Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
COW Agenda Packet 11/13/2018
BoardDocs* Pro Page 1 of 1 Tuesday, November 13, 2018 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE AGENDA Mount Prospect Village Hall 50 S. Emerson Mount Prospect, IL 7:00 p.m. 1. CALL TO ORDER 1.1 Roll Call 2. APPROVAL OF COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MINUTES 2.1 APPROVAL OF COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MINUTES OF OCTOBER 23, 2018, 3. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD 4. DISCUSSION ITEMS 4.1 2018 Fire Prevention Poster Contest Winners 4.2 PRESENTATION OF DOWNTOWN PARKING AND TRANSPORTATION STUDIES 5. MANAGER'S REPORT 5.1 As submitted 6. ANY OTHER BUSINESS 7. ADJOURNMENT ANY INDIVIDUAL WHO WOULD LIKE TO ATTEND THIS MEETING BUT BECAUSE OF A DISABILITY OR NEEDS SOME ACCOMMODATION TO PARTICIPATE, SHOULD CONTACT THE VILLAGE MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 847/392-6000, EXTENSION 5327 https://www.boarddocs.com/il/vomp/Board.nsf/Public 11 /9/2018 BoardDocs® Pro Page 1 of 1 Agenda Item Details Meeting Nov 13, 2018 - COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE AGENDA Category 1. CALL TO ORDER Subject 1.1 Roll Call Access Public Type Procedural Public Content Administrative Content Executive Content https://www.boarddocs.com/il/vompBoard.nsf/Public 11/9/2018 BoardDocs® Pro Page 1 of 1 Agenda Item Details Meeting Category Subject Access Type Public Content Nov 13, 2018 - COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE AGENDA 2. APPROVAL OF COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MINUTES 2.1 APPROVAL OF COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MINUTES OF OCTOBER 23, 2018. Public Action Administrative Content Executive Content https://www.boarddocs.com/il/vompBoard.nsf/Public 11 /9/2018 ]wTcsswrwa:l,'�n7m9xcs COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MINUTES - October 23, 2018 — 3rd Floor, Village Board Room Village Hall, 50 S. Emerson Street 1. ROLL CALL— CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 6:02 p.m. in the Village Board Room of the Village Hall, 50 South Emerson Street, by Mayor Arlene Juracek. Trustees present included William Grossi, Eleni Hatzis, Paul Hoefert, Richard Rogers (Arrived at 6:33 p.m.), Colleen Saccotelli and Michael Zadel. Staff present included Village Manager Michael Cassady, Assistant Village Manager Nellie Beckner, Village Clerk Karen Agoranos, Chief Technology and Innovation Officer Andrew Schaeffer, Director of Communications Howard Kleinstein, Executive Assistant to the Village Manager Doreen Jarosz, Human Resources Coordinator Heidi Neu, Human Resources Generalist Ryan Kast, Director of Building & Inspection Services William Schroeder, Deputy Director of Building & Inspection Services Mark Rysavy, Director of Community Development William Cooney, Director of Finance David Erb, Fire Chief Brian Lambel, Fire Deputy Chief John Dolan, Director of Human Services Julie Kane, Deputy Director of Human Services Esther Martinez, Police Chief John Koziol, Police Deputy Chief Michael Eterno, Police Deputy Chief Timothy Griffin, Director of Public Works Sean Dorsey, Deputy Director of Public Works Jason Leib and Management Analyst Alexander Bertolucci. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 2.1 Approval of Committee of the Whole Minutes of September 11, 2018. Motion made by Trustee Grossi seconded by Trustee Zadel. Minutes were approved. 2.2 Approval of Joint Village Board and Finance Commission Workshop Minutes of October 9, 2018. Motion made by Trustee Zadel seconded by Trustee Saccotelli. Minutes were approved. 3. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD None. DISCUSSION4. 4.1 " "" scar• •w BudgetDiscussiongp '. Operating and Non- Qgpartmegtal, Finance Director David Erb provided an overview of the proposed 2019 Budget, proposed 2019 Property Tax Levy, Forecast Budget for 2020 and a General Fund balance update. He stated 2019 proposed budget revenues ($145.2 million) increased 15.3% from 2018 amended budget due to transfers and bond proceeds which increased from the prior year. He stated the corporate levy increase is 1.66% which is the lowest percent increase since 2010. Mr. Erb reviewed charges for services and noted that for a third year there is no increase in the direct charge for refuse which had a $15 increase programed. He stated the Village revenues are still impacted by State actions including Local Government Committee of the Whole Page 1 of 6 10/23/18 Distributive Fund reduction ($263,000), Sales Tax Administrative Fee ($82,000) and Personal Property Replacement Tax reduction ($62,000). Mr. Erb stated total proposed expenditures ($162.3 million) increased 28.6% from the 2018 amended budget due in part to transfers to support the capital program and debt service. He stated the Pension Systems budget increased 10.4% because of a large number of retirements during 2018. Other changes to expenditures include a reallocation of some positions salaries among departments to more accurately reflect true department costs, authorized positions for full-time decreased by one, a salary pool of 3% for cost of living adjustments, and the Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF) contribution rate drops from 10.76% to 8.77%. Mr. Erb reviewed the Prospect and Main Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District's proposed 2019 budget ($10.2 million). It includes redevelopment and maintenance related expenses. He stated the proposed Village budget expects an increase in General Fund revenues for 2019 with a 5.5% growth from the amended 2018 budget while expenses increased 4.1 % from 2018 amended budget. He explained the planned drawdown of reserves totaling $808,567 and the continuation of a four year subsidy to support the pension levy in calendar year 2019 and 2020. He also reviewed reserve levels in the General Fund. Mr. Erb presented highlights from the 2020 Forecast Budget. The 2020 General Fund budget reflects a surplus of $385,280 as presented and includes a property tax subsidy and capital transfers totaling $1,721,000. He reviewed the proposed 2018 tax levy and its assumptions. The pension levy will be abated with a General Fund subsidy of $420,000 and the debt service levy will be abated using alternative revenue sources totaling $1.4 million. He also shared how a 1.66% property tax levy increase would impact a home with a property value of $350,000 equaling an additional $18 to the property tax bill. The following responses from staff were provided to questions from the Village Board: • Staff may share general categories contributing to the 16.2% growth in sales tax which include pharma, general merchandise and food & beverage. The Village has several big box stores and about 30 large sale tax remitters. • A 0% property tax levy would take out over $700,000 from the Village's budget in two years. ii) Departmental Presentation Fire Fire Chief Brian Lambel presented the Fire Department's 2019 Proposed Budget which is increasing 3.2% ($213,670). He reviewed major budget impacts for each program area. The department is implementing more citizen CPR training and the price of American Heart Association's CPR completion card increased. The hose and appliances account increased based on the recent annexations on the south end of the Village. Professional services increased since pressure testing hoses is now contracted to a third party. Emergency Preparedness increased to purchase right sized emergency equipment for employee go (emergency) kits and clothing supplies for Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) volunteers. He provided an overview of 2018 accomplishments and 2019 goals. Committee of the Whole Page 2 of 6 10/23/18 The following responses from staff were provided to questions from the Village Board: • The Fire Cadet Program ended in the 1980's. Staff has talked to municipalities that currently have the program to gather information on how it works. A student would spend half the day at school and the remaining half would be at the fire station. • The upcoming staffing survey will be completed by the Illinois Fire Chiefs Association to analyze efficient service delivery for the southern district and changes involving the Elk Grove Rural Fire Protection District. • National Fire Protection Association standards state turnout gear has a maximum life span of 10 years. Turnout gear replacement varies from year to year since some equipment wears out quicker and at times new gear is required for new employees. • Go Kits contains different items depending on position in the Village. Equipment for an Administration staff person assigned to field operations could be coat, helmet, boots, rain gear, flashlight, paper, and clipboards. All the positions were recently reviewed to assess roles in an emergency and necessary equipment. • The staffing survey is all -in -one and includes number of apparatus, number of calls, changing demographics and etc. It would build on the recently completed fire station location survey. Public Works Director of Public Works Sean Dorsey provided an overview of the department's proposed budget and changes from the prior year. Overall the Public Works budget increased 3.6%. Personal Services and Employee Benefits increased due to the reallocation of salaries and benefits from other departments or divisions within Public Works. The department will be making more frequent adjustments to vehicle lease payments to support increases in vehicle purchase and outfitting costs. He noted that almost 70% of the department's budget is funded by user fees. He provided an overview of 2018 accomplishments and 2019 goals. The following responses from staff were provided to questions from the Village Board: • Recent annexations have had a minimal impact on Public Works operations to date as many of the properties are commercial and there is not much new infrastructure to maintain. Half of the Addison Ct improvement costs were paid for by Elk Grove Township and the Township has maintained responsibility to snow plow the road. • Personnel was reallocated within the budget to where they should be charged to refined department budget figures. These changes were prompted by reviewing positions after recent retirements and a true up of past practice within the Enterprise Resource Planning system. • The parking deck's lighting is more expensive to operate then a LED solution. It also makes economic sense to replace lights using in-house staff and equipment, and utilizing grants for funding. • A Household Hazardous Waste event is not budgeted for 2019. The 2018 event cost $95,000 which $30,000 was the base fee to have the recycler come on -site. The event was successful and there was demand for it. Staff is reviewing alterative options to a one day event per year (smaller more frequent events, appointment based system, etc.) • Pumpkins can be recycled with yard waste. Committee of the Whole Page 3 of 6 10/23/18 Sidewalks along Central Rd are being changed to comply with ADA requirements. Partnering agencies for the Melas-Meadows Bridge have received push back from their boards. Staff is working to collect video evidence which supports the need for a crossing at the railroad tracks, Waterman Ave, Northwest Hwy and Melas Park. Randhurst is in the process of bidding out the work to install street lights on Rte 83/Elmhurst. Project construction will begin in spring 2019. Randhurst cost share is over $1 million and the Village's portion will be around $200,000. Police Police Chief John Koziol reviewed the department's 2018 highlights. He stated the budget increased 1.1 % ($213,670) with wages and benefits almost remaining flat since several senior employees retired in 2018. He stated major budget impacts include employee testing and training. A significant corresponding cost is the overtime incurred from hire backs which are needed to fill shifts while new hires are at Police Academy. Additionally, vehicle purchase payments were adjusted to better account for actual cost experience including outfitting new vehicles. He provided an overview of 2018 accomplishments and 2019 goals. The following responses from staff were provided to questions from the Village Board: • Regarding anticipatory hiring, two new hires will be going to the Police Academy in January to prepare for July retirements. The problem in 2018 was the academy was closed and when it was opened seats filled quickly. • The department has an internship program where a student spends a semester with the department getting experience in all divisions. • The number of retirements should start tapering off. • New officers in field training are assigned across the three shirts. • About 200 people take the written police recruitment test which produces an eligibility list of 40 to 45 candidates. The department may hire 5 before the list is exhausted, Human Services Director of Human Services Julie Kane reviewed 2018 statistics to date which totals 7,417 service units. She provided an overview of the annual budget which decreased 6.5% ($81,266) for 2019 as a result of reductions in wages and benefits not related to the aforementioned reallocation of some personnel salaries. She provided an overview of 2018 accomplishments and 2019 goals. The following responses from staff were provided to questions from the Village Board: • Additional research is required to determine if another Community Connections Center is needed in a specific part of town. • United Way funds specific service areas, not specific agencies. Community Development - Building & Inspection Services Director of Building & Inspection Services William Schroeder stated the department's budget decreased 0.2% ($3,188). The department further minimized third party services and cloud based services decreased due to the elimination of Citizenserve startup costs. He showed the mapping capability of Citizenserve with 2018 permit and code enforcement case data. He provided an overview of 2018 accomplishments and 2019 goals. The following responses from staff were provided to questions from the Village Board: Committee of the Whole Page 4 of 6 10/23/18 • The Village has six teardowns to date this year. Last year the Village had a total of seven. Staff hopes to see an increase since design takes between three to six months and the Single Family Incentive Program started earlier this year. • Number of permits increased 2-3% from the prior year. • The number of house flippers operating in town have decreased; however, contractors at times do not disclose all their work. • Staff hosts pre -submittal meetings with customers early in their projects to discuss improvements and possible value engineering. • Prior permit review process took 23 days and it was reduced to 10 days. Community Development - Economic Development/Planning & Zoning Director of Community Development William Cooney presented the Economic Development and Planning and Zoning 2019 Budget. 2019 major budget impacts are the elimination of Citizenserve startup costs, employee benefits decreasing by more than $30,000 and other accounts increasing 2%. He noted the annual Community Development Block Grant continues to be reduced by U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the Economic Development and Planning and Zoning budget includes several Community Investment Program projects related to downtown pedestrian and corridor improvements. He provided an overview of 2018 accomplishments and 2019 goals. The following responses from staff were provided to questions from the Village Board: • No recent proposal received for 111 S Main St. • There are 1,200 businesses in town and staff may not always know why a business closes; however, staff conducts business visits and outreach as a means of proactive business retention. • Carson closing doubled the Village's total retail space vacancy. Finance & Non -Departmental Director of Finance David Erb presented an overview of the Finance Department 2019 Budget. He stated personal services/employee benefits decreased $10,839 from savings in medical insurance and IMRF contributions. Other expenditures increased $255,200 related to payments made to Elk Grove Rural Fire Protection District (EGRFPD) per state mandate. Also, allocation for Liability Insurance increased $164,339 and Finance absorbs this cost for the General Fund. Savings are expected moving forward. He provided an overview of 2018 accomplishments and 2019 goals. Director of Finance David Erb summarized the non -departmental budgets of Debt Service, Risk Management, Business District and Pension Funds. The total budget for Debt Service in 2019 is $7,842,226. Debt follows repayment schedules established at time of issuance and there is significant support from Prospect and Main TIF and Water/Sewer Funds. He stated $2,434,000 is paid through property taxes and while the debt service budget increased 42.7% from the prior year the debt service portion of the property tax levy will not increase. He stated Risk Management increased 6.9% from 2018 and this includes medical coverages and the liability/workers compensation program. He provided an overview of the Randhurst Village Business District budget that totals $1,525,000 for 2019. He stated total budget for pension expenses in 2019 is $12.2 million, an increase of 10.4% from the prior year due to the retirements during 2018. Pension benefits account for $11.8 million of the total budget. Committee of the Whole Page 5 of 6 10/23/18 Public Representation/Village Administration Management Analyst Alexander Bertolucci provided an overview of Public Representation, Village Manager's Office, Village Clerk's Office, Human Resources and Communications Divisions budgets. Public Representation budget decreased by 28.4% ($219,990) due to the reallocation of salaries and benefits of several employees that support community events to their respective departments. The reallocation moved Public Works overtime costs for community events like the Block Party, Irish Fest, Fridays on the Green, and etc. back to the department for improved presentation of department costs. He stated the Village Administration budget decreased 6% or $248,876. Legal Services budget was reduced in part to the litigation settlement with District 214 and the IT budget reduction in salary and benefits is due to reorganization efforts reducing the division's full- time positions by one. He provided an overview of 2018 accomplishments and 2019 goals. A 2019 goal is to add a part-time Human Resources position and Human Resources Coordinator Heidi Neu presented the justification for the new position. She stated industry standards is to have one human resources staff person for 100 employees. The Village's current human resources staff to employee ratio is 0.63 while comparable communities average 0.87. She stated that adding a part-time position would bring the Village's ratio to 0.78 and will allow the division to achieve the aforementioned goals. Chief Technology and Innovation Officer Andrew Schaeffer stated the Information Technology Division Budget decreased 11.7% ($179,520) from the prior year. He provided an overview of 2018 accomplishments and 2019 goals. The following responses from staff were provided to questions from the Village Board: • The Community Investment Program budget includes the project to lay fiber cables to the new Police and Fire HQs. • The Village does not share Wi-Fi with the main library. AT&T fiber comes in through the library which then is separated between the Library and the Village. The Village has a firewall between the equipment and the Village's internal network. Finance Director Erb concluded the Proposed 2019 Budget Overview by reviewing upcoming scheduled budget meetings and next steps. 5. M'ANAt ER'S REPORT None. 6. ANlY OTHER BUSINESS None, 7. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 9:31 p.m. Alexander Bertolucci Management Analyst Committee of the Whole Page 6 of 6 10/23/18 BoardDocs® Pro Page 1 of 1 Agenda Item Details Meeting Category Subject Access Type Public Content N Nov 13, 2018 - COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE AGENDA 4. DISCUSSION ITEMS 4.1 2018 Fire Prevention Poster Contest Winners Public Administrative Content Executive Content https://www.boarddocs.com/il/vompBoard.nsf/Public 11 /9/2018 pternber 2017 , ui paiiii e III : EMOINEERINO mm��� Ilulll�;, I III uo �� su u TABLE mml� LE Il u�'" F IV Illllllplll II um 1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................... ....,......................., ..........,,.............. ................1-1 1.1 Study Area and Study Locations .................. ........... ....................................................... 1-1 1.2 Existing Roadway System Characteristics...„ .. ......... ...„„..„.......... ......... ........................... 1-3 1.3 Pedestrian Facilities ...................................... ................ ,............... „......... ....................... 1-3 2.0 TRAFFIC VOLUMES ............................... .................. .................. ........................2-1 2.1 Existing Traffic Volumes ................................... --- ................ ---- ............................. 2-1 2.2 Feasibility of Additional Railroad Crossing......„..............................................................2-1 2.3 Future Traffic Volumes .......................................... ............................ ............................. 2-5 3.0 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS....................................,................,...............,.................................3-1 3.1 Capacity Analysis Methodology ............................ ............................................. ............ 3-1 3.2 Existing Conditions..................................................... .......... --- ................... ............... 3-2 3.3 Future Conditions ................................................ ........ ......... ........ .........................3-4 4.0 TRAIN PLATFORM & STATION PLACEMENT............................................................4-1 4.1 Existing Conditions.................................................... .............................. ....................... 4-1 4.2 Platform Modification Guidance .............................. .„......... .....,..„.......„,,...„..................... 4-1 4.3 Extend Existing Platform ..................................... ............................ ............................... 4-2 4.4 Relocation Alternatives ....................................... ......... ................... .,......... .................... 4-4 5.0 - SEPARATED PUSH BUTTONS ......................... .................®..................................5-1 5.1 Existing and Proposed Conditions ....................... ................. ...........„.„„.....,.................... 5-1 5.2 Cost Estimate ..................................................... .......... ........................ .......................... 5-2 6.0 CONCLUSION................................................................................................................6-1 LIST OF APPENDICES (to be provided electronically) APPENDIX A: Raw Traffic Data APPENDIX B: Union Pacific Correspondence APPENDIC C: Signal Timing Sheets APPENDIX D: Synchro Worksheets APPENDIX E: Push Button Exhibits APPENDIX F Conceptual Cost Estimates Downtown Mount Prospect Transportation Study September 2017 The Village of Mount Prospect realizes peak period traffic congestion through its downtown as large traffic volumes crossing the Union Pacific (UP) railroad tracks at -grade are interrupted by a high number of commuter trains during the same peak period times. The only two railroad crossings in the downtown area are IL 83 and Emerson Street. The traffic delays are compounded by the condition that the IL 83 and Emerson Street railroad gates remain down while Metra passengers board and alight the train, increasing the time traffic is stopped and significantly decreasing the efficiency of the three interconnected traffic signals along IL 83 and at Emerson Street and Northwest Highway. The downtown roadway, railroad and traffic signal network is shown in Figure 1, along with study locations for the detailed traffic analysis. It is a similar situation to many suburban communities along commuter rail lines. In fact, as part of a previous study, Sam Schwartz cataloged similar conditions in Arlington Heights, Des Plaines and La Grange of traffic signals interconnected to railroad crossings near Metra stations and along high Average Daily Traffic (ADT) arterials. That previous study determined the key differences in traffic signal operations of the Mount Prospect railroad crossings are the number of phases, and the significantly longer cycle length required to ensure safe clearance of vehicles from the tracks. The purpose of this Downtown Transportation Study is to improve multimodal transportation conditions in the downtown through an alternatives evaluation of moving the Metra station and loading platform to reduce the time that Metra trains block the IL 83 crossing, as well as investigating the feasibility of an additional at -grade crossing to accommodate existing and new traffic generated by development. This study also includes a preliminary cost estimate and feasibility study of adding/modifying pedestrian push buttons and changing the traffic signal controller at the intersection of IL 83 and Prospect Avenue. 1.11 Study Aiirea aind Study III-ocatlioins The study area generally includes the downtown Mount Prospect intersections on either side of the railroad tracks from IL 83 to School Street, both signalized and unsignalized locations. This area includes the key intersections within the downtown that would be most impacted by changes to train boarding location and gate timings. The study locations selected for detailed traffic analyses are as follows: 1. IL 83 (Main Street) with Northwest Highway (US 14) 2. IL 83 with Prospect Avenue 3. Emerson Street with Northwest Highway 4. Emerson Street with Prospect Avenue 5. Maple Street with Northwest Highway 6. Maple Street with Prospect Avenue 7. School Street with Northwest Highway 8. School Street with Prospect Avenue Downtown Mount Prospect Transportation Study September 2017 1-1 Sain Schwall z N Not to Scale Fi ure 1 : 5tudr Area Fo"I —Traffic Signal LOU Study Intersections 1. l; zlii stming [loadway Systeirri CIhairschfirliicticc Brief physical and operational characteristics of the roadways in the study area are described as follows: IL 83/Main Street is a five -lane arterial roadway that carries approximately 12,500 vehicles per day (in 2015) across the Union Pacific railroad tracks at -grade. IL 83 provides separate left -turn lanes at its signalized intersections with Northwest Highway and Prospect Avenue. IL 83 is under the jurisdiction of the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT). Emerson Street is a two to three -lane local collector roadway with parking (parallel and diagonal) on both sides of the street. It carries approximately 4,700 vehicles per day (in 2015) across the railroad tracks at -grade. Emerson Street is signalized at its intersection with Northwest Highway and under stop -sign (3-way) control at its intersection with Prospect Avenue. It is under the jurisdiction of the Village. Northwest Highway / US 14 is a four to five -lane arterial roadway that runs along the north side of the UP tracks. It carries approximately 11,500 vehicles per day according to counts conducted by IDOT in 2015. IDOT has jurisdiction of Northwest Highway. Prospect Avenue is a two-lane local roadway that runs along the south side of the railroad tracks and parking is generally allowed on both sides of the street. It carries approximately 3,300 vehicles per day according to counts conducted by the Village in 2008. It is under the jurisdiction of the Village. Maple Street is a two-lane local roadway that does not provide a railroad crossing. The south segment of road terminates at Prospect Avenue where it is under stop -sign control. Access to a large commuter parking lot is located on Maple just south of Prospect Avenue. The north segment of road terminates at Northwest Highway where it is also under stop -sign control. Maple is under the jurisdiction of the Village and carries approximately 1,000 vehicles per day south of Prospect Avenue. School Street is a two-lane local roadway that also does not provide a railroad crossing. School Street is under stop -sign control at its three-legged intersections with Prospect Avenue and Northwest Highway. It carries approximately 500 vehicles per day south of Prospect Avenue and is under the jurisdiction of the Village. 1.3 Pedestrian Facilities Sidewalks are provided along all study roadways on both sides of the street, except for portions of Northwest Highway and Prospect Avenue on the track side. Crosswalk markings are provided at each signalized intersection. Mount Prospect Downtown Transportation Study September 2017 1-3 °� 2m�� ymo T � F W'N IIIm1 �III1' pumoiop NI mi i�u I I IIu�, rcn� This section describes the methodology for developing existing and future traffic volume networks and establishes the peak hour volume networks used in the following capacity analysis chapter. Traffic volumes were developed for the Existing Traffic condition and then projected to the future Total Traffic condition with the potential projects included in the Downtown Implementation Plan. .1 i"'xi ftriug I raffilict Wfluirries Intersection turning movement counts were performed in May 2017 during the following peak periods at each of the study intersections: • Weekday morning (AM): 7:00 AM to 9:00 AM • Weekday evening (PM): 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM All raw traffic data is included in Appendix A. In addition, daily traffic volumes provided by the Village from 2008 were referenced for several roadway segments in the study area The Existing Traffic and Pedestrian volume diagrams for the weekday AM and PM peak hours are shown in Figures 2 and 3. 7. ..m III�'cnsliillVrwi1111i1tf AdditioinM III°fniiilllrnd irih°°iul.g The Village is considering the feasibility of an additional railroad crossing in the downtown area in order to provide an alternative local travel route to IL 83 or Emerson Street, as well as help to accommodate new traffic projected to be generated by development. A grade separated crossing was considered for School Street underneath the UP tracks. According to the IDOT BIDE manual Figure 33-5.A, the clearance needed under the tracks is a minimum of 14'-9" and the clearance over the tracks is a minimum of 23'-0". Since the clearance under the tracks is smaller, a viaduct under the railroad was investigated, rather than a bridge over. The maximum slope for a local road like School Street is 9%. If a slope of 6% was used, School Street would have to be vertically realigned 300' north and south of the intersections of School with Northwest Highway and Prospect Avenue. There are six driveways that would be impacted by the realignment to the north of the viaduct, and four driveways south of the viaduct. If the intersection with Northwest Highway and Prospect Avenue were to intersect with School on either side of the viaduct, 400' of realignment would be necessary to bring the roadways back to existing grade. This would affect several properties on both streets and ten driveways in all. Figure 4 shows the impacted areas of a grade -separate crossing at School Street. And generally, a similar situation where the area of impact spans several properties would be the case with any potential new at -grade crossing in the downtown area. Furthermore, Union Pacific officials indicated that construction of a new grade -separated crossing requires that one at -grade crossing in the community is closed. Since so much land use would be impacted by a grade -separated crossing and given UP's one - for -one policy, an at -grade crossing is preferred. Union Pacific officials, however, have indicated it is UP's policy that in order for a new at -grade crossing to be constructed, three existing at -grade crossings must be closed. A copy of UP's correspondence is included in the Appendix. This requirement does not make a new at -grade crossing feasible for Downtown Mount Prospect. Downtown Mount Prospect Transportation Study September 2017 2-1 k--25(50)� ' f— 475 (510) 1— 55 (40) 00) 5 (530) 495 —� (5) 5 > (80) 25 (20) 10 7-- 5 (5) 450 (490) 15 (25) IL 83 (60) 55 (520) 440 (30)60� �o k—15 (50) 75 (180) 1�-105 (60) 10(15) 130 (160) �30(20)Emerson St (40) 30 (155) 105 —► %� (30) 55 a, / a p-, 15 (30) 10 (5) 40 (20) (5) - -� (5) Maple St L? ' - 15 (20) i---20 (10) School St +a O S Z rp O * o = In, 11 (5) w IL 83 13 17 (5) (55) �I Emerson St 00 Maple St School St Z O L N rD Not to Scale Figure 4: Grade Separated Crossing S Areas for Reconstruction: Sc"I vv%airtz IfPM = Roadway = Commercial Driveway EMAZYM = Residential Driveway 2.3 Ful1uire °°'rref1'ic Volkmne.s Traffic volumes in Downtown Mount Prospect are expected to increase to some extent as redevelopment occurs and density increases, though interaction between existing and new land uses and transit -oriented residential housing will limit new traffic. The future traffic volume projections account for the assignment of new traffic due to this increased density. Since a proposed at -grade crossing was not deemed feasible, the existing roadway framework was assumed to remain as -is when determining future traffic volumes. 2.3.1 Downtown Development Plans The Village completed a Downtown Implementation Plan in 2013 which lays out the community's vision of downtown for a 10 to 20-year horizon. Key redevelopment sites and concept plans were developed and used as a basis for estimating future AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes in this study. The site referred to as Lion's Park has the most direct impact on our study area but other redevelopment sites are expected to also incrementally increase traffic Downtown, particularly on IL 83 and Northwest Highway. 2.3.2 Development -Generated Trips The estimates of traffic to be generated in the future condition are based upon the Downtown Implementation Plan proposed land use type and size. The Institute of Transportation Engineer's (ITE) Trip Generation, 9th Edition was used to identify traffic generated by the redevelopment concepts. Table 1 summarizes the peak hour trip generation estimates, as well as the applicable Land Use Code reference. Table 1: Trip Generation Land Use / Size Weekday AM Peak Hour Weekday PM Peak Hour In Out Total In Out Total Lion's Park Ml eevelo m'ent Retail — 7,500 SF (LUC 826) - - - 10 10 20 Residential — 294 DU (LUC 230)' 15 90 105 85 40 125 Park-N-Ride — +165 spaces 140 35 175 120 85 205 Other R94AvleMopn1gLnt Retail — 12,500 SF (LUC 820) 10 5 15 20 25 _ 45 Residential — 180 DU (LUC 230)' 10 55 65 50 25 _ 75 Total 175 185 360 285 185 470 11v u...— ai l U /0 I VUU% uvr I Ur I u rNa csurrlaieu IW[iI I I C 1 rip Uenerarfon To account Tor I UU 2.3.3 Site Traffic Assignment The Lion's Park site -generated traffic was assigned to the roadway network based on a directional distribution and according to the site access shown in the concept plans. Other development traffic was assigned to IL 83, Northwest Highway and Prospect Avenue as background through traffic. The development -generated traffic was added to the Existing Traffic volumes to develop the future Total Traffic condition. The resulting Total Traffic volumes are shown in Figure 5. Mount Prospect Downtown Transportation Study September 2017 2-5 p `off �y en w b C 1 U k-25(50) ca �5(5) / 490 (525) % 485 (555) i 80 (95) ( 15 (25) IL 83 (10) 5 (60) 55 (550) 500 —i (580) 490 —► (5) 5 (30) 60 o z -o, , c '� � 15 (50) CIO) 10 (15) --*75 (180) 150 (180) 125 (90) 30 (20) Emerson St (10) 10 —� �j } (40) 30 (115) 115 —► / / (175) 115 —► (10) 10 � morn (30) 55 , o �o Af ' 1S 30) -.�10 5) II �40(20) Maple St (125) 40� (5) - (40) 20� (10)- (5) —► -• i a, I / / k-- 15 (20) 20 (10) School St (50) 70� (30) 30--� , X _T V v X UD C O s Vl V D O v In -0 t rap rp O ' pIDj ' N ° C rl to rat O O = Vt 2 V1 (�) C C rD 3.01 TRAFFIC A traffic capacity analysis was performed to identify possible traffic impacts associated with the development potential of Downtown Mount Prospect. Traffic analyses were performed for the weekday AM and PM peak hours, and capacity analysis results were developed for the following conditions: • Existing Traffic, which establishes baseline conditions for the current year • Total Traffic, which establishes conditions 10 to 20 years in the future and considers increased density in the downtown as envisioned in the Downtown Implementation Plan 3.1 Capacity Analysis IMetlhod6ogy The Synchro (version 9) traffic analysis software was used to analyze traffic operations for the Existing Traffic conditions as well as for future Total Traffic conditions. The capacity analysis results from Synchro provide average vehicle delays and levels of service (LOS) for each study intersection. SimTraffic, the traffic simulation module of the Synchro software package, was also used to develop traffic simulations for the existing and future scenarios to further inform traffic operations and to assist in determining the effectiveness of the existing roadway system. Traffic signal timings for the signalized intersections were obtained from IDOT (see Appendix C) and verified in the field. The Level of Service (LOS) of a signalized intersection is defined in terms of control delay per vehicle (seconds per vehicle). Control delay is the portion of total delay experienced by a motorist that is attributed to the traffic signal. For signalized intersections, LOS A describes operations with minimal delays (up to 10 seconds per vehicle), while LOS F describes operations with delays in excess of 80 seconds per vehicle. In general, delays experienced at LOS D or better are generally considered "acceptable" operating conditions, while LOS E and F are generally considered "unacceptable" operating conditions. The LOS criteria for signalized intersections, as defined in the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM 2010), are provided in Table 2. Table 2: LOS Criteria for Signalized Intersections Level of Service Average Delay LOB A < 10.0 seconds B > 10.0 and <_ 20.0 seconds C > 20.0 and 35.0 seconds D > 35.0 and <_ 55.0 seconds E > 55.0 and <_ 80.0 seconds F > 80.0 seconds Transportation Research Board. Highway Capacity Manual, 2010. For unsignalized intersections, the total delay is defined as the total elapsed time from which a vehicle stops at the back of the queue until the vehicle departs from the stop line. This includes the time required for the vehicle to travel from the last -in -queue to the first -in -queue position. The LOS thresholds for unsignalized intersections are different from those for signalized intersections and are summarized in Table 3. Downtown Mount Prospect Transportation Study September 2017 3-1 Table 3: LOS Criteria for Unsignalized Intersections Level of ServicefLtSw Average Delay A <_ 10.0 seconds i3 > 10.0 and <_ 15.0 seconds C > 15.0 and <_ 25.0 seconds D > 25.0 and _< 35.0 seconds E > 35.0 and <_ 50.0 seconds F > 50.0 seconds escarct� �3 Art transportation rctl. M" Aw•,'y' apacrty Manual, 2010. �': g t���oriurl'i'tliioirius �1, � IIV: IIC �t ui t: lii ur�i Table 4 summarizes the train and railroad crossing information during the peak 90-minute periods in both the morning and evening "rushes" at the intersection of IL 83 with Northwest Highway and Prospect Avenue. Table 4: Mount Prospect Railroad Crossing Summary Average Daily # of Location Traffic Signal N/S E/W Phases Route Route Cycle Length No. of Train Min Gate interruptions Down AM PM AM PM AM PM Peak Peak Peak Peak Peak Peak L 83 @ Northwest Hwy 12,500 11,400 10 160 170 17 & Prospect Ave 14 34 32 As the table shows, the crossing gates are down 32 to 34 of the peak 90-minute traffic period. Because of the high number of train preemption calls that occur during those peak periods and the fact that Synchro and SimTraffic modeling have limited capabilities when it comes to modeling train interruptions, the intent of the Level of Service analysis is to compare existing and future traffic loads with respect to each other and roadway intersection capacity. Train interruptions reduce Levels of Service further so the Synchro results may appear to show better operations than in the field. The intersection capacity analysis results for the Existing Traffic condition for signalized and unsignalized intersections are shown in Table 5. The Synchro files for all conditions and peak hours are provided in Appendix D. Mount Prospect Downtown Transportation Study September 2017 3-2 Table 5: EXISTING LEVEL -OF -SERVICE Time of Day Intersection/Lane Weekday AM Weekday PM Peak Hour Peak Hour Delay A LOS B Delay LOS IL 83 R Northwest Hwy (s) Eastbound L 14.5 B 14.5 B Eastbound TR 21.3 C 25.0 C Westbound L 33.6 C 36.9 D Westbound TR 42.4 D 50.8 D Northbound L 0.3 A 0.4 A Northbound TR 0.6 A 0.7 A Southbound L 68.3 E 76.8 E Southbound TR 53.6 D 50.1 D Overall Intersection .. 