school, respectively. Based on the low number of pedestrians/bicyclists crossing Central Road at Clayton Lane/Horner Lane, a marked crosswalk and school crossing signs are probably not needed at this intersection. The existing school speed limit zone may also not be needed. The Village should coordinate with the Saint Emily School to discuss the report findings on the need for a marked crosswalk on Central Road at Clayton Lane/Horner Lane and the potential for eliminating the school speed limit zone on Central Road. Central Road Pedestrian Crossing Study 1 12 CIORBA GROUP Consulting Engineers There are several safety tools (low, medium, and high cost) that could be implemented throughout the Village to improve pedestrian and bicyclists safety and convenience. Specific tools for the Central Road corridor are described in the Recommendations section of this report. Low Cost Safety Tools Marked Crosswalk- Marked crosswalks designate where pedestrians can cross help to ensure high visibility for drivers, and provide guidance. Crosswalk locations should be convenient for pedestrians and accessible for pedestrians in wheelchairs. Crosswalk markings alone are unlikely to increase pedestrian safety. They should be used along with additional measures to improve crossing safety, especially for roadways with an ADT greater than 10,000. Advance Warning Signs- These signs give drivers advanced notice of pedestrian crossing locations. The signs can be fluorescent yellow, oversized or potentially mounted on an overhead cantilever to attract the attention of motorists. In Road State Law Stop for Pedestrian Signs- These signs remind drivers that it is state law to stop for pedestrians in crosswalks. Signs are placed at the centerline of the pedestrian crossing. State Law Stop for Pedestrian signs can be used at uncontrolled intersections and midblock crossings. One problem is that the sign can easily be hit by vehicles on roadways with high traffic volumes. No Right Turn on Red Signs —Conflicts can frequently occur between pedestrians/bicyclists crossing a signalized street and vehicles turning right on red. Providing No Right Turn on Red (RTOR) restrictions during the busiest times of the day could alleviate this conflict and the potential for injuries. Full time restrictions may be needed near schools or areas with constant pedestrian activity. A negative effect of this restriction is the possibility of reduced traffic flow efficiency. According to the MUTCD, a No Turn on Red sign should be considered when an engineering study finds that one or more of the following conditions exists: STATE LAW 1' FOR a WHIN CROSSWALK NO RIGHT TURN ON RED • Inadequate sight distance to vehicles approaching from the left (or right, if applicable); • Geometrics or operational characteristics of the intersection that might result in unexpected conflicts; • An exclusive pedestrian phase; • An unacceptable number of pedestrian conflicts with right -turn -on -red maneuvers, especially involving children, older pedestrians, or persons with disabilities; • More than three right -turn -on -red accidents reported in a 12 -month period for the particular approach; or • The skew angle of the intersecting roadways creates difficulty for drivers to see traffic approaching from their left. Central Road Pedestrian Crossing Study 1 13 CIORBA GROUP Consulting Engineers If installed, enforcement plays a key role in reducing right turn on red crashes. Speed Feedback Signs — These signs display passing vehicle speeds. They are a visual reminder to vehicles to be aware of the speed limit. These signs can be installed on a temporary or permanent basis. People routinely travelling on the same roadway may become desensitized to the speed feedback signs. Pedestrian Guidance Signs — These signs are placed at crosswalks to provide pedestrians information and guidance for crossing a roadway. Medium Cost Safety Tools Pedestrian Refuge Islands- A pedestrian refuge island offers a protected area that allows pedestrians to cross one direction of traffic at a time. Refuge islands allow for easier crossings for roadways with two-way traffic, especially for the elderly and those with disabilities. The "In Road State Law Stop for Pedestrian Signs" mentioned above can be added at the ends of the median to help emphasize the pedestrian crossing. Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons- RRFB's can be used at uncontrolled or midblock crossings. Pedestrians push a button to activate the yellow rapid flashing lights, this alerts drivers to stop for pedestrians in the crosswalk. The Illinois Department of Transportation has issued a moratorium on the use of these on state routes in Illinois due to patent issues. Illuminated crosswalks - Illuminated crosswalks increase the visibility of crosswalks in low light situations. They can be used at any marked crosswalk. Ongoing maintenance is required however, to keep all the lights operational. HAWK Beacons- High -Intensity activated crosswalk beacons are used to stop traffic and allow pedestrians to cross safely. These beacons are dark until activated by a pedestrian. Once activated, the signal first flashes yellow, then steady yellow, and steady red over a period of several seconds. A pedestrian volume warrant must be satisfied to provide a HAWK Beacon. With the Central Road traffic volumes, a minimum pedestrian crossing volume of 20 pedestrians per hour must be satisfied to warrant a HAWK Beacon. IDOT has been against the use of these on State routes. If used, the beacon should be installed at least 100 feet from side streets or driveways that are controlled by stop or yield signs. Central Road Pedestrian Crossing Study 1 14 CIORBA GROUP Consulting Engineers High Cost Safety Tools Bump Outs- Bump outs extend the sidewalk info a parking lane. They reduce the distance for pedestrians to cross in a crosswalk and help reduce traffic speeds. Bump Outs also improve the visibility of the crosswalk. Traffic Signals- A traffic signal with protected crossings and pedestrian signal heads provides a high level of protection for pedestrians and bicyclists. An engineering study must first be done to determine if a traffic signal is warranted. Pedestrian signal heads with countdown timers is preferred. This provides pedestrians with additional information regarding the remaining time to complete the crossing. Accessible Pedestrian Signals (APS) make it easier for pedestrians who are blind or visually impaired to cross an intersection by providing audible and/or vibrofacfile information about when the WALK interval begins and when it is no longer safe to cross. The audible signals can also provide directional guidance which can be very beneficial at large or skewed intersections. Pedestrian Defectors are also available that use microwave or infrared technology to defect pedestrians and then activate the WALK signal. These defectors can also be used to monitor pedestrians crossing an intersection and extend the clearance interval, if needed, to a preset maximum timing. Central Road Pedestrian Crossing Study 1 15 CIORBA GROUP Consulting Engineers Studies on the Effects of adding Pedestrian Facilities The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) research on pedestrian crossings of uncontrolled intersections is summarized in Figure 4. This study indicates that the crash rate for pedestrians of marked crosswalks without other additional improvements can be significantly higher than of unmarked crosswalks. A marked crosswalk is one that has pavement markings only. 1.6 14 CAw c r vs 1.2 ti 0 a U C W W a r a 0.6 a U a e 0.4 a �i 0.2 0 No Median No Raised Median No Raised Median No Raised Median Raised Median Raised Median All ADT's < 12,000 ADT 12,000-15,000 ADT > 15,000 ADT ; 15.000 ADT > 15,000 ADT 2 Lanes 3 to 8 Lanes 3 to 8 Lanes 3 to 8 Lanes 3 to 8 Lanes 3 to 8 Lanes (9 14 Sites) (260 Sites) (149 Sites) (417 Sites) (87 Sites) (173 Sites) Type of Grossing Figure 4. Safety Effects of Marked versus Unmarked Crosswalks at Uncontrolled Locations. Reference. C. V. Zeeger, J. R. Stewart, H. H. Huang, P. A. Lagerwey, J. Feaganes and B. Campbell, Federal Highway Administration, McLean, VA, September2005. Central Road Pedestrian Crossing Study 1 16 CIORBA GROUP Consulting Engineers One reason for the higher crash rate at marked crosswalks is called a "multiple threat" crash. This occurs when a motorist stops to let a pedestrian cross and the pedestrian is struck by a motorist traveling in the same direction whose view is obstructed by the stopped vehicle. The study states that another reason for these higher crash rates is that pedestrians over 65 years old were more likely to cross at these locations. Compared to other age groups, these pedestrians have a higher risk of being struck by cars. The FHWA also developed a safety guidance table for uncontrolled intersections which is provided in Appendix 5. This table indicates guidance for crosswalk usage based on the roadway type (number of travel lanes and median type), the vehicle ADT and speed limit for the roadway to be crossed. In general, providing marked crosswalks alone is insufficient since this may increase the pedestrian crash risk. Additional treatments, such as traffic calming measures, traffic signals with pedestrian crossing signals when warranted or other substantial crossing improvements should be considered. Ciorba Group contacted Jeff Shaw with the FHWA to discuss these study findings. The telephone conversation summary is provided in Appendix 6. Mr. Shaw stated that the study did not always provide the best guidance to implement improvements at existing crossing locations. He believed that adding medians with warning signs on high volume streets would improve crossing safety. Items such as a raised crosswalk might be good for pedestrians, but it would have impacts on traffic by slowing vehicles at crosswalks which would probably not make it a preferable solution. Other improvements to consider include providing highly visible crosswalks (continental, ladder or zebra crosswalks), florescent yellow warning signs, oversized warning signs or signs mounted on a cantilever. He stated that a background color can be provided between the white crosswalk lines but there is no evidence that it makes the crossing safer. Green could not be used since this color is reserved for bike lanes. Potential funding options for pedestrian and bicycle projects for local transportation projects are provided in Appendix 7. Some of the main funding sources are: • Illinois Transportation Enhancement Program (ITEP) —All pedestrian/bicycle infrastructure improvements with a relationship to surface transportation are eligible for funding. Safety and educational programs are also eligible. Recreational improvements are not eligible. • Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) — The purpose of this fund is to improve air quality and reduce traffic congestion. Funding is typically awarded to projects having the greatest improvement to air quality. Safety and educational programs are also eligible. • Surface Transportation Program (STP) —This funding is for state and local road and transit projects. Bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure improvements are eligible; however, the Village belongs to the Northwest Council of Mayors (NWCM). Bicycle and pedestrian improvements are not a high priority as established by the NWCM Technical Committee. • Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) —This program provides funds for safety projects that will reduce crashes resulting in fatalities and serious injuries. Eligibility is mainly based on fatalities or Type A injuries occurring at a specific location. • Safe Routes to School (SRTS) —The purpose of this fund is to enable and encourage children to walk and cycle to school. Bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure improvements are eligible Within a two-mile radius of a K-8 school. Safety and educational programs are also eligible. Central Road Pedestrian Crossing Study 1 17 CIORBA GROUP Consulting Engineers There are many ways that pedestrian and bicyclist safety can be improved along Central Road. Options include: Education There are several educational strategies that could be used to increase safety for pedestrians and bicyclists. Some of these include: • Providing safety information and guidelines for pedestrians, bicyclists and motorists using the Village website, handouts, etc. • Educating targeted groups (such as school children, students in driver education programs, older adults, etc.) about improved safety guidelines for pedestrians, bicyclists and motorists. This could be done in the school or other location through handouts, video presentation, seminar, etc. • Highlight pedestrian or bicycle crossing features when introducing new infrastructure improvements. Enforce Traffic Laws Police enforcement is essential to preserve the pedestrian right-of-way and provide a safe environment for pedestrians. Educational programs can make the driver aware of the benefits of following traffic regulations, but good and bad driving behavior can be a function of direct consequences that follow driver behavior. In addition to enforcing the law on speeding, driving under the influence and red light running, additional attention could also be spent on enforcement of crosswalk laws such as not yielding or stopping for pedestrians. Enforcement can increase driver compliance at crosswalks, increase driver awareness of pedestrians and make engineering solutions more effective. Improve Sight Distance Making pedestrians and bicyclists more visible to motorists will improve safety. Many of the Central Road intersections have a reduced sight distance due to shrubs, trees or fences located within the motorist's line of sight. Where possible, shrubs and trees that are within the public right-of-way should be trimmed or removed. Unfortunately, numerous sight distance issues are caused by objects that are within private property. Working with property owners to remove obstructions should improve sight distance issues. Crosswalk Treatment All existing marked crosswalks at signalized intersections should remain in place and restriped on an as needed basis. Providing north/south marked crosswalks on Central Road at Arthur Avenue is recommended. Crosswalk and Crosswalk Ahead signs could be added at the Central Road intersections with Busse Road, Main Street/IL 83, Arthur Avenue and Mount Prospect Road. We recommend adding a north/south marked crosswalk on the east leg of the Central Road and Busse Road intersection. Constructing additional safety measures should be considered for the marked crosswalks at uncontrolled intersections on Central Road. Intersections with marked crosswalks and no stop or yield control along Central Road include: We Go Trail/Lancaster Street, Cathy Lane and Emerson Street. A multi-year program could be developed to implement the improvements. Medium cost improvements as described in the Safety Toolbox Options section to improve crosswalk safety at these locations could include: • Adding medians with pedestrian crossing warning signs as a mid -street refuge islands. • Provide highly visible crosswalks with continental, ladder or zebra striping. • Provide florescent