HomeMy WebLinkAbout2300_001COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE Clerk's office
A G E N D A
Meeting Location: Meeting Date and Time:
Board Room, 2nd Floor Tuesday, July 12, 1983
112 East Northwest Highway 7:30 p.m.
I. CALL TO ORDER - ROLL CALL
II. ACCEPTANCE OF MINUTES OF JUNE 28, 1983
III. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD
IV. AWARDS PRESENTATION - POLICE DEPARTMENT
V. TRAFFIC WARRANTS
On several occasions, the Village Board has asked for
information regarding proposed traffic signals throughout
the'Village. The Engineering Division has reviewed
criteria for determining whether or not a signal is
warranted and provides the information in the attached
report for your review andconsideration. Studies have
been conducted for five intersections which have been
considered for signalization in recent years. In addition,
applicable sections of the State of Illinois Manual on
Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways
has been copied and included in your packet. The Board
may choose to ,adopted this Manual by reference in order
that the Village will have criteria for future traffic
control devices.
VII. MANAGER'S REPORT
1. Parental Responsibility Legislation..
2. Landlord/Tenant Update.
3. S -Curve Speed Limit.
4. Wheeling Road Petition/Private Alley Repaiirs.
VIII.ANY OTHER BUSINESS
IX. EXECUTIVE SESSION
An Executive Session has been called for the purpose
of discussing litigation concerning the Landlord/Tenant
Ordinance.
X. ADJOURNMENT
DEFERRED ITEMS
Development Code Administrative Update
LI-brar'y
Sidewalk Lawsuits/Notice,
Economic Development Commission
Citizens Utilities Acquisition,
MINUTE
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
.JUNE 23, 1983
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Krause at
7:30 p.m. Present at the meeting were: Mayor Krause,
Trustees Ralph Arthur, Gerald Farley ,� Leo Floro s
Norma Murauskis , George Van Gees. and Theodore Wattenberg.
Also present at the meeting were Village Manager
Terrance Burghard, Assistant Tillage Manager Jay
Hedges, Director of Community Development Kenneth. Fritz,
Director of Management Services John Hedstrom, Director
of Public works Herbert weeks and several other staff
members representing various Departments. . There were
approximately 18 persons in the audience including members
of the',Planning Commission and: Zoning Board of Appeals.
I I . MINUTES
The Minutes of,the Committee of the whole meeting of
June 14, 1983 were reviewed and filed.
III. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD
There being, no ci izens present t the meeting desiring
to make ars presentation before the Comm:*Lttee of the
Whole, the Mayor moved cin to the next item tem'.of business.
IV. ROUSEJRANDHURST PRESENTATION
Mr. Claude Lamontagne., with th�e o 8 e C r ra'inn.,
introduced his staff from R.an hul s the Rouse 6rati n.
d. op ra app l esters hr a th � s
�b try . �, On they, acquired ''Ran-, h a p�e� t y o
years o , t et their sty , a s for ac °l s. -011s And
pmol e'd the �os�ib�lty :� expansion, a .change in tenant
ice, epi s i an 8 tab � h market and pr6vid.ed the
II
potential ,profit for return on their 'investment.
The Rouse staff reviewed their market research data which
indicated that R.andhurst could benefit in our market from
the infusion of some additional stores airing at ahigher
quality and higher price market.
Ii
1
MINUTE
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
.JUNE 23, 1983
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Krause at
7:30 p.m. Present at the meeting were: Mayor Krause,
Trustees Ralph Arthur, Gerald Farley ,� Leo Floro s
Norma Murauskis , George Van Gees. and Theodore Wattenberg.
Also present at the meeting were Village Manager
Terrance Burghard, Assistant Tillage Manager Jay
Hedges, Director of Community Development Kenneth. Fritz,
Director of Management Services John Hedstrom, Director
of Public works Herbert weeks and several other staff
members representing various Departments. . There were
approximately 18 persons in the audience including members
of the',Planning Commission and: Zoning Board of Appeals.
I I . MINUTES
The Minutes of,the Committee of the whole meeting of
June 14, 1983 were reviewed and filed.
III. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD
There being, no ci izens present t the meeting desiring
to make ars presentation before the Comm:*Lttee of the
Whole, the Mayor moved cin to the next item tem'.of business.
IV. ROUSEJRANDHURST PRESENTATION
Mr. Claude Lamontagne., with th�e o 8 e C r ra'inn.,
introduced his staff from R.an hul s the Rouse 6rati n.
d. op ra app l esters hr a th � s
�b try . �, On they, acquired ''Ran-, h a p�e� t y o
years o , t et their sty , a s for ac °l s. -011s And
pmol e'd the �os�ib�lty :� expansion, a .change in tenant
ice, epi s i an 8 tab � h market and pr6vid.ed the
II
potential ,profit for return on their 'investment.
The Rouse staff reviewed their market research data which
indicated that R.andhurst could benefit in our market from
the infusion of some additional stores airing at ahigher
quality and higher price market.
Mr. Lamontagne then reviewed the changes to date including
the establishment,�of some new stores., Their future short -
i irs area
range plans include the completion of the downsta'
by Christmas of -1983 and then by mid -1984, the completion
of the food court, the elevators, escalators and the main
area. According to Mr. Lamontagne, the major em has s of
their changes will be to modernize,the establ3'_,shment, bring
-d
:
in a better mix of stores meetih' eit,", �,ni s',,U
rytoyata,
V�p
le
Lan can,, ami.1, y act.�' at�d: ent, rrt,�ain
,xo e
r t
an th_16,�,;." thAt, 'W'111 I
t, ab,,(l zae �1 �tme,rc'
r own
make their own im'
provements w*th*n the* i
stores. 0
A general discussion ensued with, the Rouse Corpolration.
poi ntIng,out that they .ave .developed some concejplans
for the peripheral properties but they are not prepared at
thIs poll.nt to discuss them in detail. Development,outside
1 n
the center and for the exterior, s'siand its po'ble expansi icy
w ill be�-part of PhaseIII in the '�future. There are a number
of prospective tenant's now 'in negotiation with Rouse but
Mr. Lamontagne was not at liberty to reveal those".
Members of the audience asked various q uestions and
4subsequently`, Mayor Krause than"Ked the Rouse Corporation
for iia ,p'r'esentation.
V., IRMA/SELF- INSURANCE
'The Village Manager reviewed with the Committee of the
Whole' 'aper 6ximately,five years ago the Inter-gov,&rnmental
RI*sk,Ma' nagembnt Agency was formed and the Village'' of
Mount Prospect subsequently JoJi_ned. This is an Inter-
governmental agency ofapproximately 37municlipalitifes who
self,-i*_nsur,e and pool the purchase of raj or risk coverages.
-o
Last year,, IRMA requested and the staff rec mmended that
11-the''Village give at, indication as to whether or not *t would
con 't'nue membership in IRMA at the completion of,the first
J
five-yepr,period. The Village of Mount Prospect did indicate
by Resolution of its ,intent to proceed -with the second phase
of IRMA-for either an additional :our or five years.
- began do*n
Subsequent to that decision, Mr,. John Hedstrom ig
s , ome research and"he concluded that it may well be possible
for the Village of Mount Prospect to self - 'insure on its own
ithout IRMA and save roughly between $40,000-$90,000 per
w
year.