27.2 C 31.6 C IL 83 at Prospect Ave (s) � i . Eastbound L 85.2 F 86.9 F Eastbound TR 40.6 D 40.9 D Westbound L 78.7 E 73.7 E Westbound T 77.3 E 78.0 E Westbound R 79.3 E 76.1 E Northbound L 55.6 E 57.8 E Northbound TR 64.4 E 66.2 E Southbound L 25.9 C 23.1 C Southbound TR 0.4 A 0.4 A Overall Intersection 36.4 D 38.4 D Emerson St at Northwest Hwy (s) Eastbound LT 0.9 A 1.9 A Eastbound R 1.4 A 2.6 A Westbound L 4.9 A 6.1 A Westbound TR 7.4 A 9.4 A Northbound L 28.4 C 27.6 C Northbound TR 26.6 C 30.1 C Southbound L 28.8 C 25.4 C Southbound TR 31.0 C 30.3 C Overall Intersection 10.6 B 12.3 B Emerson St at Prospect Avenue Eastbound LT 9.0 A 27.3 D Eastbound R 2.3 A 3.2 A Westbound LT 8.3 A 18.8 C Westbound R 4.2 A 24.5 C Northbound LTR 10.4 B 30.5 D Southbound L 0.9 A 0.9 A Southbound TR 2.6 A 1.9 A Overall Intersection 6.4 A 15.8 C Maple St at Northwest Hwy Eastbound L 8.3 A 9.7 A Westbound L 0.3 A 0.1 A Northbound LTR 14.7 B 25.1 D Southbound Approach 18.2 C 22.8 C Maple St at Prospect Ave Westbound L 1.2 A 1.0 A Northbound Approach 10.9 B 11.5 B School St at Northwest Hwy Eastbound L 0.2 A 0.3 A Southbound A roach 13.9 B 16.5 C School St at Prospect Ave Westbound L 1.4 A 0.9 A Northbound Approach 9.6 A 9.6 A Average control delay in seconds oer vehicle. BLevel of service. (sl Sinnali7M intpmPCtinn Mount Prospect Downtown Transportation Study September 2017 3-3 All unsignalized intersections operate at LOS D or better. There are several movements and lane groups under traffic signal control that currently operate below LOS D during the peak hours. Signalized traffic movements or lane groups that currently operate at LOS E or LOS F include the following: The southbound left -turn movement operates at LOS E during the AM and PM peak hour. lIW;=$I= • The eastbound left -turn movement operates at LOS F during the AM and PM peak hour. • All westbound movements operate at LOS E during the AM and PM peak hour. • All northbound movements operate at LOS E during the AM and PM peak hour. Although it is outside of our study area, long queues were noted on eastbound Prospect Avenue at Mount Prospect Road. Table 6 presents the future Total Traffic conditions traffic analysis results for the signalized and unsignalized study intersections, respectively. Based on the analysis results, the majority of the approaches/lane groups would operate at the same LOS as in the existing conditions. The increase in traffic volumes due to traffic growth between the Existing and Total conditions would result in a change in LOS beyond LOS D at the following locations: •MM The southbound through/right-turn lane group would degrade from LOS D to LOS E during the AM peak hour. The westbound through/right-turn lane group would degrade from LOS D to LOS E during the PM peak hour. Emerson Street and Pros ect Avenue • The eastbound through/left-turn lane group would degrade from LOS D to LOS F during the PM peak hour. • The westbound through/left-turn lane group would degrade from an LOS C to LOS F during the PM peak hour. • The westbound right -turn lane would degrade from an LOS C to LOS E during the PM peak hour. • The northbound lane degrades from an LOS D to an LOS F during the PM peak hour. As part of the analysis, we modeled the intersection of Emerson Street and Prospect Avenue under traffic signal control to test the operations compared to three-way stop sign control. The advantage of signalization is that the track clearance phasing will guarantee passage for both Mount Prospect Downtown Transportation Study September 2017 3-4 northbound traffic crossing the tracks through Northwest Highway and southbound traffic crossing the tracks through Prospect Avenue. The disadvantage, however, is that signalization will not significantly improve intersection LOS operations and it will degrade LOS at Emerson Street and Northwest Highway as more time will be required to be dedicated to clearance track phases, thus increasing the cycle lengths from 85 seconds to 170 seconds in the PM period to match IL 83. The Emerson/Northwest Highway cycle length currently runs at half the length of the IL 83 signal cycles which has significantly reduced delays and queuing at the intersection. Field observations noted long queues eastbound on Prospect Avenue at Mount Prospect Road. The intersection is outside of our study area but it is estimated approximately 25-30 vehicles will be added to the eastbound movements at that intersection in the AM and PM peak hours under future conditions. This intersection is slated to be improved by IDOT and the signal timing may be adjusted by IDOT or one of their timing consultants after construction in 2018-2019. Mount Prospect Downtown Transportation Study September 2017 3-5 Table 6: FUTURE LEVEL -OF -SERVICE Time of Day Intersection/Lane Weekday AM Weekday PM Peak Hour Peak Hour Delay A LOS B Delay LOS IL 83 at Northwest Hwy (s) Eastbound L 16.5 B 14.3 B Eastbound TR 27.6 C 29.8 C Westbound L 40.6 D 41.0 D Westbound TR 49.6 D 59.8 E Northbound L 0.3 A 0.3 A Northbound TR 0.7 A 0.8 A Southbound L 68.3 E 76.8 E Southbound TR 55.6 E 53.2 D Overall Intersection 30.6 C 35.5 IL 83 at Prospect Ave (s) ... _ ........ _. Eastbound L 87.8 F 89.1 F Eastbound TR 41.7 D 43.6 D Westbound L 67.9 E 67.3 E Westbound T 68.5 E 74.2 E Westbound R 79.1 E 76.4 E Northbound L 55.8 E 58.0 E Northbound TR 68.0 E 71.9 E Southbound L 26.5 C 26.8 C Southbound TR 0.4 A 0.5 A Overall Intersection 39.1 D 1 41.8 D Emerson St at Northwest Hwy (s) Eastbound L 1.0 A 2.0 A Eastbound TR 1.4 A 2.5 A Westbound L 5.2 A 6.5 A Westbound TR 7.8 A 10.0 B Northbound L 27.9 C 27.0 C Northbound TR 27.1 C 30.2 C Southbound L 28.1 C 24.7 C Southbound TR 31.4 C 30.4 C Overall Intersection 11.1 B 12.8 B Emerson St at Prospect Avenue Eastbound LT 10.0 B >50 F Eastbound R 3.1 A 5.7 A Westbound LT 9.1 A >50 F Westbound R 4.3 A 46.2 E Northbound LTR 10.1 B >50 F Southbound L 0.6 A 1.2 A Southbound TR 3.0 A 2.2 A Overall Intersection 6.4 A 68.2 Maple St at Northwest Hwy Eastbound L 8.3 A 9.8 A Westbound L 0.3 A 0.2 A Northbound LTR 14.9 B 26.0 D Southbound LTR 18.3 C 23.6 C Southbound Approach 18.3 C 23.6 C Maple St at Prospect Ave Westbound L 2.4 A 2:3 A Northbound Approach 12.7 B 15.6 C School St at Northwest Hwy Eastbound L 0.2 A 0.3 A Southbound Approach 14.1 B 16.9 C School St at Prospect Ave Westbound L 1.3 A 1.5 A Northbound Approach 10.9 B 11.0 B "Average control delay in seconds per vehicle. Level of service. (s) Signalized intersection. Mount Prospect Downtown Transportation Study September 2017 3-6 . TRAIN P I O4 & STATION ��illl The Metra station in Downtown Mount Prospect is a key component in attracting residents and businesses to the area. However, the current location of the station and loading platform parallel to Northwest Highway between IL 83 and Maple Street causes traffic operational problems. Long traffic signal cycle lengths at two of three signalized intersections along Northwest Highway and IL 83 are required because the current signal sequences require safety clear -out phases. Those long cycles cause all movements to experience lengthier delays than if the cycle length were shorter. Additionally, daily occurrences of trains blocking IL 83 and Emerson Street crossings for over 30 of the 90 minutes in the AM and PM peak periods cause significant inefficiencies in the network. This section summarizes our findings in determining the best location for the commuter station to alleviate these traffic signal operational issues and best serve the multimodal transportation users of the downtown area. .t Exsflng Condliitiloins Currently, the Metra Station Platform is 971' and extends from the eastern edge of pavement of Main St. eastward to a point 95' past Maple St. The station depot is located on the southeast quadrant of Northwest Highway and IL 83. In this quadrant, the perpendicular distance between the north track and the curb line of Northwest Highway is approximately 85'. The 85' property width contains the station depot, the north platform, parking spaces, the access driveway from Northwest Highway to the station and adjacent parking lots, sidewalk, and a landscaped parkway. The 85' width of land is maintained 830' east from IL 83 to the parking lot entrance directly across from Maple St., where it begins to taper to a width of 53' at the eastern edge of the parking lot. Although there is no loading platform west of IL 83, a similar 85' width of land is maintained westward approximately 460' from Main St. to the parking lot entrance directly across from Wille St., where it begins to taper to a width of 53' at the western edge of the parking lot. Because the existing platform is at the eastern edge of pavement of IL 83, the current design of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) track circuits causes the railroad gates at IL 83 to hold in the down position for the entire time the train is parked in station. If the depot and platform remain in the existing location the UPRR has no reason to consider moving these circuits, and the signal operation will continue to be dramatically affected by parked trains at the station. 4 2 rlll tf iriru m III'Wo fficotliioin Giii.fitainco In discussions with the UPRR, they are open to relocation or extension of the train platform and offered the following recommendations and requirements: The edge of the loading platform closest to the crossing (depending on location) should be at least 650' away from the edge of pavement of IL 83 to increase the probability that the gates would not be held in the down position. A length of 650' would allow 2 engines (approximately 75' long each) to be parked between the end of platform and the crossing and a 500' clear zone between the front of the engine and the crossing. • If the Village proposed to move or extend the platform, a general rule of thumb from both Mount Prospect Downtown Transportation Study September 2017 4-1 Metra and the UPRR would require a new train depot to be near the midpoint of the relocated platform, with some flexibility. However, a depot could not be located near the end of the platform. ,3 Exteirid IIExiistiiing F"Illatfoirrrm Option 1 — Extend Platform The lowest cost alternative to trains blocking the IL 83 crossing would be to extend the existing loading platform 579' to the east. As seen in Figure 6, Option 1 proposes to end the platform between Elm Street and School Street instead of the current location between Maple Street and Elm Street. The total length of proposed extended platform would be approximately 1550'. In research of other stations in Park Ridge, Des Plaines, Arlington Heights, Palatine, Barrington, and Crystal Lake on this same UPRR line, Sam Schwartz found that all stations except Des Plaines have similar length platforms (between 850' and 975'). However, the Des Plaines station has a 1422' long platform with a train depot at the approximate center of the platform. For the proposed platform extension in Mount Prospect, the train depot would have to be moved from its current place at the western edge of the platform to a location in the current parking lot near Northwest Highway and Maple Street as shown by the yellow rectangle in Figure 6. The relocation would not require any realignment of Northwest Highway or land acquisition. A conceptual cost estimate is shown in Table 7. Table 7: Summary of Conceptual Cost Estimate — Option 1 Item Estimated Cost Construction $1,844,000 Design Engineering (10% of $ 277,000 Construction Cost) Construction Engineering (5% of j $ 90,000 Construction Cast) Land Acquisition - $ - TOTAL $ ,211,000 Detailed conceptual cost estimate in Appendix F Mount Prospect Downtown Transportation Study September 2017 4-2 Not to Scale n s N If lia Figure 6: Platform Extension Option 1 °w6,.°h,vvotr z Existing Station Platform: 971 ft. Platform Extension: 579 ft. Proposed Total Length:1550 ft. 4. f:t:rk)(-stk)iri Alterriatives An alternative solution to platform extension is to maintain the existing platform length of 971' and move the train station and platform either east or west of the current location, as described in Options 2 and 3 below and shown in Figure 7. In this option, Sam Schwartz analyzed either an eastbound train where the engines were pulling cars or a westbound train where the engines were pushing cars, as in both cases the parked engines would be the closest point to the IL 83 crossing. This train orientation would have a 971' platform from a point 130' west of Elmhurst Avenue to a point at the eastern edge of Wille Street. An approximate halfway point for the relocated train depot would be 170' west of Pine Street. As seen in Figure 7, the width of land between the north track and the curb line is about 50' at this location on Northwest Highway. The 85' property width at the existing depot for sidewalk, parkway, parking, and access drives could not be provided at this depot location without significant geometric realignment of Northwest Highway. In Option 2, westbound trains would still be 512' away from the crossing at Central Road, which would most likely fall out of the clear zone for that crossing and not force the gates at Central Road into a down position while the train is parked. Gates at IL 83 would remain in the upright position for trains parked in either direction. As seen in the blue shaded area of Figure 7, relocation option 2 would require a 50' wide parcel of land acquisition of private property on the northside of Northwest Highway for realignment. The estimated total acreage would be 1.3 acre. Additionally, that realignment would be impossible without the removal of the 5-story condominium building on the northeast corner of Northwest Highway and Pine Street. Six commercial driveways would be affected by this realignment, while no residential driveways would be affected as their access is on various side streets. A conceptual cost estimate is shown in Table 8. Table 8: Summary of Conceptual Cost Estimate — Option 2 Item Estimated Cost Construction $ 7,936,000 Design Engineering (10% of Construction Cost) Construction Engineering (5% of Construction Cost) Land Acquisition TOTAL Detailed conceptual cost estimate in Appendix F Mount Prospect Downtown Transportation Study September 2017 $ 795,000 $ 397,000 $ 4,245,000 $ 13,373,000 4-4 it • In this option, we analyzed either a westbound train where the engines were pulling cars or an eastbound train where the engines were pushing cars, as in both cases the parked engines for would the closest point to the IL 83 crossing. This train orientation would have a 971' platform from Evergreen Street to School Street. Parked trains would hold down the gates at Emerson Street but not at IL 83. An approximate halfway point for the relocated train depot would be just west of Elm Street. As seen in Figure 5, the right of way between the north track and the curb line is about 60' at this location on Northwest Highway. The 85' property width at the existing depot for sidewalk, parkway, parking, and access drives could not be provided at this depot location without significant geometric realignment of Northwest Highway. Several parking spaces on the east end of the existing parking lot would also be lost with this depot location. Relocation option 3 would require a similar land acquisition for the realignment of Northwest Highway as option 2 with an estimated area of 1.0 acre as seen in the green shaded area of Figure 7. Additionally, the realignment would impact the water tower, several townhouses, and the Village Bank & Trust. Two commercial driveways would be affected by this realignment, no residential driveways would be affected as their access is on various side streets. A conceptual cost estimate is shown in Table 9. Table 9: Summary of Conceptual Cost Estimate — Option 3 Item Estimated Cost Construction 7,753,000 Design Engineering (10% of $ 775,000 Construction Cost Construction Engineering (5% of $ 387,000 Construction Cost) _ Land Acquisition 3,390,000 _ TOTAL 12,305,000 betailed conceptual cost estimate in Appendix F Mount Prospect Downtown Transportation Study September 2017 4-5 Not to Scale Figure 7: Platform Relocation Alternatives Sal it1[ Eisting Station n Platform: 971 ft �c fii"�J)a,IV"t Longest Rush Hour Train: 1080ft. 11 Cars (85 ft. per car) = 935 ft. 2 Engines (72 ft. per engine) =144 ft. Sam Schwartz assessed the pedestrian push buttons at two signal locations in downtown Mount Prospect, IL 83 at Northwest Highway and Emerson Street at Northwest Highway. The current signals have one push button on each corner. When pressed, the button calls for both crossings from the corner to be activated. This causes a false call in the unused direction which can create unnecessary green time for minor approaches and corresponding delays for major approaches. The following lists proposed improvements and a preliminary cost estimate of adding those pedestrian push buttons and modifying the traffic signal controller. Should the Village decide to proceed with this improvement, the required process would be to submit plans and specifications to IDOT permits for approval. From our 2016 traffic signal study of the Downtown area with IDOT and the Village, IDOT would be open to the improvement. Although the proposed signal phasing would not change, the plans would also have to go to ICC (Illinois Commerce Commission) for approval. IDOT Traffic Operations Department would handle coordination with ICC before IDOT ultimately issues the permit for construction. f il'''''':aai i,iiing aind ilwurof o i:cf Conditions 5.1.1 Northwest Highway at Emerson Street Existing: One (1) push-button at each corner NW corner — Push-button on post used for both crossings, existing post is 20' from N-S crossing NE corner — Push-button on post used for both crossings, post is 15' from E-W crossing SW corner — Push-button on post used for both crossings, post is 20' from E-W crossing SE corner — Push-button on post used for both crossings, post is 8' from curb Proposed: Addition of four (4) push -buttons and two (2) push-button posts NW corner - Add push-button post for N-S crossing, use existing button for E-W crossing NE corner - Add push-button post for E-W crossing, use existing button for N-S crossing SW corner - Add push-button to mast arm post for E-W crossing, use existing button for N-S crossing SE corner — Add push-button to signal post for E-W crossing, use existing button for N-S crossing Mount Prospect Downtown Transportation Study September 2017 5-1 5.1.2 IL 83 at Prospect Avenue Existing condition: One (1) push-button at each corner NW corner — Push-button on mast arm post used for N-S crossing NE corner — Push-button on mast arm post used for N-S crossing SW island — Push-button on post used for N-S crossing SW corner — Push-button on mast arm post used for both crossings SE corner — Push-button on mast arm post used for both crossings Proposed: Addition of two (2) push -buttons NW corner — No change needed NE corner — No change needed SW island — No change needed SW corner — Add push-button to mast arm post for E-W crossing, use existing button for N-S crossing SE corner — Add push-button to mast arm post for E-W crossing, use existing button for N-S crossing 5.1.3 IL 83 at Northwest Highway Existing condition: One (1) push button at each corner NW corner — Push-button on mast arm post used for both crossings NE corner — Push-button on post used for both crossings, existing button 16' from E-W crossing SW corner — Push-button on post used for both crossings SE corner — Push-button on mast arm post used for both crossings, post is 15' from E- W crossing Proposed: Addition of four (4) push -buttons and two (2) push-button posts NW corner — Add pedestrian push-button post northeast of handhole for E-W crossing, use existing button for N-S crossing NE corner — Add pedestrian push-button to mast arm post for E-W crossing, use existing button for N-S crossing SW corner — Add pedestrian push-button to post for E-W crossing, use existing button on same post for N-S crossing SE corner — Add pedestrian push-button post for E-W crossing, use existing button for N-S crossing 5.opt Es l iririvate 5.2.1 Northwest Highway at Emerson Street • 4 push -buttons • 2 push-button posts • Cable and conduit • Maintenance of traffic signal during construction - $2,500 • Construction cost estimate: $11,000 Mount Prospect Downtown Transportation Study September 2017 5-2 5.2.2 IL 83 at Prospect Avenue 0 2 push -buttons • Cable Maintenance of traffic signal during construction - $2,500 a Construction cost estimate: $6,500 5.2.3 IL 83 at Northwest Highway 4 push -buttons 0 2 push-button posts M Cable and conduit • Maintenance of traffic signal during construction - $2,500 Construction cost estimate: $9,000 5.2.4 Total Costs for Potential Push Button Improvements at all 3 locations • Contractor - Construction cost including maintenance - $34,000 o Consultant - Design and permitting process cost - $12,500 • Consultant - Construction engineering and inspection - $17,500 Mount Prospect Downtown Transportation Study September 2017 5-3 imu um�o pmmi� pm���i� of �uumW . m� o��������wllllli' IIIIIII� ii�illli � iul h Sam Schwartz offers the following conclusions to the various analyses completed in this project: New development potential in the downtown as laid out in the Downtown Implementation Plan will increase traffic downtown, including traffic crossing the railroad tracks. Traffic analyses show that the increase will degrade LOS for specific traffic movements at the already congested IL83/Northwest Highway/Prospect Avenue intersection. The intersection of Prospect Avenue and Emerson Street may also degrade with the realization of development -generated traffic along Prospect Avenue. Other intersection operations are expected to continue to generally operate at the same LOS as they do currently. Analysis of signalizing this intersection was considered, however installation of a traffic signal at Prospect Avenue and Emerson is not recommended for the following reasons. The signal would operate similarly to the IL83/Northwest Highway/Prospect Avenue intersection requiring a complex sequence, long cycle lengths, and clear -out phases over the railroad tracks in conjunction with the existing signal at Northwest Highway and Emerson St. Synchro analysis shows while a signal may improve operation at Prospect Avenue and Emerson Street, it would decrease LOS at Northwest Highway and Emerson St from C or better (in the proposed PM unsignalized scenario) to D or E for 4 of the 8 movements and would not improve the overall intersection level of service of the combined intersection despite the construction cost which could exceed $200,000. Vehicular capacity improvements are possible by removing some of the sidewalk at Prospect Avenue and Emerson Street, but the improvements would have an adverse effect on pedestrian operations at the intersection and would require the demolition of the streetscape project completed approximately 15 years ago. The Illinois Commerce Commission is the final authority for the authorization of any at - grade crossing in the state, there is no federal government involvement. The UPRR will also have significant input with the ICC for any at grade or grade separated crossing on their lines. In our conversations with UPRR staff they stated that their general policy requires that three existing at -grade crossing be eliminated for one new crossing to be considered. Therefore, Sam Schwartz concludes the likelihood for an at -grade crossing in Downtown Mount Prospect is minimal. • Construction of a grade -separated crossing at School Street, and all other potential locations, will substantially impact residents' and businesses' access along Northwest Highway, Prospect Avenue, and School Street. In addition, UPRR policy for adding a grade separated crossing is to attempt to eliminate one at -grade crossing. Extending the existing platform 579' to the east to a total length of 1550' and the corresponding track circuit re -design and construction would allow the railroad gates at IL 83 to remain in the upright position while the train is parked. However, the train depot would have to be relocated to the parking lot near the intersection of Northwest Highway and Maple Street to meet the UPRR and Metra's request that any new station be located near the center of the platform. Des Plaines is the only nearby municipality with a station platform of that length. Sam Schwartz estimates that Option 1 would cost approximately $2.2 million. Mount Prospect Downtown Transportation Study September 2017 6-1 Platform relocation either eastward or westward would also require moving the train station depot to a point near the center of the relocated platform. To provide the same 85' property width between the railroad tracks and the curb line of Northwest Highway that exists at the current depot location, significant land acquisition and the realignment of Northwest Highway would be required. Sam Schwartz estimates that either Option 2 or 3 would require a minimum land acquisition of 1.0 acre and a cost of $12-13 million. «� Pedestrian posts and pushbuttons would be a low-cost improvement that would improve the operational efficiency of the IL83/ Northwest Highway/ Prospect Ave. and Northwest Highway at Emerson St. intersections by eliminating unused green time caused by false pedestrian calls. Sam Schwartz estimates total design and construction costs for this improvement to be $64,000. Mount Prospect Downtown Transportation Study September 2017 6-2 MEW TRAFFIC DA"r'A Mount Prospect Downtown Transportation Study Sam Schwartz Engineering D.P.C. Sam Schwartz Engineering (IL) 1000 W. Irving Park Rd., Suite 130 Itasca, IL, Illinois, United States 60143 630.213.1000 Ingenuity . Accessibility . Integrity Turning Movement Data Count Name: US 14 and IL 83 Site Code: Start Date: 05/02/2017 Page No: 1 IL 83 US 14 IL 83 US 14 Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Start Time Wght Alp Right qDP Right Right qPP" Inl. Left Thru Right art Peds Total Left Th Right on Pecs Total Left Thru Right on Peds TAPP otal Left Thru Right on Peds Total Total Red R,ed Red Red Red 7:00 AM 3 72 0 _...... 0 1 75 5 51 12 ...._............._._ 0 2 ...... .....,. 68 ..................... ... 15 128 9 0 6 152 1 69 10 0 1 80 375 7:15 AM 4 126 0 __... 0 2 130 8 72 ................ 17 _._ 0 ......... r ...... 97 - 18 106 13 0 `r1' 137 6 133 15 _. 0 1 154 518 7:30 AM 5 .......... 109 0 0 0 114 5 71 5 0 3 81 9 .....�......................................... 132 16 0 5 ..... 157 ..._................. 2 105 la 0 0 125 477 .......... 7:45 AM 1 134 2 0 1 137 14 92 10 0 2 116 14 89 19 0 ". 122 1 159 25 0 %� 185 5- Hour Tolad 13 441 2 0 4 456 32 286 44 0 11 362 56 455 57 0 21 568 10 466 68 0 6 544 1930 8:00 AM 7 ..� .......... 123 .............. _,._ ........ 3 0 5 133 5 83 6 0 8 94 12 112 12 0 !) 136 2 .......____.._......_.. 93 16 ._ 1 .... ------- _; ....- 112 475 ............., 8:15 AM 5 106 0 0 2 111 12 77 16 0 4 105 17 100 9 0 0 126 3 116 17 0 3 136 478 8:30 AM 4 102 0 0 0 106 6 73 9 0 0 88 ''. 7 99 8 0 1 114 2 112 17 0 f' 131 ''. 439 8:45 AM 3 113 0 0 0 116 11 80 5 0 0 96 7 72 10 0 0 89 0 101 13 0 0 114 415 Ho�udy, ToW 19 444 3 0 7 466 '.. 34 313 36 0 12 383 43 383 39 0 1 465 7 422 63 1 9 493 1807 9:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ? - BREAK "' .. .. ,. �.. .. ......0 6422.' Total. 0. 0.......0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 2 0 0.... 0 0 0.... 0 0..... 0 p. �...... 0 2 4:00 PM 3 .................W 159 0 0 1 162 23 140 23 0 ...._............................ 1 186 ................................................... 13 127 11 ................ D 9............... 0 ...............______' 151 0 127 18 0 0 145 644 ..._............ 4:15 PM 7 ...............�..�..... 146 2 0 1 155 '.. 17 104 16 0 .. 4 ._.._. 137 _.._...._.._..._._._.___._... 1B 144 12 _. 0 _._. ............ 174 _. _. ... 3 102 19 0 _�_..___._.. ., 124 590 .._.._.... 4:30 PM 5 123 0 p......,"', 128 19 151 21 0 1 191 15 121 9 0 2 145 ''.. 2 118 19 0 2 139 603 4:45 PM 13 13B 2 0 0 153 9 135 12 0 0 156 9 101 9 0 119 5 114 21 0 140 568 hdoivady Total ......................................... 28 566 .. 4 0 2 598 i 1 68 530 72 0 6 670 55 493 41 0 5 589 10 __.. 461 77 0 6 548 ,. 2405 5:00 PM 6 127 1 0 0 134'. 14 119 14 0 0 - 147 19 137 12 0 0 168 2 99 21 0 0 122 571 5:15 PM 5 87 1 0 .. ....._.... 2 - 93 ._.....� ''. 12 147 .............,.. 20 _.......... p 179 5 61 5 0 3 71 1 111 16 0 128 471 5:30 PM B 141 2 0 0 151'. 11 148 20 1 2 180 18 170 6 0 3 194 3 115 12 0 14 130 655 5:45 PM 8 151 0 0 0 159 11 110 21 0 1 150 18 134 9 0 161 2 86 10 0 98 5" I12 Tilled 27 506 4 0 2 537 48 532 75 1 5 656 „60 502 32_ 0 6 594 8 411 59 0 25 478 ,2265 6:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grand Total 87 1957 _0 13 q 2057 L183 1661 228 1 34 2073 214 1833 169 0 33 2216 35 1760 267 1 48 2063 8409 Approach % 42 95.1 06 00 B B 801 11,0 0.0 - 9�7 82.7 76 0,0 - . 17 85,3 12,9 0.0 - Total % 1.0 23.3 0.2 0..0 24..5 2.2 19,8 2.7 0.0 24.7 2.5 218 2..0 0.0 26..4 0..4 20..9 3..2 0..0 24..5 .. Ldgh'ts 77 1884 13 0 1974 Ell1608 217 1 2004 207 1762 166 0 2135 33 1696 265 1 - 1995 8108 ..... %Li %� is B85 96,3 100,0 - 96,0 j 97..3 96,8 95.2 ._.._.._._......... 100�0 96,.7 957 96.1 98.2 96,3 943 96.4 99.,3 100..0 967 9fi 4 ....Buses 7 13 0 0 20 0 9 6 ..... 0 . .......1/6 .. 15 1 16 2 0 19 0 10 0 0 10 64 Buses 8.0 ..._..... D7 .._ 0.0 1�0 '', 0,0 0�5 2,6 0.0 0,7 _ 0;5 ........._....__.... 0,9 1,2 ._..__.,_.._._.._..__.__......._.__ - 0,9 00 ._.�..._.... 0,6 00 ....... 0,0 .... ___ .. 05 ..... _. 0..0 .................. .... Trucks 3 ._.._.._.._.._.._. 60 0 0 63 5 44 5 0 - 54 ... _.. 6 55 ..........._...�,.�,.�,..�.....,...�..�..._._..., 1 0 62 2 _2-- 54 ....... .. 2 0 ........ - ..--- 58 237 ...-- % Trucks 3A 3..1 0,0 - 31 2,7 2,6 2.2 0.0 2,6 2,8 3.0 0.6 - 2.B 5,7 3..1 0-7 0,0 2 B 2,0 Bicycles on 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '.. 0 Road._�.�............ .....:............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................._...,._.................... % Bicycles 010 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 on Road _ Pedestnan9. ......... ....__�..... _ ..... ........ ., �.. ......... ................................... .._ . .. .._....... ...................._ �.........._ % pode�s1nons �:, Sam Schwartz Engineering D.P.C. Sam Schwartz Engineering (IL) 1000 W. Irving Park Rd., Suite 130 Itasca, IL, Illinois, United States 60143 630.213.1000 Ingenuity . Accessibility . Integrity Count Name: US 14 and IL 83 Site Code: Start Date: 05/0212017 Page No: 2 �.,�d, In Total 20131974 3987 22 20 42 62 63 125 0 0 0 2097 2057 4164 0 13 �60 0 3 0 0 d 0 0 0 0 0 5 _13 9957 67 15 R R L. P A I m o ev o m „d ............ ........_...... . a m m m m 11 m a m O m OS/0220177:00 AM 0 J m ro ® v 0 0 0 0M'07J2'017 6:15 PM a`! m v d B. Bosses- o a N 0 Trucks Bicydea Road � — -u a... a3 o a' m on Pedestrians L T R P Turning Movement Data Plot Sam Schwartz Engineering D.P.C. Sam Schwartz Engineering (IL) 1000 W. Irving Park Rd.„ Suite 130 Count Name: US 14 and IL 83 Itasca, IL, Illinois, United States 60143 Site Code: 630.213.1000 Start Date: 05102/2017 Ingenuity . Accessibility . Integrity Page No: 3 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (7:15 AM) IL 83 US 14 IL 83 US 14 Soulhbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Right Rrghl on Peds Ap�p�, Left Thru Right Right on Peds App Left Thru Right Rd hd M Peds A�vp'. Left Thru Right R ht on Peds A - al Int. Red Tolall iced Total Red Total. Rod 'Np Total 7:15 AM 4 126 0 0 2 130 8 72 17 0 4 97 18 106 13 0 9 137 6 133 15 0 1 154 518' 7:30 AM 5 109 0 0 0 114 1, 5 71 5 0 3 81 9 132 16 0 5 157 2 105 18 0 0 125 477 7:45 AM 1 134 2 ....�..�.... 0 1 137 14 92 10 0 2 116 14 ..... 89 19 0 1 122 1 159 25 0 4 185 560 8:00 AM 7 123 ....�....� 3 0 5 133 ............._.. 5 83 6 0 ..... 8 94 12 .•...... 112 12 0 .... 0 136 ..... 93 16 1 6 112 _.....�_ 475 ToW 17 492 5 ... ...�._._..... 0 8 514 32 318 38 0 17 388 53 .�.. 439 __ 60 _.. 0 15 552 ,2 11 490 74 1 11 576 ........ 2p30 4ffrOacRu % 3.3 95.7 _. 1.0 _....._..... 0,0 - 8 2 82..0 9.8 0.0 .. 9.6 79 5 .•........__ 10.9 0,0 • 1.9 85.1 12.B 02 . Total %ro 0.8 24..2 0.2 0.0 25.3 1S 15,7 19 0..0 ...... 19.1 2,6 21.6 3.0 0.0 272 _...... 0.5 24,1 3,6 0,0 284 ..... .._ PHF 0,607 0 918 ....... 0 41,7 0,000 0..938 0,571 0,864 0.559 0=0 - 0,836 0.736 0,831 0 789 0,000 0 879 ........_..... 0..458 0.,770 0740, 0 250 0..778 0..906 ILph1.a 15 473 5 0 493 30 292 32 0 - 354 48 414 58 0 520 9 465 74 1 549 1916. %Lr&L 882 96.1 100,0 95,9 93.B .. 91.8 ......d.... 842 - - �,..._..__..� 912 90.6 94.3 96.7 94.2 81,8 94.9 100,0 100,0 95..3 9414 Buses 2 2 0 0 4 0 2 2 0 4 0 s 1 0 _ ....... 6 0 0 __._.._...._.._ 0 0 0 14 - Buses 11.8 ...-. 04 0..0 O.8 0..0 OA _ 53 1,0 00 m...�:. 11 1..7 - 1.1 00 0.0 0.0 0,0 pp O.7 Trucks 0 17 0 0 17 •33 2 24 4 03030 • 5 20 1 0 26 25 0 0 ......._. 27 100 %Irucm O.O 3. 5.. 0,0...�....- 63 7,5 10.5 W� 77 9..4 4S ...... 1.7 - - 4..7 _2_ 18,2 5,1 ___......0 0,0 0,0 4.,7 4...g 8dcyyold�s on rioad' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0..... 0 ..�... - 0 ......... O 0 0 _ 0 ...._._. 0 on Road onRoad 00 00 0,0 - - 0.0 00 O,0 00 - 0,0 0.0 00 0,0 - 00 '.. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0_0 1 0,0 �edestnans _._.. _ .__... H M .... ..... ____._._. .. ..__ sedaislmlara% Sam Schwartz Engineering D.P.C. Sam Schwartz Engineering (IL) 1000 W. Irving Park Rd., Suite 130 Itasca, IL, Illinois, United States 60143 630,213.1000 Ingenuity . Accessibility . Integrity Count Name: US 14 and IL 83 Site Code: Start Date: 05/02/2017 Page No: 4 7L.4Y1m6... Out In Total 4:y5 —M- 1 4 It I 20 17 43 0 0 0 0 0.... 0 _ _..A9i ',�514 1'4ME2 4„IyI W Peak Hour Data m r0177:15 ry n AM Endmg Ending At OSN212017 0 15 AM m u • wMr" ... u a o n� o � 9 N o n Lights o o w ^• T— huc a ®u"Pc9ns on Raad PC ttm- 2M ............. �Y' ..._ ................. R I L P 40 414 56 0 0 5 A 0 5 20 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 53 439 60 15 576 520 1090 90 26 45 .......... ....._....2........ 0. 0 0 0 599 552 1`61 C7rJd In 'TVW Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (7:15 AM) Sam Schwartz Engineering D.P.C. Sam Schwartz Engineering (IL) 1000 W. Irving Park Rd., Suite 130 Count Name: US 14 and IL 83 Itasca, IL, Illinois, United States 60143 Site Code: 630.213.1000 Start Date: 05/02/2017 Ingenuity . Accessibility . Integrity Page No: 5 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (4:00 PM) I L 83 US 14 I L 83 US 14 Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Right Right on Peds App Left Thru Right Right on A Peds PP' Left Thru Right Right on Peds APP- Left Thru Right App. Int. �..,........ Red Total ..�.�.,,......,_....._ Red Total g Red Total Right 9 on Red Peds Total Total 4-00 PM 3 159 0 0 1 162 23 140 23 0 1 186 13 127 ....., 11 _.......... 0 0 151 ... _.-...��.._...._ 0 127 18 0 0 145 .... 644 4:15 PM 7 146 2 0 1 155 17 104 16 0 4 137 18 144 12 0 3 174 3 102 19 0 5 124 590 4:30 PM 5 123 0 _�.. ......�....�,.�...... 0 0 _ 128 19 151 ..._ 21 ..�,.......... 0 1 191 15 _..._.. 121 9 0 2 145 2 11B 19 0 2 139 603 4:45 PPFA ... 13 - 138 ..m......,.....�.. 2 ...._..............�..m...... 0 0 153 9 135 12 0 0 156 9 101 9 0 ... 0 119 5 ._....-.�.. 114 21 0 ......... 1 - 140 .r-0..,.. 568 'Total 28 .........,... 566 4 -....... 0 2 598 .... 6B 530 _._......._ 72 0 6 670 1 55 •493 —_.�..-- 41 .. ..._. 0 5 589 10 .. 461 77 .. 0 8 548 '.. 2405 Appaoach ✓a 4.7 94 6 0,7 00 101 791 107 00 9 3 837 7 0 0,0 ............... - 1.8 .... 84.1 141 0,0 Toia.1 % 1 2 ..- 23 5 0.2 ..�..�...... 00 -,,.—.......... 24.9 .. 2 8 22,0 3.0 DA - ••• 27.9 2.3 20.5 _,_.......-........_ 1,7 0.0 24,5 OA 19..2 &2 0.0 22..8 PHF 0,53E .,- 0.890 a 500 0,000 0,923 ------ 0.739 0,877 .....-..., 0,783 0,000 .. �.... 0,877 0..764 0.856 ..._ 0.854 0.000 0,846 �O 0.500 .... 0-907 D 917 _�... 0,000 0-945 D.934 Lk his 23 540 4 0 567 •60 524 71 0 - 663 55 488 41 0 - 584 ��....,,..-.., 10 450 76 0 - ....._ 536 W...� 2350 l.0 7its B2, I 95,4 100..0 94<8 100 0 989 9B6 - 990 100,0 990 101 99 2 100,0 97..6 98,7 97..8 97,7 Buses 2 5 0000 7 Z�� 01 o010 8 0 0 8199%Buses 71 09 0.0 - 12 00 02 0..0 •- 02 0.0 1,7 00 - 1..5 0.8 Trucks 3 21 0 0 - 24 0 4 0 D 4 0 4 0 0 4 0 3 1 0 4 36 Trucks 107 37 0,0 - - 4.0 0,0 0..8 0 0 •• 0.6 0..0 O 8 0..0 - 0,7 0-0 D 7 1,3 - 0,.7 1.5 Bicycles on Road �.. 0 0 0 0 ._..... - 0 0 0 _. 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 Bicycles o on Road 0,0 0 0 ..... 0,0 _. 0,.0 ...... O 0 0 0 _..... .......... 0 0 - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ..... 0,0 -----.�...� 0,0 0,0 ............. 0,0 - 0,0 00 �ad'asgrians ,. ,,... .._ .............. ........._......_.._ ,.. ............ •.. _._... ..,.... ..,....._ ......... ......._ r__. _,mm.... adestdan 8 .,. Sam Schwartz Engineering D.P.C. Sam Schwartz Engineering (IL) 1000 W. Irving Park tad., Suite 130 Itasca, IL, Illinois, UnitedStates 60143 630.213.1000 Ingenuity . Accessibility . Integrity Peak Hour Data 09@212"7 4 M PM Ending Al OSN2f2017 5 00 PM Vghls ®uses TPUCk4 ws��sRoaa Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (4:00 PM) Count Name: US 14 and IL 83 Site Code: Start Date: 05/02/2017 Page No: 6 Sam Schwartz Engineering D.P.C. Sam Schwartz Engineering (IL) 1000 W. Irving Park Rd., Suite 130 Count Name: IL 83 and Prospect Avenue Itasca, IL, Illinois, United States 60143 Site Code: 630.213.1000 Start Date: 05/02/2017 Ingenuity . Accessibility , Integrity Page No: 1 Turning Movement Data IL 83 Prospect Avenue IL 83 Prospect Avenue Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Right RenPeds Left Thru Right Red R" Wt Ri V'ul 9 RightTd7 9 Ran Peds App Left Thru Right qw Peds App' Left Thru Right Peds F� Tint ea1. TotlaR Red Total 9 Red "7d1a1 'otal 7:00 AM 12 65 3 0 32 80 3 5 5 0 3 13 0 121 0 0 2 121 6 18 0 0 10 24 238 .�--. ................._ ...-...._...-.....-...�.._. .__ ._ 7:15 AM 11 124 8 0 38 143 6 6 6 0 3 18 0 122 0 0 0 122 7 12 0 1 18 20 303 ............ ..._. ....�...._.. ....__ .. ....._...........�. 2.._.... 3 7:30 AM 12 107 4 _0 18 123_' 2 4 4 0 2 10 0 139 0 0 1 139 15 20 0 0 14 35 307 7:45 AM 16 122Yuu S _ 0 21 143 4 7 2 0..........�.. .._ 00 ,13 2 109 ,,,,0 0 1 111 11 10 2..... IT ., .......�,_...w 1 9 24 2'91 .......... !1111rl Tetlal' S1 418 20 0 109 489 15 22 17 0 8 54 2 491 0 0 4 493 39 60 2 2 51 103 1139 8:00 AM 16 122 5 0 40 143 3 2 3 0 1 8 1 127 2 0 0 130 13 18 0 1 31 32 3'C3 . --_ ......---.. ... _........ ... .. _.._- ...�..._......... 8:15 AM 12 112 5 0 16 129 7 11 8 2 0 28 2 96 0 1 1 99 6 13 1 0 25 20 276 ...... ..........._. _ ..... ._ ...._... ........ 8:30 AM 8 101 6 0 1 115 1 8 1 0 1 10 2 103 0 0 0 105 11 16 3 1 0 31 261 8:45 AM 2 116 10 0 0 128 4 10 3 0 0 17 0 75 20 0 77 7 4.... 1 0 0 12 234 ..... .�.... _. ... ..._.._... ._.._.. td�uTotal 38 451 26 0 57 515 15 31 15 2 2 63 5 401 4 1 1 411 37 51 5 2 56 95 1084 .. M 1—... 9:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .,._.........�............._ _ ._.......,,.......... ._ ......_.�....._.._..._ '°' BREAK "" ,. ., .. .. .. �.... mm. .... �...............m ...�.:,,,,... oualy Total 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -_.�....—.,..._........., _._ ..... .�.�,..... ......_ .....�........_... 4:00 PM 11 179 B 0 0 198 3 8 6 0 0 17 0 148 2 0 2 150 19 12 1 0 1 32 397 .�......- ._ . _ . ....... ..... _ ...... ........ 4:15 PM 6 143 18 0 3 167 1 7 6 0 3 14 1 136 1 0 2 138 11 7 1 1....... 6 20 339 ......._.., ..�............... ._.... -�.._ ..._.. _...........��.. ._ ......._ 4:30 PM 9 132 5 0 22 146 5 7 1 0 0 13 1 130 2 0 2 133 12 6 1 2 19 21 313 4 45 PM 7 147 8 0 0 162 2 5 4 0 0 11 1 106 1 0 0 108 14 13 0 0 2 27 308 Hourly Total 33 601 39 0 25 673 11 27 17 0 3 55 3 520 6 0 6 529 56 3B 3 3 28 100 1357 �. .. ....�..,....... ......... 5:00 PM 12 129 13 0 0 154 3 15 7 0 0 25 1 142 1 0 0 144 15 11 1 0 1 27 350 -- ._. ._................... ..........._.,....._.._ ........ ......... 5:15 PM 1111 85 10 0 41 106 6 18 2 1 2 27 3 60 2 0 3 65 9 14 3 1 73 27 225 5:30 PM 8 155 11 0 1 174 5 15 1B 1 1 39 1 166 0 1 0 168 10 13 0 0 0 23 404 ........ - _.... __....�.�............. .......-.......................w. 5:45 PM 9 143 15 0 1 168 b 18 5 0 2 ,,,,,,, 28 3 163 1 1 1 168 10 12 1 0 8 23 307 kinuu'tl TataC 40 512 50 0 43 602 19 66 32 2 5 119 8 531 4 2 4 545 44 50 5 1 82 100 1366 6:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 -- _ . ......... Grand'ToaW 162 1982 135 0 234 2279 . ....—......... ... _.... ... 0 3 8 2..... APPro'uc'h % 7.1 870 5 9 0..0 20.6 50.2 27 8 1.4 1,0 9t3 2 0,7 0 2 44. 50, .0 Total Sry 3,3 40 0 2 7 0,.0 - 46,0 1.2 3,0 1.6 0.1 5,9 0.4 39 3 0.3 0..1 40.0 3,6 4,0 0,3 0..2 130 �...�.-�..�.........._ _. .___..._ ......... " .... ..�......_,.......... L3gt11s 160 1912 135 0 2207 59 142 79 4 204 19 1871 14 3 1907 176 197 13 8 394 4792 °4r LI!9hds 98 8 96 5 100.0 96 8 98 3 97,3 975 100.0 97.6 100,0 96,2 100,0 100..0 96,.3 100,0 99,0 86.7 100.0 99.,0 981 Buses 0 12 0 0 12 0 1 0 0 1 0 16 0 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 29 .. --.. ....... � ...... ° 0 0 0..7 0.0 0,0 0,3 0,0 0..8 0.0 0,0 08 0.0 0..0 0,0 0,0 0.0 O's Buses 0 0 _. 0 6 0 0 .....__ 0..5_. _. ..._._....,,.,.,.. �. .M.m...... .,�.._. 'C'nanPus 2 57 0 0 59 1 2 2 0 5 0 58 0 0 58 �� 0 0 2 D 2 124 ° ..... ..... 0_.._..�......� ..._.... ......... /°Trucks 12 _29 0.0 2.6 17 1,4 25 0,0 1.7 0.0 30 0.0 OA 2.9 0,0 0..0 133 OA 0,5 2.5 Bicycles on 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 .0.. Road 2 0 0 2 4 _.. .........._... a ._.._..... w..... ...�......__......._ ........-........ .w _ ...... ........ % Bicycles 0,0 0.1 0,0 0 0 0,0 0.7 0,0 0..0 0.3 0,0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0 0 0.0 1'0 0,0 0 0 0,5 0,1 on Road ..._. 1... .. ....... _ ... ..... ........_.._._..... ......,..�.. ........ �edestnans n .. ......, �.,................ --,........... 'O destnans CO Sam Schwartz Engineering D.P.C. Sam Schwartz Engineering (IL) 1000 W. Irving Park Rd., Suite 130 Itasca, IL, Illinois, United States 60143 630,213.1000 Ingenuity , Accessibility . Integrity PANIC L. 1 P 0 0 58..0 0...--R—. 0 0 0 a -T, 19 1945 17 is 60 58 lie 1 0 1 -7— 0 _0 ... 20851001 40AO OIn T.W1 IL B3 VON Turning Movement Data Plot Count Name: IL 83 and Prospect Avenue Site Code: Start Date: 05/02/2017 Page No: 2 Sam Schwartz Engineering D.P.C. Sam Schwartz Engineering (IL) 1000 W. Irving Park End.,, Suite 130 Count. Name: IL 83 and Prospect Avenue Itasca, IL, Illinois, united States 60143 630.213.1000 Site Code: Start Date: 05/02/2017 Ingenuity . Accessibility . Integrity Page No: 3 Turning Movement Leak Hour Data (7:15 AM) IL 83 Prospect Avenue IL 83 Prospect Avenue Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Right g Right oo Peds APp- Total Left Thru Right Flight on, Peds p Left Thru Right 9 Right on Peds A,p Left Thru Right Right APP Int. .�.... Re,d Red 70fal' Real Tplau 0�n 9 Red Peds Total Total 7:15 AM 11 124 6 0 38 143 6 6 6 0 3 18 0 122 0 0 0 122 7 12 0 1 11 20 303 7:30 AM 12 107 4 0 18 123 2 4 4 0 2 10 0 139 0 0 1 139 15 20 0 0 14 35 307 7:45 AM 16 122 5 0 21 143 4 7 2 0 0 13 2 109 0 0 1 111 11 10 2 1 9 24 291 8.0RCAM 16 122 5 0 40 143 3 2 3 0 1 8 '�. 1 127 2 0 0 130 13 18 0 1 31 32 313 Total 55 475 22 0 11 5552 15 19 15 0 6 49 '.. 3 497 2 0 2 502 '.. 46 60 2 3 72 111 1214 A roecku !^ 10.0 86 1 4..0 00 306 38,8 30.6 0,.0 - 0.6 990 0.4 OA 41 4 54.1 1.8 2..7 Tow %% 4,5 39.1 1,.8 �0.�688. 0.0 _ 45.5 12 1,6 1,2 0.0 4.0 0.2 40.9 0.2 0,0 41,4 3..8 4 9 0.2 0,2 91 - PHF 0 859 0,958 0..000 „ 11 0.965 0.625 0,679 0 625 0 000 - 0.681 0.375 0,894 0 250 0.000 0,903 0,.767 0,750 0,250 0750 0.793 0 .,970 V„l 55 457 22 0 534 ', 15 " "19. 15 0 49 3 463 2 0 468 46 �59 3..._... 1 109 160 �rghts Ypls 100.0.. 96 2 100 0 96 7 100 0 100 0 100 0 „• �100.0 1c0,0 93..2 1.00.0 - 93 2 100,0 981 ., 50,0 100.,0 95.6 Buses 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 •98.2 p 8 00 A 06 00 Q6 pp 0.0 00_.12 0.0......" 120.,0 0,0 ..00 0YY0 .,0. 0 0.7_ T6e4;5s 0 0 0 00 00 0 ......._. 0 0 28 0 0 45 Trucks 0 0 3 4 0.0 - 2 9 0 0 0..0 0 0 - 0.0 0.0 5 6 0.0 " 5:6 0.0 0,0 50..0 0,0 ._." 0.9 ..........�. 3,7 Bicycles on Road 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 %Bieycles Road 00 00 00 - 00 00 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 00 00 00 - 00 0.0 17 00 0,0 0.9 al �edesErians.. Sam Schwartz Engineering D.P.C. Sam Schwartz Engineering (IL) 1000 W. Irving Park Rd.., Suite 130 Itasca, IL, Illinois, United States 60143 630.213.1000 Ingenuity . Accessibility . Integrity Count Name: IL 83 and Prospect Avenue Site Code: Start Date: 05/02/2017 Page No: 4 ss� E._.. TOW 524 s 534 1058 0 2 20 _16 44 0 0 OIT....., 0 0 0 5^�8 552 k^tl'N0 22 457 55 0 0 ? 8 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 117 22 476 L5 'M R T L P +1 l 4 _... ...... Peak Hour Data > 0000o N�®oo m . O o o m H. 4- � a cJ o b c c _ oSOzrzon7:lsann Ending At Ti O&0_017 8:15 AM 5 _ z U gM� r s T"wee Trued - r a. edestri on Road aea�maoa +1 t r► 4r� 28 4 0 9 0 4%$ 502 O-WT i�b m�amt Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (7:15 AM) Sam Schwartz Engineering n.r.lc. Sam Schwartz Engineering (IL) 1000 W. Irving Park Rd. Suite 130 Count Name: IL 83 and Prospect Avenue Itasca, IL, Illinois, United States 60143 Site Code: 630.213.1000 Start Date: 05/02/2017 Ingenuity Accessibility . Integrity Page No: 5 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (5:00 PM) IL 83 Prospect Avenue IL83 Prospect Avenue Soulhbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Right Right an Peds A 'AP&,, Lek Thru Right Right q,,� Peds A� Left Thru Right Right on Peds ApR' Lek Thru Right Right on App- Int. . Rq�d Red �, Red TcrEal Red Peds lctial Total 5:00 PM 12 129 13 .,_ 0 0 154 .�... 3 15 7 0 .....�..-Jam..... 0 25 1 ...�,,.�......... 142 1 0 0 144 15 11 1 0 1 27 350, 5:15 PM 11 _ 85 10 0 41 106 6 18 2 1 2 27 3 60 2 0 3 65 9 .....- 14 3 1 _. 73 27 ._.,...._. 225 5. 9,.,. 0 ^^^^^ 23 5. 45 PM 143 16 mm w0 1 168 „ 5 18 5 2 2B 3 163 11 1 1 168 10 12 10 0 a 23 38 rclal 40 512 50 0 43 602 19 66 32 2 5 119 B 531 4 2 4 545 44 50 5 1 62 100 m, 1366 A eroach % 6.6 _.....�. 85 0 8,.3 0 0 16 0 55 5 26 9 1,7 ...... 1 5 97 4 0:7 0..4 - 440 50,0 5..0 1,0 - TotaI % 2,9 37 5 3.7 00 .. 441 1 4 4,8 23 0,.1 8,7 0.6 ........,-� 38.9 0,3 0.1 ............. - 39.9 3,2 37 ........ 0..4 0,1 7.3 - PHF 0,833 0,826 .. 0 7B1 0 000 O,B65 OJ92 0 917 0 444 0.500 ,, 0,763 0,667 0.800 ,_,_,_....:.... 0 500 0 500 0.811 0,.733 0,893 0,417 0,250 0..926 0-845 UP! is 39 504 50 0 ..... 593 19 65 32 2 116 8 520 4 2 534 44 50 5 ..m ...... 1 100 1345 L_. /Buses.. 905 9Z4 1000.0 9�5..._10000 9805 1000.0 ...._-....� 1000.0 1000 .......�__� 990,2 1000.0 939 10000 10000 .... 8....... 983.0 .1000.. 10000 10000_.1000.0 10000 1000 9r0.5� 0 _..._. ..m.....�......�...�_..... % Buses 00 - 0.4 0,0 .. _.. - ....... 0.3 0 0 QA 0 0 _-........._... 0.0 0.,0 0 0 0.6 �_...m... 0.0 0..0 0.6 0..0 ........ 0..0 0 0 0,0 ........ - 0.0 0.4 Trucks 1 5..,--....0 0,-�........6 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 B 0 .. ---- 0 0 0 _._........_.�... 0 14 ...05... 11...._IT0 1' _ 00 OA 01 ,. 105 105 pOp B Road on 0 o0 O0._ 00 0 00 ........ 00 00....._. 00 0 Zq'... % Bicycles on Road 00 0.2 0.0 �.......... 0,2 00 1,5 0�0 0.0 O.B 00 0,0 0.0 OA 00 0.0 0.0 00 0.0 - 0.0 0.1 Pdalq�sMdarus �.. _ __. .. ,� .� ,1Fi . _.. PgtlqsVdans ., .. ww ..m.............. .. ....... .. ...... Sam Schwartz Engineering n.P.c. Sam Schwartz Engineering (IL) 1000 W. Irving Park Rd., Suite 130 Itasca, IL, Illinois, United'States 60143 630.213.1000 Ingenuity . Accessibility . Integrity n==n Peak Hour Data ""22"7 6:®® PM E Adi AH 6W02l2U97 ®00 PM LiBhm Buses TNCV6 Bi�r��da;,y on R68d PbdQAi.140116 �Y WIR Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (5:00 PM) Count Name: IL 83 and Prospect Avenue Site Code: Start Date: 05/02/2017 Page No: 6 Sam Schwartz Engineering D.P.C. Sam Schwartz Engineering (IL) 1000 W, Irving Perk Rd, Sut 130 Count Name: US 14 and Itasca, IL, Illinois, United States 60143 Emerson Street Site Code: 630.213.1000 Start Date: 05/03/2017 Ingenuity . Accessibility . Integrity Page No: 1 Turning Movement Data Emerson Street US 14 Emerson Street US 14 Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Start Time Right A&rP, Right ,APP,,. Right AynP. Right APP. Int Left Thru Right 17n Pads ToWl Left Thru Right o6k Pads .rolai. Left Thru Right on Pads 'retal. Left Thru Right on Peds Total Total Red Red Red Red 7:00 AM 7 41 5 2 6 55 4 55 12 0 8 71 11 40 4 9 6 64 2 76 2 6 12 867B _ ..�.�.,-...... ,,,,,,......-.....W......._... .._�..,,.. ._.._._.., 7:15 AM 7 37 0 2 2 46 13 99 7 0 4 119 14 30 10 4 4 58 11 122 3 2 8 138 361 7:30 AM 7AS AM 1 20 _ 0 1 0 32 7 _ 93 5 0 8 105 7 26 7 4 5 44 _.....4 116 4 1 12 125 306 %loan(.Tolal 31 124 7 6 12 168 33 350 35 1 23 419 34 118 34 20 37 206 25 435 13 9 43 482 1275 .. .... .. 8:00 AM 6 47 4 2 11 59 10 77 5 0 19 92 7 26 10 3 0 46 9 128 10 0 15 147 344 8:15 AM 11 37 7 0 5 55 11 02 10 1 10 104 4 18 10 4 2 36 3 101 8 0 12 912 307 ,._.. ._ ,....5 ... ...-...._.W.. ....._......... .�01 ...._.. 8:30 AM 5 25 6 1 0 37 10 86 16 0 1 112 6 25 8 1 5 40 9 102 7 0 8 118 307 B.45 AM 1 26 9 0 0 36 12 70 11 0 3 93 9 28 7 6 1 50 3 96 3 0 2 102 281 RLAYTolal 23 135 26 3 16 187 43 315 42 1 33 401 26 97 35 14 8 172 24 427 28 0 37 479 1'239 0 0 0 0 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n o 0 0 0 0 ao64ToRNYI 0 0 0 0 ....... 0 o p a..: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ,,_................ ..mm.. 4:00 PM 9 46 7 3 1 65 32 153 11 1 4 197 7 27 11 4 2 49 5 104 9 1 7 119 430i 4:15 PM 4 27 3 3 2 37 29 145 9 3 8 186 8 28 7 2 1 45 12 84 11 0 13 107 375 4:30 PM 6 57 8. 3 7 74 22 153 8 3 4 186 9 29 5 1 1 44 6 103 2 0 12 111 415 ..... _ _.._.-.....�.29 5 1 . ........ ._...... 4:45 PM 5 33 9 3 7 50 9 145 6 3 12 163 7 35 12 0 3 54 6 125 4 0 11 135 402 46o1�r4 Tartatl 24 163 27 12 17 226 92 596 34 10 28 732 31 119 35 7 7 192 29 416 26 1 43 472 1622 5:00 PM 4 51 3 1 5 59 26 167 9 0 2 202 9 . 6 .............. .....W.. ...._._._...... 5:15 PM 2 20 3 1 1 26 27 173 10 0 7 210 5 31 6 1 6 43 3 130 4 0 13 137 416 5.30 PM 9 _ 47 4 3 .... 6..__ 63 31 141 11 2___ 18 1,85 9. 52 B 42 73 12 81 6"�n 3�24 102 42':;p _.23 545 PM 5 42 6 3 r 56 22 128 7 0 9 157 15 42 7 1 3 65 9 93 10 0 12 112 390 ........ _....... , „..�, ........ ....... 34our Total 20 160 16 8 19 204 105 609 37 2 36 754 38 156 29 7 11 230 28 442 24 3 56 497 1685 6:00 PM 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 ... .......,,6 ,-........ ....._. .�,.,.... _-....�...._....,.. .....,_ C.;earue Total 98 582 76 29 64 785 274 1B70 148 14 120 2306 129 490 133 48 63 800 106 1720 91 13 179 1930 5821 _....._. ..,......... _ _....... ....._ ...._. ...-�........... _........-...- ...,,.�....... A ! ah % 12 5 74 1 9.7 3 7 11,9 81.1 6 4uuuu 0.6 16..1 61.3 16,6 6,0 5,5 89.1 47 03 Total % 1.7 100 1,3 0.5 13 5 4.7 32,1 2 5 0.2 39,6 2.2 BA 2 3 0 8 - 13 7 1.8 29..5 1 6 0.2 33.2 ..,,,,.. _. _.,_. _, ...._.. ... _..._. ......_..._ l.4 Lx 98 576 76 29 779 269 1816 144 14 ,,,,,,2243 128 482 132 4B 790 105 1654 90 13 1862 56i74 Buses 100,0 990 10..0 10^... O99..2 98 ^2 971 9,.3 10p0,on �97.,3 992_.. 98p4 ^^^9992 10000 988 99,1 96.2 989 1000 96,5 97.5 14 1 0 16 3T ses 0,0 02 0,0 0,0 01 04 09 0.7 0.0 0.8 OB 00 0.0 0,0 0.1 0.9 0,8 1,1 00 08 0,6 Trucks 0 3 0 0uuuu 3 4 37 3 0 44 0 4 1 0 5 0 52 0 0 52 1'.04 % Trucks 13ipyc o' on Op 2 .. 0 0 .......... 4 p5 0 .... 200 0 .. _ 109 QO 48 08 0 ...... 4 00 30 .. _.. 00.. o�...e,....._ _ 07. 1s .... ........ ..... onn Raad. % Road 010 0,3 0.0 0,0 0,3 0.0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0.0 0,0 0.8 0,0 00 - 0.5 0..0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0,1 Pedestrians ..._........w �...._.�._ .._.. , _ ..... ...... __ .. . m Pedeslnans 0i ,i ,. 1 • r r:; .`i �, i ., Sam Schwartz Engineering D.P.C. Sam Schwartz Engineering (IL) 1000 W. Irving Park, Rd.., Suite 130 Itasca, IL, Illinois, United States 60143 630.213.1000 Ingenuity , Accessibility . Integrity 4 '713' 77.00 AM Ending At 05/032.17695 PM Lights '�"" Buses Trucks Bic/des on Raad '...Ped�Mane, 0 Turning Movement Data Plot Count Name: US 14 and Emerson Street Site Code: Start Date: 05/03/2017 Page No: 2 Sam Schwartz Engineering D.P.C. Sam Schwartz Engineering (IL) 1000 W. Irving Perk Rd., Suite 130 Count Name: US 14 and Emerson Street Itasca, IL, Illinois, United States 60143 Site Code: 630.2111000 Ingenuity . Accessibility . Integrity Start Date: 05/0312017 Page No: 3 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (7:15 AM) Emerson Street US 14 Emerson Street US 14 Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Start Time Lek Thru Right Right Peds A .p.oa'� Lek Thru Right Rght Peds Total Left Thru Right Right on Peds Left Thru Right Right ion Peds Int ..... ._ _ .....� Rand .,... _.....- rdod d Rod Total Red Total Total 7:15 AM 7 37 0 2 2 46 13 99 7 0 4 119 14 30 10 4 4 58 11 122 3 2 6 ...... 138 361 7:30 AM 6 26 2 1 4 35 9 103 11 1 3 124 2 22 13 3 22 40 8 121 4 0 12 133 332 7:45 AM 11 20 .. 0 1 0 32 r 7 93 _. 5 0 ..�.�.._. 8 105 .. 7 26 7 4 5 44'. 4 116 4 1 11 125 306 _"8-00AM 6 47.._ 4 2 11 59 10 77 5 ,0 19 92 7 26 10 ... 3 0 46 ''. 9 128 10 _....�........ 0 15 147 344 Total .........._.... 30 130 6 �..., 6 17 ._. 172 39 372 28 1 .. 34 440 30 104 .....- 40 14 31 1B8 32 4B7 21 3 46 543 1343 Approacll % ...,...._.. 17..4 75 6 3 5 3,5 .,a - 8 9 84.5 6,4 ........_... 02 16,0 55 3 - 213 7.4 ...... - 5.9 ........._...�...�- 89.7 3 9 0,6 ......m..543 - - Total % ..._ 2.2 9,7 ., 0,4 0.4 12.8 29 27.7 .. .__.�...... 21 0..1 32.8 _ 22 .. 77 ....�.... 30 10 ......... 14,0 2,.4 ..........-..�.�...........,...,. 36,3 1,6 0,2 40.4 PHF ..�.... 0 682 0.691 0.375 ..�...... 0,,750 0,729 0..750 0.903 0.636 0250 .,....... �.. 0,587 _. 0.536 0 867 0,769 0.875 0 610 0727 0,951 ,. 0,525 0 375 - _ 0,923 _...�.�., 0..930 LA.h.Es 30 130 6 ._....� 6 .. 172 38 353 28 1 ..._ .... 420 29 101 40 14 _......�....s.�._,m,._ 184 32 ....... 466 21 3 .". 522 "....8 'l298' % k tghm 100.0 .�.. 100.0 100.0 ...........�.,.. 100,0 .... 10p 0 974 94.9 - 100 0 100.0 .�._..... 9S 5 96..7 97.1 ...... 100.0 100,0 .....,..-�....._.__. - 97,.9 100.0 95.7 100 0 100,0 96.1 96,6' Busea 0 ..-._.., 0 0 0 - 0 _. 1 3 0 .._ _.. 0 - �.....,.. 4 1 0 0 0 1 0 3 ._..... 0 0 3 .. 8 % Buses 0 0 00 0.0 0 0 0,0 2.6 0.8 0,0 0.0 0.9 33 0.0 0..0 0 0 0 5 _.. __. 0„0 06 0 0 ....... 0.0 0,6 0:6 -- 'trucks 0 ...- 0 0 0 ..... 0 0 ... 16 0 0 16 0 .. _-...� 1 0 0 1 0 18 0 0 18 35 Trucks 0.0 ..... 0.0 0..0 0 0 _.. 0,0 0 0 4 3 0 0 0,0 wW... 3"6 0,0 ...._ 1 0 0.0 ...... ........ 0.0 0.5 0.0 3 7 0.0 ..m.............._._..... 0..0 :...._ 3.3 2,6 BicyGes on Road 0 ........ 0 _......_ 0 0 .. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 ... 0 2 0 _ 0 0 0 0 2 �w alA."�p'ad on Road 0..0 0,0 0.0 .,_ . 0 0 . ..... 0,0 0.0 0.0 ...... 0,0 .......�....,_ 0.0 . 0,0 0 0 1,9 ... 0,0 0 0 - 1.1 ........ 010 0:0 0.0 ...,_._.. 0.0 0.0 0.1 �edeslrrans ......, ..._..... % sedosEri�®-ns '. _ Sam Schwartz Engineering D.P.C. Sam Schwartz Engineering (IL) 1000 W. Irving Park Rd., Suite 130 Itasca, IL, Illinois, United States 60143 630.213.1000 Ingenuity . Accessibility . Integrity N -� 4 S t Peak Hour Data � H OS/Q32Q77 7:15 AM Ending At ', OS/03P1.Q97 8:15 AM B Trucla: Bicycles on Road PedasPrians FOOMMIT1911 M. Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (7:15 AM) Count Name: US 14 and Emerson Street Site Code: Start Date: 05/03/2017 Page No: 4 Sam Schwartz Engineering D.P.C. Sam Schwartz Engineering (IL) 1000 W. Irving Park Rd., Suite 130 Itasca, IL, Illinois, United States 60143 630.213.1000 Ingenuity . Accessibility . Integrity Turnina Movement Peak Hour Data (4:45 PM) Count Name: US 14 and Emerson Street Site Code: Start Date: 05/03/2017 Page No: 5 Emerson Street US 14 Emerson Street US 14 Soulhbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Right Right on Peds APP'' Left Thru Right Right on Peds APP' Left Thru Right Right on Peds APP' Left Thru Right Right an Peds APP• Int. Red i"atlaR ........................................................................... Red - Total Ra,d .............................. Total ................................................................ Red '"Gotla3 Total 4:45 PM 5 33 9 3 7 50 9 145 6 3 12 163 7 35 12 0 3 54 6 125 4 0 11 135 402 5:00 PM 4 51 3 1 5 59 26 167 9 ............................................ 0 2 202 9 _ 31 ___..._.._.._.._......_._........_.- .._ 8 1 ri 49 4 13B 4 0 7 146 456 5:15 PM 2 20 3 1 1 26 27 173 ...m.........._.._.._.._.._.._......_..._.. 10 0 7 210 _ 5 31 6 1 6 43 1 _�,,. 3 130 4 0 13 137 416 5:30 PM 9. 47 4 3 6 63 31 141 11 2 18 185 9 52 B 4 2 73 12 81 6 3 24 102 423 Total ._.__mm.......... 20 151 19 B N 198 _ 93 626 36 5 39 760 30 149 34 6 11 219 25 474 18 3 55 520 1i6�97 A saach 9s i 10.1 76,3 9.6 4,0 122 82.4 4.7 07 13.7 68,0 155 2.7 4 8 91 2 3.5 0 6 TclW% _ '', 1,.2 _8.9_ 1.1 05 117 5.5 36.9 2.1 0,3 44,.8 1.8 8.8 2.0 0.4 12,9 1„5 27,9 11 02 _ 30.6 PHF '10,556 0,740 0,528 0,667 0.786 0,750 0,905 0818 0,417 0,905 0.833 0.716 0,708 0,375 0750 0,.521 0..859 0.750 0,250 0,890 0 930 hls. 120 150 19 8 197 93 ...._......._. 622 36 .....w.... 5 756 30 144 33 6 213 24 461 ._ 1B 3 ......------ 506 1672 �Fn Lights 1000 99.3 100,0 100.0 99,5 . ___ . ......................... ......www-_._.___._.,....- 0 1 0 0 1 p 0 0 0 O 1 5 0 0 6 7 9hBases 0..0 0..0 0..0 0..0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0A 01 00 00 0 .0 m 0..0 0.0 0, 0 4 0 1 1 0 0 0.0 1.2 0,4 Trucks 0 1 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 ........................_... 3 .............................:_.............,.:..........�...�...._ '.. 0 3 1 0 4 0 8 0 0 - 8 16 % Trucks 0,0 03 0,0 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.5 0.0 0..0 0 4 0..0 2.0 2..9 0.0 1B 0.0 1..7 0.0 0..0 1:.5 0.9 Wcydas on 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 Road ............... _.. ................ .. ...... . ................................ -------- Bicycles 00 0.0 010 0.,0 - 0,0 00 00 0,0 0,0 0:.0 0.0 1..3 0.0 0,0 0 9 0 0 0,0 00 0.0 0,0 0,1 on Road Pedestrians Pedestrians ... r .........M ....... ....... .... .......� Sam Schwartz Engineering D.P.C. Sam Schwartz Engineering (IL) 1000 W. Irving Park Rd., Suite 130 Itasca, IL, Illinois, United States 60143 630.213.1000 Ingenuity . Accessibility . Integrity Peak Hour Data "W"20 17445PM 'Ending At I 5MM017 5 45 PM kifidhSN I 644 Trunks Bicycles on Road '_.foon. 2� 30 144 39 I P a ..... j ..... 1--.0 —4-2- 0 1 : 0 0 0 =0 302R 49 40 1 n !- Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (4:45 PM) Count Name: US 14 and Emerson Street Site Code: Start Date: 05/03/2017 Page No: 6 Sam Schwartz Engineering D.P.C. Sam Schwartz Engineering (IL) 1000 W. Irving Perk dl.„ Suite 130 Count Name: Prospect Avenue and Emerson Street Itasca, IL, Illinois, United States 60143 630.213.1000 Site Code: Start Date: 05/03/2017 Ingenuity . Accessibility , Integrity Page No: 1 Turning Movement Data Emerson Street Prospect Avenue Emerson Street Prospect Avenue Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Right Peds APP& Left Thru Right Peds APP Left Thru Right Peds +P'P" Left Thru Right Peds App' Int. ... ._ _ Td-tat TdgaN Cptlel Tcakal Total ......�.................-.Y. W..��,.......... .......-.�..�........... .. 7:00 AM 28 16 4 33 48 0 7 30 8 37 2 35 3 1 40 '.. 3 17 6 <. 26 151 ... ... ..,. �.... ................,.... ...... _..... _. 7:15 AM 30 19 3 46 52 6 9 15 9 30 5 32 1 0 38 4 24 6 8 34 154 _ .�.�.....,.... �.....m.. ... .....� _._. .,,.. ........ 7:30 AM 23 12 5 6 40 0 9 8 4 97 2 28 3 3 33 9 19 4 32 122 Ti45 AM 14 12 3 40 29 0 6 9 9 15 2 30 0 2 32 7 16 6 2 29 105 ,,,,Ndmau9To1oV w95 59 15 125 169 6 31 62 30 99 11 125 7 6 143 23 76 22 14 1.21 53?2 8:00 AM 40 15 66�20 610 6 10 88 16 1 27 4 0 32 8 29 7 1 44 153 „..... ...... _._.......... 8:15 AM 22 24 6 33 5E 3 14 13 10 30 1 21 5 27 111 7 6 19 12'8 8:30 AM 15 21 5 0 41 1 11 6 4 18 2 34 2 0 38 5 6 3 2 14 111 ....m.. .._ _...�.... ....._......... ........ . ...._.__. 8:45 AM 16 19 6 0 41 2 11 10 2 23 1 30 1 1 32 2 15 3 1 20 116 ,.........�_ - ....... ..m......... a...,..........._.w... ... ....... fi^loaartly Total 93 79 23 53 195 6 42 39 24 87 5 112 12 1 129 16 61 20 10 97 508 m_ ..,......_ ... .....�....� ..... ......... ........ 9:00AM 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ..» RRFA1t ... ..... .............. ..._..... Mhdurl., Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 PM 18 54 15 4 87 3 10 10 3 23 1 35 1 3 37 5 12 6 1 28 974b 4:15 PM 13 44 8 1 65 1 7 16 2 24 2 28 2 1 32 6 10 .._. 5 8 21 142 ..�.._.......... .....-.-.....m.... .... ...... _._.._.. .. ........ 4:30 PM 17 47 11 2 75 1 11 13 10 25 1 2 22 1 0 26 4 13 10 2 27 152 4.45 PM 13 31 5 8 49 3 4 20 13 27 3 31 2 2 36 2 10 6 0 18 130 _. .�...... .®.... _....,.......�...�,_........ ...w........- kNowa 'PdTall 61 176 39 15 276 8 32 59 28 99 8 116 6 6 130 17 45 27 12 89 $94 . .... .��.. .........�. 5:00 PM 19 46 12 2 77 2 9 14 3 25 0 33 1 0 34 3 12 7 4 22 158 .......__... .. _. .�.._. ........ ........... ......,�.............. 5:15 PM 7 29 9 39 45 5 22 12 59 39 3 20 3 6 26 5 13 10 19 20 138 5:30 PM 17 50 16 2 83 2 18 37 3 57 2 36 3 0 41 2 13 5 4 20 201 a45 PM 17 41 14 0 72 2 21 30 4 53 2 28 2 2 32 5 18 6 5 29 186 ... ,_ - - .. ..�.... .... INcavty Total 60 166 51 43 277 11 70 93 69 174 7 117 9 8 133 15 56_........ 26 32 99 683_....__.._m.. ..... ....W 600PMt 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 .......... ......... _ ....._.. Grand Total 309 480 928 236 917 31 175 254 151 460 31 471 34 21 536 71 238 97 68 406 2.319 Appaoach `% 33,7 52.3 14 0 - 6,7 38 0 55,2 - 5.8 87,9 6.3 - 17.5 58.6 23 9-.-- ,. ......_._. _..�.,.,.,....� ....... �... .m... _.. _. Total% 13.3 20.,7 5539,5 13 7..5 11,0 - 198 1.3 20.3 1.5 23,1 3,1 10.3 42 17,5 Likdafs 305 469 127 901 27 168 253 448 31 464 32 527 69 228 96 393 2269 ILrogktks 98..7 97 7 99..2 98 3 87 1 96.0 99,6 97 4 100 0 98S 94,1 98,3 97,2 95,8 99.0 96.8 9T8' .._. .._�............�..W.,.... _ .._ ..... Buses 1 2 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 Q 5 % Buses 03 0,4 0 0 0 3 0 0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0 2 2.9 0,4 0,0 0,0 0..0 0..0 0,2 ...._. _..... .............. Trucks 3 ..... ...._ .. _ ...... P4. dtwckfi 1.0 08 OB 0.9 OA 2.9 0,4 1.3 0.0 08 0.0 ,,,,, ww07... 0,0 2,9 10 2,0 11 _. _........ 2 ..._._ ._ ......�.....�.-- . Bicycles on 0 5 0 5 4 2 0 6 0 2 1 3 2 3 0 5 19 Road %Bicycles on 0.0 1,0 00 05 129 1.1 0.0 Road 1.3 0,0 04 2.9 06 2,B 130.0 12 0.8 Pedestrians _._.... ... %Pedestrians Sam Schwartz Engineering D.P.C. Sam Schwartz Engineering (IL) 1000 W. Irving Park Rd.., Suite 130 Itasca, IL, Illinois, United States 60143 630, 213.1000 Ingenuity . Accessibility . Integrity Count Name: Prospect Avenue and Emerson Street Site Code: Start Date: 05/0312017 Page No: 2 - E mrw, 541Ode(Rq.I Ou[I In Tote) d 901 'IC1 1 3 4 5 B 13 4 � 9 7Y6 917 1713 127 A89.... 30S 0..... 2 1 0 9 4 3 0 lV S 0 0 0 0 0 236 126 450 309 236 .... .................... ......m......." .......�__ .... ..... _.... may,, _. o n a a 'a o W S o n n a r- W 4} ti 53 o n! m o 8. w m..o. ry � 05(03f10177:00 F.PA L9 4F ,a OS/032097 8 1 S PM1A w c o N � - a o o a� m a '' 9icydes un Raad '.IPerAochians � a.. ur a o I o o �. �". "J'Pu7 S27 ...6;d'g1i L T R P Turning Movement Data Plot Emerson Street Southbound Start Time Left Thru Right Peds 7:15 AM 30 . .... ..... 19 . 3 ........ 46 — 7:30 AM 23 12 5 6 7:45 AM 14 12 3 40 8:00 AM . . 40 . is ............... 6 . 20 .... —. _111'al 107 _52 11 .112 �Garh o _513 8 3_. T6191 % 20,0 10.9 3.2 PHF 0.669 0�763 0 708 Lights 107 56 17 % Lights . .... . 100.0 96s 1000 ........ — Buses 0 1 0_ % Buses O'o 1.7 00 .... . ....... 0 Trucks 0,0 20 oo BicVas on o 0 ad 0 1 0 % B=1 on 0,0 1.7 0.0 Pedestrians Sam Schwartz Engineering D.P.C. Sam Schwartz Engineering (IL) Count Name: Prospect Avenue 1000 W. Irving Park Rd,, Sufte 130 and Emerson Street Itasca, IL, Illinois, United States 60143 Site Code: 630.213.1000 Start Date: 05103/2017 Ingenuity . Accessibility . Integrity Page No: 3 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (7:15 AM) Prospect Avenue Emerson Street Prospect Avenue Westbound Northbound Eastbound A PP' Total Left Thru Right Peds Left Thru Right Ped. TP% Left Thru Right Peds Int. . .......... TZ . ..... . . . .. Total 52 6 9 15 9 30 5 32 . 1 ......... 0 38 4 24 . ...... . ..... 6 8 34 154 40 0 9 8 i 17 2 28 3 . ...... 3 33 9 19 4 2 32 122 9 15 2 30 — 0 2 32 ................... 7 16 6 ....... 29 105 61 0 6 10 16 27 4 7 32 1 4j 153 182 6 30 42 30 78 10 . .......... 117 a . 5 ............ 135 . 28 88 23 13 139 534 —1,7_2�5 5 3_8 7 5.9 . 20.1 .... 63.3 16,5 341 1 1 5S T9 4,6 -9 I . 21�9 1,5 25,3 52 165 4,3 260 . . . ......... 0 746 0.250 0.833 0 700 0.650 0,500 0 914 . ............... 0500 0888 0-778 — 0759 0821 . 0 790 . .......... 0.867 180 6 29.... 41 76 10 117 7 134 28 82 ........ 23 133 623 989 1000 9 7 976 9 4 1000 1000 075 -, 993 1�0 0 932 1 �0� 957 97 9' . ...... ..... - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0,5 00 00 .....0.0 0,0 0'0 O'D 00 00 00 0,0 00 O'o 02 00 ....... 0 0 4 0 4 6 . ..... 2�0. 33 24 .......... . �6�.. _.O,O 00 00 00 . .............. 2-0 ...... . ..... 45 0 _0_3.9— - 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 . 2 0 2 4 0,5 00 00 — 0,0 ------------ 00 ...... . ..... . � 00 . 00 .......... 125 . 0,7 . . 0o ......... 2,3 . 0'0 ..................... — 14 — 07 Sam Schwartz Engineering D.P.C. Sam Schwartz Engineering (IL) 1000 W. Irving Park Rd., Suite 130 Itasca, IL, Illinois, United States 60143 630.213.1000 Ingenuity . Accessibility . Integrity Count Name: Prospect Avenue and Emerson Street Site Code: Start Date: 05/03/2017 Page No: 4 E,m ,.21sfctd 1S'B' _ ..... OIn 9'aw Wk' 165 160 366 0 0 .........� . �.......'.......... ......... '........... 0 0 0 ti09' 182 369 '.. 97 56 107 0 ....................—.2...... .........a,.....� _..... � ....... 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 112 17 58.. 107 112 R T L P N 1.............4 ...... � Peak Hour Data ffomlo�as -_ ��''�bo wy s ._ I So n®��! oQ o ®�oe 4 N .n w . WOU20177:15 AM f vdun�pp At . o ti m m Of"d3P,7'097815AM r m 5 0 LiOhts Buses o .... a Trucks B1 Vd" on Road a o Ped"Nians +1 t r► k 7 R P 90 997 P 0 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (7:15 AM) Sam Schwartz Engineering D.P.C. Sam Schwartz Engineering (IL) 1000 W. Irving Park Rd., Suite 130 Count Name: Prospect Avenue and Emerson Street Itasca, IL, Illinois, United States 60143 Site Code: 630,213.1000 Start Date: 05/03/2017 Ingenuity . Accessibility . Integrity Page No: 5 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (5:00 PM) Emerson Street Prospect Avenue Emerson Street Prospect Avenue Soulhbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Right Peds Ap'p. Left Thru Right Peds AT,14 Left Thru Right Peds A P Left Thru Right Peds A1Pp, Int. T'dtal ¢'daa� To1sl 'T06 Total 5:00 PM 19 46 ....._...._ 12 2 ._ 77 , 2 �..m...,.�...._„_ 9 14 3 25 0 33 1 G 34 3.... 12 7 4 22 158 5:15 PM 7 29 ..,�. 9 39 45 _ .. 5 22 ..._. _. 12 ��.... 59 39 3 20 3 ...... 6 _ 26 5 13 t0 19 28 ......._ 138 5:30 PM 17 50 ...... 16 2 83 2 18 ..�......... 37 3 __...._.. 57 2 36 .. 3 ..�....1 0 ... 41 _.... 2 ....�......._....... 13 5 a 20 0% 5 4S PM; 17 41 14 0 72 2 21 30 4 53 2 2B 2 2 32 5 18 w 6 29 186 Total 60 166 51 43 277 11 70 93 69 174 7 117 9 8 133 15 56 28 32 99 6B3 Approach fn ._... 21,7 59.9 _ 184 6.3 _...,.......�,.....m..-�......... 40,2 53A 5.3 WO 6,8 15,2 56,6 28.3 m .. Total % 88 .-.w. 24..3 7..5 ......... ....._..... 40.6 1.6 10.2 13.6 ..—�..... 255 1 0 171 1.3 19,5 ..... 2.2 .�.....�....,_. 8.2 4.1 14,5 PH 0.789 0,830 ......... - 0.797 ....... 0,834 0 550 0,795 0 628 .... 0.763 0.583 ........ 0.813 _....... 0750 0,811 0..750 0 778 0.700 ......... 0,853 0,856 4nh1s ,......_ fi0 166 51 ... _ 277 8 69 93 .. 170 7 113 9 ....... 129 13 ..m....__....,�.�..�....._._.. 56 28 97 673 L'hCs. 1002 100 0 1000 - 100,0 72.7 98 fi 100 0 97.7 100.0 96.6 100.0 ........... 97.0 �.._.. 86..7 100..0 100,0 ..._._ ...... 98,0 08.�5 Buses 0 0 .. ._......�.. 0 0 _ _ 0 0 _.. _ 0 ..,�....�.......�.. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Buses 0.0 0,0 0,0 .. 0.,0 0.,0 0.0 0,0 ..,.... 0,0 ....... 00 .,_... 00 0.0 ........ 0 0 0.0 ._... 0,0 0,0 0..0 ....._.�..... 0,0 _ Trucks ou..�W0 _ 0 _ .... 0 0 0 0 _..... 0 0 3 p ..m.........,._......, 3 0 0._._, 0 . ........ ___ _ 00....... 900 QO ....... . 000 ,,,,,,..... 2B ._ 000 000 ,0 ��,,,, B Roadkon �. 0 00 .m......_,_., 30 O �Q 23 .. Z0 .,,,._. Z0 %Bicydesan Road 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 ..._ 273 1..4 00 2..3 0,0 09 0,0 - 0,8 13.3 0.0 0.0 20 1,0 Pedesln 'ans µ r� Pedasiszans ,. ,,,,...I GO 0 �. .. (i Sam Schwartz Engineering D.P.C. Sam Schwartz Engineering (IL) 1000 W. Irving Park Rd., Suite 130 Itasca, IL, Illinois, United States 60143 630.213.1000 Ingenuity . Accessibility . Integrity Count Name: Prospect Avenue and Emerson Street Site Code: Start Date: 05/03/2017 Page No: 6 ......0'angrs.Aml90np�th 'SBA 49ut �2774Z 0 q 3 225 27F 5q2. 41 J S m'm Peak Hour Data is O a '.. ~ 2017 "' PM 4- ' 2 AP17 _ p `` FEndl; m uo o m Roaddpla +1 t ............ ®_. I R P ,.....9.... 7 113 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 ,�.. . _. .... .... ®...... O.m... 0 6 7 117 9 9 2i0d' 124 '7,31 .......3 0 3..... 3i 1 ...,�... 0 0.. 205 133.......338 OW1. try TOO q,:lYM1e14�M1A'M1r(ryryt Bu^F1' 51 i66 60 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 9 0 0 0 43 51 t96 50 43 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (5:00 PM) Sam Schwartz Engineering D.P.C. Sam Schwartz Engineering (IL) 1000 W. Irving Park Rd„ Se ute 130 Count Name: US 14 and Maple Itasca, IL, Illinois, United States 60143 Street Site Code: 630.213.1000 Start Date: 05/04/2017 Ingenuity . Accessibility . Integrity Page No: 1 Turning Movement Data Maple Street US 14 Melra Parking Lot US 14 Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Right Peds A,%` Left Thru Right Pads APp' "1"'g1GIsG Left Thru Right Peds Aipp. Left Thru Right Peds App, Int .._.... ....... To-BaB 9 ... .. 9 To To9a�l. '.., Total .ta, 7:00 AM 7 - 9 5 fS ..m......_._. 21 6 63 _ 1 0 ........ 70 _ 0 ... 0 0 ... p 3 106 ......... 2 3 111 20?, 7:15 AM 10 3 3 2 16 3 86 7 0 �2 96 0 0 0 0 ...... 0 6 152 ........ 22 160 ..� 272 ••, .392 •......13�y4 0 0 bBdua 1" ali 39 17 15 2 366 14 ,,,..0 � 9 ..... 14 519 S.n .11 538 1004 8:00 AM 10 0 6 0 16 1 89 5 3 95 0 0 t 1 1 3 129 0 132 244 8:15 AM 12 0 3 3 15 1 94 4 0 99 0 1 1 0 2 4 140 1 2 145 261 8:30 AM 7 0 1 8 0 m0 85 5 0 90 0 �•� 0 0 0 0 3 112 0 115 213 8:45 AM 6 0 _.__.. ..............._. 10 1 16 120•••�4 0 124 ..•0 ..�... 0 0 0 0 4 122 0 ....• 0 126 266 B4ou'rBY Totte9 35 0 20 5 55 2 388 16 3 408 0 1 _... 2 1 3 ..,...... 14 503 1 3 .. 516 984 9:00 AM 0 0 _.... 0 0 0 0 0 _.... 0 0 __... 0 0 .......... 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 0 0 BREAK ^.. .. .. .. . .. _ _......... .. ......... .. ..�� ..............._... m ,. N1oudy Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m.... ......,- 0 ........... 0 0 0 .. ... 0 .00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 PM 11 1 16 1 28 0 151 5 156 0 0 D (l ..... 0 5 118 0 0 123 ._. 307 4:15 PM 3 .,-_. 0 �.�...._. 12 1 -....�...-_.m. 15 0 197 13 ..... D 210 4 6 3 0 13 1 123 0 1 124 362 4:30 PM ..8• 0 9 2 17 ... 0 182 6 :; 188 0 1 _........... 0 0 1 .._ 2 �._.._..,........ 142 0 1 144 350 @ 45 PM 3 0 4 .... (J .A 3 171 9 0 183 0 2 ......0 0 2 3 _._ 135 0 ....... 'i 130 330 H4axA7d4dB 25 1 41 4 67 3 ••••••• 70133_•• 0.737 W 4 9 3 D 16 11 518 0 2 529 1349 5:00 PM •• 137 5:115 PM 5 2 5 7 12 6 190 6 10 202 0 ••• 2 _2 _.. 0 33 3 3 121 ® 4 125 342.. 5:30 PM 6 0 4 .....�..... 7 10 ....... 1 17B 9 ., ._..._...... ; 188 '.. 2 7 4 - ••, ww :`s 13 4 112 0 0 •••• 116 tlu 327 5'46 PM ••,m 4 'I 8 2 13 1 191 9 0 201 2 .... 1 1 D __ 4 2 83 ......... 0 _. 1 ._.... 85 .._._ 303 Houdy Total ••••• 21 3 30 16 54 8 753 29 1 790 4 11 6 6 21 11 451 1 5 463 1328 6 00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .....�_ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ` 0 0 Grand Total -,�.�.. - 120 _.... 21 106 ... 38 247 25 2208 94 6 2327 ..,_... 9 22 _........ 12 7 43 .......�. 50 1991 7 21 2048 4665 A aaa B % 48.6 @5 ... 429 _„ 1.1 94 9 4.0 ..... 20,9 51.2 ._.. 27 9 .....5-1..�..........21 2 4 97,2 0,3 _Total % 2..6 0.5 2..3 ..... 5�3 0 5 47 3 2.0 49,9 0.,2 0,5 ....... 0,3 0,9 1 1 42 7 0 2 _....... 43.9 LI;'tints 119 20 • • • 103 242._ 25 2166 94 2285 9 •••• 22 12 43 48 1934uw 71989 4559 L.uhls 99.2 95.2 97 2 98,0 100.0 981 1000 98 2 100.0 100 0 100..0 ••••••• 100,0 96, 0 9Z 1 100.0 97.1 97, 7 Buses 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 12 25 Buses . ....... 0,0 0.0 ...... 00 00 ... 0,0 -.-.-OS 0.6 00 0.6 0..0 00 0,0 : 0.0 0,0 0,6 0,0 0..6 0,5 Trucks .... ... 1 .-- 0 3 -...... ..... .. - 4 �... 0 _ . 29 0 .. 29 0 ...�-...,-� 0 0 .. .......�. 0 2 45 ....0 0 47 .., 80 %Truaks 0.8 ...,... 0,0 - 2.8 1.6 00 ... _,. 1.3 00 ....._ ...... 1,2 „_ 00 .......... ....................... 0.0 0.0 0,0 ..... 4,0 2..3 0,0 2.3 1..7 Bicycles on 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 �........_.., 0 0 0 _ 0 0 ......... 0 ......... 0 1 Bicycles on Road 0..0 4 8 ....._ 0.0 _.. ... 0 4 0,0 0,0 00 0,0 0,0 0 0 010 0 0 0,0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0,0 PedeMnans ......... ... % Pedestrians Sam Schwartz Engineering D.P.C. Sam Schwartz Engineering (IL) 1000 W. Irving Park Rd., Suite 130 Itasca, IL, Illinois, United States 60143 630.213.1000 Ingenuity. Accessibility, Integrity Count Name: US 14 and Maple Street Site Code: Start Date: 05/04/2017 Page No: 2 r o. WfmmID '9!3'�_ In T.W 242 dOW041 0 ., 244 _. 903... 20 119 '', 0 0 0 w 0 3 0 0 0 1 .......� 0. 0 0 0 $9 10_8... 21 120 39 R T L P 1 N4...._ m e IEEE _ ... NISI N ti N N � � 05ro4r201aa00nnn oe �° o i ;, ena�m ne 00 m4a01a 0:15 PM .... .._ M—ry r N a o a '"+iP V9hts r a p ®uses w a rn,o� Pnlaxelr�ans +1 r► L. T R P 9 22 2 0 ..... ........................ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 ......12...... 5A' 0 95 0 0 ....6_...... r 0 1 0 0 0 (7u1 '. 9rt TW49 fifU9Yq.Perkan I.hf M1&B Turning Movement Data Plot Sam Schwartz Engineering D.P.C. Sam Schwartz Engineering (IL) Count Name: US 14 and Maple 1000 W. Irving Park Rd., Suite 130 Street Itasca, IL, Illinois, United States 60143 Site Code: 630.213.1000 Start Date: 05/04/2017 Ingenuity, Accessibility . Integrity Page No: 3 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (7:15 AM) Maple Street US 14 Metra Parking Lot US 14 Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Right Peds AF&` Left Thru Right Pads Al4G, Left Thru Right Peds App` Left Thru Right Peds AP, int. Tplad ldradq,l Total "Pedal Tola 7:15 AM 10 3 3 i 16 3 86 7 0 96 0...... 0...... 0 0 0 6... 152 2 2 160 272 7:30 AM 14 3 3 3 20 3 114 3 1 120 1 1 1 C; 3 2 109 1 3 112 255 7:45 AM 8 2 4 '3 14 0 103 3 1 106 0 0 0 0 0 3 152 0 155 275 8:00 AM �..�.�.. 10 _... 0 m.... 6 0 16 _. 1 89 5 3 _. _. 95 0 ._..�.. 0 1 'i 1 3 129 0 0 132 4 244 ToM1al �...- 42 B .. 16 B 66 _.... 7 392 1B 5 ........... 417 1 1 2 1 4 ........ 14 542 . 3 .,. 3 ....... 559 ,�. 1044'C Approach % 636 • ..........._. 121 24,2 _.. 1 7 94,0 4,3 ..: _....... 25.0 _.. 25 0 500 - ......... 2 5 97 0 0.5 - __._..... Total %. 4.0 0.0 1 5 6.3 0 7 375 17 - 39.9 0..1 _._ 0.1 ...... 0 2 OA 1 3 _ .... 51,8 0,3 53.4 = PHF 0 750 ..... 0 .,667 _ 0.667 ...... - 0.825 0,583 0 860 ..._............._......_ 0,643 O.B69 0,.250 0,250 0,500 0,333 0,583 O.B91 0,375 0,873 0.95, 41 7 14 62 7 372 18 397 1 1 2 4...... 13 .,_....._...... 528 3 544 1007 % Lights ..� 976 -.-.W.�. 87..5 87,5 _._...... 93.9 100 0 94 9 100 0 .......... 95.2 1100.0 100.,0 100 0 100.0 02.9 97.4 100.0 97,3 98..3 Buses 0 ,_ 0 0 ..,�............. .. 0 0 5 ........ 0 - 5 ._. 0 0 .........�.. 0 0 0 _..._...... 3 0 3 ..3 B % e4JUS: 0.0 m ... •...-�.�....m....... 0.0 0,0 - 0 0 0,.0 1.3 .......��..�..._...... 0'0 1,2 0 0.... 0,0 _._.. 0,0 0 0 0.0 0.6 ......... 0.0 0..5 0.8 Trucks 1 0 2 -- 3 0 15 0 15 0 0 ..�.......... 0 0 1 11 ......... 0 12 30 %. Tri141ks 2A 00 12-,5 - 4.5 QA 3,8 00 36 0.0 00 0.0 - 0.0 7.1 2.0 0.0 - 2,1 2.9 r,&Iu;yy4ia^etrrs on &d 0 , 1 0 .... 1 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ti %llacycias on Roed 0,.0 12.5 0.0 1.5 0.0 ........ 0�0 _..-.W.-..�._.........m 0.0 0,0 0,0 0.0 ...... 0,0 -- 00 0,0 0.0 ... _....... 