yellow warning signs, oversized warning signs or signs mounted on a cantilever in advance of the crosswalk. • Provide a sign for pedestrians informing them to make sure all traffic is stopped prior to crossing the roadway. Central Road Pedestrian Crossing Study 1 18 CIORBA GROUP Consulting Engineers An enhanced crosswalk as described above is recommended at the Central Road and Pine Street intersection. Exhibits that illustrate an enhanced crosswalk across Central Road are included in Appendix 4. Other Recommendations Mount Prospect has several Central Road intersections in the downtown area that do not have compliant ADA tiles. It is recommended that they be replaced with tiles with truncated domes that satisfy ADA standards. The two bicycle crashes at the Central Road/Busse Road intersection (see Crash Analysis section) occurred while the driver was making a right turn on red. Eliminating this maneuver may help make the intersection safer for pedestrians and bicyclists. Bump outs decrease the crossing distance for pedestrians and bicyclists. However, since Central Road does not have a parking lane and eliminating a travel lane would be unacceptable to IDOT (and the motoring public), construction of bump outs is not a viable option. It is also recommended that the Village discuss with Lincoln Middle School officials the elimination of the existing school speed limit zone between Waverly Place and Millers Lane. Our study found that students do not appear to be using the We Go Trail/Lancaster Road crosswalk. The Village should also discuss with the Saint Emily Catholic School eliminating the school speed limit zone between Marcella Road and Clayton Lane/Horner Lane. No students were seen crossing at this location during the traffic counts for this study. Central Road Pedestrian Crossing Study 1 19 CIORBA GROUP Consulting Engineers Appendix 1 - Crash Analysis Village of Mount Prospect Phone: 773.775.4009 1 www.ciorba.com Quality Engineering Solutions for the Community ACCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET ROUTE: Central Road LOCATION: Pine Street MUNICIPALITY: Mount Prospect COUNTY: Cook TIME PERIOD COVERED: 1/1/2012 - 12/31/2016 REFERENCE MARKERS/ NODES REMARKS: Selected Accidents TIME OF DAY # ACC % 6 AM - 10 AM 5 29.4% 10 AM - 4 PM 6 35.3% 4 PM - 7 PM 6 35.3% 7PM-12 AM 0 0.0% 12 AM - 6 AM 0 0.0% Unspecified 0 0.0% Total 17 0.0% WEATHER # ACC % Clear 17 100.0% Cloudy 0 0.0% Rain 0 0.0% Snow 0 0.0% Sleet/Hail/Freezing Rain 0 0.0% Fog/Smog/Smoke 0 0.0% Unspecified 0 0.0% Total 17 11.8% SURFACE # ACC Dry 17 Wet 0 Mud/Slush 0 Snow/Ice 0 Unspecified 0 Total 17 TIME OF YEAR # ACC Winter (Dec -Feb) 3 Spring (Mar -May) 3 Summer (Jun -Aug) 5 Fall (Sep -Nov) 6 Total 17 1 DIRECTION #ACC % DIRECTION North 1 2.8% Northeast South 6 16.7% Northwest East 23 63.9% Southeast West 6 16.7% Southwest Total 36 0 Unspecified - 2 DATE: 5/16/2017 # ACC 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% ACCIDENT TYPE # ACC % ACCIDENT TYPE # ACC 11.8% Rear End 7 41.2% Pedestrian 0 0.0% Overtake 3 17.6% Bicycle 0 0.0% Right Angle 4 23.5% Parked Vehicle 0 0.0% Left Turn 2 11.8% Backing 0 0.0% Right Turn 1 5.9% Run Off The Road 0 0.0% Fixed Object 0 0.0% Animal 0 0.0% Head On 0 0.0% Other 0 0.0% Sideswipe 0 0.0% Unspecified 0 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 17.6% 17.6% 29.4% 35.3% DAY OF WEEK # ACC % Sunday 2 11.8% Monday 1 5.9% Tuesday 4 23.5% Wednesday 4 23.5% Thursday 2 11.8% Friday 2 11.8% Saturday 2 11.8% Total 17 100.0% SUMMARY OF ACCIDENT SEVERITY BY YEAR: Fatal Accidents Total 36 Injury Accidents LIGHT CONDITION Property Damage Accidents # ACC % Non -Reportable Accidents 17 100.0% Total Accidents 0 0.0% Total 17 2014 ACCIDENT SEVERITY # ACC % Fatal 0 0.0% Injury 3 17.6% Property Damage 14 82.4% Non -Reportable 0 0.0% Total 17 0 TYPE OF VEHICLE # ACC % Passenger Cars 36 100.0% Commercial Vehicles 0 0.0% Total 36 LIGHT CONDITION # ACC % Daylight 17 100.0% Dawn/Dusk 0 0.0% Night 0 0.0% Unspecified 0 0.0% Total 17 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 3 2 3 1 5 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 3 2 6 HSA Software 3.0 COLLISION DIAGRAM Key Number = 1 MUNICIPALITY: Mount Prospect COUNTY: Cook FILE: Central INTERSECTION: Central Road -Pine Street CASE #: PERIOD: 5 YEARS 0 MONTHS FROM 1/1/2012 TO 12/31/2016 BY: MLD DATE: 5/16/2017 Eastbound �� Pine Street 0=0 1 15 11 C®0 10 E171 14 12 16 j 13 2 II 6 Central Road SYMBOLS MANNER OF COLLISION r MOVING VEHICLE PEDESTRIAN REAR END HEAD ON TURNING VEHICLE BICYCLIST LEFT TURN RIGHT TURN BACKING VEHICLE ANIMAL 4�— LEFT TURN RIGHT TURN PARKED VEHICLE FIXED OBJECT ==�l OVERTAKE RIGHT ANGLE 9991 RECORD NUMBER Fatal ./\,–j OUT OF CONTROL SIDE SWIPE HSA Software 3.0 ACCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET ROUTE: Central Road LOCATION: Emerson Street MUNICIPALITY: Mount Prospect COUNTY: Cook TIME PERIOD COVERED: 1/1/2012 - 12/31/2016 REFERENCE MARKERS/ NODES REMARKS: Selected Accidents TIME OF DAY # ACC % 6 AM - 10 AM 7 20.0% 10 AM - 4 PM 18 51.4% 4 PM - 7PM 8 22.9% 7PM-12 AM 2 5.7% 12 AM - 6 AM 0 0.0% Unspecified 0 0.0% Total 35 11.4% WEATHER # ACC % Clear 31 88.6% Cloudy 0 0.0% Rain 0 0.0% Snow 0 0.0% Sleet/Hail/Freezing Rain 0 0.0% Fog/Smog/Smoke 0 0.0% Unspecified 4 11.4% Total 35 5.7% SURFACE Dry Wet Mud/Slush Snow/Ice Unspecified Total TIME OF YEAR Winter (Dec -Feb) Spring (Mar -May) Summer (Jun -Aug) Fall (Sep -Nov) Total DAY OF WEEK Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Total # ACC 31 3 0 1 0 35 # ACC 6 11 6 12 35 # ACC 3 2 7 5 7 6 5 35 1 DIRECTION #ACC % DIRECTION North 24 33.3% Northeast South 7 9.7% Northwest East 13 18.1% Southeast West 28 38.9% Southwest Total 72 0 Unspecified - 2 DATE: 5/16/2017 # ACC 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% ACCIDENT TYPE # ACC % ACCIDENT TYPE # ACC % Rear End 5 14.3% Pedestrian 0 0.0% Overtake 3 8.6% Bicycle 1 2.9% Right Angle 19 54.3% Parked Vehicle 0 0.0% Left Turn 2 5.7% Backing 2 5.7% Right Turn 3 8.6% Run Off The Road 0 0.0% Fixed Object 0 0.0% Animal 0 0.0% Head On 0 0.0% Other 0 0.0% Sideswipe 0 0.0% Unspecified 0 0.0% 88.6% 8.6% 0.0% 2.9% 0.0% 17.1% 31.4% 17.1% 34.3% 8.6% 5.7% 20.0% 14.3% 20.0% 17.1% 14.3% SUMMARY OF ACCIDENT SEVERITY BY YEAR: Fatal Accidents Injury Accidents Property Damage Accidents Non -Reportable Accidents Total Accidents Total 35 2014 ACCIDENT SEVERITY # ACC % Fatal 0 0.0% Injury 7 20.0% Property Damage 28 80.0% Non -Reportable 0 0.0% Total 35 0 TYPE OF VEHICLE # ACC % Passenger Cars 69 98.6% Commercial Vehicles 1 1.4% Total 70 LIGHT CONDITION Daylight Dawn/Dusk Night Unspecified Total # ACC 28 1 6 0 35 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 3 1 8 3 7 6 4 0 0 0 0 0 9 4 8 9 5 80.0% 2.9% 17.1% 0.0% HSA Software 3.0 COLLISION DIAGRAM Number = 2 MUNICIPALITY: Mount Prospect COUNTY: Cook FILE: Central INTERSECTION: Central Road -Emerson Street CASE #: PERIOD: 5 YEARS 0 MONTHS FROM 1/1/2012 TO 12/31/2016 BY: MLD DATE: 5/16/2017 Emerson Street Eastbound Awk-� B so Central Road 48 44 37 33 C C C G G C 23 29 25 19'22][28][W]24 31 34 52 38 40 43 47 49 51 20 36 SYMBOLS MANNER OF COLLISION r MOVING VEHICLE PEDESTRIAN 3—.. REAR END HEAD ON TURNING VEHICLE BICYCLIST LEFT TURN RIGHT TURN BACKING VEHICLE ANIMAL 4�— LEFT TURN RIGHT TURN PARKED VEHICLE FIXED OBJECT ==�l OVERTAKE RIGHT ANGLE 9991 RECORD NUMBER Fatal ./\,—j OUT OF CONTROL SIDE SWIPE sA Sart°.v G. y Appendix 2 - Traffic Signal Village of Mount Prospect Warrant Analysis Phone: 773.775.4009 1 www.ciorEa.com Quality Engineering Solutions for the Community Warrants Summary Central Road and Pine Street Page 1 of 2 Speed 35 ❑ Population < 10,000 Warrants Summary Coordinated Signal System Information al (ft) 760 E ear 3 ❑ Adequate Trials of Alternatives 5 -yr Growth Factor 0 Analyst Marie Daboub RT Intersection Central Rd and Pine St Agency/Co Ciorba Group 2 Jurisdiction Mount Prospect Date Performed 5/24/2017 0 Units U.S. Customary Project ID 20689.01 LTR Time Period Analyzed 6am-6pm East/West Street Central Road North/South Street Pine St File Name Pine.xhy 789 Major Street East-West Project Description 20689.01 1 15 General I 2/0 -- -- IRoadwav Network Speed 35 ❑ Population < 10,000 Two Major Routes ❑ Coordinated Signal System Weekend Count ❑r al (ft) 760 E ear 3 ❑ Adequate Trials of Alternatives 5 -yr Growth Factor 0 Geometry and Traffic EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 Lane usage LTR LTR LTR LTR Vehicle Volume Averages (vph) 13 819 6 5 789 9 2 1 10 1 1 15 Peds (ped/h) / Gaps (gaps/h) _ 2/0 -- -- 1 /0 -- -- 3/0 -- -- 3/0 -- Delay (s/veh) / (veh-hr) -- 0/0 -- -- 0/0 -- -- 0/0 -- -- 0/0 -- Warrant 1: Eight -Hour Vehicular Volume ❑ 1 A. Minimum Vehicular Volumes (Both major approaches --and-- higher minor approach) --or-- ❑ 1 B. Interruption of Continuous Traffic (Both major approaches --and-- higher minor approach) --or-- ❑ 1 (80%) Vehicular --and-- Interruption Volumes (Both major approaches --and-- higher minor approach) ❑ Warrant 2: Four -Hour Vehicular Volume ❑ 2 A. Four -Hour Vehicular Volumes (Both major approaches --and-- higher minor approach) ❑ Warrant 3: Peak Hour ❑ 3 A. Peak -Hour Conditions (Minor delay --and-- minor volume --and-- total volume ) --or-- 3 B. Peak- Hour Vehicular Volumes (Both major approaches --and-- higher minor approach) Warrant 4: Pedestrian Volume 4 A. Four Hour Volumes --or-- 4 B. One -Hour Volumes Warrant 5: School Crossing 5. Student Volumes --and-- ❑ 5. Gaps Same Period ❑ Warrant 6: Coordinated Signal System ❑ 6. Degree of Platooning (Predominant direction or both directions) ❑ Warrant 7: Crash Experience ❑ 7 A. Adequate trials of alternatives, observance and enforcement failed --and-- ❑ 7 B. Reported crashes susceptible to correction by signal (12 -month period) --and-- ❑ 7 C. (80%) Volumes for Warrants 1A, 1B --or-- 4 are satisfied ❑ file:///C:/Users/mdaboub/AppData/Local/Temp/w2k973F.tmp 5/25/2017 Warrants Summary Page 2 of 2 Warrant 8: Roadway Network ❑ 8 A. Weekday Volume (Peak hour total --and-- projected warrants 1, 2 or 3) --or-- ❑ 8 B. Weekend Volume (Five hours total) ❑ Warrant 9: Grade Crossing ❑ 9 A. Grade Crossing within 140 ft --and-- ❑ 9 B. Peak -Hour Vehicular Volumes ❑ Copyright© 2014 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS 201OTM Version 6.65 Generated: 5/25/2017 2:12 PM file:///C:/Users/mdaboub/AppData/Local/Temp/w2k973F.tmp 5/25/2017 �CO CO It 0 0 W N M N M M M M N o O o N o' o N O 00 CO Cl) Cl) It Cl) CO O N N CO O O Z N N N O O CO O N O O N O H O Cl) r 00 00 O 00 r CO f- f- It N CO CO M � O � 00 N Cl) O N CO O CO Cl) N CO CO o O o Co o O o 0 I,- r O 00 ti CO CO CO f,- O O O O O ti Co N ti r O O O O C) CO O N O CO O to " ) C2 >Ncu CL W Q W f- W M f- � CO CO It 00 O Cl) O CO O� CO � O N C0CD O O O O r.: O N O L Z) C2 L 0O Q A Z Q O O Cl) 00 Cl) Cl) CO N 00 CO r f- CO w r CO f� CO O 00 � O M W o Cl) o Co 0 It0 0 O r r CO O Cl) CO O N CO O O O O Co O CO O N O H It O U) C2 >NCL W > Q Z)oN N N N Cl) NN O O COIt 0 N 1- O N O L L C2 O 0 Q Z n Q Y N t) Y 7 000000000000 Y tU 000000000000 Y 7 CU a O 000000000000 3 OCn O Cfl ti a0 O N C7 in -0 W 0 0 0 0 0 morn N 0 N N c: i i i 1 i i i i O N �' 7 N N LO LO LO LO LOO O O O O O O O O O O O Q +N+ O O N N V V a) L 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 L o o o 0 0 0 o J 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N C7 0 J 0 Q.1 m I m Warrants Summary Central Road and Emerson Street Page 1 of 2 Speed 35 ❑ Population < 10,000 Warrants Summary ❑ Coordinated Signal System Information al (ft) 375 E ear 9 ❑ Adequate Trials of Alternatives 5 -yr Growth Factor 0 Analyst Marie Daboub RT Intersection Central Rd and Emerson St Agency/Co Ciorba Group 2 Jurisdiction Village of Mount Prospect Date Performed 5/24/2017 0 Units U.S. Customary Project ID 20689.01 LTR Time Period Analyzed 6am-6pm East/West Street Central Road North/South Street Emerson Street File Name Emerson.xhy 683 Major Street East-West Project Description 20689.01 4 8 General I 6/0 -- -- IRoadwav Network Speed 35 ❑ Population < 10,000 Two Major Routes ❑ ❑ Coordinated Signal System Weekend Count ❑r al (ft) 375 E ear 9 ❑ Adequate Trials of Alternatives 5 -yr Growth Factor 0 Geometry and Traffic EB WB NB SB ILTT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 Lane usage LTR LTR LT R LTR Vehicle Volume Averages (vph) 4 713 98 63 683 7 19 11 66 2 4 8 Peds (ped/h) / Gaps (gaps/h) _ 6/0 -- -- 1 /0 -- -- 1 /0 -- -- 2/0 -- Delay (s/veh) / (veh-hr) I -- 1 0/0 -- -- 0/0 -- -- 0/01 0/0 -- Warrant 1: Eight -Hour Vehicular Volume ❑ 1 A. Minimum Vehicular Volumes (Both major approaches --and-- higher minor approach) --or-- ❑ 1 B. Interruption of Continuous Traffic (Both major approaches --and-- higher minor approach) --or-- ❑ 1 (80%) Vehicular --and-- Interruption Volumes (Both major approaches --and-- higher minor approach) ❑ Warrant 2: Four -Hour Vehicular Volume ❑ 2 A. Four -Hour Vehicular Volumes (Both major approaches --and-- higher minor approach) ❑ Warrant 3: Peak Hour ❑ 3 A. Peak -Hour Conditions (Minor delay --and-- minor volume --and-- total volume ) --or-- 3 B. Peak- Hour Vehicular Volumes (Both major approaches --and-- higher minor approach) Warrant 4: Pedestrian Volume 4 A. Four Hour Volumes --or-- 4 B. One -Hour Volumes Warrant 5: School Crossing 5. Student Volumes --and-- ❑ 5. Gaps Same Period ❑ Warrant 6: Coordinated Signal System ❑ 6. Degree of Platooning (Predominant direction or both directions) ❑ Warrant 7: Crash Experience ❑ 7 A. Adequate trials of alternatives, observance and enforcement failed --and-- ❑ 7 B. Reported crashes susceptible to correction by signal (12 -month period) --and-- 0 7 C. (80%) Volumes for Warrants 1A, 1B --or-- 4 are satisfied R file:///C:/Users/mdaboub/AppData/Local/Temp/w2k7A43.tmp 5/25/2017 Warrants Summary Page 2 of 2 Warrant 8: Roadway Network ❑ 8 A. Weekday Volume (Peak hour total --and-- projected warrants 1, 2 or 3) --or-- ❑ 8 B. Weekend Volume (Five hours total) ❑ Warrant 9: Grade Crossing ❑ 9 A. Grade Crossing within 140 ft --and-- ❑ 9 B. Peak -Hour Vehicular Volumes ❑ Copyright© 2014 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS 201OTM Version 6.65 Generated: 5/25/2017 4:01 PM file:///C:/Users/mdaboub/AppData/Local/Temp/w2k7A43.tmp 5/25/2017 It O M fI- � N It O O W It W N CO � O� CO - M N O O N fI- CC) CC) M CC) co M f- O o O o w o o N O 00 CC) N M M M CC) O N M 'r -CO . 