Mr. Hedstrom- briefly re,vie e'd his research on the matter
indicating for the last: thr'ee and one-h;.a.l��=,�
_.y a.rs, tin
Village has incurred average I-Qs, es in tie, ne. ghbo ood
of $l l , 0 . Since May , r . H d trom'l .ad contacted
so'
even, brokers And self- ins��.ran�� � �n�� ,ra°�° �� 1 .�ri.�i.ng
prop a, l s with a,sbm i i,,�-), n date., � � Jun � � � l 3of
this .eating, the Ivr.e on I-Ita e have r ved has
been from Arthur"J., Calla ier ar dCamp,,a; .� yen
. tlng to ut together conventional insurance
carrier za atte
ro ra.m but they
P _ have not ....ub.:�.ttd any data as or this
date,
Mr. James Gault, of Arthur J. Gallagher, was present in the
audience and btiefly reviewed the ba's c formatcif the
program. The village would continue t" self-insure for all
claims under general liability, auto. coverage and, workers'
compensation up to an annual stop loss of $250,000. ':!she
remaining exposure would be covered by conventional-umbrella
insurance secured. through Arthur J.' Gallagher 'and most likely
placed with. Lloyd's of Lon,d.on. ArthurJ.Gallagher would
administer our c1..a.lms' a.nd their a.d.rninistration fee would
be ,approximately $25,000 er
the purchase of the umbrella coverages ,anad the administrative
fee would amount to $111,000.
The Committee of the Whole discussed the-merj-'ts of the
proposal, individual concern.s from elected officials and
the mechanics for review. IIU(4A must .have an. Ordinance by
Sept& b r 1 of 1983 ind.icat;n the . vil lag;e' s des ire topartli,c1 ate in the second pha8`e of the program. Therefore,
the il,11age must make its f`inal decision by, the second meeting
in. August if i t hopes, to c,3. op.,t the,. Ordinance, at :a-regular
meeting and not a special ' me" etin.g . T ecau.se of this short
time-span, the. Committee of the. Whole,,recommended thatthe
matter be referred immedi��. el to t e "inenceCommission
- for their review and advice The Committee of the Whole
felt generally that the mater ou ht. to be explored but
reserved ,judgment for final decisl on until'they receive
the recommendation of the Finance Commission and,,have more
time to'study the proposal in`detail. :elected officials
having specific questions are to direct them to the
administration and they will be addres se.d with the. Finance
Commission.
VI. MANAGER'S REPO'
The village Manager reported that the WATER AGENCY pipeline
has now crossed Central Avenue from the north, work has
begun on the line in the commercial area in the vicinity
of Venture and Countryside Bari.k and that the auk tiring pit
is being constructed on. the MSD property at the far south.
The Manager acknowledged tt-iat the 'He'rald n'
ewsp,ap,,er had
accurately repo ' rted the recent ac't.ion of:theaMayor and
'Board of Trustee's'to waive the, plimbi,ng if-nspe.ctilon fees
for those residents'in the CTT.TZEN'S,IJTILITIES'serv:*I.ce
area that must chac
age their sump I I �*
pump,onfiguration.
J
The article, however, erroneously'directed people to'call
the Department of Public 14orks when, in fact, ift shuld
have instructed them to_ the Division of-Code
Enforcement. 11 � I
The ' Police Dstas
epartment aff hdeveloped twot,
,-.,omputer
programs for,keeping track of DUI ARREST*,RECOR'DS. The
Village administration is reviewing the adequa("%y of these
two formats and Mr. Hedges will complete the pro, mct and
we, should-have reports to,the Board sometime in July.,
V'II. ANY OTHER BUSINESS
Trustee Van Geem suggested that the Com-milttee'of the Whole
begin a series of operational reviews of burAdvisory Boards
and Commissions. In this way, the Board and,lComissions
could-bette'r identify the tasks'and expect,aitioris,:of the
various groups and each Board membej�'would become more
familiar with .the respons 'iblilities, and achievements Of the
Adv
eery Boards and Cs s,omm' A s. A general dsn
is; ensi.i,ed
i a- on
and Ma''yor Krause suggested that this matter be'scheduled for
aComittee of the Whole at which t1ine the Zon:*I.ng Boa rd of
,,,mi
Appeals would be re'vi'ewed. 'In the interim, Tru s't�e Van Geem
expressed the esire to submit a memo to the 116'4,yor and the
'Board specifically outlining his reasons and expectations
for such an' operational re-view.
VIII,.EXECUTIVE SESSION"
A
Trustee Floros moved that the Committee of the' Whole go
1 'Execut d I 1 1
nto ive Session to iscuss ex"st"ng I-t1gation*
,Oak Park Trust and Savings v, Village of'Mount Prospec't
and the Landlord/Tenant Ordinance. The Village Manager
also suggested that the Executive Session also discuss
existing labor negotiations, Trustee Floros amended his
motion and it was -seconded by Trustee Arthut. The
Committee of the Whole voted unanimously to fie into
Executive Session for the above stated purposes at 9:18 p.m.,
-4-
,h
The Executive Session adjourned at 9:40 p.m. and the
Committee of the 'Whole was immediately reinstated.
Trustee Wattenberg reviewed :dor the Committee of the
Thole a recent incident that he had in municipal court
in observing ' the, procedures . The court clerk: announced
at the beginning of the session that note taking was
prohibited. Mayor Krause e su,gges ted that these kinds of
matters be direct d to the„ Bar Association and that
perhaps "trustee Wattenberg write ,,a letter to the Chief
Judge, -Trustee Wattenberg suggested that Mr. Pavlock:,
Chief of Police, bring this matter up far ' discussion with.
,Judge Geocaris as it appears to be an affront to our
Constitutional rights
The Committee cif the ' 'hale meeting adjourned at 9:45 p.m,
Respectfully submitted,
TERRANCE L. BUR HARD
Village Manager
TLB/rcw
VillaSI,,.- of MountProspeck
Mount Prospect, Illinois
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: ALL POLICE PERSONNEL (to be read.at roll call 4 times)
FROM: RONALD W.- PAVLOCKt CHIEF OF POLICE
SUBJECT: AWARDS ANNOUNCEMENT/MEG UNIT
DATE: JULY 59 1983
On Tuesday, July 12,,, 1983, at 7.�30 p.m. at -a Mount Prospect Village Committee
of the Wholemeeting Officers Barone and Herman will be presented special
awards from the Northeastern Metropolitan Enforcement Group Narcotics Unit
for enforcement actions taken during the past year. These two officers were
selected from a s,l'a,t,e of.several, officers throughout the metropolitan area
for these awards.,
It is a.great honor to the Mount Prospect Police Department for these two
individuals to be receiving these awards. -- .I am sure' you. will join me in
congratulating them on a job -well done.
'final d W. Pavl oc"k"
Chief of Police
RWP: i h
cc: Deputy Chief Daley
'e'r
31"a'age -,"Manag
Y, i, i
BOFPC
Personnel Files
Village of Mcount Prospect
Mount Prospect, Illinois
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM w, ;.T.
/7(
TO: Village Manager
FROM: Drew Johanson, Engineering
DATE: June 17, 1983
SUBJECT: Proposed Traffic Si.anal s
A traffic study was made -at various intersections in the, Village �'to 'b-Termine if
traffic signal inst - allation are warranted. This study is the latest of many studies
conducted at these intersections, which have been the concern of village officials
and private citizens alike. The purpose of the installations would be to facilitate
the safe crossing of vehicles and pedestrians. Data was collected concerning physical
charatteristics, traffic volumes and accidents. Since our present Traffic Code does
not cover any warrants for the installation of traffic signals, the State of Illinois
Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways (M.U.T.C.D.) was
used in analyzing the data collected.