00 0,0 01 Pedestrians ..,.....�.. ..... ,__ Sam Schwartz Engineering D.P.C. Sam Schwartz Engineering (IL) 1000 W. Irving Park Rd., Suite 130 Itasca, IL, Illinois, United States 60143 630.213.1000 Ingenuity . Accessibility . Integrity N -. 4 Peak Hour Data Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (7:15 AM) Count Name: US 14 and Maple Street Site Code: Start Date: 05/0412017 Page No: 4 Maple Street Souhbound Start Time ....„ Left Thru Right Peds 4:15 PM 3 0 12 1 4:30 PM 8 0 9 2 4:45 PM 3 0 4 0 5:00 PM 6 0 13 0 Total 20 0 38 3 Approoch / 34 5 0,0 655 Iolal % 1A Q0 27 PHF 0..625 0 000 0,731 L,'i hNs 20 0 ... _ 38 _. % L'ighis 100.0 - 1000 Buses 0 0 0 % Buses .... 0.0 ...... 00 Tnroks 0 0 0 % Trucks �..� ..�._. '�. 0,0 0.0 _............ Bicycles on 0 0 0 Road Bicycles on 0..0 0.0 Road Pedasanana . % Pedestrians Sam Schwartz Engineering D.P.C. Sam Schwartz Engineering (IL) Count Name: US 14 and Maple 1000 W. Irving Park tad., Suite 130 Street Itasca, IL, Illinois, United States 60143 Site Code: 630.213,1000 Start Date: 05/04/2017 Ingenuity . Accessibility . Integrity Page No: 5 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (4:15 PM) US 14 Matra Parking Lot US 14 Westbound Northbound Eastbound Left Thru Right Pads :4p'pp Left Thru Right Peds #pgv, Left Thru Right Peds Ft- Int To tdlal Total 7eCaq Total Total 15 0 197 ........�.........._.._.. 13 0 210 4 6 3 0 ..... 13 1 123 0 1 124 36�2 17 0 182 6 _. 0 _ 188 0 1 0 } 1 .......,... 2_. 142 _. 0 9 144._ . 350 7 3 171 ...._ 9 �J ....,.....„..„._..... 1� 83 0 2 0 0 2 ._ ........ 3 135 0 3 138 ....... 33p 19 0 194 ..._... 5 _. 0 199 0 1 0 -;l 1 2 _................. 135 0 0 137 _.._..,..... 356 58 3 744 33 0 780 4 10 3 0 17 8 535 0 2 543 1396 04 95.4 4,2 - 23,5 588 17.6 1 5 98,5 00 4,1 0.2 53.2 ...... 2,4 55..8 0.3 _ 0.7 0.2 1..2 0,6 38,3 0.0 38.8 0.763 ........ 0250 .� 0,944 0,635 .............. 0,929 0,250 0..417 0.250 ..�.... 0,327 _ ........-.- 0.667 0..942 0,000 .. _._ ........ 0,943 0.96a 58 ........ 3 740 33 ._.....„.... 776 4 10 3 .�..._.._.. 17 8 526 0 534 1385 1000 100,0 99.5 100.0 ..............._ 99.5 100..0 100.0 100.0 . - 100.0 100.0 98.3 ._.... ...._._ .............. 08.3 0'p,1 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 4 0.0 '.. 0,0 .,m...... 0.3 OA __.. 0,3 0.0 0,0 0.0 ........ 0,0 0,0 0..4 - p.4 0�.3' 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 7 ........: 0 ............._._ 7 9 0..0 00 .03 00 0.3 0,0 0,0 0.0 0.0 00 1,3 - 1,3 mM 46 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 ... 0�0 .. 0,0 _ 00 i 0,0 ........ .. 0,0 __.. 0,0 0.0 .. .. ........ 0,0 0.0 _ 0,0 .. _......................... 0.0 0,0 ,. Sam Schwartz Engineering n.P.c. Sam Schwartz Engineering (IL) 1000 W. Irving Park Rd., Suite 130 Itasca, IL, Illinois, United States 60143 630.213.1000 Ingenuity . Accessibility . Integrity N 1 4 Peak Hour Data 0510412"' 4.1s 11 sa�d'�n Al f:ut} 01 7 51 s PM Lights ®uses Trucks Bey a us an Raad Pra,�aa�tnans ♦l t r► L. T R P 4 1p 0..... 0 0 0 t30 0 00 0 4 10 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (4:15 PM) Count Name: US 14 and Maple Street Site Code: Start Date: 05/04/2017 Page No: 6 Sam Schwartz Engineering, D.P.C. Maple St. @ Prospect Ave. File Name MAPLE@PROSPECT Site Code 00000000 Start Date : 5/2/2017 Page No : 1 .. MAPLE ST.... PROSPECT rAVE.° CAS. TRUCKS -BUSES ....... ...._. MA ....� om m North S#ar Time, ,R�9htTThruro eft Peds n�romi Ri ht Thru �r eft eP ds ro�.i Ri ht Thrurpo�m it Pods � row,i Ri ht hRFromWeP dE.r ro�i i�c oca�] 07:107:05 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 35 5 150 190 2 0 10 1 10 .......19 5 ._. 0 mm ..21.1,.!!� 1 161 �� �..... t.m.........� _....�. 9 20 19 22 0 10 51 161 203 07:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 1 25 44 3 0 7 1 11 1 18 16 0 7 41 96 07 45, 0_.. Q„_.,_. .....__ 0 ., 0 0 13 ....._248, 63m 2 0. 3..... ....2 __,..7b 23 0.....m 10 3.8 ._ 106. Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 85 9-2 36 330 16 0 27 5 48 56 86 0 48 190 568 08:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 3 28 43 1 0 9 2 12 23 26 0 7 56 111 08:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 1 82 98 3 0 6 3 12 6 21 0 35 62 172 08:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 0 5 26 2 0 3 0 5 4 21 0 0 25 56 t? ....... _m,.? ,.. 0 0...... 15....... 1... _...... 'N 1� 0 - � Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 63 5 116 184 11 0 22 6 39 32 1t1 0 0 1,2 39. �.. 5 78 0 42 155 378 BREAK '** 04:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 3 2 25 2 0 6 4 12 6 27 0 9 42 79 04:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 1 26 44 5 0 12 1 18 0 23 0 6 29 91 04:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 0 1 20 3 0 2 1 6 5 22 0 0 27 53 0445 - Ct_, 0.._......_ 0 _� 0... 2......_..... Total �� 0 0 0 0 0 0 81 8 33" .....__ _ ,.rc,� .. ... .. ....----..m . 52" ... 4..._. s3 0 ..... 20_ 12 .... 30 3 122 14 0 29 9 52 1 1 05:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 2 1 22 1 0 13 0 14 9 18 0 0 27 63 05:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 2 32 54 6 0 22 5 33 9 28 0 15 52 139 05:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 3 91 118 6 0 32 25 63 8 18 0 25 51 232 _.._05;45 P Total ......... 0 0 .0 . 0 .... O .... ��.. 1_22 37 231 . 19.... .o� 1.4.. ..__ t .a2 ..... �"...... 1 _._. , ...� .. . _ . � .... 81 31 131 33 80 0 45 158 520 Grand Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 306 30 531 867 60 0 159 51 270 138 337 0 155 630 1767 Apprch % 0 0 0 0 0 35.3 3.5 61.2 22.2 0 58.9 18.9 21.9 53.5 0 24.6 - Total ° .....�................. Q_ ,1,7.3 .�...17 _3[ 1 �.1.__3A _...... 4 9 . 15,3 7, CARS 0 0 0 0 0 0 303 30 531 864 59 0 159 50 268 138 332 0 155 625 1757 -- TRUCKS �. 0_ ....... 0 _ 0 ..... — 99 .......1 DO 1 QO 9.9w�..._ 98.3 .... 0 100... .2 % TRU KS 0.... - 0-__.,n,n....0 0 ........0 � 0...---.,1 �....... 0 _.... 0 3 ..._1._7 0 �.... 0 � 2 . 0 7, ....100 ....�0 9 . .�� 1i�� ., ���� Q._ S 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 3 1 0 0 1 2 0 3 0 0 3 8 BUSESro 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 2 % BUSES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.6 0 0 0.3 0.1 MAPLE ST. 07:00 AM 0 0 0 0 07:15 AM 0 0 0 0 07:30 AM 0 0 0 0 07:45 AWN _.Total 0 --- ...... 0 ..... 0 0 .........,6 6 08:00 AM 1 0 0 0 0 08:15 AM 0 0 0 0 08:30 AM 0 0 0 0 08 4 AI19 Q___ ...�7 ........... a Total 0 0 0 0 '*" BREAK '** 04:00 PM 0 0 0 0 04:15PM 0 0 0 0 04:30 PM 0 0 0 0 04:45 PM 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0 0 0 05:00 PM 0 0 0 0 05:15 PM 0 0 0 0 05:30 PM 0 0 0 0 05.45 PM ��Total 0._ 0 0 0 0 0n.n...� 0 0 Grand Total 0 0 0 0 Apprch % 0 0 0 0 Total °/u 0 0 0 0 Sam Schwartz Engineering, D.P.C. Maple St. @ Prospect Ave. PROSPECT AVE. MAPLE ST. From East From South mi Right Thru Left Peds !!" Tnt� Right Thru J_-Left �_ Peds 0 0 39 1 50 90 9 0 10 1 0 0 15 5 113 133 2 0 7 1 0 0 18 1 25 44 3 0 7 1 0 0 --- 13 2 48 ._.. 63 —330m 2 0 3 2 16 0 27 5 0 0 12 3 28 43 1 0 9 2 0 0 15 1 82 98 3 0 6 3 0 0 19 0 5 24 2 0 3 0 0 0... 15 1 ..........1 17 _ 5 0- 4_ 1_ 0 0 61 5 116 182 11 0 22 6 File Name °: MAPLE@PROSPECT Site Code : 00000000 Start Date 5/2/2017 Page No : 1 ROSPECT AVE. Total, Rl i1fU I.. ,Lett „Y Peds q 1pl Inl. Tot,!. 20 19 22 0 10 51 161 10 14 25 0 21 60 203 11 18 15 0 7 40 95 7 6 23 0 10 38 108 48 : 56 85.n.n.n.n.n...0 48 189 567 12 23 25 0 7 55 110 12 6 19 0 35 60 170 5 4 20 0 0 24 53 10 2_—.._._ 0 2 39 39 35 74 0 42 151 372 0 0 19 3 2 24 " 2 0 6 3 11 6 27 0 9 42 77 0 0 17 1 26 44 5 0 12 1 18 0 23 0 6 29 91 0 0 19 0 1 20 3 0 2 1 6 5 22 0 0 27 53 0 01 25 4 ..8.........33 4 33 3 0 .... 9 3 15 3 21 0 5 29 ......... 77 0 0 80_,,,_,_, 121m 13 0 29 8 50 14 93 0 20 127 298 0 0 19 2 1 22 1 0 13 0 14 9 18 0 0 27 63 0 0 20 2 32 54 6 0 22 5 33 9 28 0 15 52 139 0 0 24 3 91 118 6 0 32 25 63 8 18 0 25 51 232 0 0 14 1 22 37 6 0 14 1 21 7 16 0 5 ---- 28 86 0 0 77 8 146 231 19 0 81 31 131 33 80 0 45 158 520 00 303 30 531 864I 59 0 159 50 268, 138 332 0 155 625Q 1757 0 35.1 3.5 61.5 22 0 59.3 18.7 22.1 53.1 0 24.8 ul 0, 0 17.2 1.7 30.2 49.2 U 3.4 0 9 2.8 15.3 7.9 18.9 0 8.8 35.6 Sam Schwartz Engineering, D.P.C. Maple St. @ Prospect Ave.. File Name : MAPLE@PROSPECT Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 5/2/2017 Page No : 1 to PrinPROSPECT -TRUCKSFrom MAPLE ST. PROSPECTE : MomeftNorth,ds East �I S uth� From West _ Stark Tlme ..... Ri ht ,,,.. Th n, .Tom a .... .P..,,, Ri ht Thru Left .,.,, � .. Peds n ase Right Thru ........ ... ... 1� t ......_ i Left Peds np .Toms Ri ht y Thr !,eftT P "", --- P,.... I � I...__..._� [eds �!W�.TQgi im ro>ai.� *** BREAK *** 07:30AM 0 0 0 0 01 0 0 0 0 01 0 0 0 0 01 0 1 0 0 1 1 "'*" BREAK Total 0 .........�..�.., 0 0 0 0 0........ �... 0 0 0 ...... 0 �. O. 0 ............. 0 0 0� .. �. _ 1_.....— 0 0 ... 1 1......_ 1 08:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 •** BREAK *** ------Total -0 6......�_..... 0 � 0 � �..� �. 2 — 0 0 � � 0. 0 ..... 2 -------- 0 0 2 4 *** BREAK *** 04:00 PM 0 0 0 0 01 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 01 2 ** BREAK *** 0445 PM { 0 0 t7 a h_ 0... 0 :............. . ,Q.-. 0 .. ....� � Q I_.. Total 0 0 0 ......... 0 0, .. 0 1 .....0 —.0 0 0 1' �I .. 1 ,� 0 0 1 - 2� 0 0 0 0 0 3 *"* BREAK *** Grand Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 3 1 0 0 1 2 0 3 0 0 3 8 A Total % 0 0 0 0 0 0 37.5 0 0 37.5 12.5 0 0 12.5 25 0 37.5 0 0 37.5 Sara Schwartz Engineering,D.P.G. Maple St. @ Prospect Ave.. File Name : MAPLE@PROSPECT Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 5/2/2017 Page No : 1 Groups ups P'aivutt. BUSES-... ST. _ PROSPECT AVE.ThruAAP T. PROSPECT AVE. From North From East om S From o r m West _ $ ta► �1 - Ri ht Thru ��_.. r Left Peds app. Tope XW _ . � Ri ht Thru Left Peds n� ro�i . .. ............W �� Ri ht Pe Le —Pe Peds appITT®pi R„i ht Thru Left .Peds Aop.7®mi _iwt.rotai *** BREAK'*' 08:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 08:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 p 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 **` BREAK **" — Total 0 ..................................................................... 0 0 —---------.. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 ........_ 2.. *** BREAK *** Grand Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 2 Apprch % 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 0 0 Total % 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 0 0 100 Sam Schwartz Engineering D.P.C. Sam Schwartz Engineering (IL) Count Name: US 14 and School 1000 W. Irving Park Rd., Suite 130 Street Itasca, IL, Illinois, United States 60143 Site Code: 630.213.1000 Start Date: 05/04/2017 Ingenuity . Accessibility, Integrity Page No: 1 Turning Movement Data School Street US 14 US 14 Southbound Westbound Eastbound Start Time Left Right RYghl on Peds App� Thru Rightpp Ri� by on Peds APP. Left Thry Peds APp Inl, Total R'ad. Total R;ed Total Total 7:00 AM 8 0 4 12 68 4.. 0 '' ::.. 72 3 113 _....._...m.. 116 200 .. 7:15 AM 5 0 3 2. 8 95 3 0 ......... .... ":; 98 2 ............ 165 ::; — „........ 167 273 _ ............ — 7:30 AM .... .... 2 ..._.._ ...__._... 0 3 5 115 2 0 117 3 125 12B 2$0 7:45AM 4 0 5 " 9 1 98 ....... 3 0 101 1 .............. 161 162 _. 272 .............. &Soutpy Total ......_ 19 0 15 ;. 34 376 12 0 10 388 9 564 1 573 9105 8 00 AM 8 0 4 12 94 5 1 i 100 10 136 146 258 8:15 AM 9 0 5 14 92 9 0 101 7 145 �i 152 •••••••. 267 8:30 AM 7 0 6 13 102 2 0 104 0 119 119 236 8:45 AM 2 0 3 5 113 .............. 6 1 ", 120 ._... 2 125 .,..�... - 127 252 ..... 1•oiur'17 Total 26 0 18 PI 44 401 22 2 Cd 425 19 525 0 544 1013 9:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (' 0 0 0 0 0 .«BREAK... ....... .. .... .. . ..... ..... ._...� ,. Houd Total 0 0 0 (0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 PM 3 1 .........._ B _.................... 12 143 2 1 _........ Gi 146 3 123 Ci .................... 126 284 ... 4:15 PM 4 1 2 '• 7 185 4 1 190 2 130 132 329 4:30 PM 0 0 6 6 177 2 0 5 179 0 154 154 339 4 45 PM 1 0 3_ 4 180 2 0 182 0 142 •142 328 ImlVy Total 8 2 19 Y 29 685 10 2 C0 697 5 549 0 554 1280 5,00 PM 5 2 2 ......._ ..._.._.._.._._..........,� 9 205 .,..�.. 5 0 _... ..._.. 210 2 138 .�- 140 359' 5:15 PM 1 5 2 ....................................................... 8 187 2 2 191 3 132 135 334 5:30 PM 4 5 0 9 178 1 0 179 B 128 p 136 324 5:45 PM 2 4 0 6 200 3 1 ..... 204 3 _95 98 308 W'orurt "total Y 12 16 4 S 32 770 11 3 !' d 784 16 493 509 fi 025.. 6:00 PM _. 0 0 0 0 2 0 ....... 0 (r 2 0 ............ ...,_ 0 0 2. ........ Grand Total 65 18 56 139 2234 .W.W_ 55 ...... .. 7 '"' 2296 -........... 49 ... .... 2131 - 2180 4015 .. .._ Approach % 46..8 12,9 40.3 97,3 A 03 2.2 97.8 .. •- tat % 1..4 OA 1 2 3.0 .. 48.4 ..... ........_._ 12 01 49.8 .......,.._,. 1.1 �.. 462 .............. 472 - ....._......._.... L{ hls 65 18 55 138 2191 53 6 2250 49 2074 2123 4511 % IUghl& 100,0 100,0 98..2 99.3 98A 96 4 857 WWWW •••• 98.0 100.0 97,3 ••••••••• 974 977 Buses 0 0 1 1 12 1 1... 14 0 12 - 12 27 Buses r 0,0 0..0 1.B 0..7 OS 1.a 14..3 ........_ 0,6 00 0 .6.__. _..........__ 06 0,6 Trucks ._...,�...... 0 _........ 0 ........ 0 0 31 1 0 32 1 0 •••• 44 44 ... ........ 76 'tlin TluOcks .. _._._. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 14 ....._ 18 ...._.._.._ 0,0 1,4 00 _W...._..._ 2.1 2,0 ••u, 1.6 iq Aas on Road .._.... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 Blic+ los on fRla¢Yd 0,0 0,0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 00 •0.,, _. 0.0 0,0 0,0 0..0 Pedesria tns +.... ,,.... .. .. .. 2. % Pedestrians w d r r m nae o Sam Schwartz Engineering D.P.C. Sam Schwartz Engineering (IL) 1000 W. Irving Park Rd., Suite 130 Itasca, IL, Illinois, United States 60143 630.213.1000 Ingenuity . Accessibility, Integrity School St W SB] 106', 136 246 2 1 3 0 '', 0 0 0 0 0 73 65 1 6 4L, 0 0 74 R 0 0 0._.. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ® 0 0 0 0 0' Out In Totdl d'a**APMrr4 NY..4 Turning Movement Data Plot Count Name: US 14 and School Street Site Code: Start Date: 05/04/2017 Page No: 2 Sam Schwartz Engineering D.P.C. Sam Schwartz Engineering (IL) Count Name: US 14 and School 1000 W. Irving Park Rd.„ Suite 130 Street Itasca, IL, Illinois, United States 60143 Site Code: 630.213.1000 Start Date: 05/04/2017 Ingenuity . Accessibility „ Integrity Page No: 3 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (7:15 AM) School Street US 14 US 14 Soulhbound Westbound Eastbound Start Time Left Right R'ighl on Peds AppTotal Thru Right R.igl 4dO" Pads Lek Thru Peds ATf, Int. Total Re e Total e ToWI Telal 7:15 AM 5 0 3 i 8 95 3 0 a 98 2 167 273 7:30AM 2 0 3 ', ._ 5 115 _..,,.w..............�.......,_,_ 2 0 C _-.......�...... 117 3 125 128 2'.'S0 7:45 AM 4 0 .__.....Y............ 5 9 ••••98 3 0 !; ................ •......_,�..... 101 1..... ............ 161 162 272 8:00 AM 8 0 4 1 12 94 5 1 0 100 .... 10 ,,,_...... 136 0 146 258 Total ...m 19 0 15 - _........ 34 402 _,_ ._..d..�........ 13 1 0 416 16 587 -0 603 1053 A roach % 55 9 00 441 96.6 3.1 0.2 ........_ 27 .� 973 .____ ••• 'row % 1 8 0.0 1 4 32 382 12 0.1 39.5 1,5 55 57 3 PHF 0 594 0,000 0,7 750 - 0 705 0.874 0.650 0 250 0.889 0.400 0.689 0,903 0,064 _.Lljtdls.... 19 0 14 - 33 383 13 1 397 16 571 587 1017 %Lights ........�....,.,. .,., 100.0 . _.-_....�..,. - ..�.......,...�.......... 933 971 95 3 100 0 ..2 100.0 96, 4 100 �0 97 3 97.3 98.8 Buses 0 0 1 - 1 4 0 ....�....... 0 4 0 ..... 3 3 ........ 8 % Buses 0..0 6.7 2 9 1 0 0 0 0,0 1'0 0.0 0,5 0,5 0.0 'Trucks _......., 0 0 0 0 15 ..,.. .. 0 0 .....0 15 0 12 � 12 27 %Trucks 0.0 00 00 •37 0.0 0,0 ........ 3.6 w—.... 0„0 ........ 20 — 20 2,6 B1<Fe1 on Road 0 0 0 - ...... _ •_ ........ 0 0 ._.._.....��......_..._ 0 0 0 0 1 _"N Bdcyrckt on Road 00....— .IT. ._... 00 OA 00 .mmmm ®-® 00 '._ 0.0 ............ 0.0 02 0.2.....1 0.1 Pedestrians ..m 4"". Podmslrtam�s .... _mm.mm ..... Sam Schwartz Engineering D.P.C. w O5 m n o 0 m a o a o 0 0 o a Sam Schwartz Engineering (IL) 1000 W. Irving Park Rd.., Suite 130 Itasca, IL, Illinois, United States 60143 630.213.1000 Ingenuity . Accessibility . Integrity Schcol Street SB�.',... GYut In .... Total L03O 33 83 1 1 0 0 0 iP a 34 64 V19 rOM19 Peak Hour Data E :15 AM 815 AM Rcad Count Name: US 14 and School Street Site Code: Start Date: 05/04/2017 Page No: 4 1-1 U-1111111 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (7:15 AM) 01 Sam Schwartz Engineering D.P.C. Sam Schwartz Engineering (IL) 10'00 W. Irving Pants Rd., Suite 130 Count Name: US 14 and School Street Itasca, IL, Illinois, United States 60143 Site Code: 630.213.1000 Ingenuity Accessibility Integrity Start Date: 05/04/2017 . . Page No: 5 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (4:30 PM) School Street US 14 US 14 Soulhbound Westbound Eastbound Start Time Left Right Ri hti on peds App` Thru Right Rirp on Pads APp' Left Thru Peds -- ........ -. ed Total ....tat ...- Right R!e4 Total Tatpai Int" Total 4:30PM 0 0 6 6 177 2 ._ 0 179 �....... 0 .. 154 154 _.,Total 339 4:45 PM 1 0 3 ll ._ ......_ 4 .m.... _ 180 2 �., 0 182 0 142 142 328 5:00 PM 5 2 2 9 205 __... 5 .... ,,,, .._. 0 ? 210 _..... 2 ..... 138 140 359 5:15 PM ... 1 ..... 5 2 W 8 187 2 ._ 2 ^; 191 a,,,, 3 _........-�.�..,_. 132 b 135 .._ 334 Total 7 7 13 °; 27 749 11 ....,, 2 762 5 566 .... 571 1360 4proach. % 25,9. ..... 25 9 48..1 .. 983 1.4 0.3 0,9 99,1 . Total% 0..5 0.5 10 - ...... 2.0 551 08 01 56.0 0.4 41.6 42.0 PHF 0.350 0 350.... 0 542 750 _.. 0..913 0.550 ...,...W„�. 0.250 ...... .Toot 0..907 0,417 .. 0.919 0 927 0,947 ILeONata „ .,,. 7 IT 7 13 ............. ....� 27 744 11 _....�.. 2 _.,...,_,..... 757 ...._.�............--�...._.._........ 5 559 584 1348 1 ate.., 100.0 100 0 100.0 ..�.,.... 100,0 99.3 ...,_..,.�....... 100 0 100.0 99.3 100.0 988 _........ 98.8 99,1 Buses 0 0 0 0 1 0 ...y.�,.,.._. 0 1 .-.-......_,........ 0 1 ....... 1 Buses 00 0..0 0..0 0 0 0,.1 0..... Trucks .......... 0 ........ 0 0 0 _.. 4 0 .. 0 ' q 0 6 g M_........ 10 Trucks 00 00 00 00 0,5 0..0 ..... . 00 05 .....-..-�........ 0.0 11 11 07 "-Toot 'cues on Road 0 .......��.... 0 0 .,__ 0 0 ....W......_,_ 0 0_ 0 0 0 :...� 0 0 .+�rr,•da4s en Raadl OD ..... 0.0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0.0 ....... 0 0 0,0 0.0 ................. 0 0 0,0 0.0 ''WOWIrualrs Pedeslladan.s ove Sam Schwartz Engineering D.P.C. Sam Schwartz Engineering (IL) 1000 W. Irving Park Rd., Suite 130 Itasca, IL, Illinois, United States 60143 630.213.1000 Ingenuity . Accessibility . Integrity 11 27 1 45 1 0 0 0 0 0 46 R 20 7 o o 0 0 0 0 0 ...... .... 0 0 20 ..... . ... . .... R� p +1 4 Peak Hour Data ' % 74 PM jA .1 PM in T__ n Road Pedestrians Q 0 0 0 0 Oat. 0 0 0 " T.W Faho App.a4h qNQ Count Name: US 14 and School Street Site Code: Start Date: 05/04/2017 Page No: 6 0 4- Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (4:30 PM) Saris Schwartz Engineering, C.P.C. School St. @ Prospect Ave. File Name : SCHOOL@PROSPECT Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 5/3/2017 Page No : 1 --From — ... r . ..r�rt-gr1_! AR.. „ - TRUCKSSCH SCHOOL...... PROSPECT OUSTS L PROSPECT Start Tim ThO eedTKR0,O O Fromast Ped .T8 R. rom South pT R.Th From West .,Pp OAM O 34 O 35 ,�1 O1� , 130 0 -T 17 int.T1...1 707 07:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 30 4 0 34 2 0 2 5 9 0 33 0 0 33 76 07:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 1 0 10 8 0 3 6 17 1 0 26 0 0 26 53 ......... ...... 0 11 0 4[--25 5� Total 0 0 0 0 0 88 12�--0... 100 , 18 0 1� ._..18 .... ...53 6.... ..22..... ...... 94 0 0 . . 1003 08:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 4 0 18 2 0 4 6 12 1 23 0 0 241 54 08:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 2 0 18 8 0 2 11 21 2 17 0 0 19 58 08:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 11 3 0 1 0 4 0 12 0 0 12 27 0'45 M_ 0 .... O .. __O 0 ... O ... 5 ...._.__Q ..._ 0 ... .... 22__ ?.5 ��.... 9 Total 0....._ 63 15 0.� 100...�4� 1 ..-1 4 ... ......_0 70 0 _0_ . 0 74 .... 178 BREAK "' 04:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 1 0 19 9 0 2 2 13 2 32 0 0 34 66 04:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 0 13 4 0 1 1 6 1 25 0 0 26 45 04:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 3 0 25 5 0 1 1 7 0 34 0 0 34 66 e04 45 PM 0 0- -.....0 � ..�0 ..... t� 11....... 1 0... .. 1.2 4^.... 0- 1 '0:.. 20,m.n. 0 0 220 9 Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 64 5 0 69 22 0 ..... 6 5 .... mm7 —33 3 111 —0"0 114 216 05:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 14 5 0 1 1 7 0 27 0 0 27 48 05:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 4 0 25 5 0 4 3 12 0 19 0 0 19 56 05:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 4 0 22 8 0 4 6 18 2 37 0 0 39 79 _O1. ........_ 0__.. 0 . o .. 0- 0......... 0 Total... 0... 0 C 84 10 0....94' 19 . ...0 ..__ �5,. 1.1... ..45 ..... ,0.. 119 2 0 0 ...._'7 . 122 .._0.... 261 Grand Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 293 33 0 326 74 0 47 51 172 23 387 0 0 410 908 Apprch % 0 0 0 0 0 89.9 10.1 0 43 0 27.3 29.7 5.6 94.4 0 0 Total --%..CARS ... 0 .... 0 ... 0 _.....0 - 0 33 —0.. 117 42 6 0 0 0... 292 325 2.,.�. ...0 ---47_._... 51� 0 23 380 0 ....4. 0 ... 898 — .e.e. AR'S — _ 99,1 1 00, 0 99.7 97.3 �0 0 100, 100 100 9 8 Z_ 0 0 8.3 98 -5 98 9 TRUCKS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0� 1 .., ..w 0 _ 0 0 .. .90�$._ 0 . 0 _,w 5 0 0 , 5 6 TRU'Y� - 0_-- 0 0 p ...... O . 0....... 0.3 _._,,. ......0 0 3......._ 0 0�----O 06'--2— 7.2. 7... BUSES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 __ 2 ..0 0 ........0...._.0.. 0 0 2 ...1.3 0 �....._.Q ,..0. 2 0 0 2 4 % BUSES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.7 0 0 0 1..2 0,5 0 0 0.5 0.4 Sam Schwartz Engineering, D.P.C. School St. @ Prospect Ave. File Name : SCHOOL@PROSPECT Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 5/3/2017 Page No : 1 PrInt+ed- CABS SCHOOL �oCT SCHOOL PROSPECT rom PROSPECT ----- .. S T.. .. _ _ m West From North Thru Left Peds gap,r]333 R�gntfeThru Left Pe n�Pm From Peds A,p, Total i°t._r°�i _Start Time R� ht Thru Left Ped °�� R� ht _ ds Tom Ri ht Thru Left _ 07:00 AI1A 0 0 0 0 0 0 34 4 0 5 0 10 1 16 4 13 0 0 17 71 07:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 29 4 0 2 0 2 5 9 0 32 0 0 32 74 07:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 1 0 7 0 3 6 16 0 24 0 0 24 50 07:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 3 0 18 3 0 2 6 11 2 22 0 _0 24 53 Total. ..._0..._.....--0 0 - 0 0......... 0 87 .... 12 0 99 17 0 .... 17m.. 18._. 52..m_.._s s1 0 ........ 0 97 248 08:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 4 0 18 2 0 4 6 12 1 23 0 0 24 54 08:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 2 0 18 8 0 2 11 21 2 15 0 0 17 56 08:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 11 3 0 1 0 4 0 12 0 0 12 27 04a Ar1....? ..... 9 ........,. _ 0 1 --- — _6 2? ---. 0 4 1..... 1 . Q 1.8 _ ....38.. Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 57 6 0 63 15 0 9 17 41 4 67 0 0 71 175 **� BREAK — 04:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 1 0 19 8 0 2 2 12 2 31 0 0 33 64 04:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 0 13 4 0 1 1 6 1 25 0 0 26 45 04:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 3 0 25 5 0 1 1 7 0 34 0 0 34 66 04:45 PM 0 —0. 0.1- _......... 0 0:... 11 .... 1......... 0.. .........2 .... 1 7_ .. ? ___m.__ . -- 0 20 39 Total 0 0 0 0 0 j 0 64 5 0 69 21 0 6 5 32 3 110 0 0 113 214 05:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 14 5 0 1 1 7 0 27 0 0 27 48 05:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 4 0 25 5 0 4 3 12 0 19 0 0 19 56 05:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 4 0 22 8 0 4 6 18 2 37 0 0 39 79 05:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 31 2 0 33 1 0 6 1 8 8 29 0 0 _37 78 Total.. 0........ --0 0 0 ,.0............0 84 10-0 94 � 19 0 ......15. 11 45_,....._10 112 - 0— _0 122 261`., Grand Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 292 33 0 325 72 0 47 51 170 ; 23 380 0 0 403 f 898 Apprch % 0 0 0 0 0 89.8 10.2 0 42.4 0 27.6 30 5.7 94.3 0 0 Total % 0 0 0 0 0 0 32.5 3.7 0 36.2 8 0 5.2 5.7 18.91 2.6 42.3 0 0 44.9 Sam Schwartz Engineering, D.P.C. School St. @ Prospect Ave. SCHOOL From North Ri 5�L9,ht ,, Thru Left Peds BREAK'*' 07:15 AM 0 0 0 0 07:30 AM 0 0 0 0 BREAK — ...... � --'f �tal F . . ..... BREAK **' 08:15 AM 1 0 0 0 0 *!.!. BREAK !!* Total —6 BREAK'*' 04:00 PM 1 0 0 0 0 BREAK ot I F— 6 0 0 0 BREAK *** Grand Total 0 0 0 0 Apprch 0 0 0 0 Total % 0 0 0 0 PROSPECT 01 0 10 0 00 0 00 bi ' 6 - — ---- i" 6--0 01 0 0 0 0 61 — ----- 6 0......._ 6._.... 6' 01 0 0 0 0 61 6--b - — - ----- 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0_ 0 0 0 01 0 0 0 0 6T— --6"'-6 —0 --o" 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16.7 0 0 16.7 0 0 0 0 File Name SCHOOL@PROSPECT Site Code 00000000 Start Date 5/3/2017 Page No 1 ------------ PR0sP E CT ..omWest Right j�nul 0 0 1 0 0 1 2 0 0 2 0 0 2 2 6T . ....... . 6 0 3 4 01 0 1 0 0 1 1 .. . . ............ . . . . . 0 7- 0 1 . ............ . . 0 0 ..... 1 1 1 01 0 1 0 0 11 1 . ..... .... . .......... . . 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 5 0 0 5 6 0 100 0 0 uN 0 0 83.3 0 0 83.3 Sam Schwartz Engineering, D.P.C. School St. @ Prospect Ave. SCHOOL From North BREAK *** 07:30 AM 0 0 0 0 BREAK '*" - ""- Total 0 "1 11--.- 0 0 0 BREAK 08:15 AM 1 0 0 0 0 BREAK *** 08!45 AM Q-, 0 0 --Total 0 6 0 6 BREAK 04:00 PM 1 0 0 0 0 ... BREAK *** - ",— 0 0 0 0 BREAK '** Grand Total 0 0 0 0 Apprcl 0 0 0 0 Total % 0 0 0 0 PROSPECT 01 0 0 0 0 61-0 —0 - ly 01 0 0 0 0 91. 9 ..9L. .- A . .. . ........... -Q- — 01 .. 0 ..... 0 0 0 01 0 0 0 0 F '0"'---- "" —0'-0 — -0 00 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 File Name SCHOOL@PROSPECT Site Code 00000000 Start Date 5/3/2017 Page No 1 SCHOOL 01 1 0 0 0 01 0 0 0 0 .... "P ....� . .9 0"1.-0 0. 0-. 0. 0Q 01 1 0 0 0 '6-T........ —� . 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- 0 0 01 0 1 0 0 91 0 'A . . . . ....... ..9, 01 —0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 TT ...0 0 6--o oil-int Total 01 1 —01-- 12 ��2 01 1 - 0 0 � 2 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 2 4 100 0 0 0 0 100 0 0 0 50 0 0 0 50 0 50 0 0 50 CORRESPONDENCE W IRRESM iT11-1 UINIION PACIFIC REGARDING NEW CROSSING POLICY Mount Prospect Downtown Transportation Study Downtown Mount Prospect — Coordination Meeting with UPRR 6/20/17 — 10:00 AM — Sam Schwartz Downtown Chicago Office Attendees: Pete Wojtkiewicz — SSE Steve Lynch — Patrick Engineering Stephen Heath — Patrick Engineering Sean Collier— Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) Meeting Notes: • UPRR is not opposed to platform relocation and corresponding hold circuit relocations • Elmhurst is an example of a municipality that considered a similar move in the recent past but ultimately decided against it. • If the hold circuit is moved, UPRR wants to avoid the up / down / up problem, as that will lead people to call in saying the gates are not functioning correctly. Especially in cases where school buses use the crossing often. • Regarding depot and platform locations, general rule of thumb is that Metra and UPRR like to see the depot in the middle of the platform. • Any re -design of hold circuits will be done in-house by UPRR in Omaha. Village would then reimburse UPRR for their time and effort in the re -design. • Village Consulting Engineer would then re -design platform, depot and coordinate through UPRR. • Agencies that approve any redesign would depend on who currently owns the depot, no Metra involvement would be necessary unless they own the depot. • Discussed 3rd at -grade crossing, UPRR's response would be that for any new at -grade crossing, 3 at -grade crossings need to be closed. For a new grade separated crossing, UPRR would like to see 1 at -grade crossing closed. Approval Any depot or platform changes would have to be approved by UPRR Structures group. UPRR would complete internal approval of any changes of the track circuits, and any changes in signal warning times would have to be approved by ICC. 1114 P tl E ,IX", C. EXISTING S uuuuopllIllAL. iI G D WS Mount Prospect Downtown Transportation Study US 14 & IL 83 US 14 & IL 83 (MAIN ST.)/PROSPECT 6/30/2016 16:25 Configuration Controller Sequence Priority 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Ring 1 Phases 1 2 p 0 4 Ill 1 3 112 1 9 110 p 0 0 0 Ring 2 Phases 5 6 f 7 8 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 In Use. X X X X X X X X X X X X Exclusive Ped Direction Overlap A B C D Direction . Load Switch Channel/Driver Group Assign (Info Only): Load Signal Switch Driver Group (MMU) Phase/ Channel Ovlap Ped 1 . . . . 1 2 . . . . . . 2 3 . . . . . . 3 4 . . . . . . 4 5 . . . . . . 5 6 . . . . . . 6 7 . . . . . . 7 8 . . . . . . 8 9 . . . . . . 2 X 10 . . . . . . 4 X 11 6 X 12 . . . . . . 8 X 13 . . . . . . A 14 . . . . . . B 15 . . . . . . C 16 . . . . . . D US 14 & IL 83 US 14 & IL 83 (MAIN ST.)/PROSPECT 6/30/2016 16:25 Configuration Continued --------------------------------------------------------------------- Enable BIU: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Terminal/Facilities. . . . . . . . . Detector Rack. Type 2 Runs as Type 1. . . . MMU Disable. . . . . . . . X Diagnostic Enable. . . . . Peer -Peer Comm Enable. . . 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Peer To Peer Addresses 255 255 255 255 255 255 255 255 255 255 Port 2: Port 2 Protocol . . . . . . . Terminal Port 2 Enable . . . . . . . . . YES AB3418 Address. . . . . . . . . 0 AB3418 Group Address. . . . . . 0 AB3418 Response Delay . . . . . 0 AB3418 Single Flag Enable . , . NO AB3418 Drop -Out Time. . . . . . 0 AB3418 TOD SF Select. . . . . . 0 Data Rate . . . . . . . . . . 1200 bps Data, Parity, Stop. . . . . . 8, 0, 1 Port 3: Port 3 Protocol . . . . . . . Telemetry Port 3 Enable . . . . . . . . . YES Telemetry Address . . . . . . . 2 System Detector 9-16 Address„ 0 Telemetry Response Delay. . . . 2000 AB3418 Address. . . . . . . . . 0 AB3418 Group Address. . . . . . 0 AB3418 Response Delay . . . . . 0 AB3418 Single Flag Enable . . . NO AB3418 Drop -Out Time. . . . . . 0 AB3418 TOD SF Select. . . . . 0 Duplex . . . . . . . . . . . , Full Data Rate . . . . . . . . . . . 9600 bps Data, Parity, Stop. . . . . . . 8, 0, 1 US 14 & IL 83 US 14 & IL 83 (MAIN ST.)/PROSPECT 6/30/2016 16:25 Configuration Continued -------------------------------------------------- Event Enabling Critical RFE'S (MMU/TF) . . . » Non -Critical RFE'S (DET/TEST) Detector Errors . . . . . . . Coordination Errors . . . . . . MMU Flash Faults. . . . . . . . Local Flash Faults. . . . . . , Preempt . . . . . . . . . . . . Power On/Off. . . . . . . . . Low Battery . . . . . . . . . . X ALARM 1 . . . . . . . . „ X X ALARM 2 . . . . . . . . . . „ X X ALARM 3 . . . . , , . . . . . . X ALARM 4 . . . . . , . . . . . . X ALARM 5 . . . . . , . . . . . . X ALARM 6 . . . X ALARM 7 . . . » . . X ALARM 8 . . . . . . . . , . , . X ALARM 9 . . , . . . . . . . . ALARM 10. . . . . . . , .. . , ALARM 11. . . . . . . . , . . . ALARM 12. . . . . . . . . ALARM 13. . ,. . . . . ALARM 14. . , . . , . ALARM 15. . . . . . . . . . X ALARM 16 . . . . . . . . . . . Supervisor Access Code. . . **** Data Change Access Code **** MMU Compatibility Program (Info Only) Channel Is Allowed to Time With Channel 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 . . 2 . » . . 3 » . 4 . » . .. 5 . . . .. . , . » . 6 . . . . , . . 7 . , . . 8 . . . . 9 . . 10. . . . » 11. 12. 13. 14. . . 15. . . Version Info: Software Assy. Part No. Version Boot 27831 2.83 Program 45591 1.9 Application . 3 Help 27891 6.33 Configuration 27919 C912❑ US 14 & IL 83 US 14 & IL 83 (MAIN ST.)/PROSPECT 6/30/2016 16:25 By -Phase Timing Data Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Direction Minimum Green 3 15 5 15 3 15 3 15 17 3 1 8 Bike Min Green 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cond Sery Min Grn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Walk 0 7 0 7 0 7 0 7 0 0 0 7 Ped Clearance 0 26 0 27 0 20 0 22 0 0 0 22 Veh Extension 3.0 7.0 3.0 7.0 3.0 7.0 3.0 7.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 4.0 Alt Veh Exten 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Max Extension 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Max 1 15 40 20 35 15 40 12 35 10 10 1 18 Max 2 15 40 15 35 15 40 12 35 10 10 1 18 Max 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Det. Fail Max 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Yellow Change 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 3.5 4.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Red Clearance 0.0 1.5 1.5 1.5 0.0 1.5 1.0 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Red Revert 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Act. B4 Init 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sec/Actuation 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Max Initial 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Time B4 Reduction 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 8 Cars Waiting 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Time To Reduce 0 0 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 0 0 5 Minimum Gap 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 US 14 u IL 83 US 14 & IL 83 (MAIN ST')/PB0S2ECT 6/30/20I6 16;25 No -Serve Phases _________________________________________________________________ gbaae Cannot Serve With Phase Phase 12 lI 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 l' 2' ' . . . . . . . . . . . 3' ' - . . . . . . . . . 4' ' ' 5' ' . 6' ' . 7' ' . 8' 9' I0- - . lI- . - . US 14 a IL 83 US 14 a IL 83 (MAIN ST')/PR03PECT 6/30/20I6 I6:25 Ped Carryover _________________________________________________________________ Ped Start Phase Carry Over Phase l O 2 0 3 O 4 U 5 0 6 0 7 O 8 0 9 0 10 0 Il 0 12 O US 14 & IL 83 US 14 & IL 83 (MAIN ST.)/PROSPECT 6/30/2016 16:25 Vehicle/Ped Phase as Overlap Ped Phase As Overlap Ped Consists of Ped Phases Ovlap Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 , 8 9 10 11 12 Veh Phase As Overlap Veh Consists of Veh Phases Ovlap Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 X 2 X X 3 X 4 X 5 X 6 X X 7 X 8 X 9 X X X 10 X X 11 X X X X X X X 12 US 14 & IL 83 US 14 & IL 83 (MAIN ST.)/PROSPECT 6/30/2016 16:25 Overlap Data Overlap A Phase: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Standard. ....... X X X X X X X X Protected . . . . . . . Permitted . . . . . . . Enable Lag. ...... X X X X X X X Enable Lead . . . . . . Spare . . . . . . . . . „ Advance Green Timer . . . . . 0.0 Green Yellow Red Lag/Lead Timers . . . . . , . . 7.0 4.5 1.5 Overlap B Phase; 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Standard. . . . . . . . . X X X X X Protected . . . . . . . . Permitted . . . . . . . Enable Lag. . . . . . . . X X X X Enable Lead . . . . . . Spare . . . . . . . . . Advance Green Timer . . . . . . 0.0 Green Yellow Red Lag/Lead Timers . . . . . . . . . 7.0 4.5 1.5 Overlap C Phase: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Standard. ....... X X X X X X X Protected . . . . . . . Permitted . . . . . . . Enable Lag. . . . . . . X X X X X Enable Lead . . . . . Spare . . . . . . . . . Advance Green Timer . . . . . . . 0.0 Green Yellow Red Lag/Lead Timers . . . . , . . . . 7.0 4.5 1.5 Overlap D Phase: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Standard. . . . . . . . X . X X X X Protected . . . . . . . Permitted . . . . . . . „ Enable Lag. . . . . . . X X „ X X Enable Lead . . . . . . Spare . . . . . . . . . Advance Green Timer . . . . . . . 0.0 Green Yellow Red Lag/Lead Timers . . . . . 7.0 4.5 1.5 US 14 & IL 83 US 14 & IL 83 (MAIN ST.)/PROSPECT 6/30/2016 16:25 Power Start, Remote Flash ------------------------------------------------------------------- Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Power Start. . . . . X X . . External Start . . . X X . . Into Remote Flash. . . . X Exit Remote Flash. . . . . . . Overlap Remote Flash Yellow. .. . . . . . . . A B C D Flash Together . . . . . . . . . . . Initialization Interval: Power Start . . . . . . . . Yellow Overlap External Start. . . . . . . Yellow Overlap Power Start All Red Time. 0 Power Start Flash Time. . 0 Remote Flash Options: Out of Flash Yellow . NO Out of Flash All Red. . NO Minimum Recall. . . . . . . NO Alternate Flash . . . . . NO Flash Thru Load Switches. . NO Cycle Through Phases. . . . NO US 14 & IL 83 US 14 & IL 83 (MAIN ST.)/PROSPECT 6/30/2016 16:25 Option Data ----------------------------------------------------------------- Guaranteed Passage . Call To NonActuated 1 Call To NonActuated 2 Dual Entry. . . . . . . Conditional Service . . Conditional Reservice Actuated Rest in Walk Flashing Walk . . . . . Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 x x . . . . . . . . . . . x x x x . . . . . . . . . . . . Enable Programmable Options Dual Entry. . . . . . . . . . . ON Backup Protection Group 1 Conditional Service . . . . . . OFF Backup Protection Group 2 Ped Clearance Protection. . . . OFF Backup Protection Group 3 Special Preempt Overlap Flash OFF Simultaneous Gap Group 1. Cond Service Det Cross Switch OFF Simultaneous Gap Group 2. Lock Detectors in Red Only. . . OFF Simultaneous Gap Group 3. Five Section Left Turn Control Phases: 5-2 7-4 1-6 3-8 11-10 9-12 Left Turn Head. . . . x x ON . . . ON OFF ON ON OFF US 14 a IL 83 US 14 a IL 83 (MAIN ST')/PBOSPECT 6/30/20I6 16:25 Recall Data, Dimming ------------------------------------------ _______________________ Locking Deteotoz' , . . Vehicle BeoalI' ' . Pedestrian Recall ' - ' Recall To Max Soft Recall ' ' ' , - . Don't Beat Here Ped Dark if No Call . . Phase I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Il 12 ' X }{ X ' X X X ' ' _ ' _ X _ _ _ X _ _ _ _ _ _ ^ ~ ~ ^ ^ ^ ^ ~ ^ ^ ^ ~ ^ ^ ~ ^ ' ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ~ ^ ~ ` ^ ~ ^ ~ ^ ^ ^ ` ^ ^ ` ' ` ~ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ - Load Switch I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 15 16 Green/Walk. , ' ' NO 00 NO NO NO NO 00 00 00 00 00 00 NO NO NO NO Yellmm/Ped Clear. NO NO NO NO NO NO 00 NO 00 NO NO NO NO NO NO NO Bed/Don't Walk. ' 00 NO NO 00 NO 00 NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO US 14 & IL 83 US 14 & IL 83 (MAIN ST.0 PROSPECT 6/30/2016 16:25 Detector Type/Timers --------------------------------------------------------------------- Locking Log Timers Don't Reset Det. Memory Enable Extend Delay Extend Type 1 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 2 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 3 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 4 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 5 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 6 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 7 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 8 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 9 NO NO 0.0 0 6 - Calling 10 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 11 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 12 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 13 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 14 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 15 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 16 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 17 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 18 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 19 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 20 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 21 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 22 NO NO 0.0 0 6 - Calling 23 NO NO 0.0 0 6 - Calling 24 NO NO 0.0 0 6 - Calling 25 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 26 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 27 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 28 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 29 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 30 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 31 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 32 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal Detector Names Det 1: Detector 1 Det 2: Detector 2 Det 3: Detector 3 Det 4: Detector 4 Det 5: Detector 5 Det 6: Detector 6 Det 7: Detector 7 Det 8: Detector 8 Det 9: Detector 9 Det 10: Detector 10 Det 11: Detector 11 Det 12: Detector 12 Det 13: Detector 13 Det 14: Detector 14 Det 15: Detector 15 Det 16: Detector 16 Det 17: Detector 17 Det 18: Detector 18 Det 19: Detector 19 Det 20: Detector 20 Det 21: Detector 21 Det 22: Detector 22 Det 23: Detector 23 Det 24: Detector 24 Det 25: Detector 25 Det 26: Detector 26 Det 27: Detector 27 Det 28: Detector 28 Det 29: Detector 29 Det 30: Detector 30 Det 31: Detector 31 Det 32: Detector 32 US 14 & IL 83 US 14 & IL 83 (MAIN ST.)