'r -co M N N N O O w O N O O N O H O � N � N 00 N O CC) M N N O M O O o d o I o � 0 0 Z ti r o f- W W W W f- 00 O O 00 CO t CO 00 N C. O r C) co C) w O N O It O to "� C2 >N cu CL W Q X 0 0 0 00 00 00 O O O N M CO o � o o � 0 0 Z) 00 M O CO N o O CO — 00 O r O L O L C2 0O Q A Z Q It LO N CO O ti ti CO r 00 N 00 r� M r O It 00 CC) N N O N CO CO o O o O o O o 0 O O f- f- W CO CO CO CO f- O r N O 00 ti O C r O O 41 co w r N O H t O C2 cu >N CL W > Q O W� ti c3 N 00 O~ O O M Oo O O 0 04 O M M L � � Q L O 0 // Q Z n Q Y N v V L 000000000000 Y tU 000000000000 Y 7 CU O 000000000000 3 OCn O Cfl ti 00 O N m 'IT LOCfl r-_-0 W 00 0 0 0 0 00000 L L L Li0 L i i i O O O O O O O O O O O O Q +N+ O O N N V V N L- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0L o o� o 0 0 0 o J Do N N N N N N N N N N N N C7 �� J. Q.1 m e m Appendix 3 - Pedestrian Traffic Counts rntttt Prospcct 1 Village of Mount Prospect Phone: 773.775.4009 1 www.ciorEa.com Quality Engineering Solutions for the Community U C) N O O O O O O O O O= O M 70 U a U w o � � O O O O O O O O O N 70 a� a U UMOOO0 0000 U) 70 �a O U� U cnOOOOOOO00MLO 70 a� a U C) o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U) 70 a� U a ca w� U to O O O O= O O O O O O O � 70 N d U C) N O O N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 019T 70 d O Z to — M O— O-- O O N O— 0 70 N d 000000000000 000000000000 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. O O O O O O O O O O O O 000000000000 (C) I� 00 O O N CO 'IT LO (D ti 0 0 0 0 � � � � � � � J m m m m ce) ce) ce) ce) ce) (Y) ce) ce) < O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O E O O O O O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N N N N N N O cu J (n U U 0�0000=00=Ln 70 U a U woo�Oo�OOOMO�O 70 a� a U C) M N O N 0 70 L � � d O U U 0 Q Q 0 0 0 0 M 70 a� a U C) o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U) 70 a� U a ca w� U to O O O O O O O O O O O O O 70 N d U v00o==0oo000MLn U) N 70 L O O U Z U L W O O O O O O O O O o o - r 70 � a a a� J O O O O O O O O O O O o .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. t 000000000000 000000000000 U (Dr`000)0 i-iCi'IT LO(Dr` J 0 0 0 0 70 C7 C7 C7 C7 C7 C7 C7 C7 C7 C7 C7 C7 Q O 00000000 O O O O O O Cfl Cfl Cfl Cfl Cfl Cfl Cfl Cfl Cfl Cfl Cfl Cfl 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c N N N N N N N N N N N N L U -j cu rA U ) O M O N O � O O— O O 70 U d 00��0 0 M V-- V--00Nc1r) 70 a� a U C) 0 0 NLO O'RT N M N N 70 L � � d O U to O N'RT O N O N E 00 70 N d U ) O N O 0 0 0 0 N � 00 70 N U d (B W U to N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LO 70 N d U C) � c7 N o= O c7 = LO 70 � N � d O Z U) N CO 'RT 0 c7 N 0 0 c7 ON 70 N d 000000000000 000000000000 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 I,- 00 O O N M LO O 1- 0 0 0 0) Lo Lo Lo R O O O O O O O O O O O O E O O O O O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N N N N N N O cu J (n U C)IRT LnIRT MLo �C�=o�N� 70 U d to -04 N C7 O(C) O � ON O N 70 G) N d U ) N O N 0 0 0 0 0 70 L � � d O U U 0 o o N== = O O m 70 a� d U N o 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 70 a� U a ca w� U to M �= 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 00 70 N d U C7 C7 N O O O 0 0 04 70 � N � d O Z U to O N 0 0 0 0 0 N O I- 70 N d 000000000000 000000000000 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. O O O O O O O O O O O O 000000000000 (C) I� 00 O O N C7 'IT LO O� 0 0 0 0 � � � � � � � J 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O E O O O O O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N N N N N N O cu J (n U 70 00000000000 (If70 a� a U U 000000000000 70 a� a U c)c�c���0000� �70 a� a� a a � z U W= O O O O O= O O O N 70 a� a U 70 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a� a U W O O O O O O O O O O O N d U 0 0= N M O== O N 70 N N d d z U to M N O M O- 0- 0- � 70 N d 0000000000 9999999999 0000000000 9999999999 00 O O N M LO O 1- 0000000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E O O O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N N N N O cu J (n U U O = O O U) 70 U d U u) 0 O N 70 a� d U C) 0 0 0 0 0 70 a� U a ca w� U u) N O O CO 70 N d U c) 0 CIO 70 d O Z U u) N N O O ,T 70 N d 0000 0000 0000 0000 O O LO O O � J O O O O LO LO LO U') 0000 E O O O O P N N N N O cu J (n U C) O O O 70 �a O U� U U) 000� 70 a� a U C) 0 0 0 0 0 70 a� U a ca w� U u) N O O CO 70 N d U c) 0 CIO 70 d O Z U u) N N O O ,T 70 N d 0000 0000 0000 0000 O O LO O O � J O O O O LO LO LO U') 0000 E O O O O P N N N N O cu J (n Appendix 4 - Recommended Village of Mount Prospect Improvements Phone: 773.775.4009 1 www.ciorEa.com Quality Engineering Solutions for the Community ++ m Q� L ' ^L+ CD W c Co = � N U c E J N �U co a �Eol 0-0-6 C� 0 �aa� U = Ln o b-0 U o� OU 0 0 = °C .E Ln LU -b-0 6w-, r4III A' � k z w p f w z Q m LU CC C) Lu W <C/) m LU wLU C) Z O a WA fl� 00 C) Q � 00 J Z Z X w LU w U w C w w > §Elol:-�m peil 09 a� w 75 0 d 0 O O a In W O r O O O J 0 �4 E �0� Ln c U U 0 - U co - = N 0 U E a (D Uo J LU �O V U Z u < Q m Z 550 0 CD O = U auel xuleo _ Z Q w LUZ�Q Z°O LU C) Lu LU - C/) m LU LU " C) Z 0 � co O c O LA Q:� 00 p ■.: o 0C) J Z Z X w LU w U w C w w > 00� 0- m auel xuleo 4. 0 " z Q w C) O Z Z Q LU LU X LU LU Z Z 0 0 U0 w w Q:� a�mU O O �. 0 LO a� > N y o 0 U aI@@JIS quid co O' co 0 OI co E ' V"w �o Qz LU O _ O�Q z U U Z Q w >- m Q LU J Z Q M m z 0 �� z m w 0 LU j w O o Q C��O mLUCD� =�U 3:D:�Eo z0 LU� I 0 0 + o= s � Q O � Z ZX w LU w 0 Uw 0 C) w 0 cu m U O D CD 3 Q1 O w0� ZLO �U N 0 c E O > i O rr, �U �00AS uos�aw3 Who 4 p O E -a 0 N o U QZ O J 1 Oz - UUZ Q QO o ' >- m w Z J M m Z0 I o � - LU > > O w X00 mLU =�U = LU 11 ' LU Z H r •:gym A' r hails uosJaw3 ag 4 I MO8 X3 1 II K I� a a � J I I o r o ~ T Lu IIIf II I cw u a s N $ y I„+F Ill III III l l III I I w F v� o N N l l 0 � w III III I I 0 � III I III I I Lr) I--I N C/j a .K III I � III I l III I I (/j III I I O I C/� iii l l o U W III , I III , I W z o kf I J Q F W CL o d I I C � I N O III I I I p O W w lu I I d o U J III I II d I--I � J III I I W F� III I I III I I III I I � U z III I I III I I N a VIII I I III I I CrJ O o III I I III I I III I I III I I W w w _ a III I I III I I III I I Y L ~ II IIII III I z � z N = II ill i II I I I I I I _ I I I I M08 X3 I U ' C d LOw O� Appendix 5 - Pedestrian Facility Studies oust Prospc ct Village of Mount Prospect Phone: 773.775.4009 1 www.ciorEa.com Quality Engineering Solutions for the Community 8 �Eq:Ta z z z z Y ... E O G1 O d: Ln s Ln rl 1p E M � Ln Y E a Z Z Z S GJ n MM S M S E Q vi Y E U a Z Z EQ Z Z Z Z O O Y E O O ct15 � Ln 0 Q �� s s v0 lC v EQ Ln Y E U d d Z t O v� U � N r -I A ++ M t •'• M Q E le E vi Y E U d d Z CW N aj aj CQ E RE O Y E a a Z Z O sU. � � � O C O 7z�. C) U y •� rq w rj L -n s Z 0 Ln E rn E U a a a s O " Y pp 0 > cf A M t .•. M Q RT Es vi Y E U U U d Q tb o E S SE a a a z C O Y tb v U U Q1 tb _ s vi CLn j � �, QY v '� n C U U U d aj U s � M s .•. s RT E M Q vi Y E U U U U C: GJ a J O E O E �` N �� vI N L p E L p . > L (1)C L L (c 3 oma fa0 O v O D co ��-a O O O~ >:• U (6 +' (6 7 t6 7 in N z N C c co � fa 8 O ct15 Lam. 0 v� U ro CW N p O Gq sU. � � 7z�. C) U y •� " pp tb G tb v U U tb �• U j � �, • U v '� CL �' U tb �. U O O ^� >:• U cw 0 � tb O N U y v °� eC tb U ' " •y 44. .. y y " V iii tb 8 Appendix 6 - Coordination Village of Mount Prospect Phone: 773.775.4009 1 www.ciorba.com Quality Engineering Solutions for the Community CIORBA GROUP Consulting Engineers Date: 7/19/2017 Time: 3:50 PM Contact: Daryl Drew Representing: IDOT Incoming ❑ Phone Number: By: Mark Johnson Conversation Summary: RECORD OF PHONE CALL Job No.: 20689.01 Project: Central Road Pedestrian Crossing Study Subject: Traffic Signals at Central/Emerson • 1 informed Daryl Drew at IDOT that the Central/Emerson intersection satisfied MUTCD Signal Warrant 7 — Crash Experience and asked if a signal could be provided at that location. I informed him that the Central/IL 83 signalized intersection was 1 block (approximately 370') west of Emerson and the proposed signals at Emerson (if installed) would have to be coordinated with the IL 83 Signals. • He stated that I DOT would not allow a signal at Central/Emerson since the Central/IL 83 intersection was too close. The minimum distance that IDOT would consider for signalized intersection spacing would be 1,000'. • He stated that some concerns IDOT would have are: o Potential traffic queueing at one intersection could extend into the other intersection. o If the signal at the more distant intersection was green but the signal at the closer intersection was red, traffic approaching the closer intersection may travel through the red light because they see the green light at the distant intersection. 5507 N. Cumberland Avenue 9 Chicago, Illinois 60656 9 Tel 773.775.4009 9 Fax 773.775.4014 9 www.ciorba.com CIORBA GROUP Consulting Engineers Date: 7/20/2017 Time: 1:30 PM Contact: Jim Stoner Representing: I DOT Incoming ❑ Phone Number: By: Mark Johnson Conversation Summary: RECORD OF PHONE CALL Job No. Project: Subject: 20689.01 Central Road Pedestrian Crossing Study School Speed Zones • 1 asked Jim Stoner at IDOT about what data or studies would be required to establish a school zone along Central Road. He asked what location was being considered and I mentioned the area near the Westbrook School which would include the Central crossing by Weller. • Jim stated that if a school zone was to be reestablished at this location, the rapid flashing beacon could only be operated during school hours on school days. It would not operate on weekends or during the summer when school was not in session. The Village would not be able to have both the reduced speed associated with a school zone and the rapid flashing beacon operating full time. 5507 N. Cumberland Avenue 9 Chicago, Illinois 60656 9 Tel 773.775.4009 9 Fax 773.775.4014 9 www.ciorba.com CIORBA GROUP Consulting Engineers Date: 7/21/2017 Time: 12:50 PM Contact: Jeff Shaw Representing: FHWA Incoming ❑ Outgoing Phone Number: By: Mark Johnson Conversation Summary: RECORD OF PHONE CALL Job No.: 20689.01 Project: Central Road Pedestrian Crossing Study Subject: FHWA Unsignalized Crosswalk Guidelines I mentioned that Mount Prospect would like to improve the safety of some existing marked crosswalks that cross Central Road which is a multilane minor arterial with an ADT ranging from 12,000 to 23,000 vehicles per day. The majority of the roadway is under IDOT jurisdiction. The speed limit is 35 MPH. He said he was familiar with the Central Road corridor and had been at the area to perform a pedestrian and bicycle safety analysis of the area. • 1 mentioned an FHWA study from 2005 comparing the safety of marked vs. unmarked crosswalks for roadways matching Central Road. It indicates that marked crosswalks can be more dangerous than marked crosswalks and should only be provided if other treatments are added such as traffic -calming, signals, or other substantial improvements. Is this still the case? o He stated that the study provided data but did not provide the best way to implement improvements for existing crossings. The goal should not be to remove all existing striped crosswalks at unsignalized locations. However, a standard crosswalk with two transverse lines should not just be added at the crossing of a roadway with a high ADT. 5507 N. Cumberland Avenue 9 Chicago, Illinois 60656 9 Tel 773.775.4009 9 Fax 773.775.4014 9 www.ciorba.com July 27, 2017 I mentioned that Mt. Prospect plans on improving existing marked crossings by adding center medians, warning signs and highly visible crosswalks. Unfortunately, the crossing locations don't satisfy signal requirements. o He stated that medians with warning signs would improve crossing safety. Items such as a raised crosswalk might be good for pedestrians, but it would have impacts on arterial traffic which would probably not make it a preferable solution. Items to consider would be providing highly visible crosswalks (continental, ladder or zebra crosswalks), florescent yellow warning signs, oversized warning signs or signs mounted on a cantilever. Another possibility is providing high friction asphalt in advance of the crosswalk to decrease the stopping distance of a vehicle. The stop distance would be based on AASHTO design guidelines. I asked if there is any advantage to providing a background color between crosswalk stripes. o He stated that a background color can be provided between the white crosswalk lines but there is no evidence that it makes the crossing safer. Green could not be used since this color is reserved for bike lanes. • 1 asked if he could provide any information regarding national or statewide pedestrian/bicyclist crash data. o He stated that Lisa Heaven -Baum (IDOT District 1) or Filiberto Sotelo (IDOT Central Office) would be the best people to provide this information. • Page 2 Appendix 7 - Funding Sources Village of Mount Prospect Phone: 773.775.4009 1 www.ciorba.com Quality Engineering Solutions for the Community o � .o as� o 0 ct3-I 0 oN-a p o U � � O U W �+ Cll bA U sm. rA � +C5 p u C's C n •.. H o o E-� g C=t ct ct .� U ct c Qin a �a �dyCG C b�A o U r3 pC U �'r O U 4-i U m U ct QJ U G U O ct .. U+ � O O Fm. � � �•' U bA y C y � •o c y � � H 6A �A �A �A 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 a w U3 �d a, �z C/D O f3 09 69 69 69 69 69 69 y F+y i4 69 69 69 P4 P 69 � � 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 bg bg �I 69 69 CIO 69 tb W U G 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 6F3 6F3 6F3 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 U � O a O �" 69 ff3 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 � W C/] ff3 E!-1 6R 6R 69 09 69 09 a Ef3 69 69 69 69 69 64 69 64 69 09 } Q, A 69 09 09 09 69 69 69 69 69 69 09 09 09 09 Ff? 09 H69 � 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 4�os � o w 69 69 6i 69 69 6i 69 69 69 69 � 6i 69 CIO II � 69 W 4�A (!� 69 ff3 Ef3 6F3 6F3 6F3 69 69 69 69 69 ' � ,� i••� .moi 5•-i � us U �r'�i us .moi �' '� l� � •� •O y�.i � O W �" U m N � U � s• -i O U U +U-' O U to N N U O C',O U us w '� rR U II O it U cd U W n n p bA U a U u C cn O U 2.= � l � m ... � ,'T U" n U p" o u u i o u i� � u .o �, a P. an M o ... U oQu u uo70. mon ci a� �H N 'C OJ W w o � a b a ° > C pj o a�4 0 �o��o o N _ as as as gUaE�S"r 'CC a N as m U U w O O Cc, T O y O V o �O O R R s. U U p— tdw o. p U t o U O ^C � � O cn C, q 4� p s. G' Vi 011 Q U Z . A. C a .0 +••� 0 �a 3 0 on �.2 o H.�cn +� o C)h ami b ¢¢HHwQulxz� aw � O � � C 69 69 69 69 �z O o a�oa •Uj V] V] V] V] F+I V] dj H 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 64 69 P4 69 w �oq �oq Eoq E's tb j� U G 69 69 69 69 H 04 H P4 H P4 F 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 * 69 H P4 69 b4 U] 6R 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 C L� W w� coq coq 4,q ��El� coq Qn a� � d s9 ss -6s -6s cfl s9 CID H rs Els Els ������ coq o w CIS CIS Eos Eos Eos Eos Eos Eos '�,q '�,q I I w rs E's 4�oq 4�oq � coq coq coq coq coq 4z,� � Eoq a y U U C�j O � � ' � Ln � Qr fir' � "•' Ln U O44 U ,y �\ C's O V] O cn U �•I .� y p. c�-Ii�„� 5•-� C �Jf�' u as Cj "C yy 5••i •.y as � 'C Cd �'"� +-+ �1r U N y -^•i U �r"y 4-y as i�, S-. yy a••i �. cd O ' as o Cn xasQ U U p\ p c� �bA bOq bA as 'C m 'C U v o o IN O 4N 4N 4N Po A � �n an o � '�C-, 'l� C, sno UD UD l� a� �H N 'C OJ W w o � a b a ° > C pj o a�4 0 �o��o o N _ as as as gUaE�S"r 'CC N as m U U O O Cc, T O y O V o �O O R R s. U U p— tdw o. p U t o U O ^C � � O cn C, q 4� p s. G' Vi 011 Q U Z . A. C a .0 +••� 0 �a 3 0 on �.2 o H.�cn +� o C)h ami b ¢¢HHwQulxz� aw U ca o U cu o i o mon ct o a5 on m lull, N o C's y ct + N Nct U 0 OU 0 +-' � � O o0 U��' p a � N � cr O O N ct U cn ct y0 y v O U y 1 .: o C7 0 y y as,is ct Clj oma w0 0 p o U y^ y p yU., O ,r—, ' c� 'C G, �S-'.i p. [�—i p per., O U N ct s n s U p .� a H w ct O O � 0 F+" U '� � � U •� � � p„i U U cC O C.,." • p :� u a cn a� ami v Upp �bA U' p U S O V U U W m N p"� ur U v) p cd SO. c� U a E cd C �U+ U U 4J i- O U] fn c-, O N c,3 N •--, cf.i 'C UC C,3 44 O O H U 'C O r� ,� U V] 4-, O 0 bA 0 � Q• C, y r. +-' +-- SC c�U cN c�U U C N U i N w i4" p cd ,•p cC cC �.' C U � - O p - ) w o p �' ,r W4-i m m .U. ,'T 64 -s.-i bA "C '--' 4? O U bA U5 C , � � O O � ,� U s.-, �'' U r--.Ui �, U •� „+_, � � cn � . � y � �U, � � • � 4-, ,�, U] bA � � � H bA � +� � P-, � � � ,� y • � � djU„ � •� N � p U cn cd ' _0 4--i m o C,3iw M 140.