M.U.T.C.D. lists 8 warrants for the installation of traffic signals. Traffic signals
should not be installed unless one or more of these signal warrants are met.
Warrant 1 - Minimum Vehicular Volume
Warrant 2 - Interruption of Continuous Traffic
Warrant 3 - Minimum Pedestrian Volume
Warrant 4 - School Crossings
Warrant 5 - Progressive Movement
Warrant 6 - Accident Experience
Warrant 7 - Systems
Warrant 8 - Combination of Warrants
(See attached excerpts from the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control
Devices).
Listed below in order of their severity are the intersections surveyed based on data
collected and the above standards.
1) Huntington Commons Road and Elmhurst Road - meets warrants
2) Busse Road and Lincoln Street - does not meet warrants
3) Kensington Road and Wheeling Road - does not meet warrants
4) Golf Road and Meier Road - does not meet warrants
5) Algonquin Road and Briarwood Drive -*does not meet warrants
(See attached data sheets}
2 -
Since Golf Road, Elmhurst Road, Algonquin Road and K ensington'Road are State
maintained and Busse Road is County maintained, they would conduct their own
traffic studies before approving the installation of the traffic signals.
Because our present Traffic Code does not cover any warrants for the installation
of traffic -signals and in order to analyze future requests, i recommend we adopt
by reference I.D.G.T. Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices to the Traffic
Code as the Village Standards.
Dre' hanson
DGd/m
c Director, Public Works
Village Engineer -Files
C. WARRANTS
4C-1 Advance Engineering Data Required
A comprehensive investigation of traffic conditions and physical char-
acteristics of the location is required to determine the necessity for a
signal installation and to furnish necessary data for the proper design
and operation of a signal that is found to be warranted. Such data
desirably should include:
1. The number of vehicles entering the intersection in each hour
from each approach during 16 consecutive hours of a representative
day. The 16 hours selected should contain the greatest percentage of the
24-hour traffic. I
2. Vehicular volumes for each traffic movement from each approach;
classified by vehicle type (heavy trucks, passenger cars and light trucks,
and public -transit vehicles), during each 15 -minute period of the two
hours in the morning and of the two hours in the afternoon during which
total traffic entering the intersection is greatest.
3. Pedestrian volume counts on each crosswalk during the same pe-
riods as the vehicular counts in paragraph (2) above and also during
hours of highest pedestrian volume. Where young or elderly persons
need special consideration, the pedestrians may be classified by general
observation and recorded by age groups as follows:
(a) under 13 years
(b) 13 to 60 years
(e) over 60 years.
4. The 85-'pereentile speed of all vehicles on the uncontrolled ap-
proaches to the location.
5. A conditions diagram showing details of the physical layout, in -
eluding such features as intersectional geometries, channelization,
grades, sight -distance restrictions, bus stops and routings, parking con-
ditions, pavement markings, street lighting, driveways, location of
nearby railroad crossings, distance to nearest signals, utility poles and
fixtures, and adjacent land use.
6. A collision diagram showing accident exp I erience by type, location,
direction of movement, severity, time of day, date, and day of week for
at least one year.
The following data are also desirable for a more precise understand-
ing of the operation of the intersection and may be obtained during the
periods specified in (2) above:
I. Vehicle -seconds delay determined separately for each approach.
4C-1
M
2. The number and distribution of gaps in vehicular traffic on the
major street when minor -street traffic finds it possible to use the inter-
section safely.
3. The 805 -percentile speed of vehicles on controlled approaches at a
point near to the intersection but unaffected by the control.
4. Pedestrian delay time for at least two 30 -minute peak pedestrian
delay periods of an average weekday or like periods of a Saturday or a
Sunday.
Adequate roadway capacity at a signalized intersection is desirable.
Widening of both the main highway and the intersecting roadway may
be warranted to reduce the delays caused by assignment of right-of-way
at intersections controlled by traffic signals. Widening of the intersect-
ing roadway is often beneficial to operation on the main highway be-
cause it reduces the signal time that must be assigned to side -street
traffic. In urban areas, the effect of widening can be achieved by elimi-
nation of parking at intersectional approaches. It is always desirable to
have, at least two lanes for moving traffic on each approach to a signal -
i , zed intersection. Additional width may be necessary on the leaving side
of the intersection, :as well as the approach side, in order to clear traffic
through the intersection effectively. BeTore an intersection is widened,
the additional green time needed by pedestrians to cross the widened
streets should be checked to ensure that it will not exceed the green
time saved through improved vehicular flow.
4C-2 Warrants for Traffic Signal Installation
Traffic control, signals should not be, installed untess, one or more, of
the signal %�°arrants in this Manual aretnet. Information should be ob-
tained by means of engir.ieering studies and compared �with the, require-
ments, set forth in, the warrants. If these requirements are not, met, a
trafic, signal should neither be put into operation nor continued in op -tion, if already installed).
For the purpose of warranting sign.alization, a wide -median intersec-
tion should be considered as, one intersectiom
When a traffic control signal is indicated as being warranted, it is
presumed that the signal and all related traffic control devices and
markings are installed according to the standards forth in, this Man-
ual. It is further presumed that signal indications are properly phased,
thatroadu-ays are properly designed, that adjacent traffic signals are
properly coordinated, that there, is, adequate, supervision of the opera-
tion and, maintenance of the signal an(I all of its related devices, and that
the, traffic, signal, controller will 'be selected on the basis of engineering
study and Judgment -
An investigation, of the need for traffic signal control should include
where, applicable, at least an analysis of the factors contained in the
following warrants:
4C-2
III
6
ip
Warrant 1—rlinimum vehicular volume.
Warrant 2--Interruption of continuous traffic.
Warrant 3—Iilinimum pedestrian volume.
Warrant 4--School crossings,.
Warrant 5—Progressive movement.
Warrant 6--Accident experience.
Warrant 7—S��stems.
Warrant 8—Combination of warrants.
4C-3 Warrant I, Minimum Vehicular Volume
The gni rVehicuarVolume �°W�rrnt is intended'for
application, cu e of intersecting traffic is
the principal rea-son for
signal a
�� �Wr � nstllatlon, The �a�rrant isr satisfied �phen�, fir
consideration of ��,�� �
each ofani � hours, of an a erage clay, the traffic olu nes given in the
`
table
r et and on the higher lure minor-
t below exist o�� the major, etre i
higher-volume
street approach tothe intersection. An "a e°rage"" clay is defined a,.; a
meet: day representing traffic volumes n o,r,rrially and repeatedly fund at
the location.
MINEMU'M VEHICULAR VOLUMES FOR WARRANT 1
Number of lanes for moving traffic Vehicles per hour on
Vehicles per hour on higher-volume mi-
on each approach major street (total of nor-:street apprrwch
Major Street :Minor Street both approaches) (one direction only)
1. ...._. ..... I-------- •.•w,«. 5100 150
2 or
mare_ wW.. I......... WW•.., Coo
I;it1
2 or more . W .. `? or more., . . G()(} '>t
1_2ormore... 5 ,
` t?U
These major.--street and'minor-street volumes
are for 'the ������
e
hours. Duren„ those hours the direction, of
higher
volume lure on tllc
street mai e on one approach cluring some, hours and
on the ol�posftc�
approach during, other hours.
When the 8 -percentile speecl of major-street traffic exceeds 40 n ph
in either ars urban or a rural area, or when the intersection „rn lies, %Withi
the' builtup area of an isolated communit, having a population of l is
than 10,000, the Minimum Vehicular 'Volume warrant is 70 1 e *cent of
the req u i re m tit , above.