/PROSPECT 6/30/2016 16:25 Detector Type/Timers ----------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 33 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 34 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 35 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 36 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 37 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 38 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 39 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 40 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 41 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 42 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 43 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 44 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 45 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 46 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 47 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 48 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 49 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 50 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 51 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 52 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 53 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 54 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 55 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 56 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 57 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 58 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 59 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 60 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 61 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 62 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 63 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal 64 NO NO 0.0 0 0 - Normal Detector Names Det 33: Detector 33 Det 34: Detector 34 Det 35: Detector 35 Det 36: Detector 36 Det 37: Detector 37 Det 38: Detector 38 Det 39: Detector 39 Det 40: Detector 40 Det 41: Detector 41 Det 42: Detector 42 Det 43: Detector 43 Det 44: Detector 44 Det 45: Detector 45 Det 46: Detector 46 Det 47: Detector 47 Det 48: Detector 48 Det 49: Detector 49 Det 50: Detector 50 Det 51: Detector 51 Det 52: Detector 52 Det 53: Detector 53 Det 54: Detector 54 Det 55: Detector 55 Det 56: Detector 56 Det 57: Detector 57 Det 58: Detector 58 Det 59: Detector 59 Det 60: Detector 60 Det 61: Detector 61 Det 62: Detector 62 Det 63: Detector 63 Det 64: Detector 64 US 14 & IL 83 US 14 & IL 83 (MAIN ST.)/PROSPECT 6/30/2016 16:25 Detector ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Phase Assignment Phase Det. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 X 2 X 3 X X 4 5 X 6 X 7 X 8 X 9 . X 10 X 11 X 12 X 13 X 14 X 15 X X X 16 X 17 x 18 X 19 X 20 . X 21 x 22 x 23 X , 24 X 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 US 14 a IL 83 us 14 a IL 83 (MAIN ST,)/PROSPECT 6/30/20I6 I5;25 Detector Cross Switching Phase Det. I 2 3 4 5 6 7 B 9 10 ll 12 I - 3 4 5 6 7 8 A IO II 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Iy 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 US 14 a IL 83 US 14 a IL 83 (MAIN ST')/2BOSPECT 6/30/20I6 I6:25 Detector Cross Switching Phase uet' l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO Il 12 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 , 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 US 14 & IL 83 US 14 & IL 83 (MAIN ST.)/PROSPECT 6/30/2016 16:25 Ped/SD Local Assign,Log Interval Phase Ped Detector 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Is Ped Detector No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 7 *Local System Detector No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Is Local Detector No. . .. 1 2 7 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector Log Interval . 0 *NOTE: System master designations cross referenced to local system detector numbers are: SDA1 = 1 & 9 SDA2 = 2 & 10 SDB1 = 3 & 11 SDB2 = 4 & 12 SDCI = 5 & 13 SDC2 = 6 & 14 SDDl = 7 & 15 SDD2 = 8 & 16 U3 I& a IL 83 U5 14 a IL 83 (MAIN ST')/PROSPECT 6/30/20I6 I6:25 Diagnostic Plans/Fail Action ----------------------------------------------------------------- Detector Plan I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO II 12 13 14 15 16 I Diagnostic I I I 0 I I I I I l I I l I 2 I Scaling 15 15 15 I 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 2 Diagnostic 0 O 0 O 0 0 O 0 O U O U O 0 O O Scaling I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 3 Diagnostic 0 0 O O 0 O O O U O O O 0 8 O U Scaling I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 4 Diagnostic O 0 O 0 O O O 0 O O U O O O O O Scaling I I I l I l I I I I I I I I I I 5 Diagnostic O O 0 U 0 O 0 O U O 0 O 0 U O O Scaling I I I I I I I I I l l I I l I I 6 Diagnostic O O O 0 0 0 O O 0 0 U 0 0 O O 0 Scaling I I l I I I I I I I I I I I I I 7 Diagnostic O O 0 O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 Scaling I I I I I I I l I l l I I l l I 8 Diagnostic 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O O O O 0 0 O U 0 Scaling I I I l I I I I l I I I I I I I *Fail Action 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O 0 0 0 O O 0 Detector Plan 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 I Diagnostic I 2 I 2 I 3 I I O O O 0 O 0 0 0 Scaling 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 I l I I l I I I 2 Diagnostic 0 0 O 0 O O 0 O O 0 0 O U 0 O 0 Scaling l I I I I I l I I I l I I I I I 3 Diagnostic 0 0 0 O O 0 O O U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Scaling I I I I I I I I I l I I l I I I 4 Diagnostic 0 O O 0 0 O 0 8 0 O 0 0 0 U 0 O Scaling I l I l I I I I l I l l I I l l 5 Diagnostic 0 O 0 0 O O 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O Scaling l I l I l I I I I I I I I I I I 6 Diagnostic 0 0 O 0 O 0 0 O O 0 8 0 0 0 O 0 Scaling I I I I I I I I I I I l I I l l 7 Diagnostic 0 O O 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 O 0 0 O 0 0 Scaling I l I I I I I I I l I I I I I I 8 Diagnostic O 0 0 O O 0 U 0 0 O 0 O O U O O Scaling I l I l I I I I I I I l I I I I *Fail Action U O O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 0 U O 0 0 0 *NOTE: 0 = No Action, l = Min Recall, 2 = Max Recall in Effect U8 14 a IL 83 US 14 & IL 83 (DQAZ0 ST')/PBDS2ECT 6/30/20I6 I6:25 Diagnostic Plans/Fail Action -------------------------------------------------------------------- Deteotmz Plan 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 I Diagnostic O 0 0 O 0 0 0 O 0 U 0 8 0 0 O O Scaling I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 2 Diagnostic O O 0 O O O O O O 0 O O O 0 0 U Scaling I l I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 3 Diagnostic O O O O O O 0 0 O U O O O U O 0 Scaling I I I I I I I I I l l I I I I I 4 Diagnostic U O O U 0 U O O 0 0 U O O U O U Scaling I I I I I I I I l I I I I I I I 5 Diagnostic 0 O O O O O O O 0 0 0 O O 0 O U Scaling l I I l I I I I I I I I l l I l 6 Diagnostic O O 0 O O U 0 U O U U O 0 0 O U Scaling I l I l l I l I I I I I l I I I 7 Diagnostic O O 0 0 O O O O 0 O O O 0 0 0 O Scaling I I I I I I I I I I l I I I I I 8 Diagnostic 0 O 0 0 U 0 0 O O 0 0 O U O O 0 Scaling I I I I I I I I I l l I I I I I *Fail Action O O 0 0 O 0 O O O 0 U 0 U 0 U O Detector Plan 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 l Diagnostic 0 O 0 0 O 0 O 0 O O 0 0 0 O 0 O Scaling l I I I I l I I I I I I I I I I 2 Diagnostic O O O 0 O O O 0 0 0 0 U 0 O 0 O Scaling I I I I I I I I I I l I I I I I 3 Diagnostic 0 O 0 O O O O 0 O U 0 O 0 O U O Scaling I l I I I I l l I I I l I I I I 4 Diagnostic 0 0 0 O O O O O O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 Scaling I I I I I I I I I l I I I I I I 5 Diagnostic 0 0 O 0 0 0 O O O O O U O 0 0 O Scaling I I l I I I I I I l I I I I l I 6 Diagnostic O 0 O O 0 0 0 O O O O 0 0 0 0 O Scaling I l I I I I I I I I I l l I I I 7 Diagnostic 0 0 O O 0 O O O 0 0 O O O O U O Scaling I l l I I I I I I I I l I I I I 8 Diagnostic 0 O O 0 0 O O U O 0 0 O O U O 0 Scaling I I I l I I l I I I l I l I I I *Fail Action O 0 O O 0 O O D 0 0 O 0 U O O O *NOTE: O = No Action, I = Min Recall, 2 = Max DeoaII in Effect ] = Detector Fail Max Tiime from By -Phase Timing Data U3 14 a IL 83 US 14 a IL 83 (yQAZ0 ST')/PBOSgECT 6/30/20I6 I6:25 Ped Diagnostic gIaoo Plan I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO II I Diagnostic O 0 U O O O O 0 0 0 0 Scaling I I I I I I I I I I I 2 Diagnostic 0 U O 0 0 0 0 0 O O O Scaling I I I I I I I I I I I 3 Diagnostic O 0 O O O O U O 8 0 U Scaling I I I I I I I I I I I 4 Diagnostic O O 0 U U O 0 O U O 0 Scaling l I I I l I I I l I I 5 Diagnostic 0 U O 0 O 0 0 0 0 8 0 Scaling I I I I I I I I I I I 6 Diagnostic U O O O 0 O 0 0 U 0 0 Scaling I I I I I I I I I l I 7 Diagnostic O O 0 O 0 O O O O O O Scaling I I I I I I I I I I I 8 Diagnostic O O 0 O O O O 0 0 O U Scaling I l l I I I I I I I I Detector Diagnostic Intervals -------- --------------------- -------------------------------- ---------- Diag000tio *No -Activity *Max Presence Number Diagnostic Zo±ezvaI Diagnostic Interval Erratic Counts I 2 2 80 3 8 4 80 3 4 12 80 4 0 U O 5 0 U O 6 O O U 7 O O 0 B 0 0 0 9 O O O lO O 0 U lI O 8 O 12 0 0 O 13 O O U 14 U O 0 15 O 0 0 16 U 0 O 17 O O O 18 U O O Iy O 0 O 20 0 0 0 21 0 O O 22 O O O 23 0 O O 24 O O 0 25 D 0 O 26 O 0 0 27 0 O 0 38 0 O 0 29 0 O O 30 U 0 0 31 O O O 32 0 O 0 *NOTE: Scaling is specified in each detector diagnostic plan. US 14 & IL 83 US 14 & IL 83 (MAIN ST.)/PROSPECT 6/30/2016 16:25 Speed Detectors Local Speed Detector One Detector Speed: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Local Detector Number. ... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Vehicle Length ....... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Loop Length. . . . . . . . . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Two Detector Speed: Local Detector Number. ... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Speed Trap Length. ... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Local Speed Detector One Detector Speed: 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Local Detector Number. ... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Vehicle Length ....... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Loop Length. ..... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Two Detector Speed: Local Detector Number. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Speed Trap Length. ..... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Units. . . . . . . . . . . Inches NOTE: Speed Detector 1 STA, Speed Detector 2 = STB US 14 & IL 83 US 14 & IL 83 (MAIN ST.)/PROSPECT 6/30/2016 16:25 Coordinator Manual Command and Options ------------------------------------------------------------------ Manual Enable . . . . . Pattern . . . . . . . 0 Split Units . . . . . Seconds OffsetUnits . . . . . Seconds Interconnect Format . STD Interconnect Source ., TLM Transition. . . . . . SMOOTH Dwell Period. . . . . 0 Resync Count. . . . . 3 Actuated Coord Phase . . . X Actuated Walk Rest Inhibit Max Timing . . . . X Max 2 Select . . . . . . . Floating Force Off . . . . . Multisync . . . . . . . . . Phase Split Demand: Call Time Cyc Count 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Demand 1 0 0 . . . . . . . . . . . Demand 2 0 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Auto Permissive Min Green 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 A B C D E F Free Alternate Sequence US 14 & IL 83 US 14 & IL 83 (MAIN ST.)/PROSPECT 6/30/2016 16:25 Coordination Patterns Pattern 1 Cycle Length . . 160 COS . . . . 111 Offset . . . . . 65 Vehicle Permissive . . [1] 0 [2] 0 Vehicle Perm 2 Displacement 0 Phase Reservice. NO Splits: Phase 1- 26 2- 30 3- 14 4- 49 Phase 5- 26 6- 30 7- 15 8- 36 Phase 9- 0 10- 0 11- 14 12- 27 Split Sum: 0 Split Extension/Ring [1] 0 [2] 0 Split Demand Pattern [1] 0 [2] 0 XRT Pattern. . . 0 Phase Number: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Coord Phases X X Veh Recall Veh Max Recall . Ped Recall Veh Omit . Alt Sequence A: B: C: D: E: F: Pattern 2 Cycle Length 170 COS Offset . . . . . 50 Vehicle Permissive . . [1] Vehicle Perm 2 Displacement Splits: Phase 1- 15 2- Phase 5- 15 6- Phase 9- 0 10- Split Extension/Ring [1] Split Demand Pattern [1] XRT Pattern. . . 0 . . . 211 0 [2] 0 0 Phase Reservice. NO 35 3- 13 4- 55 35 7- 17 8- 38 0 11- 14 12- 38 Split Sum: 0 0 [2] 0 0 [2] 0 Phase Number: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Coord Phases X X Veh Recall Veh Max Recall „ Ped Recall . Veh Omit . Alt Sequence A: B: C: . D: E: F: --------------------------------------- Pattern 3 Cycle Length 170 COS Offset . . . . . 63 Vehicle Permissive . . [1] Vehicle Perm 2 Displacement Splits: Phase 1- 24 2- Phase 5- 24 6- Phase 9- 0 10- Split Extension/Ring [1] Split Demand Pattern [1] XRT Pattern. . . 0 311 0 [2] 0 0 Phase Reservice. 35 3- 16 4- 54 35 7- 16 8- 38 0 11- 14 12- 27 0 [2] 0 0 [2] 0 Split Sum: 0 Phase Number: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Coord Phases X X Veh Recall „ Veh Max Recall . Ped Recall „ Veh Omit . Alt Sequence A: B: C: D: E: F: US 14 & IL 83 US 14 & IL 83 (MAIN ST.)/PROSPECT 6/30/2016 16:25 Preemptors Preemptor 1 Active . . . . . . . . . X Det Lock. . . . . Ped Dark .. . . . . Priority Preemption. . . . . X Yel-Red To Grn. . .. Ped Active . . . .. Outputs Only During Hold Flash All Outputs Zero Ped Clr Time. Terminate Overlap ASAP . Terminate Phases. Ped Clr Thru Yel Don't Override Flash . Duration Time. . . 0 Flash During Hold. . . . . , X Delay Time . . . . 1 No CVM in Flash. . . . . Inhibit Time . . . 0 Fast Flash Grn on Hold Phase„ Min Ped Clear. . . 4 Enable Max Time. . . . . . Max Time . . . . . 0 Exit Max . . . . 0 Min Hold Time. . . 15 Hold Delay Time. 4 Green Yellow Red Minimum . . . . . . 1 4.5 1.5 Track Clear . . . . 17 4.5 1.5 Hold. . . . . . . . 0.0 0.0 Phase/Overlap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12/ A B C D Terminate Overlap . . . . . . . Track Clearance Phase . . . . X . . Hold Phases . . . . . . . . . . Exit Phases . . . . . . . . . . . Exit Calls on Phase . . . . . . . Out of Flash Color for Exit Phases . . . . Green Preemptor 2 Active . . . . . . . . . . . Priority Preemption. . . . . Outputs Only During Hold . . Terminate Overlap ASAP . . . Don't Override Flash . . . . Flash During Hold. . . . . . No CVM in Flash. . . . . . . Fast Flash Grn on Hold Phase Enable Max Time. . . . . . . Green Minimum 1 Track Clear . . . . 17 Hold. . . . . . . . X Det Lock. . . . . X Yel-Red To Grn. . Flash All Outputs Terminate Phases. Duration Time. . .. Delay Time . . . . Inhibit Time . . . Min Ped Clear. . Max Time . . . . . Exit Max . . Min Hold Time. . . Hold Delay Time. . Yellow Red 4.5 1.5 4.5 1.5 0.0 0.0 Ped Dark . Ped Active . . . . Zero Ped Clr Time. Ped Clr Thru Yel 0 1 0 4 0 0 15 4 Phase/Overlap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12/ A B C D Terminate Overlap . . . . . Track Clearance Phase . . X . Hold Phases X Exit Phases X X . Exit Calls on Phase . . . . . Out of Flash Color for Exit Phases . . . . Green Linked Preemptor . . . . 0 X US 14 & IL 83 US 14 & IL 83 (MAIN ST.)/PROSPECT 6/30/2016 16:25 Preemptors -------------------------------------------------------------------- Preemptor 3 Active . . . . . . . . . . . X Det Lock. . . . . Ped Dark Priority Preemption. . . . . Yel-Red To Grn. . .. Ped Active . . . ,. Outputs Only During Hold Flash All Outputs Zero Ped Clr Time. Terminate Overlap ASAP . Terminate Phases. Ped Clr Thru Yel Don't Override Flash . . . . Duration Time. . 0 Flash During Hold. . . . . . Delay Time . . . , 0 No CVM in Flash. . . . . . . Inhibit Time . . 0 Fast Flash Grn on Hold Phase. . Min Ped Clear. . . 0 Enable Max Time. . . . . . . X Max Time . . . . , 180 Exit Max . . . . . 0 Min Hold Time. . . 10 Hold Delay Time. 0 Green Yellow Red Minimum . . . . 5 0.0 0.0 Track Clear 0 0.0 0.0 Hold. . . . . , . 0.0 0.0 Phase/Overlap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12/ A B C D Terminate Overlap . . . . . Track Clearance Phase . . . Hold Phases . . . . . . . X X Exit Phases . . . . . . . . Exit Calls on Phase . . . . Out of Flash Color for Exit Phases . . . Green Linked Preemptor . . . . 0 -------------------------------------- Preemptor 4 Active . . . . . ,. , . X Det Lock. . . . . ,. Ped Dark . . . Priority Preemption. Yel-Red To Grn. . .. Ped Active . . . . Outputs Only During Hold Flash All Outputs Zero Ped Clr Time. Terminate Overlap ASAP Terminate Phases. Ped Clr Thru Yel Don't Override Flash Duration Time. . . 0 Flash During Hold. . . , . . Delay Time . . . , 0 No CVM in Flash. . . . , Inhibit Time . . , 0 Fast Flash Grn on Hold Phase, Min Ped Clear. . „ 0 Enable Max Time. . . . , , X Max Time . . . . . 180 Exit Max . . . . 0 Min Hold Time. . . 10 Hold Delay Time. 0 Green Yellow Red Minimum . . . . . . 5 0.0 0.0 Track Clear 0 0.0 0.0 Hold. . . . . . , . 0.0 0.0 Phase/Overlap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12/ A B C D Terminate Overlap . . . . . Track Clearance Phase . . . Hold Phases . . . . . . . X X Exit Phases . . . . . . . . Exit Calls on Phase . . . . Out of Flash Color for Exit Phases Green Linked Preemptor ® . . . 0 US 14 & IL 83 US 14 & IL 83 (MAIN ST.)/PROSPECT 6/30/2016 16:25 Preemptors Preemptor 5 Active . . . . X Det Lock. . . . . Ped Dark . . . . . .. Priority Preemption. Yel-Red To Grn. . . Ped Active Outputs Only During Hold . Flash All Outputs Zero Ped Clr Time. Terminate Overlap ASAP Terminate Phases. Ped Clr Thru Yel . Don't Override Flash . Duration Time. . . 0 Flash During Hold. . . . . . Delay Time . . . . 0 No CVM in Flash. . . . . . Inhibit Time . . . 0 Fast Flash Grn on Hold Phase., Min Ped Clear. . . 0 Enable Max Time. . . . . . . X Max Time . . . . . 180 Exit Max . . . . . 0 Min Hold Time. . . 10 Hold Delay Time. 0 Green Yellow Red Minimum . . . . . . 5 0.0 0.0 Track Clear . . . . 0 0.0 0.0 Hold. . . . . . 0.0 0.0 Phase/Overlap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12/ A B C D Terminate Overlap . . . . X Track Clearance Phase . . . Hold Phases . . . . . . . X X . Exit Phases . . . . . . . .. . Exit Calls on Phase . . . . . . Out of Flash Color for Exit Phases . . . . Green Linked Preemptor . . . . 0 ---------------------------------------- Preemptor 6 Active . . . . . . . . . . . . Det Lock. . . . . Ped Dark Priority Preemption. . . . . . Yel-Red To Grn. . . Ped Active Outputs Only During Hold Flash All Outputs Zero Ped Clr Time. Terminate Overlap ASAP . Terminate Phases. Ped Clr Thru Yel Don't Override Flash . . . . . Duration Time. . . 0 Flash During Hold. . . . . . . Delay Time . . . . 0 No CVM in Flash. . . . . . . . Inhibit Time . . . 0 Fast Flash Grn on Hold Phase. . Min Ped Clear. . . 0 Enable Max Time. . . . . . . Max Time . . . . . 0 Exit Max . . . . . 0 Min Hold Time. . . 0 Hold Delay Time. 0 Green Yellow Red Minimum . . . . . . 0 0.0 0.0 Track Clear . . . . 0 0.0 0.0 Hold. . . . . . . . 0.0 0.0 Phase/Overlap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12/ A B C D Terminate Overlap . . . . . . Track Clearance Phase . . . Hold Phases . . . . . . . . Exit Phases . . . . . . . . Exit Calls on Phase . . . . Out of Flash Color for Exit Phases . . . . Green Linked Preemptor . . . . 0 US 14 & IL 83 US 14 & IL 83 (MAIN ST.)/PROSPECT 6/30/2016 16:25 Bus Preemptors Bus Preemptor 1 2 3 4 Preemptor Active. Detector Lock . . Maximum Time. . . . . . . . . . 0 0 0 0 Reservice Time. . . . . . . . 0 0 0 0 Delay Time . . . . . . . . . . . 0 0 0 0 Inhibit Time . . . . . . . . . . 0 0 0 0 Entrance Green. . . . . . . . 0 0 0 0 Entrance Ped Clearance. 0 0 0 0 Entrance Yellow . . . . . . . 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Entrance Red. . . . . . . . . . 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Minimum Hold Time . . . . . . . 0 0 0 0 Hold Phases 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Preemptor 1 . . . . . Preemptor 2 . . . . . Preemptor 3 . . . . . Preemptor 4 n3 14 a IL 83 US 14 a IL 83 (MAIN ST.)/gDOSPECT 6/30/20I6 I6:25 NZC/TOD Clock/Calendar --------------------------------------- ___________________________ Maooal 0ZC Program Step - . - - . . ' . 0 I 0ICBaoynoTime -. ........ ..U3I5 Sync Reference is ' . - . . , . . . . . Reference Time Week 1 Begins on lst Sunday . 4 . . . . NO If NO, then week containing Jan. 1 Disable Daylight Savings Time . . Daylight Savings Begins Last Sunday in March - - RN NO If NO, then Second Sunday as per 2007 DST Law OS 14 a IL 83 US 14 a IL 83 (DQAZ0 ST')/PBDSPECT 6/30/20I6 16z25 TOD Weekly/Yearly ---------------- --------------------------- ________________________ I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO Sunday . ' , 3 I I I I I I I I l Program No. Monday , . . I I I I I I I I l I Program No. Tuesday. . - I I I I I I I I I I Program No. Wednesday. . I I I I I I I I I I Program No. Thursday - . I I l I I I I I I I Program No. Friday ' . . I I I I I I I I I I Program No. Saturday . . 2 I I I I I I I I I Program No. Week of Year I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IU Il 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 grog I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 Pzog I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l I I 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 Prog I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l US 14 a IL 83 US 14 a IL 82 (MAIN 3T.)/9BDSPECT 6/30/2016 16:25 Holiday Programs _____________________________________ Boliday Type Month Day of Week/ Week of Year/ Program Day of y0ootb Year I Fixed 0 0 U 0 2 Fixed 0 0 0 0 3 Fired 0 0 0 0 4 Fixed 0 0 0 O 5 Fixed 0 0 O 0 6 Fixed O U 0 O 7 Fixed O 0 0 U 8 Fixed 0 O 0 O 9 Fixed O 0 0 O 10 Fixed 0 0 U 0 II Fixed 0 O O O 12 Fixed 0 O 0 0 13 Fixed 0 0 0 O 14 Fixed 0 O O O 15 Fixed O O 0 0 16 Fixed 0 0 0 0 17 Fixed 0 0 0 0 18 Fixed O 0 O 0 19 Fixed 0 0 0 0 20 Fixed 0 0 O 0 21 Fixed O 0 O U 22 Fixed 0 O 0 O 23 Fixed 0 0 0 0 24 Fixed 0 0 O 0 25 Fixed U O O 0 26 Fixed 0 0 U U 27 Fixed 0 O 0 U 28 Fixed O 0 0 U 29 Fixed O 0 U O 30 Fixed 0 0 0 U 31 Fixed U 0 O O 32 Fixed O O O 0 33 Fixed 0 0 O O 34 Fixed 0 0 0 0 35 Fixed O O 0 0 36 Fixed O 0 O O US 14 & IL 83 US 14 & IL 83 (MAIN ST.)/PROSPECT 6/30/2016 16:25 NIC Program Steps ------------------------------------------------------------------ Step Program Step Begins Pattern Override 1 1 0600 2 NO 2 1 0900 1 NO 3 1 1500 3 NO 4 1 1900 1 NO 5 1 2300 0 NO 6 2 0700 1 NO 7 2 2300 0 NO 8 3 0900 1 NO 9 3 2100 0 NO US 14 & IL 83 US 14 & IL 83 (MAIN ST.)/PROSPECT 6/30/2016 16:25 TOD Program Steps ------------------------------------------------------------------- Step 1 Program 1 Step Begins 0600 Flash. . . . . . . , Dimming Enable. . . . . Red Rest . . . . . » » Alt Veh Extension . Spare 5. . . . . . . » Det Log Enable. Spare 3. . . . . . . , Spare 4 . . . . . . , . . Type 0 Dly Enable. Spare 2 . . . . . Det Diag Plan. . . 1 Phase Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Max 2 Enable . . . . » Max 3 Enable . . . . . . » » Veh Recall . . . . . , Veh Max Recall . . . . . Ped Recall . . . . Cond Service Inhibit. Phase Omit . . . . . . ». Special Function . . . . . » A B C D E F Alt Sequence , ---------------------------------------------------- Step 2 Program 1 Step Begins 1900 Flash. . . . . . . , Dimming Enable. . . » » Red Rest . . . . . , » Alt Veh Extension , Spare 5. . . . . . . » Det Log Enable. . » . » .. Spare 3. . . . . . , » Spare 4 . . . . . .. . . , Type 0 Dly Enable. » Spare 2 . . . . . . , . ,. Det Diag Plan. . . . 0 Phase Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Max 2 Enable . . . . Max 3 Enable . . . . . . » , Veh Recall . . . . . . . , Veh Max Recall . . . . . Ped Recall . . . . . . . Cond Service Inhibit. Phase Omit . . . . . . . Special Function . . . , A B C D E F Alt Sequence . . . . » , » , „, US 14 & IL 83 US 14 & IL 83 (MAIN ST.)/PROSPECT 6/30/2016 16:25 TOD Program Steps Step 3 Program 2 Step Begins 0700 Flash. . . . . . . . . Dimming Enable. . . . . . Red Rest . . . . . . Alt Veh Extension . Spare 5. . . . . . . Det Log Enable. Spare 3. . . . . . . Spare 4 . . . . . . . . Type 0 Dly Enable. . Spare 2 . . . . . . . . Det Diag Plan. . . . 1 Phase Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Max 2 Enable . . . . . , Max 3 Enable . . . . .. . « « Veh Recall . . . . . . . Veh Max Recall . . . . . Ped Recall . . . . . . . « Cond Service Inhibit. Phase Omit . . . . . . . Special Function . . A B C D E F Alt Sequence ---------------------------------------------------- Step 4 Program 2 Step Begins 1800 Flash. . . . . . . . . Dimming Enable. . . .. . . Red Rest . . . . . . Alt Veh Extension , Spare 5. . . . . . . . Det Log Enable. . . . , Spare 3. . . . . . . Spare 4 Type 0 Dly Enable. . . Spare 2 . . . . . . . . . Det Diag Plan. . . . 0 Phase Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Max 2 Enable . Max 3 Enable . . . . . . Veh Recall . . . . . . Veh Max Recall . . . . Ped Recall . . . . . . . Cond Service Inhibit, . . Phase Omit . . . . . , . Special Function . A B C D E F Alt Sequence . . . . . . . US 14 & IL 83 US 14 & IL 83 (MAIN ST.)/PROSPECT 6/30/2016 16:25 TOD Program Steps Step 5 Program 3 Step Begins 0900 Flash. . . . . . . . . Dimming Enable. Red Rest . . . . . . . Alt Veh Extension „ Spare 5. . . . . . . . Det Log Enable. . . . . . Spare 3. . . . . . Spare 4 . . . . . . . . .. Type 0 Dly Enable. Spare 2 . . . . . . . . . Det Diag Plan. . . . 1 Phase Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Max 2 Enable . . . . . . Max 3 Enable . . . Veh Recall . . . . . . . Veh Max Recall . . . . . Ped Recall . . . . . . . Cond Service Inhibit. Phase Omit . . . . . . . Special Function . A B C D E F Alt Sequence . . . . . . . Step 6 Program 3 Step Begins 1700 Flash. . . . . . . . . Dimming Enable. . . . . . Red Rest . . . . . . . Alt Veh Extension Spare 5. . . . . . . Det Log Enable. . . . Spare 3. . . . . . . Spare 4 . . . . . . . . .. Type 0 Dly Enable. . . Spare 2 . . . . . . . .. Det Diag Plan. . . . 0 Phase Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Max 2 Enable . . . . . . Max 3 Enable . . . . . . Veh Recall . . . . . . Veh Max Recall . . Ped Recall . . . . . . Cond Service Inhibit. Phase Omit . . . . . . . Special Function . . . . A B C D E F Alt Sequence . . . . US 14 & IL 83 US 14 & EMERSON 6/30/2016 16:25 Configuration Controller Sequence Priority 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Ring 1 Phases 1 2 3 4 9 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ring 2 Phases 5 6 7 8 Ill 12 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 In Use. . . . . . X X X X X X X Exclusive Ped Direction Overlap A B C D Direction . , . Load Switch Channel/Driver Group Assign (Info Only): Load Signal Switch Driver Group (MMU) Phase/ Channel Ovlap Ped 1 . . . . . 1 2 . . . . . . 2 3 . . . . . . 3 4 . . . . . . 4 5 . . . . . . 5 6 . . . . . . 6 7 7 8 . . . . . . 8 9 . . . . . . 2 X 10 . . . . . . 4 X 11 6 X 12 . . . . . . 8 X 13 . . . . . . A 14 . . . . B 15 . . . . . . C 16 . . . . . . D US 14 & IL 83 US 14 & EMERSON 6/30/2016 16:25 Configuration Continued ----------------------------------------------------- Enable BIU: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Terminal/Facilities. . . . X X . Detector Rack. . . . . . . X . Type 2 Runs as Type 1. . . X MMU Disable. . . . . . . Diagnostic Enable. . . . Peer -Peer Comm Enable. .. . 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Peer To Peer Addresses 255 255 255 255 255 255 255 255 255 255 Port 2: Port 2 Protocol . . . . . . . . Terminal Port 2 Enable . . . . . . . . . YES AB3418 Address. . . . . . . . . 0 AB3418 Group Address. . . . . . 0 AB3418 Response Delay . . . . . 0 AB3418 Single Flag Enable . . . NO AB3418 Drop -Out Time. . . . . . 0 AB3418 TOD SF Select. . . 0 Data Rate . . . . . . . . 1200 bps Data, Parity, Stop. . . . . . 8, 0, 1 Port 3 Protocol . . . . . . Telemetry Port 3 Enable . . . . . . . YES Telemetry Address . . . . . . 3 System Detector 9-16 Address. 0 Telemetry Response Delay. . . . 2000 AB3418 Address. . . . . . . . . 0 AB3418 Group Address. . . . . . 0 AB3418 Response Delay . . . . . 0 AB3418 Single Flag Enable . . . NO AB3418 Drop -Out Time. . . . . . 0 AB3418 TOD SF Select. . . . . . 0 Duplex. . . . . . . . . . . . Full Data Rate . . . . . . . . . . . 9600 bps Data, Parity, Stop. . . . . . . 8, 0, 1 US 14 & IL 83 US 14 & EMERSON 6/30/2016 16:25 Configuration Continued ---------------------------------- ---------------------------------- Event Enabling Critical RFE'S (MMU/TF) . . . . . X Non -Critical RFE'S (DET/TEST) . . X Detector Errors . . . . . . . . . x Coordination Errors . . . . . . . x MMU Flash Faults. . . . . . . . . x Local Flash Faults. . . . . . . . x Preempt . . . . . . . . . . . . . x Power On/Off. . . . . . . . . . X Low Battery . . . . . . . . . x Supervisor Access Code. Data Change Access Code Alarm Enabling ALARM 1 . . . . . . . . . . . ALARM 2 ALARM 3 . . . . . . . . . . . ALARM 4 . . . . . . . ALARM 5 ALARM 6 . . . . . . . . ALARM 7 . . . ALARM 8 . . . . ALARM 9 . . . . . . . . . . ALARM 10 . . . . . . . . . . ALARM 11 . . . . . . . . . . . ALARM 12. . . . . . . . . . . ALARM 13. . . . . . . . . . ALARM 14 . . . . . . . . . . . ALARM 15 . . . . . . . . . . ALARM 16 . . . . . MMU Compatibility Program (Info Only) Channel Is Allowed to Time With Channel 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 . . . . . . . . . . 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 . . . I . . . . . . . . . 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 . . . . . . . . . 8 . . . 9 10. . . . . . . 11. 12. . . . . . . 13. . . . . . 14. 15. Version Info: Software Assy. Part No. Version Boot 27831 2.83 Program 45591 1.9 Application . 3 Help 27891 6.33 Configuration 27919 C722-1 x x US 14 & IL 83 US 14 & EMERSON 6/30/2016 16:25 By -Phase Timing Data Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Direction Minimum Green 3 15 0 8 3 15 0 8 22 0 0 0 Bike Min Green 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cond Sery Min Grn 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Walk 0 8 0 9 0 8 0 7 0 0 0 0 Ped Clearance 0 14 0 21 0 17 0 21 0 0 0 0 Veh Extension 3.0 7.0 0.0 5.0 3.0 7.0 0.0 5.0 3.0 0„0 0.0 0.0 Alt Veh Exten 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Max Extension 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Max 1 15 45 0 25 15 45 0 25 15 0 0 0 Max 2 15 45 0 25 15 45 0 25 15 0 0 0 Max 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Det. Fail Max 9 30 0 20 9 30 0 20 0 0 0 0 Yellow Change 3.5 4.5 3.5 4.5 3.5 4.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 Red Clearance 0.0 1.5 0.0 1.5 0.0 1.5 0.0 1.5 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 Red Revert 2.0 2.0 0„0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Act. B4 Init 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sec/Actuation 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Max Initial 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Time B4 Reduction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cars Waiting 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Time To Reduce 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Minimum Gap 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 US 14 & IL 83 US 14 & EMERSON 6/30/2016 16:25 No -Serve Phases --------------------------------------------------------------------- Phase Cannot Serve With Phase Phase 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1. 2. . , 3. . » , 4. . , 5. 6. , . 7. . , 8. 9. . . 10. . . 11. US 14 & IL 83 US 14 & EMERSON 6/30/2016 16:25 Ped Carryover ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Ped Start Phase Carry Over Phase 1 0 2 0 3 0 4 0 5 0 6 0 7 0 8 0 9 0 10 0 11 0 12 0 US 14 a IL 83 US 14 a EMER3O0 6/30/20I6 I6:25 VebioIe/Ped Phase as Overlap _________________________________________________________________ Ped Phase As Overlap Ped Consists of Ped Phases OvIaB Phase I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 I - - 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO II 12 »eh Phase As Overlap Consists of \/eh Phases l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 x ^ ~~ x . . . x x x x x x US 14 & IL 83 US 14 & EMERSON 6/30/2016 16:25 Overlap Data Overlap A Phase: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Standard. . . . . . . . . Protected . . . . . . . . Permitted . . . . . . . . Enable Lag. Enable Lead . . . . . . . Spare . . . . . . . . . . Advance Green Timer . . . . . . . 0.0 Green Yellow Red Lag/Lead Timers . . . . . . . . . 0.0 0.0 0.0 Overlap B Phase: 1 2 3 4 5 Standard. Protected . . . Permitted . . . . . . . . Enable Lag. . . . . . . . Enable Lead . . . . . . . Spare . . . . . . . . . . Advance Green Timer . . . . . . . 0.0 Green Lag/Lead Timers . . . . . . 0.0 Overlap C Phase: 1 2 3 4 5 Standard. . . . . . . Protected . . . . . Permitted Enable Lag. . . . . . . . Enable Lead . . . . . . . Spare . . . . . . . . . . Advance Green Timer . . . . . . . 0.0 Green Lag/Lead Timers . . . . . . . . . 0.0 Overlap D Phase: 1 2 3 4 5 Standard. . . . . . . . Protected . . . . . . . . Permitted . . . . . . . . Enable Lag. . . . . . . . Enable Lead . . . . . . . Spare . . . . . . . . . . Advance Green Timer . . . . . . 0.0 Green Lag/Lead Timers . . . . . . . . . 0.0 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Yellow Red 0.0 0.0 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Yellow Red 0.0 0.0 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Yellow Red 0.0 0.0 US 14 & IL 83 US 14 & EMERSON 6/30/2016 16:25 Power Start, Remote Flash --------------------------------------------------------------------- Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Power Start. . . . . X X External Start . . . X X Into Remote Flash. X Exit Remote Flash. . . . . . . . . . . . Overlap Remote Flash Yellow. A B C D Flash Together . . . . . . . . . . . . . Initialization Interval: Power Start . . . . . . . Yellow External Start. . . . . . . Yellow Power Start All Red Time. . 0 Power Start Flash Time. . . 0 Remote Flash Options: Out of Flash Yellow . . . . NO Out of Flash All Red. . . . NO Minimum Recall. . . . . . . NO Alternate Flash . . . . . . NO Flash Thru Load Switches. NO Cycle Through Phases. . . NO US 14 & IL 83 US 14 & EMERSON 6/30/2016 16:25 Option Data --------------------------------------------------------------------- Guaranteed Passage . Call To NonActuated I Call To NonActuated 2 Dual Entry. . . . . . . Conditional Service . . Conditional Reservice Actuated Rest in Walk Flashing Walk . . . . . Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . x x . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x x x x . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Enable Programmable Options Dual Entry. . . . . . . . . . . ON Backup Protection Group 1 . . . . ON Conditional Service . . . . . . OFF Backup Protection Group 2 . . . . OFF Ped Clearance Protection. . . . OFF Backup Protection Group 3 . . . . OFF Special Preempt Overlap Flash OFF Simultaneous Gap Group 1. . . . . ON Cond Service Det Cross Switch OFF Simultaneous Gap Group 2. . . . . ON Lock Detectors in Red Only. . . OFF Simultaneous Gap Group 3. . . OFF Five Section Left Turn Control Phases: 5-2 7-4 1-6 3-8 11-10 9-12 Left Turn Head. . . . x x US 14 & IL 83 US 14 & EMERSON 6/30/2016 16:25 Recall Data, Dimming ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Locking Detector. . . . Vehicle Recall. . . . .. Pedestrian Recall . . . Recall To Max . . . Soft Recall . . . . . . Don't Rest Here . . . Ped Dark if No Call . , Dimming Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 X X X X Load Switch 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Green/Walk. . . . NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO Yellow/Ped Clear. NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO Red/Don't Walk. . NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO US 14 & IL 83 US 14 & EMERSON 6/30/2016 16:25 Detector Type/Timers ------------------------------------------------------------------ Locking Log Timers Det. Memory Enable Extend Delay 1 NO NO 0.0 0 2 NO NO 0.0 0 3 NO NO 0.0 0 4 NO NO 0.0 0 5 NO NO 0.0 0 6 NO NO 0.0 0 7 NO NO 0.0 0 8 NO NO 0.0 0 9 NO NO 0.0 0 10 NO NO 0.0 0 11 NO NO 0.0 0 12 NO NO 0.0 0 13 NO NO 0.0 0 14 NO NO 0.0 0 15 NO NO 0.0 0 16 NO NO 0.0 0 17 NO NO 0.0 0 18 NO NO 0.0 0 19 NO NO 0.0 0 20 NO NO 0.0 0 21 NO NO 0.0 0 22 NO NO 0.0 0 23 NO NO 0.0 0 24 NO NO 0.0 0 25 NO NO 0.0 0 26 NO NO 0.0 0 27 NO NO 0.0 0 28 NO NO 0.0 0 29 NO NO 0.0 0 30 NO NO 0.0 0 31 NO NO 0.0 0 32 NO NO 0.0 0 Det 1: Detector 1 Det 2: Detector 2 Det 3: Detector 3 Det 4: Detector 4 Det 5: Detector 5 Det 6: Detector 6 Det 7: Detector 7 Det 8: Detector 8 Det 9: Detector 9 Det 10: Detector 10 Det 11: Detector 11 Det 12: Detector 12 Det 13: Detector 13 Det 14: Detector 14 Det 15: Detector 15 Det 16: Detector 16 Don't Reset Extend Type 1 - Extend/Delay 1 - Extend/Delay 1 - Extend/Delay 1 - Extend/Delay 0 - Normal 0 - Normal 1 - Extend/Delay 1 - Extend/Delay 0 - Normal 0 - Normal 0 - Normal 0 - Normal 0 - Normal 0 - Normal 0 - Normal 0 - Normal 0 - Normal 0 - Normal 0 - Normal 0 - Normal 0 - Normal 0 - Normal 0 - Normal 0 - Normal 0 - Normal 0 - Normal 0 - Normal 0 - Normal 0 - Normal 0 - Normal 0 - Normal 0 - Normal Detector Names Det 17: Detector 17 Det 18: Detector 18 Det 19: Detector 19 Det 20: Detector 20 Det 21: Detector 21 Det 22: Detector 22 Det 23: Detector 23 Det 24: Detector 24 Det 25: Detector 25 Det 26: Detector 26 Det 27: Detector 27 Det 28: Detector 28 Det 29: Detector 29 Det 30: Detector 30 Det 31: Detector 31 Det 32: Detector 32 US 14 a IL 83 US 14 a EMEBGO0 6/30/20I6 I6:25 Detector Type/Timers ___________________________________________-_____________________ 33 00 00 0'0 O . 