-C, C8 C,3' w s¢y'' s�i c� U �, a S-0 .y -�Uoan�0, 005 0 U UUiM, MM U - R UK0 . U ou �M Q a�w +� o y'o o o v a y o 0 o o a w a U o. U 0 .� U U �+" U •y p 'C 'C �" bA 'C ''a ''a p U S_- •� + U U H U N U] U p F N vl U 0 U_ 0 S- C% o �-i U fU-I S--, •O 0 p �" ;C.,3 ;C.,3 4�-, - .- " a F- �� � dd �� , u�� ow e°'°'' -a-ar-C< � � el (D m 71.4 ami E o o v� o F" x a. 0 U i F- F�wwC�1 0 0 0 o U u px o�U3P.o o 0 0 ow o 0 0 x 2N 0 x. 6.3Appendix C: Funding Resources APPENDICES 63 N IL O L E m H f s N LL 0 0? Z o u 763 N G O T L> N ev EE E m N oo N w m N m m o ¢Us`O a `o E N a to C o CL L m u Z 2 o N O IT y Lto a is = 0 'm 3 '- y a m s 6 m m oo m : Z a u� E ta m o E t Q@ N C3 v N O to m .� N i L `c_ a m w a m >z E o o o @ 3 a - E N c °° rn E L° m c L m N c a? L E' a i m u o o a @ N o N o .o Z w o u> a a s s s W_ d U a L r m ttn r L_ m w a Q 3 a _ C O - N _ c o d V N ? E N U O a N c Q a> 0 ' O L Z ? o H o s s L to a C E O> _T m o, E O- u OI _ d Q W� a s E - N O w E w; d t= U C s Q T m a 0 O Ld U � m2 N � a a T3 y ' y0 . t -0 a o o IT m 'o ' m o E a a U Q au N c m -w E f - u (n(.7 Ima U O O m N m a u G m O O N p 3� 0� a Z __ O � y .i N O m y W E o = N E enai H O - N` L O W y c `t N? Q a u O .� @ o 3 i= t m o T m . y m u F W w �° 'NO 0.� � 'C o to o f rn y _ s c7 6 6 2 E2 a s W a a " a aEyr T � Y m a 0 APPENDICES 63 Appendix 8 - Central Road,, Northwest Highway, and Prospect Avenue Pedestrian Crossing Village of Mount Prospect Phone: 773.775.4009 1 www.ciorEa.com Quality Engineering Solutions for the Community Central Road, Northwest Highway and Prospect Avenue Pedestrian Crossing Concept In 2013, the Village of Mount Prospect developed a Downtown Implementation Plan. The suggested improvements to the Central Road intersections at Northwest Highway and Prospect Avenue are shown in Figure 3. Comments pertaining to each leg of the intersection crosswalk improvement concept are noted below. �tfdSSWAL< ._'ss CENTRAL SHIFTS EAST LANDSCAPED MEDIAN WITH REFUGE ADDED i ; Z I NEW �A: E WAY & BRA NDfNG OPPORTUNITIES CURB EXTENDED TO CREATE SHORTER CROSSING DISTANCE & MORE PERPENDICULAR INTERSECTION r r � A)EMURMPROWED CidO55�WALK AT AID[�,E AL EdtE 0 •I 1?y4�1s' SHORTER CROSSWALK, � f— ryiQ AND NEW LANDSCAPED � 1 ' ,CC NRy ti MEDIAN WITH REFUGF -FT AND RIGHT TURN 4N'$ COMBINED 1/p Hdy�u P. r �Qc�d CLN-R=L E7 TENDED SIDEWALK ON NO RTNWEST HIGNWAW qbI F46k R fT Centras -0 N-fh—d fHrgh—y - C n0otron Er>h—t Concept Figure 3. Mount Prospect Downtown Implementation Plan, Central Road and Northwest Highway and Prospect Avenue West Leg- Central Road • Concept plan provides a pedestrian refuge island, which allows a more defined and safer area for pedestrians. It also allows pedestrians to just cross one direction of traffic at a time. • The crosswalk is moved closer to the tracks, it will likely be within the railroad right of way. The railroad and ICC may have an issue with this design. • It is preferred to have a slight skew within a refuge island so pedestrians are guided to face oncoming traffic. • The trees in the refuge island may hide pedestrians from the view of the motorists. South Leg — Prospect Avenue • The east/west crosswalk is at a stop location along the south side of Central Road. This seems better than the existing location at Hi Lusi Avenue. • This concept removes the right turn lane along Prospect Avenue. This may result in reduced traffic flow for left turning vehicles. This could impact traffic flow efficiency and may require additional green time for Prospect Avenue traffic. • The southbound lane width is decreased, which may result in turning vehicles encroaching into the northbound lane. South Leg — Northwest Highway • There is a shorter crosswalk distance, not on skew. The crosswalk is decreased from 130 feet to 60 feet. • The pedestrian refuge island allows more defined refuge for pedestrians after crossing two to three lanes of traffic. It also allows pedestrians to just cross one direction of traffic at a time. The island may need to be widened to accommodate pedestrians and bicycles. • The crosswalk is set back from the intersection. This will increase the distance for east/west travelers to walk to get to the crosswalk. Pedestrians might not use this. • Since the crosswalk is far from the edge of Central Road's travel way, an additional pedestrian crossing sign should be installed along Central Road. • There is poor sight distance for northbound drivers turning left. With the existing signal configuration, the left turn signal would be approximately 250 feet away from the proposed stop bar location. • The proposed northbound left turn stop bar location is shifted approximately 50 feet away from its existing location. This provides for a left turn storage length significantly less than the 100 feet currently provided. The proposed stop bar location will also require more time for vehicles to complete a left turn. This could impact traffic flow efficiency. • The existing left turn signal is difficult to see. A left turn signal on a mast arm may improve this. • Proposed sidewalk along the west side of Northwest Highway might be within railroad right of way. The railroad and ICC may have concerns with this. East Leg- Central Road • Concept plan provides a pedestrian refuge island, which allows a more defined area for pedestrians after crossing two lanes of traffic. It also allows pedestrians to just cross one direction of traffic at a time. Illinois Department of Transportation Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering Road Safety Review Report Central Road Corridor Analysis From Dryden Place to Westgate Road Cook County, Illinois Prepared by: Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering 1/18/2018 Message from the Illinois State Safety Engineer Dear Safety Stakeholder, The Illinois Strategic Highway Safety Plan (IL SHSP) was developed in partnership with multi- discipline safety stakeholders. The key to its development and implementation is that it is data - driven, identifies key emphasis areas, and utilizes an integrated approach to identify and implement safety strategies. The goal is to address traffic -related fatalities and serious injuries with an ultimate goal of zero fatalities. Road Safety Reviews (RSRs) provide office and field reviews of the safety performance of a roadway and is an integral part of the IL SHSP. We appreciate your help in implementing projects and programs that will help to save lives on Illinois roadways and help to achieve our goal of zero fatalities. Thank you for taking the time to read this RSR report. Engineers and other safety stakeholders have collaborated to prepare this report. The report includes an assessment of safety needs and recommended strategies and countermeasures that, if implemented, will help to reduce severe and fatal crashes. For additional information about the Safety Review program or other support the Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering provides, please see our website: http://www.idot.illinois.gov/transportation-system/transportation-management/planning/SHSP or contact my office. Paul L. Lorton, P.E. State Safety Engineer (217) 782-3568 DOT.IIIinoisSHSP(c�illinois.gov Road Safety Review Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Mount Prospect, Cook County, IL Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering Table of Contents Table of Figures INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................1 Participants..............................................................................................................................1 LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION................................................................................................1 June1, 2017 Meeting..............................................................................................................2 SAFETY PERFORMANCE.........................................................................................................4 CrashAnalysis........................................................................................................................4 CentralRoad Corridor.............................................................................................................5 Weller Lane and Central Road Intersection.............................................................................9 Lancaster Street and Central Road Intersection....................................................................13 Cathy Lane and Central Road Intersection............................................................................18 Emerson Street and Central Road Intersection......................................................................22 FIELD OBSERVATIONS...........................................................................................................26 Corridor-Wide........................................................................................................................26 Weller Lane and Central Road Intersection...........................................................................27 Lancaster Street and Central Road Intersection....................................................................29 Cathy Lane and Central Road Intersection............................................................................30 Emerson Street and Central Road Intersection......................................................................32 IL 83 and Central Road Intersection......................................................................................35 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS....................................................................................36 Appendix — Crash Analysis Figures and Table..........................................................................39 CentralRoad Corridor...........................................................................................................39 Weller Lane and Central Road Intersection...........................................................................45 Lancaster Street and Central Road.......................................................................................48 Cathy Lane and Central Street Intersection...........................................................................52 Emerson Street and Central Road Intersection......................................................................56 Road Safety Review i Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Mount Prospect, Cook County, Illinois Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering Table of Figures Figure 1 — Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Cook County, Illinois ................3 Figure 2 — Central Road Corridor — Crash Type..........................................................................5 Figure 3 — Central Road Corridor RSR — Crash Location (2011 — 2015 and 2016 Provisional) ...6 Figure 4 — Central Road Corridor — Month..................................................................................7 Figure 5 — Central Road Corridor — Time of Day.........................................................................7 Figure 6 — Central Road Corridor — Day of Week........................................................................8 Figure 7 —Weller Lane and Central Road Intersection — Crash Type..........................................9 Figure 8 —Weller Lane and Central Road Intersection RSR - Crash Location (2011 - 2015 and 2016 Provisional) ......................................................................................................................10 Figure 9 —Weller Lane and Central Road Intersection — Month................................................11 Figure 10 —Weller Lane and Central Road Intersection — Time of Day.....................................11 Figure 11 —Weller Lane and Central Road Intersection — Day of Week....................................12 Figure 12 — Lancaster Street and Central Road Intersection — Crash Type...............................13 Figure 13 — Lancaster and Central Road Intersection RSR - Crash Location (2011 - 2015 and 2016 Provisional) ......................................................................................................................14 Figure 14 — Lancaster Street and Central Road Intersection — Month.......................................15 Figure 15 — Lancaster Street and Central Road Intersection — Time of Day..............................16 Figure 16 — Lancaster Street and Central Road Intersection — Day of Week .............................16 Figure 17 — Lancaster Street and Central Road Intersection — Unit 1 Direction .........................16 Figure 18 — Lancaster Street and Central Road Intersection — Roadway Surface Condition .....17 Figure 19 — Cathy Lane and Central Road Intersection — Crash Type.......................................18 Figure 20 — Cathy Lane and Central Road Intersection - Crash Location (2011 - 2015 and 2016 Provisional)...............................................................................................................................19 Figure 21 Cathy Lane and Central Road Intersection — Time of Day.........................................20 Figure 22 — Cathy Lane and Central Road Intersection — Lighting Conditions ...........................20 Figure 23 — Cathy Lane and Central Road Intersection — Roadway Surface Conditions ...........21 Figure 24 — Emerson Street and Central Road Intersection — Crash Type................................22 Figure 25 — Emerson Street and Central Road Intersection - Crash Location (2011 - 2015 and 2016 Provisional) ......................................................................................................................23 Figure 26 — Emerson Street and Central Road Intersection — Month.........................................24 Figure 27 — Emerson Street and Central Road Intersection — Time of Day...............................24 Figure 28 — Emerson Street and Central Road Intersection — Unit 1 Direction ..........................25 Road Safety Review ii Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Mount Prospect, Cook County, Illinois Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering Figure 29 — Stop Sign Obstructed at Southbound Approach at Weller Lane Intersection; Stop Sign Obstructed at Southbound Approach at Emerson Street Intersection................................26 Figure 30 — Lack of Crosswalk Striping.....................................................................................27 Figure 31 — RRFB at Weller Lane and Central Road looking westbound...................................27 Figure 32 — SUV failing to yield to pedestrian; police yielding to pedalcyclist ............................28 Figure 33 — Nighttime lighting at Weller Lane and Central Road Intersection ............................29 Figure 34 — No Crosswalk Present on East Side of Lancaster Street and Central Road Intersection...............................................................................................................................29 Figure35 — ADA Observation...................................................................................................30 