4C_4 Warrant 2, Interruption of Continuous Traffic
The Interruption of Continuous Traffic warrant applies to opc.ratingr
conditions %%Where the traffic volume on a major street is so hc>avY that
traffic on a minor intersecting street suffers excessive delay oi- hazard
in entering; or crus-,zing the major street. The warrant is satisfied r\•hc�n
4C-3
f
µ ry
for each of any 8 hours of an average day,„ the traffic volumes given in
the table below exist on the major street and on the higher -volume
- minor -street approach to the intersection, and the signal installation will
not seriously disrupt progressive traffic flow.
MINIMUM VEHICULAR VOLUMES FOR WARRANT 2
Number of lanes for mating traffic Vehicles 1vr hour on
Vehicles per hour on higher -volume mi -
on each approach major :street (total of nor-::tre•Ct ul)))roach
mi -
Major Street Minor Street both approaches:) (one direction only)
1.....,.9...,.. .. 1
................. 750•
ity
2 or more. .., . M 1.............. k)()() ?ii
`2 or more., ........ 2 or more........ WO IM
1. 2 or more. 750 l r)t)
These major -street and minor -street volumes are for the :same R
hours,., During those hours„, the direction of higher volume on the minor
street may be on one approach during some hours acrd on tho opposite
approach during other hours.
When the 85
-percentile -percentile speedof maj(ar-street traffic exceeds, 0 mph
in ether an urban or a rural area, or'when the intersection lies within
the built-up area of an isolated; com, n unity having a population of less;
than, 10,000, the Interruption of Continuous Traffic warrant is, 70 per-
cent of they requirernents above,.,
4C-5 Warrant 3, Minimum Pedestrian Volume
The Minimum Pedestrian Volume warrant is satisfied when, roi- each
of any 8 hours of an average clay, the following traffic volumes, exit:
1. On the major street, 600 or more vehicles per hour enter th+c►
intersection (total of both approaches); or where there is a r ai.,;ed me-
dian island 4 feet or more in width, 1,000 or more vehicles per hour (total
of both approaches) enter the intersection on the major street; in(]
2. During the same 8 hours as in paragraph (1) there are 15() or more
pedestrians per hour on the highest volume cross%% -alk crossing they ma-
jor street.
When the 85 -percentile speed of major -street traffic excep& 40 mph
in either an urban or a rural area, or ww ben the intersection lirs within
the built-up area of an isolated community having a populati()rr crf less
than 10,000, the Minimum Pedestrian Volume warrant is '?() p. -I -vent ()f
the requirements above.
A signal installed under this warrant at an isolated intersecti()n
should be of the traffic -actuated type with push buttons for 1.tiede stri:rrrs
crossing the main street. If ;such a signal is, installed at an irYtrr::e�c•tie)rr
%within a signal sy.,;tem, it should be equipped and operated ww•iti, currtr-()l
devices which provide proper- coordination. %
4C-4
M1Y
Signals, instAled according to this warrant shall be equipped with
Pedestrian indications conforming to requirements set forth in other
sertions of thi.-PManual.
Signals may be installedat nonitit4ersection'locations Onldblock) Pro-,
vided the requirements, of this wari,ant are, met, and, provided that the
related crosswalk is not closer than 150 feet to another e-stablished
fol. , 100 feet
crosswalk. Curbside parking sboul,(,j 'be prohibited In ad-
"vance I of awl 20 feet beyond the cros,svt-alk. Phasing, coot di nation, and,
installation must, conform to, standards set forth in this Manual. Special,
attention should be givellto the signal bead placement and the signsalid
markings, used at nonintersection locations to be sure driv-ers are, ztw,are
Ofthis S'Pecial application.
4C-6 Warrant 4, School Crossing
A traffic control signal may be warranted at an established school
crossing wben, a traffic engineering'study of the frequency and ade-
quacy of gaps in the vehicular traffic stream as related to the number
and size of groups of school children, at, the school crossing sho\%,,s that
the number of" adequate, gaps, in the trafflic stream during the period
\V1hen the children are using the crossing is less than tbe nunil,:)er of
minutes in the same period (see. 7A-3).
When traffic control signals are installed entirely under this warrant:
1. Pedestrian indications shall be provided at least for each cross,-
walk established as a school crossing.
2. At an intersection, the signal -normal]\, should be traffic-actuated.
As a minimum, it should be semi-traffic-ac'tuated, but full actuation with
detectors on all approaches may be desirable. Intersection i nstallat i oils
that can be fitted into progressive -signal systems may h.ive pretinied
control.
3. At non-inten��ection crossings, the signal :Iloulcl be
actuated, parking and other obstructions, to view should, be prohlbitistj
for at. least 100 feet in, ad%,-ance or am.i 20 feet beyond the
mm the installation should include suitat)le stand-ard sigrls and 1);wenlent
rnarkings-. Specialpoliev supem-ision and/or enforcenlc-nt -:4,11ould 1),(- pro-
vided ror a ne%v non-intersection, installation.
4C-7 Warrant 5, Progressive Movement
Progressive lliovenient control
mes necessitates traffic signal
installations at inter-se,vtions 'where they would 110t Otllel-\\-iSe lie` \\',*kt*-
ranted, in order to mainutill Proper grouping of vehicles and effectivt-ly
Yeg"Llte group speed. The Progressive Movement warr.tllt is
whell:
1. Otla ont-wav, street, or" a'.,41-Vot which has, predonlinan'tly unithre c.
tional traffic, the adljacent sigil'al's, zirt. rar aj")art Oi;lt they do 11(st
lit ox"itle the, 11("CeISS31 )*V (Ileg,roe or vchiult- phito i
(),milgaildspt-od colm-ol. or
4C-5
2. On a two-way street, adjacent signals do not provide the neces-
sary (legree of platooning and spee(,'11 control antl the proposed mond adja-
cent signal's could constitute a progressive signal system.
The installation of a signal according to this warrant should be based
on the 85 -percentile speed unless an engineering study indicates that
another speed is more desirable.
The installation of a signal according to this warrant should not be
considered where the resultant signal spacing would be less than 1000
feet.
4C-8 Warrant 6, Accident Experience
The Accident Experience warrant is satisfied when:
L Adequate trial of less restrictive remedies with satisfactory ob-
servance and enforcement has failed to reduce the accident frequency;
and
2. Five or more reported accidents, of types susceptible to correc-
tion by traffic signal control, have occurred within a '19 -month period,
each accident involving personal injury oar property damage to an appar-
ent extent of $100 or more; and
3. There exists a volume of vehicular and pedestrian traffic not less
than 80 percent of the requirements specified either in the Minimum
Vehicular Volume warrant, the Interruption of Continuous Traffic war-
rant, or the Minimum Pedestrian Volume warrant; and
4. The signal installation will not seriously disrupt progressive traf-
fic flow.
Any traffic signal installed solely on the Accident Experience %'Var-
rant should be semi -traffic -actuated (with control devices which provide
proper coordination if installed at an intersection within a coordinated
system) and normally should be fully traffic -actuated if installed at an
isolated intersection.
4C-9 Warrant 7, Systems Warrant
A traffic signal installation at some intersections may be warranted to
encourage concentration and organization of traffic flow networks. The
Systems warrant is applicable when the common intersection of two or
more major routes has a total existing, or immediately projected, enter-
ing volume of at least 800 vehicles during the peak hour of a typical
weekday, or each of any five hours of a Saturday and/or Sunday.