0 - Normal 34 NO NO 0.0 0 - O - Normal 35 00 00 0'0 0 . U - Normal 36 NO NO 0'0 0 - 0 - Normal 37 NO NO 0'0 O . 0 - Normal 38 NO NO 0'0 0 . O - Normal 39 NO NO 0,0 O . O - Normal 40 NO NO 0'0 0 . 0 - Normal 41 NO NO 0'0 0 . O - Normal 42 NO NO O'O O . O - Normal 43 NO 00 0'0 0 . 0 - Normal 44 NO NO 0'0 O . 8 - Normal 45 NO NO 0'0 0 . O - Normal 46 NO 00 0'0 0 . U - 0ornsI 47 NO NO O'U 0 . 0 - Normal 48 NO NO 0'0 O . U - Normal 49 00 NO 0'0 0 . 0 - Normal 50 NO NO O'O 0 . 0 - Normal 51 NO NO 0'0 0 . O - Normal 52 00 00 0'0 U . 0 - Normal 53 NO NO 0'0 U ^ 0 - Normal 54 NO NO 0'0 0 ^ 0 - Normal 55 NO NO 0'0 0 - U - Normal 56 NO NO 0.0 U - 0 - Normal 57 00 NO 0'0 O - 0 - Normal 58 NO NO 0'0 0 . O - Normal 59 NO NO 0'0 0 . 0 - Normal 60 NO NO 0'0 O . O - Normal 61 NO NO 0.0 0 . 0 - Normal 62 NO NO 0-0 0 ' O - Normal 63 NO NO 0'0 0 ' 0 - Normal 64 NO NO 0'0 0 . U - Normal Detector Names Det 33: Detector 33 Det 34: Detector 34 Det 35: Detector 35 Det 36: Detector 36 Det 37: Detector 37 Det 38; Detector 38 Det 39: Detector 39 Det 40: Detector 40 Det 41: Detector 41 Det 42: Detector 42 Det 43: Detector 43 Det 44: Detector 44 Det 45; Detector 45 Det 46: Detector 46 Det 47: Detector 47 Det 48: Detector 48 Det 49: Detector 49 Det 50: Detector 50 Det 51: Detector 51 Det 53: Detector 52 Det 53: Detector 53 Det 54: Detector 54 Det 55: Detector 55 Det 56: Detector 56 Det 57; Detector 57 Det 58: Detector 58 Det 59: Detector 59 Det 60: Detector 60 Det 61: Detector 61 Det 62: Detector 62 Det 63: Detector 63 Det 64; Detector 64 US 14 a IL 83 US 14 a 8MERSO0 6/30/2016 I5;25 Detector Phase Assignment _________________________________________________________________ Phaae Det' I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 lO lI 12 I � ' ~ ' ^ - 2 x 3 ~ x 4 - ' ' ' x ~ ~ ^ ~ ~ ~ ^ 5 ' - ~ x 6 7 ^ ' ^ x 8 � ~ . - ^ ^ ^ - ' - - ' 9 10 ll 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 US I& a IL 83 OS 14 a EMERS00 6/30/20I6 I6:25 Detector Cross Switching Phase Det. I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 lO II 12 I 2 3 4 5 5 7 8 9 ^ 10 II 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 US 14 & IL 83 US 14 & EMERSON 6/30/2016 16:25 Detector Cross Switching Phase Det. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 US 14 & IL 83 US 14 & EMERSON 6/30/2016 16:25 Ped/SD Local Assign,Log Interval Phase Ped Detector 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Is Ped Detector No. ... 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 *Local System Detector No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Is Local Detector No. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector Log Interval . . 0 *NOTE: System master designations cross referenced to local system detector numbers are: SDAl = 1 & 9 SDA2 = 2 & 10 SDB1 = 3 & 11 SDB2 = 4 & 12 SDCl = 5 & 13 SDC2 = 6 & 14 SDDl = 7 & 15 SDD2 = 8 & 16 US 14 a IL 83 US 14 a EMEBSON 6/30/20I6 I6;25 Diagnostic Plans/Fail Action _________________________________________________________________ Deteotor Plan I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO Il 12 13 14 15 16 I Diagnostic I I I I I 0 l I O O 0 0 0 O O 0 Scaling 15 15 15 15 15 l 15 15 I I l l l I I I 2 Diagnostic O 0 O 0 0 0 O 0 O 8 0 0 O O 0 0 Scaling I I I l l I l I I I I I I I I I 3 Diagnostic 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O O 0 0 0 O O Scaling I l I I l I I I I I I I I I I I 4 Diagnostic 0 O 0 O 0 0 U U O O 0 0 O 0 O O Scaling I l I I I I I I I I I I l I I I 5 Diagnostic O 0 O O O O O O O O O O 0 U O U Scaling I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 6 Diagnostic O O O O 0 O O O 0 O O O O O 0 0 Scaling I I l I l I I I I I l I I I I I 7 Diagnostic 0 0 O O O O O O O 0 0 0 O 0 0 O Scaling l I I I I I I I I I I I I I l l 8 Diagnostic O O O O U O 0 O O 0 O O O O 0 U Scaling I I l I I I I I I I I I I I I I *Fail Action O O O 0 O O O U 0 O O O 0 O 0 0 Detector Plan 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 28 30 31 32 I Diagnostic 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 O O O 0 O 0 0 O Scaling 1 I I I I I I I I I I I l I I I 2 Diagnostic 0 0 O O O 0 O O O O U 0 O O O O Scaling l I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 3 Diagnostic 0 0 0 O O O 0 O 0 O 0 O O O U O Scaling I I I I I I l I I I I I I I I I 4 Diagnostic O O O 0 O O 0 0 0 U O 0 O O 0 O Scaling I l I I I I I I l I l I I I I I 5 Diagnostic O O O O 0 0 O 0 O O O U O 0 O O Scaling I I I I l I I I I l I l I l I I 6 Diagnostic 0 0 O U O O O 0 O O O O O O O 0 Scaling l I I I I l I I I I I I I I I I 7 Diagnostic 0 0 O 0 O O O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 Scaling I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 8 Diagnostic O O O O O O 8 O O O 0 0 0 0 0 O Scaling I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I *Fail Action O O O O 0 0 O O 0 O O O O 0 0 0 *NOTE: 0 = No Action, I = Min Recall, 2 = Max BeoaII in Effect US 14 m IL 83 O3 14 a EMEB300 6/30/20I6 I6:25 Diagnostic Plans/Fail Action _________________________________________________________________ Deteotor Plan 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 I Diagnostic O 0 O O 0 O O 8 O 0 O O O O O O Scaling l l I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 2 Diagnostic 0 U O U O O O O 0 O U U 0 0 0 O Scaling I I I I I I I I I I I I I l I I 3 Diagnostic O 0 0 O O 8 O 0 0 O O O 0 O U 0 Scaling I I I I l I I I I I I I I I l I 1 Diagnostic O O O O O 0 O 0 O O 0 O 0 0 0 O Scaling I I I I I I I I I I I I I l I I 5 Diagnostic 0 O 0 O O 0 O O O O O 0 0 O O U Scaling I I I l I I I I I I I I I I I I 6 Diagnostic U 0 O 0 0 O 0 0 0 O O 0 U O 0 O Scaling I I I I l I I I I I I I I I I l 7 Diagnostic O 0 U 8 O 0 0 O O 0 0 O U 0 O U Scaling I I I I I I I I I I I I l I I I 8 Diagnostic O O 0 0 0 O O 0 0 O 0 O O 0 O 0 Scaling I I I I I I l I I I I I I I l l *Fail Action 0 0 O O 0 O O O 0 O O 0 0 O U O Detector Plan 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 I Diagnostic O 0 0 O 0 O O D O 0 O O 0 0 0 0 Scaling I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 2 Diagnostic 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 O Scaling I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 3 Diagnostic 0 O O 0 O 0 0 U 0 U 8 0 0 0 O 0 Scaling I l I I l I I I I I I I I I I I & Diagnostic 0 O O O 0 U O 0 O O U O 0 0 0 O Scaling I l I I I I I I I I I l l I I I 5 Diagnostic O 0 O 0 O 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 O O O Scaling l I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 6 Diagnostic O O O O O 0 0 O 0 0 O O 0 U O 0 Scaling I I I I l I I I I I I l I I I I 7 Diagnostic O 0 O O 0 0 O O 0 8 O 0 0 0 O O Scaling I I I I l I I I I I I I I I l I 8 Diagnostic 0 O 0 O O 0 O 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 Scaling I I I I l I I I I I I I I I l I *Fail Action O O O O O O O 0 O 0 O O 0 O O O *NOTE: O = No Action, I = Min Recall, 2 = Max BeoaII in Effect US 14 a IL 83 U3 14 a EMERSO0 6/30/20I6 I6:25 Ped Diagnostic Plans Plan I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 I Diagnostic O 0 0 0 U 0 O O 0 O O 0 Scaling I I I I I I I I I I I I 2 Diagnostic 0 O O O O 0 O O 0 O 0 O Scaling I I I I I I I I I I I I 3 Diagnostic O 0 O 0 O U U O O 0 O O Scaling I I I I l I I I I I I I 4 Diagnostic O O O O O O O 0 O 0 O O Scaling I I I I I I I I I I I I 5 Diagnostic O O U 0 O 0 O O O O O O Scaling I I I I I I I I I I I I G Diagnostic 0 O O U O 0 0 O 0 O O O Scaling I I I I I I I I I I I I 7 Diagnostic O O O O 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 O Scaling I I I I I I I I I I I I 8 Diagnostic 0 O D 0 O O O 8 O O 0 O Scaling I I I I I I l I I I I I OS 14 a IL 83 US 14 a EMEBS00 6/20/20I6 I6:25 Detector Diagnostic Intervals _________________________________________________________________ Diagnust±o *No -Activity *Max Presence Number Diagnostic Interval Diagnostic Zo±ezvaI Erratic Counts 1 2 2 80 2 O U O 3 O 0 O 4 O 0 O 5 0 U O 6 O O O 7 U O U 8 O O O 9 O O O 10 O O O II 0 O U 12 O O 0 13 0 O O 14 O 0 O 15 0 0 U 16 O O O 17 O O 0 18 0 U 0 19 O 0 0 20 U U 0 21 0 0 O 22 0 O 0 23 U 0 0 24 O O 0 25 O U 0 26 O 0 O 27 0 O 0 28 O 0 0 29 O O O 30 0 0 O 31 0 0 O 32 0 O O *NOTE: Scaling is specified in each detector diagnostic plan. US 14 & IL 83 US 14 & EMERSON 6/30/2016 16:25 Speed Detectors Local Speed Detector One Detector Speed: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Local Detector Number. . . . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Vehicle Length . . . . . . . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Loop Length. . . . . . . . . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Two Detector Speed: Local Detector Number. . . . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Speed Trap Length. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Local Speed Detector One Detector Speed: 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Local Detector Number. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Vehicle Length . . . . . . . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Loop Length. . . . . . . . . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Two Detector Speed: Local Detector Number. . . . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Speed Trap Length. . . . . . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Units. . . . . . . . . . . . . Inches NOTE: Speed Detector 1 :-= STA, Speed Detector 2 = STB US 14 & IL 83 US 14 & EMERSON 6/30/2016 16:25 Coordinator Manual Command and Options Manual Enable . . Pattern . . . . . .. 1 Split Units . . . . . Seconds OffsetUnits . . . . . Seconds Interconnect Format . STD Interconnect Source . TLM Transition. . . . . . SMOOTH Dwell Period. . . . . 0 Resync Count. . . . 3 Actuated Coord Phase X Actuated Walk Rest Inhibit Max Timing X Max 2 Select . . . . . . Floating Force Off Multisync. . . . . . Phase Split Demand: Call Time Cyc Count 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Demand 1 0 0 Demand 2 0 0 Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Auto Permissive Min Green 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 A B C D E F Free Alternate Sequence US 14 & IL 83 US 14 & EMERSON 6/30/2016 16:25 Coordination Patterns -------------------------------------------------------------------- Pattern 1 Cycle Length 80 COS . . . . 111 Offset . . . . . 32 Vehicle Permissive . . [1] 0 [2] 0 Vehicle Perm 2 Displacement 0 Phase Reservice. NO Splits: Phase 1- 13 2- 37 3- 0 4- 30 Phase 5- 13 6- 37 7- 0 8- 30 Phase 9- 0 10- 0 11- 0 12- 0 Split Sum: 0 Split Extension/Ring [1] 0 [2] 0 Split Demand Pattern [1] 0 [2] 0 XRT Pattern. . . 0 Phase Number: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Coord Phases X X Veh Recall Veh Max Recall Ped Recall Veh Omit . Alt Sequence A: B: C: D: E: F: Pattern 2 Cycle Length 85 COS . , . . . 211 Offset . . . . . 18 Vehicle Permissive . . [1] 0 [2] 0 Vehicle Perm 2 Displacement 0 Phase Reservice. NO Splits: Phase 1- 13 2- 35 3- 0 4- 37 Phase 5- 13 6- 35 7- 0 8- 37 Phase 9- 0 10- 0 11- 0 12- 0 Split Sum: 0 Split Extension/Ring [1] 0 [2] 0 Split Demand Pattern [1] 0 [2] 0 XRT Pattern. . . 0 Phase Number: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Coord Phases X X Veh Recall Veh Max Recall . Ped Recall Veh Omit Alt Sequence A: B: C: D. E: F: --------------------------------------- Pattern 3 Cycle Length 85 COS . . , . . 311 Offset . . . . . 24 Vehicle Permissive . . [1] 0 [2] 0 Vehicle Perm 2 Displacement 0 Phase Reservice. NO Splits: Phase 1- 13 2- 41 3- 0 4- 31 Phase 5- 13 6- 41 7- 0 8- 31 Phase 9- 0 10- 0 11- 0 12- 0 Split Sum: 0 Split Extension/Ring [1] 0 [2] 0 Split Demand Pattern [1] 0 [2] 0 XRT Pattern. . . 0 Phase Number: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Coord Phases X X Veh Recall Veh Max Recall . Ped Recall Veh Omit Alt Sequence A: B: C: D: E: F: US 14 & IL 83 US 14 & EMERSON 6/30/2016 16:25 Preemptors ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Preemptor 1 Active . . . . . . . . . . . X Det Lock. . . . . .. Ped Dark . . . . . Priority Preemption. . . . . X Yel-Red To Grn. . Ped Active Outputs Only During Hold Flash All Outputs Zero Ped Clr Time. Terminate Overlap ASAP Terminate Phases. Ped Clr Thru Yel X Don't Override Flash . Duration Time. . . 0 Flash During Hold. . . . . . X Delay Time . . . . 1 No CVM in Flash. . . . . . . Inhibit Time . . . 0 Fast Flash Grn on Hold Phase. . Min Ped Clear. . . 4 Enable Max Time. . . . . . . Max Time . . . . . 0 Exit Max . . . . . 0 Min Hold Time. . , 15 Hold Delay Time. 0 Green Yellow Red Minimum . . . . 1 4.5 1.5 Track Clear 22 4.5 1.5 Hold. . . . . 0.0 0.0 Phase/Overlap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12/ A B C D Terminate Overlap . Track Clearance Phase . . . . X Hold Phases . . . . . . . . . . Exit Phases . . . . . . . . . Exit Calls on Phase . . . . . Out of Flash Color for Exit Phases ------------------------------------------- . . . Green Preemptor 2 Active . . . . . . . . . . . X Det Lock. . . . . . Ped Dark . . . . . Priority Preemption. . . . . X Yel-Red To Grn. . . Ped Active Outputs Only During Hold Flash All Outputs Zero Ped Clr Time. Terminate Overlap ASAP Terminate Phases. Ped Clr Thru Yel X Don't Override Flash Duration Time. . . 0 Flash During Hold. . . . . . Delay Time . . . . 1 No CVM in Flash. . . . . . . Inhibit Time . . . 0 Fast Flash Grn on Hold Phase. . Min Ped Clear. . . 4 Enable Max Time. . . . . . . Max Time . . . . . 0 Exit Max . . . . . 0 Min Hold Time. . . 15 Hold Delay Time. 0 Green Yellow Red Minimum . . . . . 1 4.5 1.5 Track Clear . . . . 22 4.5 1.5 Hold. . . . . . .. 0.0 0.0 Phase/Overlap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12/ A B C D Terminate Overlap . . . . . Track Clearance Phase . . X Hold Phases . . . . . . . X X Exit Phases . . . . . . . X X Exit Calls on Phase . . . . Out of Flash Color for Exit Phases . . . . Green Linked Preemptor . . . . 0 US 14 & IL 83 US 14 & EMERSON 6/30/2016 16:25 Preemptors Preemptor 3 Active X Det Lock. . . . . . Ped Dark Priority Preemption. . . Yel-Red To Grn. . . Ped Active Outputs Only During Hold . Flash All Outputs Zero Ped Clr Time.. Terminate Overlap ASAP . Terminate Phases. Ped Clr Thru Yel Don't Override Flash . . . . Duration Time. . . 0 Flash During Hold. . . . . . Delay Time . . . . 0 No CVM in Flash. . . . . . . Inhibit Time . . . 0 Fast Flash Grn on Hold Phase. . Min Ped Clear. . . 0 Enable Max Time. . . . . . . X Max Time . . . . . 180 Exit Max . . . . . 0 Min Hold Time. . . 10 Hold Delay Time. 0 Green Yellow Red Minimum . . . . . . 5 0.0 0.0 Track Clear . . . . 0 0.0 0.0 Hold. . . . . . 0.0 0.0 Phase/Overlap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12/ A B C D Terminate Overlap . . . . . Track Clearance Phase . . . Hold Phases . . . . . . . X . X . Exit Phases . . . . . . . . . . Exit Calls on Phase . . . . . . Out of Flash Color for Exit Phases . . . . Green Linked Preemptor . . . . 0 ------------------------------------------- Preemptor 4 Active . . . . . . . . . . . X Det Lock. . . . . . Ped Dark . . . . . Priority Preemption. . . . . Yel-Red To Grn. . . Ped Active . . . . Outputs Only During Hold Flash All Outputs Zero Ped Clr Time. Terminate Overlap ASAP . Terminate Phases. Ped Clr Thru Yel Don't Override Flash . . . . Duration Time. . 0 Flash During Hold. . . . . . Delay Time . . . . 0 No CVM in Flash. . . . . . . Inhibit Time . . . 0 Fast Flash Grn on Hold Phase. . Min Ped Clear. . . 0 Enable Max Time. . . . . . . X Max Time . . . . . 180 Exit Max . . . . . 0 Min Hold Time. . . 10 Hold Delay Time. . 0 Green Yellow Red Minimum . . . . . . 5 0.0 0.0 Track Clear . . . . 0 0.0 0.0 Hold. . . . . . . 0.0 0.0 Phase/Overlap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12/ A B C D Terminate Overlap . . . . . Track Clearance Phase . . . Hold Phases . . . . . . . X X . Exit Phases . . . . . . . . Exit Calls on Phase . . . . Out of Flash Color for Exit Phases . . . . Green Linked Preemptor . . . . 0 US 14 & IL 83 US 14 & EMERSON 6/30/2016 16:25 Preemptors Preemptor 5 --____.__-___-__-_____ Active . . . . . . . . . . . Det Lock. . . . . Ped Dark Priority Preemption. . . . . . Yel-Red To Grn. . . Ped Active . . . .. Outputs Only During Hold Flash All Outputs Zero Ped Clr Time. Terminate Overlap ASAP Terminate Phases. Ped Clr Thru Yel Don't Override Flash Duration Time. . . 0 Flash During Hold. . . . . . . Delay Time . . . . 0 No CVM in Flash. . . . . . . . Inhibit Time . . . 0 Fast Flash Grn on Hold Phase. . Min Ped Clear. . 0 Enable Max Time. . . . . . . Max Time . . . . . 0 Exit Max . . . . . 0 Min Hold Time. . . 0 Hold Delay Time. 0 Green Yellow Red Minimum . . . . . 0 0.0 0.0 Track Clear 0 0.0 0.0 Hold. . . . . . 0.0 0.0 Phase/Overlap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12/ A B C D Terminate Overlap . . . . _ Track Clearance Phase . . . Hold Phases . . . . . . . . . . . Exit Phases . . . . . . . . . . Exit Calls on Phase . . . . . . . Out of Flash Color for Exit Phases . . . .. Green Linked Preemptor . . . . 0 ------------------------------- Preemptor 6 Active . . . . . . . . . . . . Det Lock. . . . . Ped Dark . . . . . Priority Preemption. . . . . . Yel-Red To Grn. . . Ped Active . . . Outputs Only During Hold Flash All Outputs Zero Ped Clr Time. Terminate Overlap ASAP Terminate Phases. Ped Clr Thru Yel Don't Override Flash Duration Time. . . 0 Flash During Hold. . . . . . Delay Time . . . . 0 No CVM in Flash. . . . . . . Inhibit Time . . . 0 Fast Flash Grn on Hold Phase. . Min Ped Clear. . 0 Enable Max Time. . . . . . . . Max Time . . . . . 0 Exit Max . . . . . 0 Min Hold Time. . . 0 Hold Delay Time. 0 Green Yellow Red Minimum . . . . . . 0 0.0 0.0 Track Clear 0 0.0 0.0 Hold. . . . . . . . 0.0 0.0 Phase/Overlap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12/ A B C D Terminate Overlap . . . . Track Clearance Phase . . . Hold Phases . . . . . . . . Exit Phases . . . . . . . . Exit Calls on Phase . . . . . Out of Flash Color for Exit Phases Green Linked Preemptor . . . . 0 US 14 & IL 83 US 14 & EMERSON 6/30/2016 16:25 Bus Preemptors Bus Preemptor 1 2 3 4 Preemptor Active. Detector Lock . . Maximum Time. . . . . 0 0 0 0 Reservice Time. . . . . . . . . 0 0 0 0 Delay Time . . . . . . . . . 0 0 0 0 Inhibit Time. . . . . . . . . . 0 0 0 0 Entrance Green. . . . . . . . .. 0 0 0 0 Entrance Ped Clearance. . . . . 0 0 0 0 Entrance Yellow . . . . . . . . 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Entrance Red. . . . . . . . . . 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Minimum Hold Time . . . . . . . 0 0 0 0 Hold Phases 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Preemptor 1 Preemptor 2 Preemptor 3 . . . . Preemptor 4 „ U3 14 a IL 83 OS 14 a EMDRSD0 6/30/20I6 I6:25 0ZC/TOD Clock/Calendar _________________________________________________________________ MaouaI NZC Program Step . - . ' . ^ . . O 0ZC ReayooTime -..~~-. . ..-.O3I5 Sync Reference is . . - . . ~ ' . . . - Reference Time Week 1 Begins on lst Sunday . . . . . . NO If NO, then week containing Jan. 1 Disable Daylight Savings Time . . . . . NO Daylight Savings Begins Last Sunday in March . . . . . . NO If NO, then Second Sunday as per 2007 DST Law US 14 a IL 83 US 14 a EMED3O0 6/30/20I6 I5:25 TOD Weekly/Yearly _________________________________________________________________ I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO Sunday . - . 3 I I I I I l I I I Program No. Monday ' - - I I l I I I I I I I Program No. Tomeday. . . l I I I I I l I I I Program No. Wednesday, . I I I I I I I I I I Program No. Tbocsday . . I I I I I l I l l I Program No. Friday . . ' l I I I I I I I I l Program No. Saturday . . 2 I I I I I I l I I Program No. Week of Year I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 g IO II 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Prog I I I I l I I I I I I l I I I I I I 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 Prog I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 Prug l I I I I I I I I l l l I l I I I US 14 a IL 83 US 14 a EMEBSO0 6/30/2016 I6:25 Holiday Programs _________________________________________________________________ Boliday Type Mouth Day of Week/ Week of Year/ Program Day of Mouth Year I Fixed 0 0 U 0 2 Fixed O 0 O 0 3 Fixed 0 0 O 0 4 Fixed 0 0 0 0 5 Fixed 0 0 U 0 G Fixed O 0 0 0 7 Fixed 0 O 0 0 8 Fixed 0 O 0 O 9 Fixed 0 0 0 0 lO Fixed O U 0 0 lI Fixed O O 0 0 12 Fixed O O 0 0 13 Fixed 0 0 0 0 14 Fixed 0 0 0 0 15 Fixed 0 0 0 0 16 Fixed 0 O 0 0 17 Fixed 0 0 U 0 18 Fixed 0 O 0 0 19 Fixed 0 0 0 0 20 Fixed 0 0 O 0 21 Fixed 0 0 0 0 22 Fixed 0 0 O O 23 Fixed 0 0 0 0 24 Fixed 0 0 0 0 25 Fixed 0 0 0 0 26 Fixed 0 U O 0 27 Fixed 0 O O O 28 Fixed 0 0 O O 29 Fixed 0 0 U U 30 Fixed 0 O O 0 31 Fixed O O 0 0 32 Fixed O O 0 O 33 Fixed 0 0 0 0 34 Fixed O O 0 U 35 Fixed 0 0 0 0 36 Fixed U O 0 O US 14 a IL 83 US 14 a EMER300 6/30/20I6 I6:25 0IC Program Steps _________________________________________________________________ Step Program Step Begins Pattern Override I I 0600 2 00 2 I 0900 l NO 3 I 1500 3 NO 4 I I900 I 00 5 I 2300 O NO 6 2 0700 I NO 7 2 2300 O NO B 3 0708 I NO 9 3 2I00 0 NO US 14 & IL 83 US 14 & EMERSON 6/30/2016 16:25 TOD Program Steps ----------------------------------------------------------------- Step 1 Program 1 Step Begins 0600 Flash. . . . . . . . . Dimming Enable. Red Rest . . . . . . . Alt Veh Extension . . Spare 5. . . . . . . . Det Log Enable. . . . . . Spare 3. . . . . . . Spare 4 . . . . . . . .. .. Type 0 Dly Enable. Spare 2 . . . . . . . . .. Det Diag Plan. . . . 1 Phase Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Max 2 Enable . . . . . . . Max 3 Enable . . . . . „ Veh Recall . . . . . . . Veh Max Recall . . Ped Recall . . . . . . . Cond Service Inhibit. . . Phase Omit . . . . . . . Special Function . A B C D E F Alt Sequence , . . ------------------------------------------------------- . . . Step 2 Program 1 Step Begins 1900 Flash. . . . . . . . . Dimming Enable. . . . . . Red Rest . . . . . . Alt Veh Extension . Spare 5. . . . . . . . Det Log Enable. Spare 3. . . . . Spare 4 . . . . . . . . . Type 0 Dly Enable. Spare 2 . . . . . . . . . Det Diag Plan. . . . 0 Phase Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Max 2 Enable . . . . . . Max 3 Enable . . . . . . . Veh Recall . . . . Veh Max Recall . . . . . „ Ped Recall . . . . . . . Cond Service Inhibit. Phase Omit . . . . . .. . Special Function . . .. . . A B C D E F Alt Sequence . . . . . . . US 14 & IL 83 US 14 & EMERSON 6/30/2016 16:25 TOD Program Steps --------------------------------------------------- Step 3 Program 2 Step Begins 0700 Flash. . . . . . . . . Dimming Enable. . . . . . Red Rest . . . . . . Alt Veh Extension , Spare 5. . . . . . . . Det Log Enable. . » » » . Spare 3. . . . . . . Spare 4 . . . . , . . . . Type 0 Dly Enable. . . Spare 2 . . . . . . . Det Diag Plan. . . . 1 Phase Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Max 2 Enable . . . . . .. » Max 3 Enable . . . . ». Veh Recall . . . . Veh Max Recall . . . . . Ped Recall . . . . . . . Cond Service Inhibit. . . . » Phase Omit . . . . . . . » Special Function . A B C D E F Alt Sequence . . . . . . ---------------------------------------------------- Step 4 Program 2 Step Begins 1800 Flash. . . . . . . . . Dimming Enable. . . .. . . Red Rest . . . . . . . Alt Veh Extension . Spare 5. Det Log Enable. Spare 3. . » . . . . Spare 4 Type 0 Dly Enable. . Spare 2 Det Diag Plan. . . . 0 Phase Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Max 2 Enable . . . . . . » Max 3 Enable . . . . . . Veh Recall . . . . . . . Veh Max Recall . . . . . Ped Recall . . . . . . Cond Service Inhibit. Phase Omit . . . . . . . Special Function . . . . . A B C D E F Alt Sequence US 14 & IL 83 US 14 & EMERSON 6/30/2016 16:25 TOD Program Steps ------------------------------------------------------------------- Step 5 Program 3 Step Begins 0900 Flash. . . . . . . .. Dimming Enable. . . . Red Rest . . . . . . Alt Veh Extension . Spare 5. . . . . . . Det Log Enable. Spare 3. . . . . » . Spare 4 . . . . . . .. Type 0 Dly Enable.. Spare 2 . . . . . . . . Det Diag Plan. 1 Phase Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Max 2 Enable . . . . . . Max 3 Enable . . . . . . Veh Recall . . . . . . . Veh Max Recall . . . . . Ped Recall . . . . . . . Cond Service Inhibit. Phase Omit . . . . . . . Special Function . A B C D E F Alt Sequence . . . . . . . Step 6 Program 3 Step Begins 1700 Flash. . . . . . . . Dimming Enable. . . . Red Rest . . . . . . Alt Veh Extension . Spare 5. . . . . . Det Log Enable. Spare 3. . . . . . . Spare 4 . . . . . . . . . Type 0 Dly Enable. . Spare 2 . . . . . . . . . Det Diag Plan. . . . 0 Phase Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Max 2 Enable . . . . » Max 3 Enable . . . . . » Veh Recall . . . . . . . Veh Max Recall . . . . . Ped Recall . . . . . . . Cond Service Inhibit. „ Phase Omit . . . . . . . „ Special Function . A B C D E F Alt Sequence . . . . . . . Mount Prospect Downtown Transportation Study Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: IL 83 & US 14/ Prospect Ave./US 14 07/07/2017 Lane Configurations 1 0 fl + T+ I fl� Traffic Volume (vph) 10 490 75 30 320 40 55 440 60 15 450 5 Future Volume (vph) 10 490 75 30 320 40 55 440 60 15 450 5 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 125 0 115 0 65 0 60 0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 Ped Bike Factor 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 Ftt 0.980 0.983 0.982 0.998 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 3453 0 1770 3469 0 1770 3459 0 1770 3531 0 Flt Permitted 0.496 0.189 0.412 0.950 Satd. Flow (perm) 918 3453 0 350 3469 0 761 3459 0 1746 3531 0 Right Turn on Red No No No No Satd. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 30 Link Distance (ft) 2109 466 282 1059 Travel Time (s) 47.9 10.6 6.4 24.1 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 8 15 15 8 11 17 17 11 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 11 516 79 32 337 42 58 463 63 16 474 5 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 11 595 0 32 379 0 58 526 0 16 479 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 Number of Detectors 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 100 20 100 20 100 Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 100 20 100 20 100 20 100 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+pt NA custom NA Prot NA Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 31112 81112 7 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 8 3 Detector Phase 5 2 1 6 311 12 811 12 7 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 3.0 15.0 3.0 15.0 3.0 15.0 Econolite #197 -Existing AM Traffic 06/29/2017 Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: IL 83 & US 14/ Pros ect Ave./US 14 07/07/2017 ' �/ 4�/� ll :„�// iiar�rc,ri%% / / /, r/il�l/ zmr�/ �/ Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) Future Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Storage Length (ft) Storage Lanes Taper Length (ft) Lane Util. Factor Ped Bike Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Fit Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Right Turn on Red Satd. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (mph) Link Distance (ft) Travel Time (s) Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Peak Hour Factor Adj. Flow (vph) Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) Enter Blocked Intersection Lane Alignment Median Width(ft) Link Offset(ft) Crosswalk Width(ft) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor Turning Speed (mph) Number of Detectors Detector Template Leading Detector (ft) Trailing Detector (ft) Detector 1 Position(ft) Detector 1 Size(ft) Detector 1 Type Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) Detector 1 Queue (s) Detector 1 Delay (s) Turn Type Protected Phases 3 8 11 12 Permitted Phases Detector Phase Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 3.0 15.0 1.0 3.0 Econolite #197 - Existing AM Traffic 06/29/2017 Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 2 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: IL 83 & US 14/ Prospect Ave./US 14 107/07/2017 Minimum Split (s) 6.0 41.5 6.0 34.5 7.5 40.5 Total Split (s) 13.0 37.0 13.0 37.0 15.0 51.0 Total Split (%) 7.6% 21.8% 7.6% 21.8% 8.8% 30.0% Maximum Green (s) 10.0 30.5 10.0 30.5 10.5 44.5 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 4.5 3.0 4.5 3.5 4.5 All -Red Time (s) 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 1.0 -2.5 1.0 -2.5 -0.5 -2.5 Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lead -Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 7.0 3.0 7.0 3.0 7.0 Recall Mode None None None None None C-Max Walk Time (s) 9.0 8.0 7.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 26.0 20.0 27.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 51.5 45.6 62.3 54.1 86.1 90.1 7.6 49.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.30 0.27 0.37 0.32 0.51 0.53 0.04 0.29 v/c Ratio 0.04 0.64 0.14 0.34 0.09 0.29 0.20 0.47 Control Delay 14.5 21.3 33.6 42.4 0.3 0.4 68.3 53.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 14.5 21.3 33.6 42.4 0.3 0.6 68.3 53.6 LOS B C C D A A E D Approach Delay 21.1 41.8 0.5 54.1 Approach LOS C D A D Queue Length 50th (ft) 2 71 22 157 0 0 13 278 Queue Length 95th (ft) m3 m199 50 198 m0 0 m25 344 Internal Link Dist (ft) 2029 386 202 979 Turn Bay Length (ft) 125 115 65 60 Base Capacity (vph) 340 926 234 1104 846 2209 114 1026 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 870 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.03 0.64 0.14 0.34 0.07 0.39 0.14 0.47 Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 170 Actuated Cycle Length: 170 Offset: 50 (29%), Referenced to phase 4:SBT and 8:NBTL, Start of 1st Green Natural Cycle: 160 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.64 Intersection Signal Delay: 27.2 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 66.6% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min)15 m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. and Phases: 1: IL 83 & US 14/ Prospect Ave./US 14 2 #1 :ZI 1 2 #1 -2 :1 2 #1 _#2 C-4 • 02 ri * 04 (R) -V C 1*04 ` 44 #1 m2 1 #2 #1F 2 1 TZ • -: y 0 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: IL 83 & US 14/ Pros ect Ave./US 14 07/07/2017 ., ...... / / MAN:: Minimum Split (s) 9.0 37.5 14.0 42.0 Total Split (s) 13.0 36.0 14.0 42.0 Total Split (%) 8% 21 % 8% 25% Maximum Green (s) 7.0 29.5 1.0 29.0 Yellow Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 All -Red Time (s) 1.5 2.0 8.5 8.5 Lost Time Adjust (s) Total Lost Time (s) Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead -Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 7.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None C-Max None None Walk Time (s) 9.0 7.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 22.0 22.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) Actuated g/C Ratio v/c Ratio Control Delay Queue Delay Total Delay LOS Approach Delay Approach LOS Queue Length 50th (ft) Queue Length 95th (ft) Internal Link Dist (ft) Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) Starvation Cap Reductn Spillback Cap Reductn Storage Cap Reductn Reduced v/c Ratio Econolite #197 -Existing AM Traffic 06/29/2017 Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 4 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2: IL 83 & U.S. 14/ Prospect Avenue/Prospect Avenue 07/07/2017 --* --I, -'* 'r IQ t 1 Lane Configurations t Vi + r 0 Traffic Volume (vph) 45 60 5 15 20 15 5 495 5 55 475 25 Future Volume (vph) 45 60 5 15 20 15 5 495 5 55 475 25 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 185 0 60 70 70 0 25 0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 Ped Bike Factor 0.80 1.00 1.00 0.79 0.90 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.989 0.850 0.999 0.993 Fit Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 3497 0 1770 1863 1583 1770 3535 0 1770 3499 0 Fit Permitted 0.950 0.710 0.457 0.950 Satd. Flow (perm) 1416 3497 0 1318 1863 1245 770 3535 0 1761 3499 0 Right Turn on Red Yes No Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 5 6 Link Speed (mph) 25 25 30 30 Link Distance (ft) 2538 450 457 282 Travel Time (s) 69.2 12.3 10.4 6.4 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 117 2 2 117 72 6 6 72 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 47 63 5 16 21 16 5 521 5 58 500 26 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 47 68 0 16 21 16 5 526 0 58 526 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 Number of Detectors 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 100 20 20 100 20 100 Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 100 20 100 20 20 100 20 100 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type Prot NA Perm NA Perm Perm NA custom NA Protected Phases 3 312 12 8 56711 12411 Permitted Phases 12 12 8 56711 Detector Phase 3 312 12 12 12 8 8 56711 12411 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 15.0 15.0 Econolite #197 - Existing AM Traffic 06/29/2017 Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 5 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2: IL 83 & U.S. 14/ Pros ect Avenue/Prospect Avenue 07/07/2017 Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) Future Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Storage Length (ft) Storage Lanes Taper Length (ft) Lane Util. Factor Ped Bike Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Right Turn on Red Satd. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (mph) Link Distance (ft) Travel Time (s) Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Peak Hour Factor Adj. Flow (vph) Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) Enter Blocked Intersection Lane Alignment Median Width(ft) Link Offset(ft) Crosswalk Width(ft) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor Turning Speed (mph) Number of Detectors Detector Template Leading Detector (ft) Trailing Detector (ft) Detector 1 Position(ft) Detector 1 Size(ft) Detector 1 Type Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) Detector 1 Queue (s) Detector 1 Delay (s) Turn Type Protected Phases 1 2 4 5 6 7 11 Permitted Phases Detector Phase Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 3.0 15.0 15.0 3.0 15.0 3.0 1.0 Econolite #197 - Existing AM Traffic 06/29/2017 Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 6 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2: IL 83 & U.S. 14/ Pros ect Avenue/Pros ect Avenue 07/07/2017 Minimum Split (s) 9.0 42.0 42.0 42.0 37.5 37.5 Total Split (s) 13.0 42.0 42.0 42.0 36.0 36.0 Total Split (%) 7.6% 24.7% 241% 24.7% 21.2% 21.2% Maximum Green (s) 7.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 29.5 29.5 Yellow Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 All -Red Time (s) 1.5 8.5 8.5 8.5 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) -2.0 -2.0 -2.0 -2.0 -2.5 -2.5 Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 7.0 7.0 Recall Mode None None None None C-Max C-Max Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 9.0 9.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 22.0 22.0 22.0 22.0 22.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 8.8 32.3 12.5 12.5 12.5 39.8 39.8 83.9 129.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.05 0.19 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.23 0.23 0.49 0.76 v/c Ratio 0.52 0.10 0.17 0.15 0.18 0.03 0.64 0.07 0.20 Control Delay 85.2 40.6 78.7 77.3 79.3 55.6 64.4 25.9 0.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 Total Delay 85.2 40.6 78.7 77.3 79.3 55.6 64.4 25.9 0.4 LOS F D E E E E E C A Approach Delay 58.8 78.3 64.3 2.9 Approach LOS E E E A Queue Length 50th (ft) 51 31 18 22 18 5 290 53 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) m92 m49 42 54 42 19 366 m87 0 Internal Link Dist (ft) 2458 370 377 202 Turn Bay Length (ft) 185 60 70 70 25 Base Capacity(vph) 93 1036 240 339 227 180 827 899 2655 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1309 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.51 0.07 OA7 0.06 0.07 0.03 0.64 0.06 0.39 i r ,✓ , „ ,.� � �r , %ii .... Intersection,Summa �� /air r � i �iiii o iia � � iii� Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 170 Actuated Cycle Length: 170 Offset: 50 (29%), Referenced to phase 4:SBT and 8:NBTL, Start of 1st Green Natural Cycle: 160 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.64 Intersection Signal Delay: 36.4 Intersection LOS: D Intersection Capacity Utilization 68.8% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min)15 m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. Splits and Phases: 2: IL 83 & U.S. 14/ Prospect Avenue/Prospect Avenue #1 #Z 1 #Z �1I ZI �1 #21#11,#Z TM1 TZ 4�# OZ ■ ■ 04 _ ■F�D]]1 � ��1Z #1 #Z�#1 �Z 1#1 #2 I#1 xZ ■, t t 08 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2: IL 83 & U.S. 14/ Prospect Avenue/Prospect Avenue 07/07/2017 rr i l / ri / t rii r ,,, .,,rrr/%%//// //%/ „< �, ,,,, ,,. �.. �, �,�/� % //.,. ,/// � � rii ✓.... . . �// / r.%/,/rrr, /iri ,/ �// ���/.. Minimum Split (s) 6.0 41.5 40.5 6.0 34.5 7.5 14.0 Total Split (s) 13.0 37.0 51.0 13.0 37.0 15.0 14.0 Total Split (%) 8% 22% 30% 8% 22% 9% 8% Maximum Green (s) 10.0 30.5 44.5 10.0 30.5 10.5 1.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 4.5 4.5 3.0 4.5 3.5 4.5 All -Red Time (s) 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 1.0 8.5 Lost Time Adjust (s) Total Lost Time (s) Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lead Lead -Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 7.0 7.0 3.0 7.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None None C-Max None None None None Walk Time (s) 9.0 7.0 8.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 26.0 27.0 20.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) Actuated g/C Ratio v/c Ratio Control Delay Queue Delay Total Delay LOS Approach Delay Approach LOS Queue Length 50th (ft) Queue Length 95th (ft) Internal Link Dist (ft) Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) Starvation Cap Reductn Spillback Cap Reductn Storage Cap Reductn Reduced v/c Ratio Econolite #197 -Existing AM Traffic 06/29/2017 Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 8 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Emerson Street & US 14 07/07/2017 Lane Configurations 0 t Ti� I T Traffic Volume (vph) 30 490 25 40 350 30 30 105 55 30 130 10 Future Volume (vph) 30 490 25 40 350 30 30 105 55 30 130 10 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 110 0 105 0 50 0 95 0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97 0.99 0.98 1.00 Ftt 0.993 0.988 0.949 0.989 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 3504 0 1805 3489 0 1805 1777 0 1805 1872 0 Flt Permitted 0.516 0.432 0.577 0.528 Satd. Flow (perm) 965 3504 0 801 3489 0 1062 1777 0 979 1872 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 7 12 36 6 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 20 20 Link Distance (ft) 466 442 244 846 Travel Time (s) 10.6 10.0 8.3 28.8 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 17 31 31 17 46 34 34 46 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 2% 0% 0% 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Adj. Flow (vph) 32 516 26 42 368 32 32 111 58 32 137 11 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 32 542 0 42 400 0 32 169 0 32 148 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 Number of Detectors 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 100 20 100 20 100 Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 100 20 100 20 100 20 100 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Perm NA Perm NA Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 8 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 8 4 Detector Phase 5 2 1 6 8 8 4 4 Switch Phase Econolite #197 -Existing AM Traffic 06/29/2017 Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 9 Lanes, Volumes, Timings I Emerson Street & US 14 07/07/2017 Minimum Initial (s) 3.0 15.0 3.0 15.