Figure 36 — Push Button and Advance Pedestrian Flashing Beacon at Cathy Lane and Central RoadIntersection......................................................................................................................30 Figure 37 — Pedestrian Signage and Crosswalk at Cathy Lane and Central Road Intersection .31 Figure 38 — Pedestrian Caution Sign at Emerson Street and Central Road Intersection ...........32 Figure 39 — Pedestrian Refuge Island Location.........................................................................33 Figure 40 — Southern Leg of the Intersection Looking North at Emerson Street and Central Road Intersection...............................................................................................................................34 Figure 41 — Current Mast Arm at IL 83 and Central Road Intersection......................................35 Road Safety Review iii Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Mount Prospect, Cook County, Illinois Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering INTRODUCTION On June 1, 2017, a safety review team conducted a Road Safety Review (RSR) on a section of Central Road from the intersection of Dryden Place to Westgate Road in the Village of Mount Prospect, Cook County. The RSR is an examination of a road's safety performance by a multi- disciplinary team. The safety review was requested by Matt Lawrie, Traffic Engineer for the Village of Mount Prospect. The request also specified a focus on pedestrian and pedalcyclist crossings at unsignalized intersections along the roadway segment. After receiving the request, an initial review of the Geographical Information System (GIS) crash data was performed by the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) - Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering (BSPE) to identify the collision types, crash severities, and crash patterns along the segment and at the intersections. After a kick-off meeting held at the IDOT district office, including representatives of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and others, a site visit was then conducted by the RSR team members to observe traffic behavior and identify potential safety problems along the segment and at the intersections. In a close-out meeting, the RSR team recommended safety countermeasures for consideration to implement as roadway improvements. Review team members and others participating in the effort are listed below. Particinants RSR Team Members: Filiberto Sotelo, IDOT — BSPE Katherine Beckett, IDOT — BSPE Cory Jucius, IDOT — District 1 Alan Ho, FHWA Jeffrey Shaw, FHWA Kick-Off/Close-out Meeting Participants: Sean Dorsey, Village of Mount Prospect Jeff Wulbecker, Village of Mount Prospect Matt Lawrie, Village of Mount Prospect Steve Travia, IDOT — District 1 Lisa Heaven -Baum, IDOT — District 1 LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION The subject RSR segment of Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road measures approximately 2.75 miles in length. The roadway has four lanes, and is divided in some locations and undivided in others. It varies in Average Annual Daily Traffic from 12,600 on the east end of the segment to 23,100 on the west end of the segment. There are four unsignalized intersection crosswalks crossing Central Road. To the east side of the intersection of Weller Lane and Central Road there is a crosswalk with a Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB), along with a pedestrian refuge island and signage. The intersection of Lancaster Street and Central Road has a marked crosswalk on the west side of the intersection and advance pedestrian warning signs. The intersection of Cathy Lane and Central Road has a marked crosswalk and a pedestrian activated flashing beacon to warn oncoming Road Safety Review Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Mount Prospect, Cook County, Illinois Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering traffic that a pedestrian is about to cross, and advance pedestrian warning signs. The intersection of Emerson Street and Central Road has a striped crosswalk west of the intersection with advance pedestrian signs. There are marked crosswalks north and south of the intersection, and no crosswalk or markings east of the intersection. The lane widths vary from 11 feet to 12 feet. The posted speed limit is 40 mph on the western part of the segment from Dryden Place to Busse Road, but changes to 35 mph from Busse Road to Westgate Road. There are two school zones present along the segment — one west of Weller Lane and the other at Lancaster Street. There are commercial businesses and residential housing along the corridor segment. There is a park with walking trails north of the Weller Lane -Central Road intersection and a school southeast of the intersection. There is also a Mt. Prospect Park District building at Cathy Lane, and the Village Hall and Public Library at Emerson. The intersection with Northwest Highway includes an at -grade railroad crossing. June 1, 2017 Meeting Representatives from IDOT BSPE, IDOT District 1 (owners of the roadway), and FHWA met at the IDOT District 1 office in Schaumburg, IL, with representatives from the Village of Mount Prospect. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the crash history on the 2.75 mile RSR corridor segment of Central Road, listen to the owners' observations and input on what road problems exist, and have the owners provide any information on future upgrades planned to Central Road. In 2015 at the intersection of Weller Lane and Central Road, the crosswalk was moved approximately 50 feet east of the intersection in order to line up with a bike path, and an RRFB was installed. In 2016, a pedalcyclist fatality occurred at the RRFB-equipped crosswalk, and additional signage and pavement markings were installed after the fatality. Representatives expressed concern about the safety for pedestrians and pedalcyclists at the crosswalk, and other crosswalks at unsignalized intersections along the corridor segment. The corridor segment of roadway is currently scheduled to be repaved and striped in the spring of 2018. Road Safety Review 2 Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Mount Prospect, Cook County, Illinois Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering �' - Marcella-R•a-.- � � -----,-Vas•sarLn cfaKeV a ¢a -R'adcVsfFe Ave aj Ana N-Loci; w 1S u e+91lr1fr N J a LU L N Owen " a '° N c of Sh OU) o/ v_.._..� 1 M w uJ C7 ,-S maale St - -N Maplc vi , 0 r •1w _ N Emerson St El. s. � NtMaIn.St o N Wille St" Wille St EI v - - r �.. •>, �a .T. S P"n e St 1......._ N Pine. -St - '.' m N E1mhiircS Ave r S Wa Pel- t LD?J a.r e A L r hJ �r r i C'- i- DAV e$cr"-ae R 4 U S Na N Oak -Ave: 3` a l n - — Ca81e.:Ave Lancaster c + ancasLer St- r Evanston Ave ti �r: 5 :rly PI - -- S Rammer-Avew -6-Donald Ave -;N'Kenily i Ave S (worth Ave - a. V" - S BobbyL•n S Waterman pave ■ 4 <S Phelps Ave -t S VVes4er Ln iS-Prrndle-Ave-aj - S Forrest Ave- ` -r BAV-Stao.gq! jr -� ` rd Rd .ndsa x a cj A4 S-McKlnle�dnria Ave De .S Glevi ve Hatlen-Ave S' c t I -S-Roost �• e' 'S'Audrey:Ln - �v -S Mer RJ aQ-s6u, - �•r. - S{3denPBr o ��. y ''� �-.., � --SRraine :Ave SAFETY PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT The safety performance Assessmentis described in the following pages, along with the field observations and the suggested countermeasures. �..l ci;bi i r�iicAi y;�PY s Crash analysis for the 2.75 mile RSR corridor segment of Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road was broken down into five parts. The first part is for non -intersection -related crashes that occurred along the corridor, excluding crashes from West Prospect Avenue to Ridge Avenue due to the at -grade railroad crossing at the location. The other four parts of crash analysis are for four unsignalized intersections: Weller Lane and Central Road, Lancaster Street and Central Road, Cathy Lane and Central Road, and Emerson Street and Central Road. GIS crash data from 2011 — 2015 and 2016 (provisional) was used for all five analyses. The crash analysis findings are represented in the charts and graphs in the following section for each part. In Illinois, roadway safety tiers are determined by calculating the Potential for Safety Improvement (PSI) value for each roadway segment/intersection. PSI calculations are based on the total number of severe injury crashes at a location within the five-year analysis period. Roadway segments/intersections are then ranked by their PSI values within their respective peer groups. Locations of most concern are identified as being in the Critical (Top 5%) safety tier, followed by the high safety tier, medium safety tier (typically within the top 25 percent of their peer group), low safety tier, and then minimal safety tier. There are no Top 5% intersections or segments along Central Road according to the 2017 Five Percent Report. However, one of the intersections is considered a "medium safety tier' intersection. Its location, peer group, and potential for safety improvement (PSI) value can be seen in Table 1. All other segments and intersections along the roadway are considered minimal safety tier locations. Table 1 - Potential for Safety Improvement (PSI) Values INTERSECTIONS Safety Tier Ranking Peer Group Major Road Minor Road PSI Values Urban Minor Leg Kenilworth Medium Central Road 3.938 Stop Control Avenue Road Safety Review 4 Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Mount Prospect, Cook County, Illinois Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering Central Road Corridor The crash data for the 2.75 mile Central Road corridor is assessed from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, excluding crashes from West Prospect Avenue to Ridge Avenue due to the at - grade railroad crossing. Crashes referenced in the intersection analysis are not included in the corridor analysis. Crash Type and Severity: Of the 108 total crashes on Central Road Corridor, there were no fatal (identified as "K") crashes, 2 A -injury crashes, 7 B -Injury crashes, 15 C -Injury crashes, and 84 property damage only (PDO) crashes. There were no pedestrian or pedalcyclist crashes along the corridor. There were 60 rear end crashes, including 6 of the 9 total A and B injury crashes. Of the 3 remaining AB crashes, 2 were turning crashes and 1 was a fixed object crash. 70 11 = 50 a v 40 LL 0 L= 30 m � 20 Z 10 C CENTRAL ROAD CORRIDOR - CRASH TYPE Rear End Sideswipe Turning Fixed Angle Sideswipe Other Head On Same Object Opposite Object Direction Direction CRASH TYPE figure 2 — Central Roaa Corridor — Crash Typr ❑ Total ❑ KAB Based on a review of the crash report narratives, a majority of the KAB rear -end crashes involved vehicle drivers not seeing the traffic stopped ahead of them or being distracted from inside the vehicle due to either a cell phone or passenger. The crash reports noted that failing to reduce speed to avoid crash or following too closely were contributing factors. Both B -Injury turning crashes occurred when the driver was attempting a left turn and failed to perceive oncoming traffic. The A -Injury rear -end crash occurred as a result of the driver at fault failing to realize that the vehicle ahead had stopped. The A -Injury fixed object crash was caused when the driver started to feel ill and attempted to slow to pull over, accidentally pressing the accelerator and striking a tree. The driver was 82 years old at the time of the crash. Road Safety Review 5 Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Mount Prospect, Cook County, Illinois Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering jr �II }I tR -f. •i`„ � � R.I [!t i `'�� r� �-..�.r•"_� 1. �',�1� ,� f+A1Na�:nllPraSPe[[ { c <; i96 �[C . M an 41-O."s s1., - -. ¢ --- b Lu LL! Werlllm-ry w _ S OM'Rn ,ay • .#-••..,Ik G1WRfY•S!—# - -i..0}�' x�" V) 'T � �._._ f .� i+F5.^1:71 �I �ShGQ4•.a�--- -- ,..0 rnf n ~" � s Ed �W r, ��� _ . _ �. ._.• _ � I .. - �� ■ it � � r �- RManr ra 40- '0 - - I ; -'��'L•8'�Giita'•��,�- Jnr rr�e�p,. _ _ 5 t3'.7nalCI AVe- .;J IR erYFr[kC31sh•A rem �f ----- ----- _i� 5 Prtalos Ara ° h -�- -<-S Fprrimt-Aire en"uaggl -� Fid--•�y5Ftd5ilr-•.r - - Pl o ! i OkV Aal �rN:4N s afiryg6°ry.�71�• _. �>� ,�F��__. mak: .. Month: 30% of total crashes occurred in the months September — November and 67% of KAB crashes occurred in the months October— January (see Figure 4). 14 Ln 12 a 10 m v 8 U- 0 = 6 W m 4 D z 2 0 CENTRAL ROAD CORRIDOR - MONTH 12 MONTH ❑ Total KAB Figure 4 - Central Road Corridor - Month Time of the Day: 48% of crashes occurred during hours of 2:00 PM — 6:00 PM, with a spike at 5:00 PM. 78% of KAB crashes occurred during hours of 1:00 PM — 7:00 PM (see Figure 5). 20 18 Ln 16 N 14 a 12 p 10 w 8 m 2 6 D z 4 CENTRAL ROAD CORRIDOR - TIME OF DAY 19 Q Q Q a Q Q Q Q Q Q a Q a a a a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N c -I N M dt Ln l6 n w m 6 c -I N r -I N M Ln ,0 r- W m rl c -I c -I rl c -I c -I HOUR Figure 5 - Central Road Corridor - Time of Day ® Tota I ■ KAB Road Safety Review 7 Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Mount Prospect, Cook County, Illinois Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering Day of Week: 67% of crashes occurred on Monday – Wednesday (see Figure 6). However, 100% of the KAB crashes occurred on Thursday – Monday, with 56% occurring on Thursday and Friday—days when only 22% of total crashes occurred. On Tuesday and Wednesday, 0% of KAB crashes occurred, compared to 47% of total crashes. 30 Ln 25 x Q 20 v LJ - C) 15 UJ UJ m 10 5 D Z 5 IC CENTRAL ROAD CORRIDOR - DAY OF WEEK Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat DAY OF WEEK Figure 6 — Central Road Corridor — Day of Week Other Crash Analysis Materials Used and Developed by the RSR Team ® Tota I ■ KAB The RSR team also used and developed crash analysis materials that are included in the Appendix. The Appendix includes information on: • Lighting Conditions • Weather Conditions • Roadway Surface Conditions • Crash Tables Summary: Crash data was reviewed for the 2.75 mile RSR corridor of Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, excluding crashes from West Prospect Avenue to Ridge Avenue and intersection -related crashes. Crash data was taken from GIS for the years 2011 – 2015 and 2016 (Provisional). 78% of the total 108 crashes were property damage only (PDO), mainly made up of rear -end and sideswipe same direction crashes. A majority of the rear -end crashes involved vehicle drivers not seeing the traffic stopped ahead of them; the crash reports noted that the contributing factors were failing to reduce speed to avoid crash or following too closely. There were no pedestrian or pedalcyclist crashes along the corridor. Additionally, there were no fatal crashes, 2 A -Injury crashes and 7 B -injury crashes on the entire 2.75 mile segment. Most of the crashes occurred from 2:00 PM – 6:00 PM and Monday - Wednesday. Road Safety Review 8 Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Mount Prospect, Cook County, Illinois Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering Weller Lane and Central Road Intersection Crash Type and Severity: A crash is considered an intersection crash if it falls within 150 ft. buffer from the center of the intersection for urban locations. Weller Lane intersection crashes were not included in the corridor analysis. There were a total of 6 crashes at the intersection from 2011 – 2015 and 2016 (Provisional). Of the 6, there were 3 rear -end crashes, 1 turning crash, 1 pedalcyclist crash, and 1 fixed object crash. The pedalcyclist crash resulted in a fatality; all 5 other crashes at the intersection resulted in PDOs (see Figure 7). 