A major route as used in the above warrant has one or more of the
following characteristics:
L It is part of the street or highway system that serves as the
principal network for through traffic flow;
9 It connects areas of principal traffic generation;
4C-6
3. It includes rural or suburban highways outside, entering or tra-
versing a city;
4. It has surface street freeway or expressway ramp terminals;
5. It appears as a major route on an official plan such as a major
street plan in an urban area traffic and transportation study.
4C-10 Warrant 8, Combination of Warrants
In exceptional cases, signals occasionally may be justified where no
single warrant is satisfied but where two or more of Warrants 1, 2, and
3 are satisfied to the extent of 80 percent or more of the stated values.
Adequate trial of other remedial measures which cause less delay and
inconvenience to traffic should precede installation of signals under this
warrant.
4C-11 Factors Governing Selection of Type of Control
The principal factors that may lead to the favorable consideration of
traffic -actuated control in the selection of the type of signal control
include:
1. Low, fluctuating or unbalanced traffic volumes.
2. High side street traffic volumes and delays only during the peak
hours.
3. The pedestrian or accident warrant is the only warrant which is
met.
4. The installation is to provide for one-way movement of two-way
traffic.
5. The installation is at a non -intersection location.
4C-12 Pedestrian -Actuated Control
Operation of traffic -actuated signals must take into consideration the
r
needs of pedestrians as well as vehicular traffic. This can be accom-
plished in the following ways:
I. When pedestrian signals, are not warranted (see., 4D-3) in tonjune-
tion %%ith a, traffie-actuated signal installation but %vhere occasional pe-
destrian movement exists and there is inadequate opportupity ,to cross
without undue delay, pedest),,ian, detectors shall be installed and oper-
ated as prescribed in sections 4D-6 and 7.
2. When pedestrian sig-nals are not otherwise Ni-wranted but a pe-
destrian inovement exists \vhich would not have adequate crossitig time
during the green interval, pedestrian signals and, detectors shall be
installed and operated as prescribed in sections 413-6 and 7.
3. When pedestrian signals are warrante( 'I and installed in conjunc-
tion with a traffic actuated signal, the operation should follow the pat-
terns, described, in sections 413-6 and 7.
4C-7
LXHIBIT DATE
INTERSECTION CONTROL ANALYSIS DATA
MAJOR COLLECTOR LOCAL OTHER
STREET 1 . +C� G_{ �.- 2 ` f/ 1 f "
c:>
ML
REQUEST: A P P I C_
EXISTING CONTROLS 11A
VOLUME & WIDTHS
STREET 24 -HR PEAK PEAK 14R WIDTHS
APPROACH VOLUME HOUR VOLUME_ PVMT. R.O.W_.
A 1 -7
B
A 3 =5� ?-Iq
Btiss'—s"i I
VISIBILITY
CLASS DESCRIPTION OF SIGHT
STREET OBSTRUCTION IF CLASS
APPROACH I II III IV III OR IV
A
B
•
3 YEAR ACCIDENT RECORD
STREET RIGHT REAR
APPROACH: ANGLE END OTHER TOTAL
B
2 A . ... ....
B
PARKING
STREET NO PARKING NO CARS BU
PARKING PERMITTED CARS EVIDENCE
APPROACH PER111ITED FROM TO NTL PARKED OF PARKING
A woo"
B
A
2
j. 13 _i
2A
2B
1B
NEIGHBORHOOD:
RESIDENTIAL
BUSINESS
SHOPPING
OTHER
NEAR SCHOOL(less than 3
block)
COMMENTS:
- - - ----------
Al Cr Oep U4
0
NO CARS AND
NO EVIDENCE
OF PARKING"'
GEORGE W.DUNNE, President
Board of County Commissioners
JL11j , 7 1%
MATHEW W. 61 ESZCZAT, Chairman
Committee on Roads and Bridge$
June 2, 1983
Mr. Charles Bencic
Village Engineer
Village of Mount Prospect
100 South Emerson
bunt Prospect., Illinois 60056
Re: Traffic -Busse Road at Lincoln Street
CCH W71-4141
Reference: Action Letter #10-3/23/83
Dear Mr. Bencic
Please refer to our letter of April 5. 1983 with reference to the feasi-
bility of traffic signals at the captioned intersection.
We have taken new manual courts at'the intersection and are enclosing
a copy. The analysis of the counts indicate that traffic signals are
still not warranted.
If you have any information such as accident reports that indicate a
problem at this intersection please advise us and we will review the
intersection.
We appreciate your interest in traffic safety and offer to pay your
share but at this time signals are. Just not warranted.
Yours truly.,
ur M., Faindli Chief Engineer
Transportation and Planning Bureau
For: Richard H. Goltennan
Superintendent of Highways
M
NU
U: aU...
���
EXHIBIT �:
INTERSECTION CONTROL ANALYSIS DATA
MAJOR COLLECTOR LOCAL OTHER
STREET 'l
2.
REQUEST: p, F'l'y 1.A -L
EXISTING CONTROLS 1A
2A 2B
1B
NEIrWBORHOOD:
VOLUME & WIDTHS RESIDENTIAL f
STREET 24 -HR PEAK PEAK HR WIDTHS
BUSINESS f
APPAROACH VOLUME HOUR VOLUME �R.O.T. W.
SHOPPING
--- - - - - - -- 7
1 A r $,o; - 4--s- ppj&7 s OTHER
B 17,c, S NEAR SCHOOL (l ess than 3
A a block) f f
2 01
B 1 471 &-? PM4 I C. IS COMMENTS
VISIBILITY
CLASS OBSTRUCTION
OF SIGHT'
'STREET OBSTRUCTION IF CLASS
APPROACHI I II III IV III OR IV
B v�
2
B
3 YEAR ACCIDENT RECORD
STREET RIGHT REAR
APPROACH ANGLE END OTHER TONAL
B ` 4
2
A i
B
7
PARKING
STREET
NO PARKING NO CARS BUT NO CARS AND
PARKING P ERMI "'ED� CARS EVIDENCE NO EVIDENCE
APPROACH' PERITED FROM TO NTL PARKED OF PARKING OF PARKING
A ✓ ✓
i
B V �
2 A - -------
B ,r�'" ✓r
tAHIBIT DATE
INTERSECTION CONTROL ANALYSIS DATA
MAJOR- COLLECTOR L-OCAL OTHER
STREET 1.
2.
REQUEST:
--LLEAFF71
EXISTING CONTROLS 1A
STREET INTERSECTION CONTROL SPEED
1APPROACH T
YIELD NONE LIMIT
A 2A 2B
B
A
2 1B,
11,1111, B
VOLUME & WIDTHS
STREET
24 -HR
PEAK
PEAK HR
WIDTHS
APPROACH
VOLUME
HOUR
VOLUME —PVMT.
CARS
R.O.W.
1
A
TO NTL
TIA
A
-T
B
�Alp —�<
""- 4
B
A
-1 40 1
-a
I o6z
2 —B
VISIBILITY
CLASS
DESCRIPTION OF SIGHT
STREET
OBSTRUCTION IF CLASS
APPROACH
I
II
III
Iv
III OR
IV
A
B,
2
A
B
3 YEAR ACCIDENT RECORD
STREET
RIGHT
REAR
APPROACH
ANGLE
END
OTHER
TOTAL
1
A-
B
2
A
PARKING
STREET
NO
PARKING
PARKING
PERMITTED
CARS
APPROACH
PERMITED
E:'R 0 -4
TO NTL
PARKED
A
-T
B
2
A
✓
B
. . ........ . I........