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 Minimum Split (s) 6.0 28.5 6.0 31.5 34.5 34.5 36.5 36.5 Total Split (s) 13.0 35.0 13.0 35.0 37.0 37.0 37.0 37.0 Total Split (%) 15.3% 41.2% 15.3% 41.2% 43.5% 43.5% 43.5% 43.5% Maximum Green (s) 10.0 28.5 10.0 28.5 30.5 30.5 30.5 30.5 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 4.5 3.0 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 All -Red Time (s) 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 1.0 -2.5 1.0 -2.5 -2.5 -2.5 -2.5 -2.5 Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 7.0 3.0 7.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Recall Mode None C-Max None C-Max None None None None Walk Time (s) 8.0 8.0 7.0 7.0 9.0 9.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 14.0 17.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 57.9 54.8 58.2 54.9 16.5 16.5 16.5 16.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.68 0.64 0.68 0.65 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 v/c Ratio 0.05 0.24 0.07 0.18 0.16 0.45 0.17 0.40 Control Delay 0.9 1.4 4.9 7.4 28.4 26.6 28.8 31.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 0.9 1.4 4.9 7.4 28.4 26.6 28.8 31.0 LOS A A A A C C C C Approach Delay 1.3 7.2 26.9 30.6 Approach LOS A A C C Queue Length 50th (ft) 1 15 5 43 14 63 14 67 Queue Length 95th (ft) m2 23 18 79 36 111 36 111 Internal Link Dist (ft) 386 362 164 766 Turn Bay Length (ft) 110 105 50 95 Base Capacity (vph) 771 2260 674 2256 412 711 380 730 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.04 0.24 0.06 0.18 0,08 0.24 0.08 0.20 Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 85 Actuated Cycle Length: 85 Offset: 27 (32%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of 1st Green Natural Cycle: 75 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.45 Intersection Signal Delay: 10.6 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 59.2% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min)15 m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. Econolite #197 -Existing AM Traffic 06129/2017 Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 10 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Emerson Street & US 14 07/07/2017 Splits and Phases: 3: Emerson Street & US 14 �SRI, Econolite #197 -Existing AM Traffic 06/29/2017 Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 11 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 5: US 14 & Maple Street 07/07/2017 Lane Configurations ►j Traffic Volume (veh/h) 15 540 5 10 390 20 1 1 2 40 10 15 Future Volume (Veh/h) 15 540 5 10 390 20 1 1 2 40 10 15 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 16 568 5 11 411 21 1 1 2 42 11 16 Pedestrians 8 5 1 8 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 0 0 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 442 pX, platoon unblocked 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 vC, conflicting volume 440 574 860 1066 292 775 1058 232 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 440 461 761 975 166 671 967 232 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 99 99 100 100 100 87 95 98 cM capacity (veh/h) 1109 1047 257 231 807 313 234 760 Volume Total 16 379 194 216 226 4 69 Volume Left 16 0 0 11 0 1 42 Volume Right 0 0 5 0 21 2 16 cSH 1109 1700 1700 1047 1700 374 341 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.22 0.11 0.01 0.13 0.01 0.20 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 0 0 1 0 1 19 Control Delay (s) 8.3 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 14.7 18.2 Lane LOS A A B C Approach Delay (s) 0.2 0.3 14.7 18.2 Approach LOS B C Average Delay 1.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 34.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Econolite #197 -Existing AM Traffic 06/29/2017 Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 1 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Maple Street & Pros ect Avenue 07/07/2017 Lane Configurations + Traffic Volume (veh/h) 90 60 10 60 25 10 Future Volume (Veh/h) 90 60 10 60 25 10 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 95 63 11 63 26 11 Pedestrians 45 214 6 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 4 18 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 164 262 346 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 164 262 346 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 99 96 98 cM capacity (veh/h) 1407 690 569 Volume Total 158 74 37 Volume Left 0 11 26 Volume Right 63 0 11 cSH 1700 1407 649 Volume to Capacity 0.09 0.01 0.06 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 1 5 Control Delay (s) 0.0 1.2 10.9 Lane LOS A B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 1.2 10.9 Approach LOS B Average Delay 1,8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 31.6% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Econolite #197 - Existing AM Traffic 06/29/2017 Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 2 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7: US 14 & School Street 07/07/2017 4___ k, \0� 41 .1.4 _10. Lane Configurations tt tt Traffic Volume (veh/h) 15 585 400 15 20 15 Future Volume (Veh/h) 15 585 400 15 20 15 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 16 616 421 16 21 16 Pedestrians 3 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 Walking Speed (ftls) 4.0 Percent Blockage 0 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 440 772 222 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 440 772 222 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 99 94 98 cM capacity (veh/h) 1114 330 780 Volume Total 221 411 281 156 37 Volume Left 16 0 0 0 21 Volume Right 0 0 0 16 16 cSH 1114 1700 1700 1700 440 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.24 0.17 0.09 0.08 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 0 0 0 7 Control Delay (s) 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.9 Lane LOS A B Approach Delay (s) 0.3 0.0 13.9 Approach LOS B Average Delay 0.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 36.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Econolite #197 -Existing AM Traffic 06/29/2017 Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 3 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 8: School Street & Prospect Avenue 07/07/2017 Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Grade Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol tC, single (s) tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) p0 queue free % cM capacity (veh/h) 105 5 15 70 10 15 105 5 15 70 10 15 Free Free Stop 0% 0% 0% 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 111 5 16 74 11 16 23 12.0 4.0 2 None None 139 139 4.1 242 136 242 136 6.4 6.2 2.2 3.5 3.3 99 98 98 1417 723 895 D06 Volume Total 116 90 27 Volume Left 0 16 11 Volume Right 5 0 16 cSH 1700 1417 816 Volume to Capacity 0.07 0.01 0.03 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 1 3 Control Delay (s) 0.0 1.4 9.6 Lane LOS A A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 1.4 9.6 Approach LOS A Average Delay 1.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 21.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Econolite #197 -Existing AM Traffic 06/29/2017 Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 4 SimTraffic Performance Report 08/09/2017 3: Emerson Street & US 14 Performance by lane Movements Served L T TR L T TR L TR L TR Denied DelNeh (s) 0.2 Total DelNeh (s) 9.3 14.1 14.4 14.2 10.9 10.1 25.6 18.4 24.5 21.0 14.8 4: Emerson Street & Prospect Avenue Performance by lane Movements Served LT R LT R LTR L TR Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 Total DelNeh (s) 9.0 2.3 8.3 4.2 10.4 0.9 2.6 6.4 5: US 14 & Maple Street Performance by lane Movements Served L T TR LT TR LTR LTR Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 Total DelNeh (s) 2.7 2.0 1.8 0.8 0.4 12.3 13.0 2.1 6: Maple Street & Prospect Avenue Performance by lane Movements Served TR LT LR Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 Total DelNeh (s) 1.2 1.4 4.1 1.6 7: US 14 & School Street Performance by lane Movements Served LT T T TR LR Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 Total DelNeh (s) 1.0 0.9 0.2 0.2 5.3 0.8 8: School Street & Prospect Avenue Performance by lane Movements Served TR LT LR Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 Total DelNeh (s) 0.2 0.7 2.7 0.7 Total Network Performance Denied DelNeh (s) 0.2 Total DelNeh (s) 16.6 Econolite #197 - Existing AM Traffic SimTraffic Report Sam Schwartz Page 1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: IL 83 & US 14/ Prospect Ave./US 14 07/07/2017 ConfigurationsLane Traffic Volume (vph) 10 410 60 50 530 75 60 520 30 25 490 5 Future Volume (vph) 10 410 60 50 530 75 60 520 30 25 490 5 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 125 0 115 0 65 0 60 0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 Ped Bike Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ftt 0.981 0.981 0.992 0.999 Fit Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 3463 0 1770 3465 0 1770 3507 0 1770 3534 0 Flt Permitted 0.248 0.211 0.383 0.950 Satd. Flow (perm) 462 3463 0 392 3465 0 701 3507 0 1763 3534 0 Right Turn on Red No No No No Satd. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 30 Link Distance (ft) 2109 466 282 1059 Travel Time (s) 47.9 10.6 6.4 24.1 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 2 6 6 2 25 5 5 25 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 11 432 63 53 558 79 63 547 32 26 516 5 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 11 495 0 53 637 0 63 579 0 26 521 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 Number of Detectors 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 100 20 100 20 100 Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 100 20 100 20 100 20 100 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+pt NA custom NA Prot NA Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 31112 81112 7 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 8 3 Detector Phase 5 2 1 6 311 12 811 12 7 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 3.0 15.0 3.0 15.0 3.0 15.0 Econolite #197 - PM Period Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: IL 83 & US 14/ Prospect Ave./US 14 07/07/2017 Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) Future Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Storage Length (ft) Storage Lanes Taper Length (ft) Lane Util. Factor Ped Bike Factor Frt Fit Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Fit Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Right Turn on Red Satd, Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (mph) Link Distance (ft) Travel Time (s) Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Peak Hour Factor Adj. Flow (vph) Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) Enter Blocked Intersection Lane Alignment Median Width(ft) Link Offset(ft) Crosswalk Width(ft) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor Turning Speed (mph) Number of Detectors Detector Template Leading Detector (ft) Trailing Detector (ft) Detector 1 Position(ft) Detector 1 Size(ft) Detector 1 Type Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) Detector 1 Queue (s) Detector 1 Delay (s) Turn Type Protected Phases 3 8 11 12 Permitted Phases Detector Phase Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 3.0 15.0 1.0 3.0 Econolite #197 - PM Period Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 2 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: IL 83 & US 14/ Prospect Ave./US 14 07/07/2017 � � � f- 4\ t / / // //// // r// / i ✓ / i l /i ✓ // , , /i, / r Minimum Split (s) 6.0 41.5 6.0 34.5 7.5 40.5 Total Split (s) 13.0 37.0 13.0 37.0 16.0 51.0 Total Split (%) 7.6% 21.8% 7.6% 21.8% 9.4% 30.0% Maximum Green (s) 10.0 30.5 10.0 30.5 11.5 44.5 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 4.5 3.0 4.5 3.5 4.5 All -Red Time (s) 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 1.0 -2.5 1.0 -2.5 -0.5 -2.5 Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lead -Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 7.0 3.0 7.0 3.0 7.0 Recall Mode None None None None None C-Max Walk Time (s) 9.0 8.0 7.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 26.0 20.0 P7.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 44.7 39.0 57.0 49.0 90.5 94.5 8.5 50.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.26 0.23 0.34 0.29 0.53 0.56 0.05 0.29 v/c Ratio 0.07 0.62 0.22 0.64 0.09 0.30 0.30 0.50 Control Delay 14.5 25.0 36.9 50.0 0.4 0.4 76.8 50.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 14.5 25.0 36.9 50.8 0.4 0.7 76.8 50.1 LOS B C D D A A E D Approach Delay 24.8 49.7 0.6 51.4 Approach LOS C D A D Queue Length 50th (ft) 2 256 39 261 0 0 23 301 Queue Length 95th (ft) m2 m361 74 305 m0 0 m33 363 Internal Link Dist (ft) 2029 386 202 979 Turn Bay Length (ft) 125 115 65 60 Base Capacity (vph) 199 795 244 999 831 2235 124 1040 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 135 0 969 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.06 0.62 0.22 0.74 0.08 0.46 0.21 0.50 / Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 170 Actuated Cycle Length: 170 Offset: 63 (37%), Referenced to phase 4:SBT and 8:NBTL, Start of 1st Green Natural Cycle: 160 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.68 Intersection Signal Delay: 31.6 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 65.8% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min)15 m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. 3pliits and Phases: 1: IL 83 & US 14/ Prospect Ave./US 14 #1 #2 1#1 T2I #1 #2 1#1 TZ :1 :2 ■ c ■ 02 1 D4 K-_ I *t 14 44t ;�12 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: IL 83 & US 14/ Prospect Ave./US 14 07/07/2017 Minimum Split (s) 9.0 37.5 14.0 42.0 Total Split (s) 13.0 35.0 14.0 42.0 Total Split (%) 8% 21 % 8% 25% Maximum Green (s) 7.0 28.5 1.0 29.0 Yellow Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 All -Red Time (s) 1.5 2.0 8.5 8.5 Lost Time Adjust (s) Total Lost Time (s) Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead -Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 7.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None C-Max None None Walk Time (s) 9.0 7.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 22.0 22.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) Actuated g/C Ratio v/c Ratio Control Delay Queue Delay Total Delay LOS Approach Delay Approach LOS Queue Length 50th (ft) Queue Length 95th (ft) Internal Link Dist (ft) Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) Starvation Cap Reductn Spillback Cap Reductn Storage Cap Reductn Reduced v/c Ratio Econolite #197 - PM Period Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 4 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2: IL 83 & U.S. 14/ Prospect Avenue/Pros ect Avenue 07/07/2017 --► 4\ t Lane Configurations Vi 0 Traffic Volume (vph) 45 50 5 20 65 35 10 530 5 40 510 50 Future Volume (vph) 45 50 5 20 65 35 10 530 5 40 510 50 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 185 0 60 70 70 0 25 0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 Ped Bike Factor 0.93 1.00 0.99 0.91 0.90 1.00 1.00 0.99 Ftt 0.987 0.850 0.999 0.987 Fit Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 3488 0 1770 1863 1583 1770 3535 0 1770 3462 0 Fit Permitted 0.950 0.717 0.429 0.950 Satd. Flow (perm) 1648 3488 0 1327 1863 1447 720 3535 0 1763 3462 0 Right Turn on Red Yes No Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 5 13 Link Speed (mph) 25 25 30 30 Link Distance (ft) 2538 450 457 282 Travel Time (s) 69.2 12.3 10.4 6.4 Confl, Peds. (#/hr) 43 4 4 43 82 5 5 82 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 47 53 5 21 68 37 11 558 5 42 537 53 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 47 58 0 21 68 37 11 563 0 42 590 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1Z 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 Number of Detectors 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 100 20 20 100 20 100 Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 100 20 100 20 20 100 20 100 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type Prot NA Perm NA Perm Perm NA custom NA Protected Phases 3 312 12 8 56711 12411 Permitted Phases 12 12 8 56711 Detector Phase 3 312 12 12 12 8 8 56711 12411 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 3.0 3,0 3.0 3.0 15.0 15.0 Econolite #197 - PM Period Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 5 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2: IL 83 & U.S. 14/ Pros ect Avenue/Prospect Avenue 07/07/2017 Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) Future Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Storage Length (ft) Storage Lanes Taper Length (ft) Lane Util. Factor Ped Bike Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Right Turn on Red Satd. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (mph) Link Distance (ft) Travel Time (s) Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Peak Hour Factor Adj. Flow (vph) Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) Enter Blocked Intersection Lane Alignment Median Width(ft) Link Offset(ft) Crosswalk Width(ft) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor Turning Speed (mph) Number of Detectors Detector Template Leading Detector (ft) Trailing Detector (ft) Detector 1 Position(ft) Detector 1 Size(ft) Detector 1 Type Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) Detector 1 Queue (s) Detector 1 Delay (s) Turn Type Protected Phases 1 2 4 5 6 7 11 Permitted Phases Detector Phase Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 3.0 15.0 15.0 3.0 15.0 3.0 1.0 Econolite #197 - PM Period Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 6 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2: IL 83 & U.S. 14/ Pros ect Avenue/Pros ect Avenue 107/07/2017 err////i,��"l////////ii,�, Minimum Split (s) 9.0 42.0 42.0 42.0 37.5 37.5 Total Split (s) 13.0 42.0 42.0 42.0 35.0 35.0 Total Split (%) 7.6% 24.7% 24.7% 24„7% 20.6% 20.6% Maximum Green (s) 7.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 28.5 28.5 Yellow Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 All -Red Time (s) 1.5 8.5 8.5 8.5 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) -2.0 -2.0 -2.0 -2.0 -2.5 -2.5 Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 7.0 7.0 Recall Mode None None None None C-Max C-Max Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 9.0 9.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 22.0 22.0 22.0 22.0 22.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 8.8 37.0 17.2 17.2 17.2 39.5 39.5 79.5 125.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.05 0.22 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.23 0.23 0.47 0.74 v/c Ratio 0.52 0.08 0.16 0.36 0.25 0.07 0.68 0.05 0.23 Control Delay 86.9 40.9 73.7 78.0 76.1 57.8 66.2 23.1 0.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 Total Delay 86.9 40.9 73.7 78.0 76.1 57.8 66.2 23.1 0.4 LOS F D E E E E E C A Approach Delay 61.5 76.7 66.0 1.9 Approach LOS E E E A Queue Length 50th (ft) 52 26 22 74 40 10 316 37 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) m90 m42 53 125 79 31 #404 m66 0 Internal Link Dist (ft) 2458 370 377 202 Turn Bay Length (ft) 185 60 70 70 25 Base Capacity(vph) 93 1033 241 339 263 167 822 856 2549 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1116 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.51 0.06 0.09 0.20 0.14 0.07 0.68 0.05 0.41 0/0 Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 170 Actuated Cycle Length: 170 Offset: 63 (37%), Referenced to phase 4:SBT and 8:NBTL, Start of 1st Green Natural Cycle:160 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.68 Intersection Signal Delay: 38.4 Intersection LOS: D Intersection Capacity Utilization 65.3% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min)15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. Econolite #197 - PM Period Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 7 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2: IL 83 & U.S. 141 Pros ect Avenue/Pros ect Avenue 07/07/2017 Econolite #197 - PM Period Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 8 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2: IL 83 & U.S. 14/ Pros ect Avenue/Prospect Avenue 07/07/2017 KIL,„ %//air ,<< Minimum Split (s) 6.0 41.5 40.5 6.0 34.5 7.5 14.0 Total Split (s) 13.0 37.0 51.0 13.0 37.0 16.0 14.0 Total Split (%) 8% 22% 30% 8% 22% 9% 8% Maximum Green (s) 10.0 30.5 44.5 10.0 30.5 11.5 1.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 4.5 4.5 3.0 4.5 3.5 4.5 All -Red Time (s) 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 1.0 8.5 Lost Time Adjust (s) Total Lost Time (s) Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lead Lead -Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 7.0 7.0 3.0 7.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None None C-Max None None None None Walk Time (s) 9.0 7.0 8.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 26.0 27.0 20.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) Actuated g/C Ratio v/c Ratio Control Delay Queue Delay Total Delay LOS Approach Delay Approach LOS Queue Length 50th (ft) Queue Length 95th (ft) Internal Link Dist (ft) Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) Starvation Cap Reductn Spillback Cap Reductn Storage Cap Reductn Reduced v/c Ratio Econolite #197 - PM Period Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 9 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Emerson Street & US 14 07/07/2017 --* --,, --* Ir .- 4- 4\ Lane Configurations 1 0 +T* T I 1, Traffic Volume (vph) 30 440 25 105 600 35 40 155 30 20 160 15 Future Volume (vph) 30 440 25 105 600 35 40 155 30 20 160 15 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 110 0 105 0 50 0 95 0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25 Lane U61. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.97 0.99 0.97 0.99 Frt 0.992 0.992 0.975 0.987 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 3507 0 1805 3505 0 1805 1838 0 1805 1866 0 Flt Permitted 0.382 0.431 0.519 0.496 Satd. Flow (perm) 718 3507 0 811 3505 0 952 1838 0 918 1866 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 8 9 12 6 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 20 20 Link Distance (ft) 466 458 244 846 Travel Time (s) 10.6 10.4 8.3 28.8 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 19 11 11 19 55 39 39 55 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 2% 0% 0% 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Adj. Flow (vph) 32 463 26 111 632 37 42 163 32 21 168 16 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 32 489 0 111 669 0 42 195 0 21 184 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1A0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 Number of Detectors 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 100 20 100 20 100 Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Posibon(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 100 20 100 20 100 20 100 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Perm NA Perm NA Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 8 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 8 4 Detector Phase 5 2 1 6 8 8 4 4 Switch Phase Econolite #197 - PM Period Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 10 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Emerson Street & US 14 07/07/2017 * Minimum Initial (s) 3.0 15.0 3.0 15.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 Minimum Split (s) 6.0 28.5 6.0 31.5 34.5 34.5 36.5 36.5 Total Split (s) 13.0 41.0 13.0 41.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 Total Split (%) 15.3% 48.2% 15.3% 48.2% 36.5% 36.5% 36.5% 36.5% Maximum Green (s) 10.0 34.5 10.0 34.5 24.5 24.5 24.5 24.5 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 4.5 3.0 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 All -Red Time (s) 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 1.0 -2.5 1.0 -2.5 -2.5 -2.5 -2.5 -2.5 Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 7.0 3.0 7.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Recall Mode None C-Max None C-Max None None None None Walk Time (s) 8.0 8.0 7.0 7.0 9.0 9.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 14.0 17.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 2.1.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 53.9 49.8 57.1 52.8 18.6 18.6 18.6 18.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.63 0.59 0.67 0.62 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 v/c Ratio 0.06 0.24 0.18 0.31 0.20 0.47 0.10 0.45 Control Delay 1.9 2.6 6.1 9.4 27.6 30.1 25.4 30.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 1.9 2.6 6.1 9.4 27.6 30.1 25.4 30.3 LOS A A A A C C C C Approach Delay 2.5 9.0 29.6 29.8 Approach LOS A A C C Queue Length 50th (ft) 2 24 17 86 19 86 9 83 Queue Length 95th (ft) m4 32 43 150 42 134 25 129 Internal Link Dist (ft) 386 378 164 766 Turn Bay Length (ft) 110 105 50 95 Base Capacity(vph) 596 2057 660 2179 302 592 291 596 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 28 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.05 0.24 0.17 0.31 014 0,33 0.07 0.31 Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 85 Actuated Cycle Length: 85 Offset: 33 (39%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of 1st Green Natural Cycle: 75 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.47 Intersection Signal Delay:12.3 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 66.7% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min)15 m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. Econolite #197 - PM Period Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 11 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Emerson Street & US 14 07/07/2017 Econolite #197 - PM Period Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 12 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 5: US 14 07/07/2017 * Lane Configurations I tt Traffic Volume (veh/h) 10 450 1 10 755 30 5 10 5 20 5 30 Future Volume (Veh/h) 10 450 1 10 755 30 5 10 5 20 5 30 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0,95 0.95 0.95 0,95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 11 474 1 11 795 32 5 11 5 21 5 32 Pedestrians 5 1 6 16 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 0 0 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 458 pX, platoon unblocked 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 vC, conflicting volume 843 481 962 1368 244 1120 1352 434 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 843 376 876 1299 129 1041 1283 434 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 99 99 98 93 99 87 97 94 cM capacity (veh/h) 778 1126 206 147 855 158 151 560 Volume Total 11 316 159 408 430 21 58 Volume Left 11 0 0 11 0 5 21 Volume Right 0 0 1 0 32 5 32 cSH 778 1700 1700 1126 1700 200 260 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.19 0.09 0.01 0.25 0.10 0.22 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 0 0 1 0 9 21 Control Delay (s) 9.7 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 25.1 22.8 Lane LOS A A D C Approach Delay (s) 0.2 0.2 25.1 22.8 Approach LOS D C Average Delay 1.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 42.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Econolite #197 - PM Period Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 1 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6: Prospect Avenue 07/07/2017 Lane Configurations 1� *T Y Traffic Volume (vehlh) 80 35 10 75 80 20 Future Volume (Vehlh) 80 35 10 75 80 20 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 84 37 11 79 84 21 Pedestrians 45 146 31 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 4 12 3 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 152 280 280 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 152 280 280 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 99 87 97 cM capacity (veh/h) 1392 661 650 4,12 '� Volume Total 121 90 105 Volume Left 0 11 84 Volume Right 37 0 21 cSH 1700 1392 659 Volume to Capacity 0.07 0.01 0.16 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 1 14 Control Delay (s) 0.0 1.0 11.5 Lane LOS A B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 1.0 11.5 Approach LOS B Average Delay 4.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 31.1 % ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Econolite #197 - PM Period Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 2 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 21: US 14 07/07/2017 Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vehm) 15 495 770 15 10 20 Future Volume (Veh/h) 15 495 770 15 10 20 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 16 521 811 16 11 21 Pedestrians 1 6 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 0 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 833 1118 420 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 833 1118 420 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 98 94 96 cM capacity (veh/h) 792 196 578 �,,, ,,, „�'a.�.n i,,, ,rror //,#'•wk��i,i�, �i, �//ii,l, ,6�„�,�,r////iiii�`,"'o� ,rT%/„��/i/ii//%��������/ij �i1 riio / i,r�/%///%////ii �%��/��/%///// r Volume Total 190 347 541 286 ......... ............. 32 Volume Left 16 0 0 0 11 Volume Right 0 0 0 16 21 cSH 792 1700 1700 1700 346 Volume to Capacity 0.02 0.20 0.32 0.17 0.09 Queue Length 95th (ft) 2 0 0 0 8 Control Delay (s) 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.5 Lane LOS A C Approach Delay (s) 0.4 0.0 16.5 Approach LOS C , k o „' rnma / � � o������ � /// Average Delay 0.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 34.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Econolite #197 - PM Period Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 3 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 23: Prospect Avenue 07/07/2017 Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 115 10 10 85 15 20 Future Volume (Veh/h) 115 10 10 85 15 20 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0,95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 121 11 11 89 16 21 Pedestrians 11 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 143 248 138 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 143 248 138 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 99 98 98 cM capacity (veh/h) 1426 728 903 Volume Total 132 100 37 Volume Left 0 11 16 Volume Right 11 0 21 cSH 1700 1426 818 Volume to Capacity 0.08 0.01 0.05 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 1 4 Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.9 9.6 Lane LOS A A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.9 9.6 Approach LOS A Average Delay 1.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 22.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Econolite #197 - PM Period Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 4 SimTraffic Performance Report 08/09/2017 3: Emerson Street & US 14 Performance by lane i%ii� , �� „i�i��ii��ii iiiiii��o�� , . r�, � ..loll i ,✓ii i �, i � ii i r i i i Movements Served L T TR L T TR L TR L TR Denied DelNeh (s) 0.2 Total DelNeh (s) 9.9 9.5 8.7 9.0 7.6 9.5 49.8 53.5 62.4 46.9 19.8 4: Emerson Street & Prospect Avenue Performance by lane Movements Served LT R LT R LTR L TR Denied DelNeh (s) 0.2 Total DelNeh (s) 27.3 3.2 18.8 24.5 30.5 0.9 1.9 15.8 5: US 14 Performance by lane Movements Served L T TR LT TR LTR LTR Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 Total DelNeh (s) 3.9 1.3 1.2 0.9 0.6 9.4 15.3 1.6 6: Prospect Avenue Performance by lane .... a Movements Served TR LT LR Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 Total DelNeh (s) 1.4 1.0 4.8 2.3 21: US 14 Performance by lane r Movements Served LT T T TR LR Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 Total DelNeh (s) 1.1 0.7 0.3 0.2 6.4 0.7 23: Prospect Avenue Performance by lane Movements Served TR LT LR Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 Total DelNeh (s) 0.2 0.2 2.2 0.5 Total Network Performance ................. Denied DelNeh (s) 0.3 Total DelNeh (s) 23.6 Econolite #197 - PM Period SimTraffic Report Sam Schwartz Page 1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: IL 83 & US 14 1I07/07/2017 Lane Configurations 0 tT tT I #il� Traffic Volume (vph) 10 505 80 30 325 40 55 490 60 15 485 5 Future Volume (vph) 10 505 80 30 325 40 55 490 60 15 485 5 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 11900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 125 0 115 0 65 0 60 0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0,95 Ped Bike Factor 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 Frt 0.980 0.984 0.984 0.999 Fit Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 3453 0 1770 3473 0 1770 3468 0 1770 3535 0 Fit Permitted 0.432 0.121 0.384 0.950 Satd. Flow (perm) 799 3453 0 224 3473 0 710 3468 0 1747 3535 0 Right Turn on Red No No No No Satd. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 30 Link Distance (ft) 2109 466 282 1059 Travel Time (s) 47.9 10.6 6.4 24.1 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 8 15 15 8 11 17 17 11 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 11 532 84 32 342 42 58 516 63 16 511 5 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 11 616 0 32 384 0 58 579 0 16 516 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 Number of Detectors 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 100 20 100 20 100 Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 100 20 100 20 100 20 100 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+pt NA custom NA Prot NA Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 31112 81112 7 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 8 3 Detector Phase 5 2 1 6 311 12 811 12 7 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 3.0 15.0 3.0 15.0 3.0 15.0 Econolite #197 - Future AM Traffic 06129/2017 Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Pagel Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: IL 83 & US 14 07/07/2017 r r ,- 1 ii rr r t r i r / ✓ r Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) Future Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Storage Length (ft) Storage Lanes Taper Length (ft) Lane Util. Factor Ped Bike Factor Frt Fit Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Fit Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Right Turn on Red Satd. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (mph) Link Distance (ft) Travel Time (s) Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Peak Hour Factor Adj. Flow (vph) Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) Enter Blocked Intersection Lane Alignment Median Width(ft) Link Offset(ft) Crosswalk Width(ft) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor Turning Speed (mph) Number of Detectors Detector Template Leading Detector (ft) Trailing Detector (ft) Detector 1 Position(ft) Detector 1 Size(ft) Detector 1 Type Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) Detector 1 Queue (s) Detector 1 Delay (s) Turn Type Protected Phases 3 8 11 12 Permitted Phases Detector Phase Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 3.0 15.0 1.0 3.0 Econolite #197 - Future AM Traffic 06/29/2017 Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 2 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: IL 83 & US 14 07/07/2017 Minimum Split (s) 6.0 41.5 6.0 34.5 7.5 40.5 Total Split (s) 13.0 37.0 13.0 37.0 15.0 51.0 Total Split (%) 7.6% 21.8% 7.6% 21.8% 8.8% 30.0% Maximum Green (s) 10.0 30.5 10.0 30.5 10.5 44.5 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 4.5 3.0 4.5 3.5 4.5 All -Red Time (s) 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 1.0 -2.5 1.0 -2.5 -0.5 -2.5 Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lead -Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 7.0 3.0 7.0 3.0 7.0 Recall Mode None None None None None C-Max Walk Time (s) 9.0 8.0 7.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 26.0 20.0 27.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 46.6 39.6 55.3 45.1 90.3 94.3 7.6 48.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.27 0.23 0.33 0.27 0.53 0.55 0.04 0.28 v/c Ratio 0.04 0.77 0.17 0.42 0.08 0.30 0.20 0.52 Control Delay 16.5 27.6 40.6 49.6 0.3 0.3 68.3 55.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 16.5 27.6 40.6 49.6 0.3 0.7 68.3 55.6 LOS B C D D A A E E Approach Delay 27.4 48.9 0.7 56.0 Approach LOS C D A E Queue Length 50th (ft) 2 102 24 161 0 0 13 303 Queue Length 95th (ft) m3 m#454 53 201 m0 0 m25 367 Internal Link Dist (ft) 2029 386 202 979 Turn Bay Length (ft) 125 115 65 60 Base Capacity (vph) 280 804 185 920 829 2151 114 1000 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 981 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.04 0.77 0.17 0.42 0.07 0.49 0.14 0.52 ✓dig i / i �1 / ri �,4�1P�'t�l'�, / iG3 �muii%%ii ,i ,,,,,,✓s,,,, „%;,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,, ,, ,, i�oair, ,;%,a„�� ,:, ,, , �� ��, ,d Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 170 Actuated Cycle Length: 170 Offset: 50 (29%), Referenced to phase 4:SBT and 8:NBTL, Start of 1st Green Natural Cycle:160 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.77 Intersection Signal Delay: 30.6 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 66.6% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min)15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. Econolite #197 - Future AM Traffic 06/29/2017 Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 3 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1:IL83&US14 and Phases: 1: IL 83 & US 14 #1 #2 0012 #1 #2 #1 #21 #1 6 t08 07/07/2017 Econolite #197 -Future AM Traffic 06/29/2017 Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 4 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: IL 83 & US 14 07/0712017 Minimum Split (s) 9.0 37.5 14.0 42.0 Total Split (s) 13.0 36.0 14.0 42.0 Total Split (%) 8% 21 % 8% 25% Maximum Green (s) 7.0 29.5 1.0 29.0 Yellow Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 All -Red Time (s) 1.5 2.0 8.5 8.5 Lost Time Adjust (s) Total Lost Time (s) Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead -Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 7.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None C-Max None None Walk Time (s) 9.0 7.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 22.0 22.