4 LA UJ x a 3 v LL 2 UJ UJ m 1 D z I WELLER LANE AND CENTRAL ROAD INTERSECTION - CRASH TYPE 3 Rear End Pedalcyclist CRASH TYPE 1 0 Turning ❑ Total 1 F-1 KAB 0 Fixed Object Figure 7 — Weller Lane and Central Road Intersection — Crash Typs Only 2 of the 3 rear -end crashes listed a reason for the crash—one featured a driver taking their eyes off the road, the other driver getting distracted by a bug in the vehicle. The fatality occurred at the RRFB. The pedalcyclist was crossing northbound, and Unit 1 was eastbound in the left lane. Other vehicles were stopped in the right lane yielding to the pedalcyclist, when Unit 1 attempted to pass them. The driver of Unit 1 failed to see lights or signs indicating the presence of the active pedestrian crossing. Unit 1 then struck the pedalcyclist. The crash occurred during the day with clear weather and dry roadway conditions. Alcohol was not involved. Road Safety Review 9 Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Mount Prospect, Cook County, Illinois Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering is 0 .y 0 L a 0 N _ r O N O r Month: 50% of the crashes occurred in the months May – July (including the fatality) and 33% occurred in the months September – October (see Figure 9). F] LU a v 1 U- 0 O LU LU m 2 0 z WELLER LANE AND CENTRAL ROAD INTERSECTION - MONTH 1 11 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 �,§A 2 1A Co MONTH ❑ Total KAB Figure 9 — Weller Lane ana Central Road Intersection — rvion-in Time of the Day: The x-axis hour is defined by a range of the beginning of that hour to the start of the next hour (i.e. 9:00 AM has a range from 9:00 AM – 9:59 AM). 6 crashes occurred at 3 different hours of the day -9:00 AM, 3:00 PM, and 8:00 PM, with 50% at 3:00 PM. The KAB crash occurred at 9:00 AM, and accounts for 50% of the crashes that occurred at that time (see Figure 10). 4 LA W _ a 3 v W 2 O LU W m 1 D z I WELLER LANE AND CENTRAL ROAD INTERSECTION - TIME OF DAY Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q a a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N rl N M't Ln l0 r" W M O r -I N c -I N M Ln l0 n W M O r-1 rl r-1 r -I c -I c -I c -I HOUR Figure 10 — Weller Lane and L;en ray Road Intersection — Time of Day ❑ Total k KAB I Road Safety Review 11 Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Mount Prospect, Cook County, Illinois Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering Day of Week: 83% of crashes occurred on days Wednesday — Friday, including the fatality (see Figure 11). WELLER LANE AND CENTRAL ROAD INTERSECTION - DAY OF WEEK e 2 2 I Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat DAY OF WEEK Figure 11 — Weller Lane and Central Road Intersection — Day of Week Other Crash Analysis Materials Used and Developed by the RSR Team The RSR team also used crash analysis materials that are included in the Appendix: • Lighting Conditions • Weather Conditions • Roadway Surface Conditions • Unit 1 Direction • Crash Table ❑ Total KAB Summary: Crash data was reviewed for the intersection of Weller Lane and Central Road. Crash data was taken from GIS for the years 2011 — 2015 and 2016 (Provisional). Of the 6 crashes, 1 was a KAB crash which involved a pedalcyclist resulting in a fatality. 50% of crashes occurred from May — July (including the fatality), 50% of crashes occurred at 3:00 PM, and 83% of crashes occurred on Wednesday — Friday (including the fatality). Road Safety Review 12 Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Mount Prospect, Cook County, Illinois Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering Lancaster Street and Central Road Intersection Crash Type and Severity: A crash is considered an intersection crash if it falls within 150 ft. buffer from the center of the intersection for urban locations. Lancaster Street intersection crashes were not included in the corridor analysis. There were a total of 17 crashes at the intersection from 2011 — 2015 and 2016 (Provisional). Of the 17, there were no fatal or A -Injury crashes, 3 B -Injury, 3 C -Injury, and 11 PDO crashes. The predominant crash type was rear -end crashes which made up 35% of total crashes and 67% of KAB crashes. The crash type breakdown is shown in Figure 12. LA w 6 2 a 5 v 4 LL O 3 w 2 m 1 LANCASTER STREET AND CENTRAL ROAD INTERSECTION - CRASH TYPE Rear End Turning Sideswipe Same Fixed Object Angle Direction CRASH TYPE Figure 12 — Lancaster Street and Central Road Intersection — Crash Typc,° O Total ■ KAB Both of the KAB rear -end crashes occurred when the vehicles were westbound and Unit 1 failed to stop, rear -ending other vehicles. One crash had a vehicle which was stopped and waiting to turn left onto southbound Lancaster Street when Unit 1 failed to stop and rear-ended Unit 2, causing a chain reaction. The driver of Unit 1 was issued a ticket for failing to reduce speed to avoid a crash. The other crash had traffic stopped in the roadway. The driver was issued a ticket for following too closely. The fixed object crash occurred when the eastbound vehicle attempted a left turn onto southbound Lancaster Street. The driver lost control during the turn on the snowy roadway; the vehicle left the road and struck a fire hydrant. The crash report indicated that the driver had also been drinking prior to the crash but did not note whether a citation was issued. Road Safety Review 13 Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Mount Prospect, Cook County, Illinois Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering Month: Figure 14 shows that 47% of the crashes occurred from October - November, and all 3 KAB crashes occurred from October - January. LU 5 LU = 4 a v 3 U- 0 O = 2 W m 5 1 D z 0 LANCASTER STREET AND CENTRAL ROAD INTERSECTION - MONTH 4 4 A tJ �atr P�`\ �aJ >��� 4A MONTH Figure 14 — Lancaster Street and Central Road Intersection — Month El Total ■ KAB Time of the Day: The x-axis hour is defined by a range of the beginning of that hour to the start of the next hour (i.e. 9:00 AM has a range from 9:00 AM — 9:59 AM). Figure 15 shows 47% of crashes occurred during 1:00 PM to 5:00 PM hours, including all 3 KAB crashes. This is during the time school lets out and many people are commuting home from work. 4 LA W v=i 3 a v C)2 O LU W m 2 1 D z 0 LANCASTER STREET AND CENTRAL ROAD INTERSECTION - TIME OF DAY a Q Q Q Q a Q Q Q Q a Q a a a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N rl N M't Ln l0 n W M O c -I N c -I N M Ln l0 I� W M O c-1 c -I c -I rl r -I r -I rl HOUR ❑ Total ■ KAB Road Safety Review 15 Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Mount Prospect, Cook County, Illinois Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering Figure 15 — Lancaster Street and Central Road Intersection — Time of Day Day of Week: 47% of total crashes occurred from Sunday — Monday. 5 LA w = 4 a v 3 O w 2 m � 1 z I LANCASTER STREET AND CENTRAL ROAD INTERSECTION - DAY OF WEEK Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat DAY OF WEEK Figure 16 — Lancaster Street and Central Road Intersection — Day of Week Unit 1 Direction: 70% of Unit 1 vehicles were westbound. LANCASTER STREET AND CENTRAL ROAD INTERSECTION - UNIT 1 DIRECTION North, 2, 12%, East 3 18% West, 12,70% Figure 17 — Lancaster Street and Central Road Intersection — Unit 1 Direction ❑ Total KAB Road Safety Review 16 Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Mount Prospect, Cook County, Illinois Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering Roadway Surface Conditions: 82% of crashes had dry roadway conditions. LANCASTER STREET AND CENTRAL ROAD INTERSECTION - ROADWAY SURFACE Snow or slush, 1,I 6% Wet, 2,12%---_ Dry, 14, 82% Figure 18 — Lancaster Street and Central Road Intersection — Roadway Surface Condition Other Crash Analysis Materials Used and Developed by the RSR Team The RSR team also used crash analysis materials that are included in the Appendix: • Lighting Conditions • Weather Conditions • Crash Table Summary: Crash data was reviewed for the intersection of Lancaster Street and Central Road. Crash data was taken from GIS for the years 2011 — 2015 and 2016 (Provisional). Rear -end crashes made up 35% of total crashes and 67% of KAB crashes. There were no fatal crashes, A -Injury crashes, pedestrian crashes, or pedalcyclist crashes. There were 3 B -Injury crashes, 2 of which were rear -end crashes, and 1 was a fixed object crash involving a fire hydrant. Most of the crashes occurred from October — November and on Sunday — Monday. Road Safety Review 17 Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Mount Prospect, Cook County, Illinois Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering Cathy Lane and Central Road Intersection Crash Type and Severity: A crash is considered an intersection crash if it falls within 150 ft. buffer from the center of the intersection for urban locations. Cathy Lane intersection crashes were not included in the corridor analysis. There were a total of 16 crashes at the intersection from 2011 — 2015 and 2016 (Provisional). Of the 16, there were no fatal or A -Injury crashes, 3 B -Injury, 1 C -Injury, and 12 PDO crashes. The predominant crash type was turning crashes which made up 43% of total crashes and 67% of KAB crashes. The crash type breakdown is shown in Figure 19. 8 Lu 7 a 6 °C 5 v u- 4 O = 3 LU 2 � 1 CATHY LANE AND CENTRAL ROAD INTERSECTION - CRASH TYPE Turning Rear End Sideswipe Same Fixed Object Angle Direction CRASH TYPE Figure 19 — Cathy Lane and Central Road Intersection — Crash Type ❑ Total KAB One of the B -Injury turning crashes occurred when Unit 1 was westbound waiting to turn left (southbound). The 17 year old driver said he did not see Unit 1. The crash occurred at night with a wet roadway surface. The driver of Unit 1 was cited for failure to yield while turning left. Another crash occurred when Unit 1 was southbound, waiting to turn left (eastbound). The driver of Unit 1 stated another vehicle was attempting to turn right, and blocked the driver's view of Unit 2. The driver and passenger of Unit 2 said there was no other vehicle present to block the view of Unit 1. The crash occurred at night while it was raining; the driver of Unit 1 was 71 years old. The driver of Unit 1 was cited for improper lane usage of driving in the wrong lanes of traffic. The other B -injury crash was a rear -end crash and occurred when Unit 1 and Unit 2 were eastbound. The driver of Unit 1 looked away briefly before looking back up and seeing Unit 2 stopped in the roadway. The driver of Unit 1 was cited for failure to reduce speed to avoid an accident. The crash occurred during the day on a wet roadway. All 3 KAB crashes occurred when the roadway was wet, and 2 occurred at night. Road Safety Review 18 Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Mount Prospect, Cook County, Illinois Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering 4d 1� Time of Day: Figure 21 shows that 41 % of the crashes occurred from 5:00 PM — 7:00 PM, while the 3 KAB crashes occurred from 5:00 PM — 9:00 PM. LA 5 W = 4 LA a v 3 LL LU 2 W m 1 D Z 0 CATHY LANE AND CENTRAL ROAD INTERSECTION - TIME OF DAY Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q a a a a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N c-1 N M't Ln l0 n W M O r-1 N N M Ln lD n W M O c-1 c -I rl r -I r -I rl r-1 HOUR Figure 21 Cathy Lane and Central Road Intersection — Time of Day ❑ Total KAB Lighting Conditions: 31 % of crashes occurred in darkness with lighting present, including 2 of the 3 KAB crashes (see Figure 22). 12 LU 10 _ r� a s U LL 6 O LU W CQ 4 Z 2 IC CATHY LANE AND CENTRAL ROAD INTERSECTION - LIGHTING CONDITIONS 10 Daylight Darkness, lighted road Dusk LIGHTING CONDITIONS Figure 22 — Cathy Lane ansa i-enifai Aoad Intersection — Lighting Conditions ❑ Total KAB Road Safety Review 20 Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Mount Prospect, Cook County, Illinois Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering Day of Week: 25% of crashes, including all 3 KAB crashes, occurred when there were wet roadway conditions and 13% had snow or slush conditions (see Figure 23). 12 = 10 s LfO 6 w 4 m 2 z I CATHY LANE AND CENTRAL ROAD INTERSECTION - ROADWAY SURFACE Dry Wet Snow or slush ROADWAY SURFACE ❑ Total KAB cigure 23 — Cathy Lane and Centrai ixoao inieisection — Roadway Surface Conditions Other Crash Analysis Materials Used and Developed by the RSR Team The RSR team also used crash analysis materials that are included in the Appendix: • Month • Day of Week • Weather Conditions • Unit 1 Direction • Crash Table Summary: Crash data was reviewed for the intersection of Cathy Lane and Central Road. Crash data was taken from GIS for the years 2011 — 2015 and 2016 (Provisional). There were no fatal crashes, A -Injury crashes, pedestrian crashes, or pedalcyclist crashes. There were 3 13 - Injury crashes, 2 of which were turning crashes, and 1 rear -end crash. All 3 B -Injury crashes occurred on a wet roadway surface compared to 25% of total crashes, and 67% occurred at night compared to 31 % of total crashes. The majority of crashes, including the 3 KAB crashes, occurred from 4:00 PM — 9:00 PM. Road Safety Review 21 Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Mount Prospect, Cook County, Illinois Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering Emerson Street and Central Road Intersection Crash Type and Severity: A crash is considered an intersection crash if it falls within 150 ft. buffer from the center of the intersection for urban locations. Emerson Street intersection crashes were not included in the corridor analysis. There were a total of 27 crashes at the intersection from 2011 — 2015 and 2016 (Provisional). Of the 27, there were no fatal or A -Injury crashes, 4 B -Injury, 3 C -Injury, and 20 PDO crashes. The predominant crash type was angle crashes which made up 48% of total crashes and 50% of KAB crashes. Pedalcyclist crashes made up the other 2 KAB crashes. The crash type breakdown is shown in Figure 24. Ln UJ x a v U_ O UJ UJ m z 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 EMERSON STREET AND CENTRAL ROAD INTERSECTION - CRASH TYPE Angle Turning Rear End Pedalcyclist Sideswipe Parked Motor Same Direction Vehicle CRASH TYPE -figure 24 — Emerson Street and Central Road Intersection — Crash Type ® Total 0 KAB Both of the KAB angle crashes occurred when Unit 1 was northbound, and the driver pulled out into the intersection striking Unit 2, which was westbound. The Unit 1 driver stated they never saw Unit 2. The Unit 1 driver in one crash was 83 years old. Both of the KAB pedalcyclist crashes occurred when the pedalcyclist was crossing Emerson Street. One crash occurred while the pedalcyclist was crossing eastbound in the north crosswalk. The driver of Unit 1 said they were looking at both eastbound and westbound traffic and failed