RESIDENTIAL
BUSINESS
SHOPPING
OTH ER
NEAR SCHOOL(less than 3
block)
CO,'MENTS:
��' T �C. �.. 'tom-.�,�'`
ADo Loo,),�R . .. .. .... , !�� C�
NO CARS BUT NO CARS AND
EVIDENCE NO EVIDENCE
OF PARKING OF PARKING"
LAH101 l UH L L
INTERSECTION CONTROL ANALYSIS DATA
ej2.,.D. MAJOR COLLECTOR OCAL OTHER
_�
STREET 1. �. r �R,,,
. oU �►
REQUEST:
EXISTING CONTROLS 1A
VOLUME & WIDTHS
STREET 24 -HR P EAK PEAK HR WIDTHS
APPROACH VOLUME HOUR VOLUME PTMT.
A
2 B
VISIBILITY
CLASS DESCWRIPTION OF SIGHT
STREET OBSTRUCTION IF CLASS
APPROACH].— I II III IV III OR IV
1 A
B
2 A
B
3 YEAR ACCIDENT RECORD
2A 2B
1B
NEIGHBORHOOD:
RESIDENTIAL
BUSINESS
SHOPPING
. OTHER.
NEAR .SCHOOL (l es s than 3
block)
C0,14MENTS:
PARKING
STREET NO PARKING TO CARS BUT NO CARS AND
PARKING PERMITTED CARS EVIDENCE NO EVIDENCE
APPROACH PERMITED FRO1'.1 TO NTL PARKED OF PARKING OF PARKING
1
A
2
A
B � ✓
SAFETY COMMISSION RECOXIMENDATI ON:
BOARD ACTION:
EXHIBIT
RIGHT
DATE
PEAK
INTERSECTION
CONTROL ANALYSIS DATA
WIDTHS
APPROACH
MAJOR COLLECTOR
LOCAL
OTHER
STREET 1
I—p V1
*O'.w.
B
2.
PARKING
REQUEST:
STREET
N' 10 PARK I NG
EXISTING CONTROLS
P E R M I T T E DC ARS
APPROACH
4r-;7 Aiql
FROM TO NTL PARKED
STREET
INTERSECTION CONTROL
SPEED
A
✓
2 A
APPROACH --
- -------- STOP
Y I EL 0
ggL4�—O
—T� gE4—N
OTH
NONE LIMIT
-----------
VISIBILITY
A
CLASS
2A
STREET
2B
B
OBSTRUCTION IF CLASS
APPROACH
I
II
2
A
III OR IV
A
1B
B
A
N P TnppnpNnnn-
VOLUME & WIDTWS
STREET
RIGHT
24 -HR
PEAK
ANGLE
PEAK HR
WIDTHS
APPROACH
VOLUME
HOUR
VOLUME
I—p V1
*O'.w.
B
A
PARKING
STREET
N' 10 PARK I NG
B
P E R M I T T E DC ARS
APPROACH
4r-;7 Aiql
FROM TO NTL PARKED
A
A
✓
2 A
2 B
i -
VISIBILITY
CLASS
DESCRIPTION OF SIGHT
STREET
.............
OBSTRUCTION IF CLASS
APPROACH
I
II
III
TV
III OR IV
A
B
A
2
B
3 YEAR ACCIDENT RECORD
STREET
RIGHT
REAR
APPROACH
ANGLE
END OTHER TOTAL
1 A
B
2 A
B
PARKING
STREET
N' 10 PARK I NG
PARKING
P E R M I T T E DC ARS
APPROACH
PERMITED
FROM TO NTL PARKED
A
B
✓
2 A
B
RESIDENTIAL
BUSINESS
SHOPPING
OTHER
NEAR SCHOOL (less than 3
block)
COMMENTS:
L -:�O
NO CARS BUT NO CARS AND
EVIDENCE NO EVIDENCE
OF PARKING OF PARKING
2
I. INTROuUCTION
A. Ob 'ecti ves of Installinq Si nal Control
1. Purpose.
a. The overall objective of signal control is to provide
for the safe and efficient traffic flow through inter-
sections, along routes and in street networks.
b. At individual intersections, the primary purpose is
to assign right-of-way alternate streets or street
approaches,
1 Maximize Capacity.
m 2 Minimize Delay.
µ(3) Reduce Conflicts.
C* on a street system or network the Werriding objective
is to optimize the safety and efficiency of traffic
flow on the system, sometimes resulting in compromizes
at individual intersections.
(1) Provide for progressive traffic flow on street
system.
(2) Minimize overall stops and delays on system.
( Equalize capacity at intersections on the
� street systems.
(4) Provide gaps in traffic flow at intervals along
a route to permit vehicles and pedestrians to
cross at non -signalized points.
2 Advantages and Disadvantages.
a. Traffic control signals, properly located and
operated may provide one or more of the following
advantages:
(1) Provide for orderly movement of traffic
intersection; through an an entire line of
k vehicles can move through in a platoon without
' continually starting and stopping, as with stop
sign control.
(2)' Minimizes the number of conflictingmovements,
s.
Reduces the frequency of certain types of _
accidents (right angle and pedestrian).
W3 Can increase the traffic handling capacity of the
intersection.
(4) Under favorable conditions, they can be coordinated
to provide for a continuous or nearly continuous
movement of traffic at a designated speed along a
route,
r
u w
3517
3
b. Traffic signal installations, even though warranted by
traffic conditions can be improperly located, designed
or operated and can produce the following disadvantages:
(1) Probable increase in certain types of accidents (rear -
end col I isions
)
(2) Can increase total intersection delay, especially
during off-peak periods,
(3) Can interrupt the progressive flow of traffic on a
route causing increased delay and stopping.
(4) May encourage the use of less adequate routes in an
attempt to avoid such signals.
(5) Can increase pedestrian -vehicle interference.
B. criteria for Installing Traffic Signal Control
1. Many persons believe that traffic sigri91 cuntrol is the
solution to all traffic problems at intersections. This
has resulted in the installation of signals at a large
number of locations d,
where no legitimate neeexists. In
generali the fol lori ng steps should be taken prior to the
installation of traffic signal control.
a. Determine the function of the Intersection as it relates
to the overall street system. A system of major streets
should be designated to channel major flow from one
section of the city to another. Intersection controls
must be related to the major street system.
b. A comprehensive study of traffic data and physical
characteristics of the location is necessary to determine
the need for signal control and for the proper design and
operation of the control if it is justified.
co Determine if geometric or physical improvements or regu-
lations will provide a better solution to the, of
safety or efficiency that the installation of signal control
provides.
d. Use established warrants and standards to determine if
intersection control is justified, and if so, the most
appropriate device for the location. Warrants or standards
should not be used to 'Justify a pre -selected device.
3517
0
N
at
r 0 IS P
t
f N,aun
V-JIJE3g(3 0
mount, Prospecto minots,
N "E R0,jFr:ijCF'�AEM0'RANDUM
1 . ........