to see the pedalcyclist enter the crosswalk. The other crash occurred when the pedalcyclist crossed westbound in the south crosswalk. Unit 1 was northbound and stopped in the right turn lane. The driver of Unit 1 stated she was blinded by the sun and did not see the pedalcyclist in the crosswalk. The crash occurred at 8:15 AM in April. All 4 KAB crashes occurred during the day with clear weather and dry roadway conditions. Road Safety Review 22 Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Mount Prospect, Cook County, Illinois Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering A-1VU�'li � I ww'wi f i^� N CL N 0 F '{ N • - � 1 i T � N 4 r � i IF � rr i • U r _ . � @own _ u M O L c � U c ca .r m d L 9 ' o 0 L W r r i N W ii co N T) 0 c T C 7 O U O O U U N C2 Cn O c 7 O co O Co c (V (V o c LLI U "t3 LL (U E �0) p 0 a> E0- O T ly T C) N O O co c 0 O N ly0m GC e u "I5 c u m � I co N T) 0 c T C 7 O U O O U U N C2 Cn O c 7 O co O Co c (V (V o c LLI U "t3 LL (U E �0) p 0 a> E0- O T ly T C) N O O co c 0 O N ly0m Month: Figure 26 shows spikes in total crashes for the months of April, May, September and November. The KAB crashes show no trend in a particular month. LU 6 LU x 5 LA 4 v LL 3 O w 2 m � 1 EMERSON STREET AND CENTRAL ROAD INTERSECTION - MONTH MONTH Figure 26 — Emerson Street and Gentral Road Intersection — Month ❑ Total KAB Time of the Day: Figure 27 shows that 26% of crashes occurred from 11:00 AM — 1:00 PM, including one of the KAB crashes; 22% of crashes occurred from 3:00 — 5:00 PM, including one of the KAB crashes; and 15% of crashes occurred from 7:00 AM — 8:00 AM, including one of the KAB crashes. EMERSON STREET AND CENTRAL ROAD INTERSECTION - TIME OF DAY 5 W 4 4 4 = 4 a 3 U LL O2 LU LU 1 � 0 I�_ ©0 I,mo I � 1= / %� 1;= =00�1 I i,i 1:1�0f 10011012 COMMON: � 2 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 a Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N r1 N M �t Ln l0 r� W M O r-1 N r1 N M Ln lD n W M O r-1 rl r -I r -I c -I c -I rl HOUR Figure 27 — Emerson Street and Central Road Intersection — Time of Day ❑ Total KAB Road Safety Review 24 Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Mount Prospect, Cook County, Illinois Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering Day of Week: 67% of crashes were caused while Unit 1 was driving northbound; including 75% of KAB crashes (see Figure 28). 83% of crashes which had Unit 1 heading northbound were angle and turning crashes. EMERSON STREET AND CENTRAL ROAD INTERSECTION - UNIT 1 DIRECTION 20 Ln W 15 a v p 10 LU LU m 5 D 2 I East West North South UNIT 1 DIRECTION Figure 28 — Emerson Street and Central Road Intersection — Unit 1 Direction Other Crash Analysis Materials Used and Developed by the RSR Team The RSR team also used crash analysis materials that are included in the Appendix: • Day of Week • Lighting Conditions • Weather Conditions • Roadway Surface Conditions • Crash Table ❑ Total KAB Summary: Crash data was reviewed for the Emerson Street and Central Road intersection. Crash data was taken from GIS for the years 2011 — 2015 and 2016 (Provisional). 48% of the total 27 crashes were rear -end crashes. There were no fatal, A -Injury, or pedestrian crashes. There were 2 pedalcyclist crashes which resulted in B -Injuries; both involved the pedalcyclist being hit by a vehicle which failed to yield to them in the Emerson Street crosswalk. 37% of crashes occurred from September — November, 26% occurred from 11:00 AM — 1:00 PM, and 67% of Unit 1 vehicles were driving northbound. Road Safety Review 25 Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Mount Prospect, Cook County, Illinois Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering FIELD OBSERVATIONS In this section of the report, field review observations are provided and countermeasures recommendations are presented. Observations focus on intersection functionality, infrastructure, and behavioral -related conditions that potentially contribute to crashes. This section also includes photos, observations, and recommended treatments for each observation or condition. Corridor-Wid The RSR team drove the corridor during the day and at night. Some positives the team noticed were that trees are kept away from sight triangles at intersections, retro -reflective strips are used on most sign posts, and the sidewalks are pedestrian -friendly by providing wide buffers from traffic. Overall issues the RSR team noticed was that not all ramps at crosswalks appear to be ADA compliant, sign heights are not consistent, and stop signs are obstructed at the Emerson Street intersection and Weller Lane intersection by tree branches (see Figure 29). Figure 29 — Stop Sign Obstructed at Southbound Approach at Weller Lane Intersection; Stop Sign Obstructed at Southbound Approach at Emerson Street Intersection In regard to pedestrian and pedalcyclist safety, crosswalks should be restriped to improve visibility at night (see Figure 30) and lighting at crosswalks should be evaluated for improving visibility at night. Road Safety Review 26 Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Mount Prospect, Cook County, Illinois Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering Figure 30 — Lack of Crosswalk Striping When the corridor is restriped during the upcoming resurfacing project, incorporating median refuge islands at the unsignalized intersections should be considered. High Friction Surface Treatment (HFST) could be implemented as a spot treatment along the corridor at the unsignalized intersections to reduce the distance required for braking vehicles to stop. Subject to a more rigorous study and analysis, a 4 -to -3 lane road diet concept is worth considering along the corridor to enhance opportunities for walking and bicycling. The hourly roadway traffic volumes during the morning and afternoon peak periods would need to be closely examined to better understand traffic impacts. Weller Lane and Central Road Intersection The intersection at Weller Lane currently has a directly -adjacent RRFB with advance signage, advance pavement markings, and a speed indicator sign for both directions. Additional measures could include relocating the `Stop Here' sign 30 feet back from the crosswalk, and adding a stop line. Doing this might lead to a sightline conflict with an existing tree;it should be removed if there is an issue with sightline. A double white line between lanes extending 50 feet back from the stop line to prohibit changing lanes should be added. In order to slow vehicles down, pavement markings could be added to narrow perceived lane widths as drivers approach the RRFB (see Figure 31). Add stop/yield lines, and move up `Stop Here' sign (potentially remove tree). Add double white lane between lanes to prohibit changing lanes. Use lane marking to narrow lanes. Y Tom• Figure 31 — RRFB at Weller Lane and Central Road looking westbound Other potential improvements which could be considered are painting the curb of the island to increase visibility, turning it into a two-stage crossing with one direction (eastbound and Road Safety Review 27 Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Mount Prospect, Cook County, Illinois Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering westbound on Central Road) at a time flashing, installing an overhead crossing sign, and/or adding green pavement through the crosswalk to indicate that pedalcyclists could be crossing at the location. Continued education and enforcement efforts in the area are recommended. Despite the RSR team observing many instances of vehicles yielding to pedestrians, the team saw at least one instance of a vehicle failing to yield to a pedestrian, even though he was waving his arms and shouting for vehicles to stop (see Figure 32). When vehicle drivers saw a police vehicle yielding to a pedalcyclist, they all followed by example and yielded (see Figure 32). Figure 32 — SUV failing to yield to pedestrian; police yielding to pedalcyclist During the night field review, the RSR team noted that while the flashing beacons are visible, street illumination could be improved. The street light at the old crosswalk location could be moved to the new location, or another light added at the crosswalk (see Figure 33). i Road Safety Review 28 Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Mount Prospect, Cook County, Illinois Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering Figure 33 — Nighttime lighting at Weller Lane and Central Road Intersection Lancaster Street and Central Road Intersection There is only one crosswalk at the intersection, on the west side. The RSR team recommends widening the crosswalk for visibility purposes, adding a median refuge island or a painted island at the crosswalk, and installing another crossing on the east side (see Figure 34). An overhead crosswalk sign for additional and more eye-catching attention could also be considered at the intersection. Figure 34 — No Crosswalk Present on East Side of Lancaster Street and Central Road Intersection There seem to be ADA compliance issues at the intersection. It was also noted that at the southbound approach southbound pedestrians are forced to jog right and back left before crossing the street (see Figure 35). These types of issues could be further assessed. Road Safety Review 29 Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Mount Prospect, Cook County, Illinois Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering Figure 35 — ADA Observation Cathy Lane and Central Road Intersection Pedestrians and pedalcyclists can press a button to activate the flashing beacon on the sign (see Figure 36). However, there is nothing at the intersection to let pedestrians/pedalcyclists know that the signs are working. The timing of the flashers on the signs should also be evaluated to ensure the flashers are not on all the time or flashing for too long after being activated by the push button, desensitizing drivers to the presence of a pedestrian/pedalcyclist in the roadway. There also might be a potential sight line issue from the southbound approach for pedestrians and pedalcyclists. Figure 36 — Push Button and Advance Pedestrian Flashing Beacon at Cathy Lane and Central Road Intersection Road Safety Review 30 Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Mount Prospect, Cook County, Illinois Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering In addition to the issues with the advance warning signs and flashing beacon, the RSR team noted a faded crosswalk which couldn't be perceived at night. There are also several pedestrian signs placed close together that could desensitize drivers to pedestrian/pedalcyclist activity in the area, or provide too much information for them to process while driving. There is no retroreflective material on one of the sign posts (see Figure 37), and the post is made of wood, unlike the rest of the signage along the corridor. Look at sign spacing - A Crosswalk should be restri ed; consider painted t _ median refuge island No reflective strip and OOOW different post material a �� than other signs Figure 37 — Pedestrian Signage and Crosswalk at Catny i_ane ana Central Road Intersection Road Safety Review 31 Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Mount Prospect, Cook County, Illinois Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering Emerson Street and Central Road Intersection The only crosswalk present at the intersection is on the west side. There is also a sign present which states that pedestrians should use caution when crossing at the intersection, and encourages pedestrians to go to the pedestrian crosswalk one block west at the intersection of IL 83 and Central Road. In a sense the sign conflicts with the marked crosswalk and pedestrian signage at the intersection. One measure discourages pedestrians from crossing at the intersection, while others make clear crossing is expected (see Figure 38). Some pedestrians may be unwilling to walk a block west to cross and then walk back a block east; the team thinks more consistency in direction is needed here. Pedestrians were also seen crossing at Maple Street, a block east of the Emerson Street intersection, which seemed to have less traffic than Emerson Street. ATTENTION USE CAUTION WHEN CROSSING CENTRAL RD N CROSSING SIGNALS IN ST (IL RTE 83) HE BLOCK WEST Figure 38 — Pedestrian Caution Sign at Emerson Street and Central Road Intersection Road Safety Review 32 Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Mount Prospect, Cook County, Illinois Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering While a High-intensity Activated Crosswalk HAWK (also called a PHB) could be installed at the location, they should be evaluated with caution due to the close proximity to the traffic signal at IL 83, west of the intersection. Refer to the IL MUTCD for requirements. It was noted that there is space for a median refuge island which would allow pedestrians to cross in two stages instead of rushing across as some were observed doing (see Figure 39). Extend painted median and create pedestrian refuge island. r. 6 Figure 39 — Pedestrian Refuge Island Location Road Safety Review 33 Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Mount Prospect, Cook County, Illinois Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering Angle crashes made up 48% of total crashes and 50% of KAB crashes. Both angle KAB crashes occurred when Unit 1 was northbound from the south leg of the intersection. 56% of total crashes had Unit 1 driving northbound and were either angle or turning crashes. Currently at the south leg of the intersection there is a sign prohibiting left turns from 4:00 PM — 6:30 PM. Due to the high number of angle crashes, especially from the northbound direction, the RSR team recommends limiting traffic to right -in and right -out at the south leg of the intersection (see Figure 40). Signing could be supplemented with more positive control to improve compliance. -T Current signage prohibits �= r left turns from 4:00 PM — '� 6:30 PM. Proposed — changes include right in and right out only. x- N T � Figure 40 — Southern Leg of the Intersection Looking North at Emerson Street and Central Road Intersection Road Safety Review 34 Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Mount Prospect, Cook County, Illinois Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering IL 83 and Central Road Intersection In addition to the four unsignalized intersections, the RSR team also reviewed the signalized intersection of IL 83 and Central Road due to its proximity to the intersection of Emerson Street and Central Road. The intersection has countdown pedestrian signals. While the RSR team did note positives about the intersection (including a good proactive approach to access control for vacant property in northwest corner, and the countdown pedestrian signals), the team also noted improvements that could be made at the intersection — modernizing the traffic signals including mast arm upgrades, and include one signal head per lane with retroreflective backplates (see Figure 41). Figure 41 — Current Mast Arm at IL 83 and Central Road Intersection Summary: The RSR team suggests corridor -wide improvements such as ensuring pedestrian ramp compliance with Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements, providing consistent sign height and posts, and better lighting at the unsignalized intersections with crosswalks. The team also noted a potential for improvement at all four unsignalized intersections having crosswalks such as relocating signage; installing a stop line, placing a double white line ahead of the stop lines, narrowing lane lines at the Weller Lane intersection; installing an additional crosswalk on the east side of the Lancaster Street intersection; checking the flashing beacon timing and adding retroreflective material at the Cathy Lane intersection; creating a median refuge island and limiting the southern leg to right -in and right -out at the Emerson Street intersection; and modernize traffic signals at IL 83. Road Safety Review 35 Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Mount Prospect, Cook County, Illinois Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS Based on review of the crash data, discussion of the pedestrian and pedalcyclist accommodations, and field visits and observations, the following recommendations were discussed at the close-out meeting the afternoon of June 2, 2017 with all the participants: Corridor -Wide: The following recommendations are applicable across the entire length of the reviewed corridor. With a resurfacing project scheduled for 2018, several of these recommendations could be incorporated. • Consider narrowing the travel lanes using pavement markings to create space for median refuge islands at intersection crosswalks along the corridor. • Evaluate existing marked crosswalks for consistency, and consider using enhanced high visibility marking patterns and materials at all locations. It would also be beneficial to coordinate exact crosswalk locations and marking patterns (e.g. Continental or Ladder) so that they can best be detected on each approach. It was noted that there are potential visibility effects from mild vertical curvature in some locations. • Curb ramps along the corridor should be checked for ADA compliance and replaced where not compliant. This is required as part of any "alteration" project (resurfacing). • Review the signs along the corridor to determine if some signs can be removed to reduce sign clutter and potential "message overload". In addition, sign locations, heights, and posts along the corridor should be checked for consistency and modified accordingly. • Consider targeted application (i.e., spot treatment) of HFST at approaches to crosswalks or across entire intersection footprints to provide added pavement surface friction at stopping/turning areas, and improve the stopping performance of vehicles. • Review the existing illumination of all crosswalk locations and determine if additional or modified lighting is needed to achieve positive -contrast illumination of pedestrians or pedalcyclists in crosswalks during dusk and nighttime. • Consider the suitability of a 4 -to -3 lane road diet along the corridor to create additional space for on -road bicycle facilities and larger pedestrian refuge islands. Weller Lane Intersection: In addition to the corridor -wide recommendations, the following recommendations are suggested for the intersection with Weller Lane and the adjacent existing shared use path crossing: • Consider relocating the `Stop Here' (R1 -5c) sign facing westbound traffic so it is 30 feet in advance of the nearest crosswalk line. To the extent an existing tree might conflict, the sign location could be adjusted accordingly or the tree trimmed or removed. • Consider adding `Stop' lines placed coincident with the relocated `Stop Here' sign. • Consider adding double white solid lines between travel lanes to a distance of at least 50 feet before the 'Stop' line to prevent potentially dangerous lane changing. Additional pavement markings could be added along the outside edges of the travel lanes to narrow perceived lane widths into the crossing and thereby decrease vehicle speeds. • Consider modifying the roadway and intersection lighting to provide improved illumination (positive contrast) of crosswalk users at dusk/night. • Consider painting the curbing of the existing refuge with a high -visibility yellow. Road Safety Review 36 Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Mount Prospect, Cook County, Illinois Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering • Consider altering the RRFB crossing operation from the existing single -stage crossing to a two-stage crossing that would require the pedestrian to activate the RRFB twice. • Consider remarking crosswalks with higher visibility patterns or painting the crosswalk pavement green to designate the crosswalk as being specifically used by pedalcyclists. • Consider enhancing the RRFB flashers and signs by adding a cantilevered overhead installation centered between the travel lanes over the crosswalk in each direction. • Consider trimming/removing the tree branch that obstructs the 'Stop' sign facing southbound shared use path users. Lancaster Street Intersection: In addition to the corridor -wide recommendations, the following recommendations were noted for the intersection with Lancaster Street: • Consider adding a marked crosswalk across the east leg of the intersection. • Consider widening and restriping the existing crosswalk across the west leg of the intersection to enhance visibility due to mild vertical crest curvature. • Assess/improve the accessibility of the southbound approach pedestrian walkway. Cathy Lane Intersection: In addition to the corridor -wide recommendations, the following recommendations were noted for the intersection with Cathy Lane: • Assess the overall effectiveness of the existing advance warning flashing beacons. The existing installation provides no feedback to the pedestrian after the button is pressed, and it is not possible to see if the beacons are flashing from the crosswalk. When the flashers are activated, they seem to operate much longer than necessary to complete a crossing, which could confuse or desensitize drivers. • Consider restriping the existing crosswalk to improve visibility, especially at night. • Assess the spacing of signs on the westbound approach to the intersection. • It was noted that one existing sign post did not have a retro -reflective strip and is a different type and material than other posts along the corridor. • Sightlines for pedestrians and pedalcyclists on the sidewalks from the southbound approach should be checked. Emerson Street Intersection: In addition to the corridor -wide recommendations, the following recommendations were noted at the intersection with Emerson Street: • Consider modifying the existing flush median by adding a more substantial (raised/channelized) refuge island to encompass the east leg crosswalk given the available space. • Given the observed usage at this intersection and the nearby land uses, it may be worthwhile to study whether a Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon would work at this location. In either of these cases, the proximity of the signal at IL 83 would need to be closely evaluated and potentially interconnected. Refer to the IL MUTCD for use limitations. • Consider expanding the existing time -of -day turning restrictions. The crash history involving angle and turning crashes and northbound traffic suggests that restricting the southern leg of the intersection to right-in/right-out only could be beneficial. However, a more in-depth study of this intersection could reveal other options for expanding upon the movement restrictions. Road Safety Review 37 Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Mount Prospect, Cook County, Illinois Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering IL 83 Intersection: In addition to the corridor -wide recommendations, the following recommendations were noted at the intersection with IL 83: • Mast arms should be upgraded to include one signal head per lane with retro -reflective border backplates. • Consider proactively coordinating access control, including reserving additional space for sidewalks, curb ramps and signal hardware, with the vacant, fenced lot in the northwest quadrant of the intersection. Road Safety Review 38 Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Mount Prospect, Cook County, Illinois Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering Appendix — Crash Analysis Figures and Tables Central Road Corridor Crash Type Total Fatal A -Injury 13 -Injury C -Injury PD KAB Rear -end 60 0 1 5 10 44 6 Sideswipe Same Direction 24 0 0 0 2 22 0 Turning 10 0 0 2 1 7 2 Fixed Object 8 0 1 0 1 6 1 Angle 3 0 0 0 1 2 0 Sideswipe Opposite Direction 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 Other Object 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 Head On 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 TOTAL: 108 0 2 7 15 84 9 CENTRAL ROAD CORRIDOR - WEATHER Cloudy/overcast, 2, Rain, 4, 4% 2% Snow, 7, 6% 60 -Clear, 94, 88% Road Safety Review 39 Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Mount Prospect, Cook County, Illinois Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering CENTRAL ROAD CORRIDOR - LIGHTING Darkness, lighted road, 15, 14% Dusk, 2, 2% Darkness, 1, 1%—/-*. —Daylight, 90, 83% CENTRAL ROAD CORRIDOR - ROADWAY SURFACE Ice, 1, 1% Snow or slush, 7, 7%—\ Wet, 11, 10% Dry, 89, 82% Road Safety Review 40 Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Mount Prospect, Cook County, Illinois Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering w 3 w 3 3 w 3 3 3 3 3 3 w 3 3 3 w 3 w 3 - 3 - w - 3 - 3 fi w fi 3 fi 3 3 3 fi 3 3 3 3 fi w 3 3 w fi 3 fi w 3 8 Fo - - 0 0 0 0 0 - - 0 - - 0 0 - - 0 0 - - 0 - - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - - 0 0 0 0 0 0 - - 0 - - 0 0 3 z 0 v n 0 m 8 0 0 0 � .. � .. o 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 N V w 0 C T C O U Y O U iu 3 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 n n m 80 0 0 0 0 0 w 3 3 fi w 3 3 fi 3 3 8 3 8 0 0 3 8 3 8 0 0 LL 5 5 Weller Lane and Central Road Intersection Crash Type Total Fatal A -Injury 13 -Injury C -Injury PD KAB Rear -end 3 0 0 0 0 3 0 Pedalcyclist 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 Turning 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 Fixed Object 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 TOTAL: 6 1 0 0 0 5 1 WELLER LANE AND CENTRAL ROAD INTERSECTION - LIGHTING Darkness, lighted road, 1, 17% Daylight, 5, 83% WELLER LANE AND CENTRAL ROAD INTERSECTION - WEATHER -Clear, 6, 100% Road Safety Review 45 Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Cook County, Illinois Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering November 17, 2017 WELLER LANE AND CENTRAL ROAD INTERSECTION - ROADWAY SURFACE Wet, 2, 33% - Dry, 4, 67% WELLER LANE AND CENTRAL ROAD INTERSECTION - UNIT 1 DIRECTION North, 1, 17%� East, 3, 50% West, 2, 33%� Road Safety Review 46 Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Cook County, Illinois Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering November 17, 2017 ; ; tp }/ Z f : Z f > Lancaster Street and Central Road Crash Type Total Fatal A -Injury B -Injury C -Injury PD KAB Rear -end 6 0 0 2 0 4 2 Turning 4 0 0 0 3 1 0 Sideswipe Same Direction 3 0 0 0 0 3 0 Fixed Object 3 0 0 1 0 2 1 Angle 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 TOTAL: 17 0 0 3 3 11 3 LANCASTER STREET AND CENTRAL ROAD INTERSECTION - LIGHTING Darkness, 1, 6% Darkness, lighted road, 2, 12% ------Daylight, 14, 82% Road Safety Review 48 Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Cook County, Illinois Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering November 17, 2017 LANCASTER STREET AND CENTRAL ROAD INTERSECTION - WEATHER Fog/Smoke/Haze, 1, 6% Snow, 1, 6% - Rain, 2, 12%- --- Clear, 13, 76% Road Safety Review 49 Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Cook County, Illinois Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering November 17, 2017 \ { { }) { { { { }\ { }J }) {) }\ ; £ £ £ ; £ £ £ - - f:Z= f:Z= - {:Z= Em E E Cathy Lane and Central Street Intersection Crash Type Total Fatal A -Injury 13 -Injury C -Injury PD KAB Turning 7 0 0 2 1 4 2 Rear -end 4 0 0 1 0 3 1 Sideswipe Same Direction 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 Fixed Object 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 Angle 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 TOTAL: 16 0 0 3 1 12 3 Ln 4 W x a 3 v LL 2 O LULU ca 1 5 CATHY LANE AND CENTRAL ROAD INTERSECTION - MONTH I ,p¢� op¢t ,p¢� ,p¢� 3 MONTH CATHY LANE AND CENTRAL ROAD INTERSECTION - DAY OF WEEK I Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat HOUR ® Tota I ■ KAB ❑ Total KAB Road Safety Review 52 Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Cook County, Illinois Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering November 17, 2017 CATHY LANE AND CENTRAL ROAD INTERSECTION - WEATHER Snow, 2, 13%� Rain, 1, 7%� Clear, 12, 80% CATHY LANE AND CENTRAL ROAD INTERSECTION - UNIT 1 DIRECTION South, 2, 12%I North, 3, 19% - East, 8, 50% West, 3, 19%�/ Road Safety Review 53 Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Cook County, Illinois Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering November 17, 2017 EF 2E 1E 2E 1E 2E 1E \ { }t { Emerson Street and Central Road Intersection Crash Type Total Fatal A -Injury B -Injury C -Injury PD KAB Angle 13 0 0 2 2 9 2 Turning 6 0 0 0 1 5 0 Rear -end 4 0 0 0 0 4 0 Pedalcyclist 2 0 0 2 0 0 2 Sideswipe Same Direction 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 Parked Motor Vehicle 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 TOTAL: 27 0 0 4 3 20 4 rA N w 6 2 LA 5 v 4 LL O 3 LU CQ 2 � 1 z 0 EMERSON STREET AND CENTRAL ROAD INTERSECTION - DAY OF WEEK Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat DAY OF WEEK ❑ Total KAB Road Safety Review 56 Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Cook County, Illinois Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering November 17, 2017 EMERSON STREET AND CENTRAL ROAD INTERSECTION - LIGHTING Dawn, 1, 4% Darkness, lighted_ road, 3, 11% Daylight, 23, 85% EMERSON STREET AND CENTRAL ROAD INTERSECTION - WEATHER Cloudy/overcast, 3, 11%-, -Clear, 24, 89% Road Safety Review 57 Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Cook County, Illinois Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering November 17, 2017 EMERSON STREET AND CENTRAL ROAD INTERSECTION - ROADWAY SURFACE Ice, 1, 4% Wet, 1, 4% -At Dr-. y, 25, 92% Road Safety Review 58 Central Road from Dryden Place to Westgate Road, Cook County, Illinois Bureau of Safety Programs and Engineering November 17, 2017 {_ } / } (_ ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 2 - - - - - - - f{= - - 212- _ \ ; £ £ £ £ £ £ \ f ) f Village of Mount Prospect Pedestrian/Bicyclist Treatments at Uncontrolled Crossings PUBLIC EDUCATION The use of different education tools to promote safety for pedestrians & bicyclists as well as awareness of designated crossings at uncontrolled locations in the Village. Village Newsletter Mount Prospect Centennial Celebration Winds Down - .ta� mem F` , tAentennrat Nammca ', d..a Village Website www.mountprospect.orp- Social Media Ivo Mount Prospect TV MPDC,*))) MOUNT PROSPECT DIGITAL COMMUNICATION Road Message Board Pedestrian Guidance Sign .7