To'. village Manager works
FROM: Director Public -WO -r
DATE: May 122 1983 r1j, l�� V% ment
, I a.,c e,
j�f �IS Re ai 4,1 %-)����
SUBJECT Brid
On East B,-iarwood Drive
yins Creek aced. This bridge is
The bridge over Higg g and should be repl the downstream side
rapidly deteriorating ghfare located On sisted of five
t of a regular thoTOug 1 of the ends -
par C� original construct con -each ,
of Lake B-ria-rwOOd# ith concrete headwalls on culverts there
it steel culverts W the iake side of the Lake BriarwOOd
42 -ned by the the
A -0roxim ately 20 ft- from maintained' is to control
pK is owned and M f the dam of the
i S a dam wh ich tion. purnose 0 and the start
rs ,As Jn the dam was built
Homeowne lake, and between This bridge,
level of the concrete SDillway- Ilage 0 f Mount prospect
there is a tion b- the Vi. original
culverts . r to ads y gs of the
sometime PTIO or detailed drawings
and I have no records
construction. re that the headwalls on
h are now Occurring a and water is eroding
whic
The problems curve are crumbling the culverts Caus'
the cu
each end of t base around and above
granular stree Also on the downstream side
the gra the driving surface. result Of an irregular
failures occurring as a re the existing material
S some erosionthe -problem all rete
there i rect -replaced with concrete
line. To COT and probably be surface. There
will have to be removed Ig and -roadway of the bridge
culverts and new curbing the downstream S1 Sion. The
box cu wall added ,tayd er 0
should be wing wa ne of the creek and attempt to
,out of round" and to att I
to control the flow I' -Ing of the metal*
eel culverts are further weaken] the concrete
existing steel them Would result In occurring Under
straighten appears to be erosion replaced --
The also that may have to be T-1 e d
spillway SO ionconstruction this roadway would have to be CIOS
be hampered by existing
During reconstruct will sewer)telephoneto all t-raffic.Theinclude water 3, have to
-lities, which its for the work would iblY
underground Ut' lines. Perm -a of Waterways and POSS
electric, and gas o.T. DiVisiO
be obtained from J.D of Engineers.
the 1J.S. Army Corps -
M
INTERfl MEMORANDUM
Brideair Re 'placement
Continued - Page 2
It is estimated that reconstruction costs would be $40,000.
At the present time we are checking to see if any Federal or
State funds_ are available for this type of work. This bridge
was listed, with I.D.o.T. a year ago as being substandard, but
inspections indicated that reconstruction time would be at a
later . date . .With the heavy rains this winter and spring the
situation has;- changed to a more pressing need. This item was
not budgeted for -replacement this coming fiscal year and
priorities have been established -for all available funds.
There does not appear to be any stop gap measure of repair to
prolong the life of this structure. Its condition will- be
closely monitored pending your ultimate decision.
01
- b -Week's
Director Public
Village of Mount Prospect
Mount Prospect, Illinois
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Director;Public Works
FRO14: Village Engineer
DATE: May 16, 1983
SUBJECT: Briarwood Drive Bridge
I contacted I.D.O.T concerning the possibility of obtaining Federal
Funds for repair of the Brairwood Drive bridge. Mr. Dave Vandervelde
of I.D.O.T. informed me that the bridges are repaired on a priority
basis. The procedure for obtaining funds would be to have the bridge
re -inspected based on the I.D.O.T. forms. If the bridge rates low
enough it will be considered to be put on the priority list for repair.
We then would have to submit an environmental study and a design set
of plans for review. The design plans will have to be signed and sealed
by a structural engineer. If the environmental and design plans are
approved we would then be put on the priority list and when funds become
available we would get them. Mr. Vandervelde said this process would
take a minimum of 6 to 8 months from the time we submit the plans. If
we replace the bridge before the funds are available we cannot be re-
imbursed.
Chuck Bencic
CB/m
LRBALL —L0016
HB -0016 ** COMPLETE BILL STATUS **
TOPIMa-OBLINGER-YWRELL, BARNES, ;EFF, MING, PRESTON, LAURINO,
BRA 1,, BARGER9 KARPIEL2 COWLIS11A1,41 DIDRICKSON2 RONAN, FARLEY
OOCONNELL; MCGANN3, LEVERENZ AND , MADIGAN. v DOYLE$
Ch. 43, P -ars. 110, 131 and 134a
Amends The Liquor Control Act of 1934 to provide that any parent
of a person under 21 years of age who knowingly aids, encourages or
permits such person to obtain alcoholic beverages in violation of the
Act or who sells, gives or furnishes alcoholic beverages to such
person, except for participation in a religious cenaony, shall be
guilty of a Class B misdemeanor. Changes to a Class A misdemeanor
certain violations relating to the sale or possession of alcoholic
beverages to or by a person under 21 years of age.
HOUSE AMENDMENT NO. 1. (Tabled '11 -lay 25, 1983)
Changes certain Violations back to Class B misdemeanors; changes
parental violations to petty offenses; creates ,a Class B misdemeanor
of allowing a person believed to be under 21 to remain on one's
premises while consuming alcohol.
HOUSE AMENDIATENT NO. 3
Restores provision which permits a person under 21 years of
age to possess alcoholic beverages in pursuance of the order of his
parent or in pursuance of his employment and restores provision
which permits consumption by a person under 21 years of age under
direct supervision and approval of the parent of the person under
21. Restores Class B and C misdemeanor penalties for violation.
Provides that any person shall be guilty of a petty offense where
he knowingly permits a gathering at his premises of persons under
18 years of age and the owner or occupier of the premises knows or
should know that the person under 18 is in illegal possession or is
illegally consuming alcohol and the person under 18 leaves the
premises in an intoxicated condition.
JAN 12 1983 H PREFILED WITH CLERK
JAN 13 1983 H FIRST READING
J All 7 13 1983 H REFERRED TO COMMITTEE ON ASSIGnIENT
JAN 27 1983 H
ASSIGNED TO COMMITTEE JUDICIARY
APR 28 1983 H AMENDMENT 140. 01 -JUDICIARY
APR 28 1983 H ADOPTED
APR 28 1983 H DO PASS AS AMENDED 010-003-002 HJUD
APR 28 1983 H PLACED ON CALENDAR ORDER OF 2ND READING 830503
MAY 25 1983 H SECOND READING
14AY 25 1983 E AME ND!IENT NO. 02-TOPINKA
14AY 25 19183 H WITHDRAWN
MAY 25 1983 H MOTION TO TABLE ANMENV,,,,4ENT - PREVAILED 01
MAY 25 1983 H AIMENDMENT NO. 03-TOPINKA
I 1AY 25 1983 H
ADOPTED
14AY 25 1983 H PLACED Or, CALENDAR ORDER OF 3RD READING 830526
MAY 27 1983 H RE-M�4IT INTERIM STUDY CALENDAR JUDICIARY
END OF INQUIRY
LRBALL 02043,
SB -0437 CO1111PLETE BILL STATUS
FATIELL-ZITOO
(TOPINKA)
(Ch. 43, pars. 110, 131 and 144)
Amends The Liquor Control Act of 1934. Provides that any parent
of a person under 21 years of age who knowingly permits such person to
obtain alcoholic beverages in violation of the Act is guilty of a
Class B misderaeaaor# provides that any owner, or occupier of any
prLmalses who knowingly per lits any person tinder 21 years of ane and
not his child to possess or consume alcoholic beverages upon o suet,
premises is guilty of a Class B misdemeanor. Changes to Class A
misdemeanor from Class B or Class C misdemeanor certain violations
relating to - the sale or possession of alcoholic beverages to or by a
person under 21 years of age.
SENATE AMENa1'ENT NO. 10
Changes penalty for parent of person under 21 who causes or
permits violation of Act from Class A misdemeanor to a petty offense.
Deletes owner or occupier penalty. Changes Class A penalties back
Class B and Class C.
SENATE AMENDIIE�IT NO. 2.
Changes age described in Amendment I from 21 to 18.
HOUSE AM-ENDILIEN'T NO. 2. (House recedes July 1, 1983)
Deletles, reference to- Ch. 43, par. 110
Deletes Section, regia
ng authority of units of local government.
Provides that a person Occupying a premises is guilty of a petty of-
fense if he or she knows persons under 18 are consuming alcohol there.
Creates a rebuttable presu"M
,�pt,ion that if a premises has an owner and
a tenant or lessee, the tenant or, lessee is the only one occupying the
premises.
COETERENCE CUL11MITTEE, REPORT NO. 2.
Recommends that the House recede from H -am 2.
Recommends that the bill be further amended as follows * Es-
sentially restores the substance of IT-am2 with variations fr"on, that
amendment. References to "premises" are changed to "residence", and
reference to "should knou�' is deleted (now requires actual knowledge);
requires that person occupying the residence knows that the person
under the age of 18 leaves the residence in an intoxicated condition.
MAR 22 198 ' 3 S FIRST READING
"TAR 22 1983 S R1'j'FERR,ED, TO CO'A'MITTEE ON ASSIGNMENT
MAR 23 1983 S ASSIGNED TO CGI MITTEE JUDICIARY II
MAY 10 1983 S, DO PASS AS A11,1ENDED
006-000-000 SjUB
1SAY 10 1983 S PLACED ON CALF NDAR ORDER OF 2ND READING 830511
ItAy: 11 1,983 S SECOND REA.DI1;"G
MAY 11 1983 S
MAY 11 1983 S AITEND11"IENT NO. 01 -JUDICIARY 1 1
MAY 11 1983 S ADOPTED
I I AMENDMENT NO. 02-FLAWELL
!AY 11 1983 S ADOPTED
I
11AY 11 1983 S PLACED ON CALENDAR ORDER OF 3RD READING 830512
!1AY 24 1983 S THIRD READING - PASSED 054-000-001
MAY 24 1983 H ARRIVE 1",j HOUSE
MAY 24 1983 11 HOUSE SPONSOR TOPINKA
MAY 24 1( H FIRST READING
11AY 24 19%1- H REFERRED TO COMMITTEE ON ASSIGMENT
MAY 25 1983 H ASSIGNED TO COMMITTEE JUDICIARY
JUN 10 1983 H AIIENDI-IENT NO. 01-JUDICIARY
JUll 10 1983 H TABLED
JUN 10 1983 H AIIEND,"IENT NO. 02-JUDICIARY
JUN 10 1983 H ADOPTED
JUN 10 1983 H DO PASS AS AMENDED 010-004-001 HJUD
JUN 10 1983 H PLACED ON CALENDAR ORDER OF 2ND READING 830614
JUN 15 1983 H SECOND READING
JUN 15 1983 H PLACED ON CALENDAR ORDER OF 3RD READING 830616
JUNT 26 1983 H THIRD READING - PASSED 061-021-024
JUN 27 1983 S SECRETARYS DESK - CONCURRENCE 02
JUN 28 1983 S SEN NON-CONCURS IN HSE AMENWENTS (I'TiO.) 02
J U1, 17 28 1983 H SPEAKERS TABLE - NON-CONCURRENCE 02
JUN 29 1983 H HSE REFUSES TO RECEDE FROM AlITMNIDMENT NO 02
JUN 29 1983 H HSE REQUESTS CONFERENCE COM11ITTEE IST
JUN 29 1983 H HSE CONFERENCE COMMITTEE APPOINTED IST/PRESTON,
JUN 29 1983 H JAFFE, CULLERTON,
JUN 29 1983 H* TOPINKA AND
JUN 29 1983 H HAWl'%'.INS ON
JUN 29 1983 S SEN CONFERENCE C01,111ITTEE APPOI*,'=D 1ST/FAWELL,,
JUN 29 1983 S BLOOl,,'l . SANG11EISTER,
JUN 29 1983 S DARROW & ZITO
JUIN 30 1983 H HSE CONFERENCE COM',',lITTEE REPORT SUBMITED IST/TOPINKA
JUL oi 1983 H CONFERENCE REPORT LOST IN THE HOUSE 1ST/052-049-014
JUL 01 1983 H HSE REQUESTS CONFERENCE CO-1111-11TTEE 2ND
JUL 01 1983 H HSE CONFERENCE CO�'FtIIITTEE APPOINTED 2ND/PRESTOV,
JUL 01 1983 H JAFFE2 CULLERTON,
JUL 01 1983 H TOPINKA AND
JUL oi 1983 14 HAI,,',KINSON
JUL 01 1983 S SEN CONFERENCE Cg;-I*:*:IITTEE REPORT SUB,111ITED 1ST/FAIIELL
JUL 01 1983 S 3/5 VOTE REQUIRED
JUL 01 1983 S CONFERENCE REPORT LOST IN THE SENATE IST/002-038-000
JUL 01 1983 S SEPT C01"TERENCE, C0124ITTEE APPOINTED 2ND/FAWELL
JUL 01 1983 S BLOOM, SANG1.1EISTER
JUL ol 1983 S DARROW & ZITO
JUL 01 1083 11 HSE CONFERENCE 01-11-11TTEE REPORT SUBMITED 2ND/TOP INKA
JUL 01 1983 H CONFERENCE REPORT ADOPTED IN THE HOUSE 2ND/074-022-011
JUL 01 1983 S SEE CO"'LTFEREYCE C01,11TITTEE REPORT SUBMITED 2ND/FAWELL
JUL 01 1983 S 3/5 VOTE REQUIRED
JUL 01 1983 S CONFERENCE REPORT ADOPTED IN THE SENATE 210/037-011-003
JUL 01 1983 S PASSED BOTH HOUSES
END OF INQUIRY
IAM DONE
DFS058 15:00:11 IAI".fL C011411AND CU,.IPLETED
Village of Mount Prospect
Mount Prospect, 111i1nois
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: JAY HEDGES
FROMW- CATHY HERMANEK
DATE: JULY 6, 1983
SUBJECT: LANDLORD/TENANT FEES
As of July 6, 1983 we have collected $25,239.13 from our landlord/
tenant ordinance fees. If we include the two anticipated payments
from the Colony we will have a total of $27,420.33.
N
CATHY HERMANEK
cc: Mike Janonis
Frank Krupa
lifinots Department of Teansportatior
Division of Highways/Dist'rict 1
11 000 Plaza e/S'chaumbulrg, Illinois/60196
ST 3 w 3 ecri� I 11 , 83,
May 24, 1983
Drew G. Johanson
Traffic Engineer
Village of Mt. Prospect
100 S. Emerson
Mt. Prospect, Ill. 60056
Dear Mr. Johanson:
Enclosed is a copy of the sReed study we conducted on
Illinois Route 83 in the "S curve area in October of
1982. We have also enclosed a copy of the policy we
follow in conducting the speed studies required by
Illinois law.
Out of a total of 800 vehicle speed measurements, only
31 vehicles were observed traveling at or below the
posted 25 MPH limit* We find it difficult to justify a
speed limit that is perceived by so many motorists to be
too low for conditions. The new 30 MPH limit reflects
the statutory limit contained in the Illinois Vehicle
Code*
We conducted a follow-up study in May of' 1983 and again
made 800 vehicle speed measurements., The prevailing,
speed of traffic remains at 34.6 MPH, a slight decrease
from the prevailing speed of 34.81 MPH, measured, with the
25 MPH limit. A copy of that study is also enclosed.
If you still feel that a personal explanation of our
speed study procedure is necessary, please contact me at
884-41410
Very truly yours,
Sigmund C. Ziejewski
District Engineer
By:
Cary F. Kowa ski
Traffic Engineer
CFK:edh
Enclosure