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) Actuated g/C Ratio v/c Ratio Control Delay Queue Delay Total Delay LOS Approach Delay Approach LOS Queue Length 50th (ft) Queue Length 95th (ft) Internal Link Dist (ft) Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) Starvation Cap Reductn Spillback Cap Reductn Storage Cap Reductn Reduced v/c Ratio Econolite #197 -Future AM Traffic 06/29/2017 Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 5 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2: IL 83 & Prospect Avenue 107/07/2017 Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 45 95 5 15 35 60 5 500 5 80 490 25 Future Volume (vph) 45 95 5 15 35 60 5 500 5 80 490 25 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 185 0 60 70 70 0 25 0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 Ped Bike Factor 0.80 1.00 1.00 0.79 0.91 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.993 0.850 0.999 0.993 Fit Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 3512 0 1770 1863 1583 1770 3535 0 1770 3499 0 Fit Permitted 0.950 0.686 0.450 0.950 Satd. Flow (perm) 1424 3512 0 1274 1863 1245 760 3535 0 1761 3499 0 Right Turn on Red Yes No Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 3 6 Link Speed (mph) 25 25 30 30 Link Distance (ft) 2538 450 457 282 Travel Time (s) 69.2 12.3 10.4 6.4 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 117 2 2 117 72 6 6 72 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 47 100 5 16 37 63 5 526 5 84 516 26 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 47 105 0 16 37 63 5 531 0 84 542 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 Number of Detectors 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 100 20 20 100 20 100 Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 100 20 100 20 20 100 20 100 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type Prot NA Perm NA Perm Perm NA custom NA Protected Phases 3 312 12 8 56711 12411 Permitted Phases 12 12 8 56711 Detector Phase 3 312 12 12 12 8 8 56711 12411 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 15.0 15.0 Econolite #197 -Future AM Traffic 06/29/2017 Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 6 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2: IL 83 & Pros ect Avenue 07/07/2017 Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) Future Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Storage Length (ft) Storage Lanes Taper Length (ft) Lane Util. Factor Ped Bike Factor Fri: Fit Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Fit Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Right Turn on Red Satd. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (mph) Link Distance (ft) Travel Time (s) Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Peak Hour Factor Adj. Flow (vph) Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) Enter Blocked Intersection Lane Alignment Median Width(ft) Link Offset(ft) Crosswalk Width(ft) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor Turning Speed (mph) Number of Detectors Detector Template Leading Detector (ft) Trailing Detector (ft) Detector 1 Position(ft) Detector 1 Size(ft) Detector 1 Type Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) Detector 1 Queue (s) Detector 1 Delay (s) Turn Type Protected Phases 1 2 4 5 6 7 11 Permitted Phases Detector Phase Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 3.0 15.0 15.0 3.0 15.0 3.0 1.0 Econolite #197 -Future AM Traffic 06/29/2017 Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 7 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2: IL 83 & Prospect Avenue 07/07/2017 -,* ". 4--- 4\ I i� Minimum Split (s) 9.0 42.0 42.0 42.0 37.5 37.5 Total Split (s) 13.0 42.0 42.0 42.0 36.0 36.0 Total Split (%) 7.6% 24.7% 247% 24.7% 21.2% 21.2% Maximum Green (s) 7.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 29.5 29.5 Yellow Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 All -Red Time (s) 1.5 8.5 8.5 8.5 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) -2.0 -2.0 -2.0 -2.0 -2.5 -2.5 Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 7.0 7.0 Recall Mode None None None None C-Max C-Max Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 9.0 9.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 22.0 22.0 22.0 22.0 22.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 9.0 39.8 19.8 19.8 19.8 36.5 36.5 77.7 122.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.05 0.23 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.21 0.21 0.46 0.72 v/c Ratio 0.51 0.13 0.11 0.17 0.43 0.03 0.70 0.10 0.22 Control Delay 87.8 41.7 67.9 68.5 79.1 55.8 68.0 26.5 0.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 Total Delay 87.8 41.7 67.9 68.5 79.1 55.8 68.0 26.5 0.4 LOS F D E E E E E C A Approach Delay 56.0 74.2 67.9 3.9 Approach LOS E E E A Queue Length 50th (ft) 52 49 16 38 68 5 293 77 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) m94 m71 42 74 116 19 370 ml15 0 Internal Link Dist (ft) 2458 370 377 202 Turn Bay Length (ft) 185 60 70 70 25 Base Capacity(vph) 93 1055 232 339 227 163 758 832 2515 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1160 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.51 0.10 0.07 0.11 0.28 0.03 0.70 0.10 0.40 Irifs`4 f,f�,lrit3 Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 170 Actuated Cycle Length: 170 Offset: 50 (29%), Referenced to phase 4:SBT and 8:NBTL, Start of 1st Green Natural Cycle: 160 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.77 Intersection Signal Delay: 39.1 Intersection LOS: D Intersection Capacity Utilization 69.9% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min)15 m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. 3pftts and Phases: 2: IL 83 & Prospect. Avenue #1 #1 #2 #1 Y 1 42\�# 1 # 2 \IhO6 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2: IL 83 & Pros ect Avenue 07/07/2017 Minimum Split (s) 6.0 41.5 40.5 6.0 34.5 7.5 14.0 Total Split (s) 13.0 37.0 51.0 13.0 37.0 15.0 14.0 Total Split (%) 8% 22% 30% 8% 22% 9% 8% Maximum Green (s) 10.0 30.5 44.5 10.0 30.5 10.5 1.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 4.5 4.5 3.0 4.5 3.5 4.5 All -Red Time (s) 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 1.0 8.5 Lost Time Adjust (s) Total Lost Time (s) Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lead Lead -Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 7.0 7.0 3.0 7.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None None C-Max None None None None Walk Time (s) 9.0 7.0 8.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 26.0 27.0 20.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) Actuated g/C Ratio vlc Ratio Control Delay Queue Delay Total Delay LOS Approach Delay Approach LOS Queue Length 50th (ft) Queue Length 95th (ft) Internal Link Dist (ft) Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) Starvation Cap Reductn Spillback Cap Reductn Storage Cap Reductn Reduced vlc Ratio Econolite #197 - Future AM Traffic 06/29/2017 Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 9 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Emerson Street & US 14 07/07/2017 * Lane 9 Traffic Volume (vph) 0 505 25 40 355 30 30 115 55 30 150 10 Future Volume (vph) 30 505 25 40 355 30 30 115 55 30 150 10 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 110 0 105 0 50 0 95 0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97 0.99 0.98 1.00 Fd 0.993 0.988 0.951 0.990 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 3505 0 1805 3489 0 1805 1782 0 1805 1875 0 Flt Permitted 0.511 0.422 0.537 0.515 Satd. Flow (perm) 956 3505 0 783 3489 0 989 1782 0 956 1875 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 6 12 33 5 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 20 20 Link Distance (ft) 466 442 244 846 Travel Time (s) 10.6 10.0 8.3 28.8 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 17 31 31 17 46 34 34 46 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 2% 0% 0% 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Adj. Flow (vph) 32 532 26 42 374 32 32 121 58 32 158 11 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 32 558 0 42 406 0 32 179 0 32 169 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 Number of Detectors 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 100 20 100 20 100 Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 100 20 100 20 100 20 100 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Perm NA Perm NA Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 8 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 8 4 Detector Phase 5 2 1 6 8 8 4 4 Switch Phase Econolite #197 - Future AM Traffic 06/29/2017 Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 10 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Emerson Street & US 14 07/07/2017 Minimum Initial (s) 3.0 15.0 3.0 15.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 Minimum Split (s) 6.0 28.5 6.0 31.5 34.5 34.5 36.5 36.5 Total Split (s) 13.0 35.0 13.0 35.0 37.0 37.0 37.0 37.0 Total Split (%) 15.3% 41.2% 15.3% 41.2% 43.5% 43.5% 43.5% 43.5% Maximum Green (s) 10.0 28.5 10.0 28.5 30.5 30.5 30.5 30.5 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 4.5 3.0 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 All -Red Time (s) 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 1.0 -2.5 1.0 -2.5 -2.5 -2.5 -2.5 -2.5 Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 7.0 3.0 7.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Recall Mode None C-Max None C-Max None None None None Walk Time (s) 8.0 8.0 7.0 7.0 9.0 9.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 14.0 17.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 57.1 53.9 57.4 54.1 17.3 17.3 17.3 17.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.67 0.63 0.68 0.64 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 v/c Ratio 0.05 0.25 0.07 0.18 0.16 0.46 0.16 0.44 Control Delay 1.0 1.4 5.2 7.8 27.9 27.1 28.1 31.4 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 1.0 1.4 5.2 7.8 27.9 27.1 28.1 31.4 LOS A A A A C C C C Approach Delay 1.4 7.5 27.2 30.9 Approach LOS A A C C Queue Length 50th (ft) 1 15 6 45 14 68 14 77 Queue Length 95th (ft) m2 23 18 82 36 118 36 124 Internal Link Dist (ft) 386 362 164 766 Turn Bay Length (ft) 110 105 50 95 Base Capacity (vph) 757 2226 655 2223 383 712 371 731 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.04 0.25 0.06 0.18 0.08 0.25 0.09 0.23 Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 85 Actuated Cycle Length: 85 Offset: 27 (32%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of 1st Green Natural Cycle: 75 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.46 Intersection Signal Delay: 11.1 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 59.2% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min)15 m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal Econolite #197 -Future AM Traffic 06/29/2017 Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 11 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Emerson Street & US 14 07/07/2017 Econolite #197 -Future AM Traffic 06/29/2017 Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 12 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 5: US 14 & Maple Street 1I07/07/2017 t -A Lane Configurations tt Traffic Volume (veh/h) 15 555 5 10 395 20 1 1 2 40 10 15 Future Volume (Veh/h) 15 555 5 10 395 20 1 1 2 40 10 15 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0,95 0.95 0.95 0,95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 16 584 5 11 416 21 1 1 2 42 11 16 Pedestrians 8 5 1 8 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 0 0 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 442 pX, platoon unblocked 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 vC, conflicting volume 445 590 879 1086 300 788 1078 234 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 445 463 767 986 158 672 977 234 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 99 99 100 100 100 87 95 98 cM capacity (veh/h) 1104 1039 253 227 812 311 229 757 m„!L......,: Volume Total 16 389 200 219 229 4 69 Volume Left 16 0 0 11 0 1 42 Volume Right 0 0 5 0 21 2 16 cSH 1104 1700 1700 1039 1700 369 338 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.23 0.12 0.01 0.13 0.01 0.20 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 0 0 1 0 1 19 Control Delay (s) 8.3 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 14.9 18.3 Lane LOS A A B C Approach Delay (s) 0.2 0.3 14.9 18.3 Approach LOS B C Ilptr„0(rrb,,, !,G /;;,,, ////, i, t %„ia / ,,,,, ,ii , ///,, ; %✓,,, ,% , iii %/ , , ii,,,,/ii/ i,,, , „i r Average Delay 1.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 34.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Econolite #197 - Future AM Traffic 06/29/2017 Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 1 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6. Maple Street & Prospect Avenue 07/07/2017 Lane Configurations � 1�r Traffic Volume (vehlh) 100 130 45 120 40 20 Future Volume (Vehlh) 100 130 45 120 40 20 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 105 137 47 126 42 21 Pedestrians 45 214 6 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 4 18 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 248 444 394 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 248 444 394 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 96 92 96 cM capacity (veh/h) 1311 527 536 Volume Total 242 173 63 Volume Left 0 47 42 Volume Right 137 0 21 cSH 1700 1311 530 Volume to Capacity 0.14 0.04 0.12 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 3 10 Control Delay (s) 0.0 2.4 12.7 Lane LOS A B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 2.4 12.7 Approach LOS B rrrrrr rr„ rr;;;;, rrr, r rrrrrr,., rrrrrr r /i / ,r i// �roi�ir ,,,, /i/ / /,,,,/i//,,, ,-„�,caa�. Average Delay 2.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 45.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Econolite #197 -Future AM Traffic 06/29/2017 Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 2 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7: US 14 & School Street 07/07/2017 Lane Configurations tf ++ Y Traffic Volume (veh/h) 15 600 405 15 20 15 Future Volume (Veh/h) 15 600 405 15 20 15 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 16 632 426 16 21 16 Pedestrians 3 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 Percent Blockage 0 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 445 785 224 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 445 785 224 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 99 94 98 cM capacity (veh/h) 1109 324 777 0L,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Volume Total 227 421 284 158 37 Volume Left 16 0 0 0 21 Volume Right 0 0 0 16 16 cSH 1109 1700 1700 1700 433 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.25 0.17 0.09 0.09 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 0 0 0 7 Control Delay (s) 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.1 Lane LOS A B Approach Delay (s) 0.2 0.0 14.1 Approach LOS B Average Delay 0.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 37.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Econolite #197 -Future AM Traffic 06/29/2017 Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 3 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 8: School Street & Pros ect Avenue 07/07/2017 Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) Future Volume (Veh/h) Sign Control Grade Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol tC, single (s) tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) p0 queue free % cM capacity (veh/h) 1 115 15 20 105 70 30 115 15 20 105 70 30 Free Free Stop 0% 0% 0% 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 121 16 21 111 74 32 23 12.0 4.0 2 None None 160 160 4.1 305 152 305 152 6.4 6.2 2.2 3.5 3.3 98 89 96 1392 664 877 ial Volume Total 137 132 .............................................. 106 Volume Left 0 21 74 Volume Right 16 0 32 cSH 1700 1392 716 Volume to Capacity 0.08 0.02 0.15 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 1 13 Control Delay (s) 0.0 1.3 10.9 Lane LOS A B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 1.3 10.9 Approach LOS B N + Average Delay 3.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 32.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Econolite #197 -Future AM Traffic 06/29/2017 Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 4 SimTraffic Performance Report 08/09/2017 3: Emerson Street & US 14 Performance by lane Movements Served L T TR L T TR L TR L TR Denied DeWeh (s) 0.2 Total DelNeh (s) 12.3 12.2 12.3 15.0 11.0 10.2 27.7 20.9 20.5 18.5 14.0 4: Emerson Street & Prospect Avenue Performance by lane Movements Served LT R LT R LTR L TR Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 Total DelNeh (s) 10.0 3.1 9.1 4.3 9.4 0.6 3.0 6.4 5: US 14 & Maple Street Performance by lane Movements Served L T TR LT TR LTR LTR Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 Total DelNeh (s) 2.7 1.9 1.7 0.9 0.4 18.2 11.5 2.0 6: Maple Street & Prospect Avenue Performance by lane Movements Served TR LT LR Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 Total DelNeh (s) 1.5 2.1 3.8 1.9 7: US 14 & School Street Performance by lane Movements Served LT T T TR LR Denied DeWeh (s) 0.1 Total DelNeh (s) 1.3 0.9 0.2 0.2 6.7 0.9 8: School Street & Prospect Avenue Performance by lane Movements Served TR LT LR Denied DeWeh (s) 0.1 Total DelNeh (s) 0.4 0.5 4.7 1.7 Total Network Performance Denied DelNeh (s) 0.2 Total DelNeh (s) 15.2 Econolite #197 - Future AM Traffic SimTraffic Report Sam Schwartz Page 1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: IL 83 & US 14/ Northwest Hn 07/07/2017 Lane ns Traffic Volume (vph) h 10 435 65 50 550 75 60 580 30 25 55 Future Volume (vph) 10 435 65 50 550 75 60 580 30 25 555 5 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 125 0 115 0 65 0 60 0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0,95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0,95 Ped Bike Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.981 0.982 0.993 0.999 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 3463 0 1770 3469 0 1770 3511 0 1770 3534 0 Flt Permitted 0.149 0.160 0.323 0.950 Satd. Flow (perm) 278 3463 0 297 3469 0 593 3511 0 1764 3534 0 Right Turn on Red No No No No Satd. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 30 Link Distance (ft) 2109 466 282 1059 Travel Time (s) 47.9 10.6 6.4 24.1 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 2 6 6 2 25 5 5 25 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0,95 0.95 0.95 0,95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 11 458 68 53 579 79 63 611 32 26 584 5 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 11 526 0 53 658 0 63 643 0 26 589 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 Number of Detectors 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 100 20 100 20 100 Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 100 20 100 20 100 20 100 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+pt NA custom NA Prot NA Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 31112 811 12 7 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 8 3 Detector Phase 5 2 1 6 311 12 811 12 7 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 3.0 15.0 3.0 15.0 3.0 15.0 Econolite #197 -Future PM Traffic 06/29/2017 Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: IL 83 & US 14/ Northwest Hyyy 07/07/2017 10 %%�Jiii/ Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) Future Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Storage Length (ft) Storage Lanes Taper Length (ft) Lane Util. Factor Ped Bike Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Fit Permitted Satd, Flow (perm) Right Turn on Red Satd. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (mph) Link Distance (ft) Travel Time (s) Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Peak Hour Factor Adj. Flow (vph) Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) Enter Blocked Intersection Lane Alignment Median Width(ft) Link Offset(ft) Crosswalk Width(ft) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor Turning Speed (mph) Number of Detectors Detector Template Leading Detector (ft) Trailing Detector (ft) Detector 1 Position(ft) Detector 1 Size(ft) Detector 1 Type Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) Detector 1 Queue (s) Detector 1 Delay (s) Turn Type Protected Phases 3 8 11 12 Permitted Phases Detector Phase Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 3.0 15.0 1.0 3.0 Econolite #197 - Future PM Traffic 06/29/2017 Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 2 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: IL 83 & US 14/ Northwest Hwy 07/07/2017 , % / 91 1%/ Minimum Split (s) 6.0 41.5 6.0 34.5 7.5 40.5 Total Split (s) 13.0 37.0 13.0 37.0 16.0 51.0 Total Split (%) 7.6% 21.8% 7.6% 21.8% 9.4% 30.0% Maximum Green (s) 10.0 30.5 10.0 30.5 11.5 44.5 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 4.5 3.0 4.5 3.5 4.5 All -Red Time (s) 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 1.0 -2.5 1.0 -2.5 -0.5 -2.5 Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lead -Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 7.0 3.0 7.0 3.0 7.0 Recall Mode None None None None None C-Max Walk Time (s) 9.0 8.0 7.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 26.0 20.0 27.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 44.2 36.8 52.9 42.3 91.8 95.8 8.5 48.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.26 0.22 0.31 0.25 0.54 0.56 0.05 0.28 v/c Ratio 0.08 0.70 0.26 0.76 0.09 0.33 0.30 0.59 Control Delay 14.3 29.8 41.0 58.5 0.3 0.3 76.8 53.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 14.3 29.8 41.0 59.8 0.3 0.8 76.8 53.2 LOS B C D E A A E D Approach Delay 29.5 58.4 0.8 54.2 Approach LOS C E A D Queue Length 50th (ft) 3 322 39 270 0 0 23 341 Queue Length 95th (ft) m3 m383 75 #523 m0 0 m33 420 Internal Link Dist (ft) 2029 386 202 979 Turn Bay Length (ft) 125 115 65 60 Base Capacity (vph) 153 749 204 863 802 2166 124 1006 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 74 0 997 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.07 0.70 0.26 0.83 0.08 0.55 0.21 0.59 Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 170 Actuated Cycle Length: 170 Offset: 63 (37%), Referenced to phase 4:SBT and 8:NBTL, Start of 1st Green Natural Cycle: 160 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.78 Intersection Signal Delay: 35.5 Intersection LOS: D Intersection Capacity Utilization 66.3% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min)15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal Econolite #197 - Future PM Traffic 06/29/2017 Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 3 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: IL 83 & US 14/ Northwest Hm 07/07/2017 and Phases: 1: IL 83 & US 14/ Northwest Hwy I \0.06 Ecwnolite #197 -Future PM Traffic 06/29/2017 Sam Schwartz Synchro 9 Report Page 4 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: IL 83 & US 14/ Northwest Hw 07/07/2017 Minimum Split (s) 9.0 37.5 14.0 42.0 Total Split (s) 13.0 35.0 14.0 42.0 Total Split (%) 8% 21 % 8% 25% Maximum Green (s) 7.0 28.5 1.0 29.0 Yellow Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 All -Red Time (s) 1.5 2.0 8.5 8.5 Lost Time Adjust (s) Total Lost Time (s) Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead -Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 7.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None C-Max None None Walk Time (s) 9.0 7.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 22.0 22.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) Actuated g/C Ratio v/c Ratio Control Delay Queue Delay Total Delay LOS Approach Delay Approach LOS Queue Length 50th (ft) Queue Length 95th (ft) Internal Link Dist (ft) Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) Starvation Cap Reductn Spillback Cap Reductn Storage Cap Reductn Reduced v/c Ratio lt,tn'�l�ll?a ; Econolite #197 - Future PM Traffic 06/29/2017 Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 5 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2: IL 83 & Pros ect Avenue 1I07/07/2017 i W Lane Configurations II ' + r +TO 0 Traffic Volume (vph) 45 90 5 20 90 75 10 550 5 95 525 50 Future Volume (vph) 45 90 5 20 90 75 10 550 5 95 525 50 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 185 0 60 70 70 0 25 0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0„95 1.00 0.95 0,95 Ped Bike Factor 0.93 1.00 0.99 0.91 0.90 1.00 1.00 0.99 Frt 0.992 0.850 0.999 0.987 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 3508 0 1770 1863 1583 1770 3535 0 1770 3463 0 Flt Permitted 0.950 0.689 0.423 0.950 Satd. Flow (perm) 1652 3508 0 1276 1863 1447 712 3535 0 1763 3463 0 Right Turn on Red Yes No Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 3 12 Link Speed (mph) 25 25 30 30 Link Distance (ft) 2538 450 457 282 Travel Time (s) 69.2 12.3 10.4 6.4 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 43 4 4 43 82 5 5 82 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 47 95 5 21 95 79 11 579 5 100 553 53 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 47 100 0 21 95 79 11 584 0 100 606 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 Number of Detectors 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Right Left Thru Left Thru Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 100 20 20 100 20 100 Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 100 20 100 20 20 100 20 100 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type Prot NA Perm NA Perm Perm NA custom NA Protected Phases 3 312 12 8 56711 12411 Permitted Phases 12 12 8 56711 Detector Phase 3 312 12 12 12 8 8 56711 12411 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 15.0 15.0 Econolite #197 -Future PM Traffic 06/29/2017 Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 6 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2, IL 83 & Pros ect Avenue 07/07/2017 r ...................... Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) Future Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Storage Length (ft) Storage Lanes Taper Length (ft) Lane Util. Factor Ped Bike Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Right Turn on Red Satd. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (mph) Link Distance (ft) Travel Time (s) Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Peak Hour Factor Adj. Flow (vph) Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) Enter Blocked Intersection Lane Alignment Median Width(ft) Link Offset(ft) Crosswalk Width(ft) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor Turning Speed (mph) Number of Detectors Detector Template Leading Detector (ft) Trailing Detector (ft) Detector 1 Position(ft) Detector 1 Size(ft) Detector 1 Type Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) Detector 1 Queue (s) Detector 1 Delay (s) Turn Type Protected Phases 1 2 4 5 6 7 11 Permitted Phases Detector Phase Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 3.0 15.0 15.0 3.0 15.0 3.0 1.0 Econolite #197 -Future PM Traffic 06/29/2017 Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 7 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2: IL 83 & Prospect Avenue 07/07/2017 Minimum Split (s) 9.0 42.0 42.0 42.0 37.5 37.5 Total Split (s) 13.0 42.0 42.0 42.0 35.0 35.0 Total Split (%) 7.6% 24.7% 24.7% 24.7% 20.6% 20.6% Maximum Green (s) 7.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 28.5 28.5 Yellow Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 All -Red Time (s) 1.5 8.5 8.5 8.5 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) -2.0 -2.0 -2.0 -2.0 -2.5 -2.5 Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 7.0 7.0 Recall Mode None None None None C-Max C-Max Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 9.0 9.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 22.0 22.0 22.0 22.0 22.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 9.0 41.9 21.9 21.9 21.9 35.9 35.9 76.2 120.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.05 0.25 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.21 0.21 0.45 0.71 v/c Ratio 0.51 0.12 0.13 0.40 0.42 0.07 0.78 0.13 0.25 Control Delay 89.1 43.6 67.3 74.2 76.4 58.0 71.9 26.2 0.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.3 Total Delay 89.1 43.6 67.3 74.2 76.4 58.0 71.9 26.8 0.5 LOS F D E E E E E C A Approach Delay 58.2 74.3 71.6 4.2 Approach LOS E E E A Queue Length 50th (ft) 52 46 22 102 85 10 330 91 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) m94 m67 48 157 136 31 #436 m133 0 Internal Link Dist (ft) 2458 370 377 202 Turn Bay Length (ft) 185 60 70 70 25 Base Capacity(vph) 93 1054 232 339 263 150 746 813 2450 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 484 1108 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.51 0.09 0.09 0.28 0.30 0.07 0.78 0.30 0.45 Ifa(ad0°tat Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 170 Actuated Cycle Length: 170 Offset: 63 (37%), Referenced to phase 4:SBT and 8:NBTL, Start of 1st Green Natural Cycle:160 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.78 Intersection Signal Delay: 41.8 Intersection LOS: D Intersection Capacity Utilization 67.2% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min)15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. Econolite #197 -Future PM Traffic 06/29/2017 Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 8 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2: IL 83 & Prospect Avenue 07/07/2017 SpIRs and Phases: 2: IL 83 & Prospect Avenue F1 »T 1#1 #2 1 ;;2 1#1 #2 ■k 12 T® -# \07"'*06 I,* \OXIoNlt Econolite #197 -Future PM Traffic 06/29/2017 Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 9 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2: IL 83 & Pros ect Avenue 07/07/2017 Minimum Split (s) 6.0 41.5 40.5 6.0 34.5 7.5 14.0 Total Split (s) 13.0 37.0 51.0 13.0 37.0 16.0 14.0 Total Split (%) 8% 22% 30% 8% 22% 9% 8% Maximum Green (s) 10.0 30.5 44.5 10.0 30.5 11.5 1.0 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 4.5 4.5 3.0 4.5 3.5 4.5 All -Red Time (s) 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 1.0 8.5 Lost Time Adjust (s) Total Lost Time (s) Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lead Lead -Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 7.0 7.0 3.0 7.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None None C-Max None None None None Walk Time (s) 9.0 7.0 8.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 26.0 27.0 20.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) Actuated g/C Ratio v/c Ratio Control Delay Queue Delay Total Delay LOS Approach Delay Approach LOS Queue Length 50th (ft) Queue Length 95th (ft) Internal Link Dist (ft) Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) Starvation Cap Reductn Spillback Cap Reductn Storage Cap Reductn Reduced vlc Ratio Econolite #197 -Future PM Traffic 06/29/2017 Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 10 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Emerson Street & US 14/ Northwest H 07107/2017 _,* -V f- .- 4-_ 4\ Lane Configurations 0 T Traffic Volume (vph) 30 455 35 105 620 35 40 175 30 20 180 15 Future Volume (vph) 30 455 35 105 620 35 40 175 30 20 180 15 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 110 0 105 0 50 0 95 0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.97 0.99 0.98 1.00 Frt 0.989 0.992 0.978 0.988 Fit Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 3495 0 1805 3505 0 1805 1845 0 1805 1869 0 Fit Permitted 0.370 0.412 0.487 0.465 Satd. Flow (perm) 696 3495 0 776 3505 0 895 1845 0 862 1869 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 12 9 11 5 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 20 20 Link Distance (ft) 466 458 244 846 Travel Time (s) 10.6 10.4 8.3 28.8 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 19 11 11 19 55 39 39 55 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 2% 0% 0% 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Adj. Flow (vph) 32 479 37 111 653 37 42 184 32 21 189 16 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 32 516 0 111 690 0 42 216 0 21 205 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 Number of Detectors 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Left Thru Leading Detector (ft) 20 100 20 100 20 100 20 100 Trailing Detector (ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 20 100 20 100 20 100 20 100 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Perm NA Perm NA Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 8 4 Permitted Phases 2 6 8 4 Detector Phase 5 2 1 6 8 8 4 4 Switch Phase Econolite #197 -Future PM Traffic 06/29/2017 Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 11 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Emerson Street & US 14/ Northwest Hwy 07/07/2017 � --,, � 4\ t Minimum Initial (s) 3.0 15.0 3.0 15.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 Minimum Split (s) 6.0 28.5 6.0 31.5 34.5 34.5 36.5 36.5 Total Split (s) 13.0 41.0 13.0 41.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 Total Split (%) 15.3% 48.2% 15.3% 48.2% 36.5% 36.5% 36.5% 36.5% Maximum Green (s) 10.0 34.5 10.0 34.5 24.5 24.5 24.5 24.5 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 4.5 10 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 All -Red Time (s) 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 1.0 -2.5 1.0 -2.5 -2.5 -2.5 -2.5 -2.5 Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 7.0 3.0 7.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Recall Mode None C-Max None C-Max None None None None Walk Time (s) 8.0 8.0 7.0 7.0 9.0 9.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 14.0 17.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 53.0 48.8 56.3 51.9 19.5 19.5 19.5 19.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.62 0.57 0.66 0.61 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 v/c Ratio 0.06 0.26 0.19 0.32 0.20 0.50 0.11 0.47 Control Delay 2.0 2.5 6.5 10.0 27.0 30.2 24.7 30.4 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 2.0 2.5 6.5 10.0 27.0 30.2 24.7 30.4 LOS A A A B C C C C Approach Delay 2.5 9.6 29.7 29.8 Approach LOS A A C C Queue Length 50th (ft) 2 23 17 92 18 96 9 93 Queue Length 95th (ft) m4 32 44 160 42 146 25 141 Internal Link Dist (ft) 386 378 164 766 Turn Bay Length (ft) 110 105 50 95 Base Capacity (vph) 575 2011 631 2141 284 593 273 597 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 79 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.06 0.26 0.18 0.33 0,15 0.36 0.08 0.34 Interseeti ----a Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 85 Actuated Cycle Length: 85 Offset: 33 (39%), Referenced to phase 2:EBTL and 6:WBTL, Start of 1st Green Natural Cycle: 75 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.50 Intersection Signal Delay: 12.8 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 66.9% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. Econolite #197 -Future PM Traffic 06129/2017 Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 12 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Emerson Street & US 14/ Northwest HIM07/07/2017 and Phases: 3: Emerson Street & US 14/ Northwest .108 Econolite #197 -Future PM Traffic 06/29/2017 Sam Schwartz Synchro 9 Report Page 13 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 5: US 14/ Northwest Hwy 107/07/2017 Lane Configurations tt tt 4� Traffic Volume (veh/h) 10 465 1 10 775 30 5 10 5 20 5 30 Future Volume (Veh/h) 10 465 1 10 775 30 5 10 5 20 5 30 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0�95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 11 489 1 11 816 32 5 11 5 21 5 32 Pedestrians 5 1 6 16 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 0 0 1 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 458 pX, platoon unblocked 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 vC, conflicting volume 864 496 987 1404 252 1148 1388 445 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 864 376 891 1327 121 1059 1311 445 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 99 99 97 92 99 86 97 94 cM capacity (veh/h) 764 1119 199 141 862 152 144 551 Volume Total 11 326 164 419 440 21 58 Volume Left 11 0 0 11 0 5 21 Volume Right 0 0 1 0 32 5 32 cSH 764 1700 1700 1119 1700 193 251 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.19 0.10 0.01 0.26 0.11 0.23 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 0 0 1 0 9 22 Control Delay (s) 9.8 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 26.0 23.6 Lane LOS A A D C Approach Delay (s) 0.2 0.2 26.0 23.6 Approach LOS D C Ire n ,,, „ Average Delay 1.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 42.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Econolite #197 - Future PM Traffic 06/29/2017 Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 1 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6. Prospect Avenue 07/07/2017 Lane Configurations 1qr Traffic Volume (veh/h) 145 95 40 110 125 40 Future Volume (Veh/h) 145 95 40 110 125 40 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 153 100 42 116 132 42 Pedestrians 45 146 31 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 4 12 3 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 284 479 380 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 284 479 380 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 97 73 93 cM capacity (veh/h) 1245 494 571 Volume Total 253 158 174 Volume Left 0 42 132 Volume Right 100 0 42 cSH 1700 1245 511 Volume to Capacity 0.15 0.03 0.34 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 3 37 Control Delay (s) 0.0 2.3 15.6 Lane LOS A C Approach Delay (s) 0.0 2.3 15.6 Approach LOS C Average Delay 5.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 45.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Econolite #197 -Future PM Traffic 06/29/2017 Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 2 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 7: US 14/ Northwest Hwy 07/07/2017 Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 15 510 790 15 10 20 Future Volume (Veh/h) 15 510 790 15 10 20 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 16 537 832 16 11 21 Pedestrians 1 6 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 0 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 854 1146 431 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 854 1146 431 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 98 94 96 cM capacity (veh/h) 777 188 569 One Volume Total 195 358 555 293 32 Volume Left 16 0 0 0 11 Volume Right 0 0 0 16 21 cSH 777 1700 1700 1700 335 Volume to Capacity 0.02 0.21 0.33 0.17 0.10 Queue Length 95th (ft) 2 0 0 0 8 Control Delay (s) 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.9 Lane LOS A C Approach Delay (s) 0.4 0.0 16.9 Approach LOS C Average Delay 0.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 35.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Econolite #197 -Future PM Traffic 06/29/2017 Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 3 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 8: Prospect Avenue 07/07/2017 Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 135 75 25 115 50 30 Future Volume (Veh/h) 135 75 25 115 50 30 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 142 79 26 121 53 32 Pedestrians 11 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 Percent Blockage 1 Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 232 366 192 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 232 366 192 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 98 91 96 cM capacity (veh/h) 1323 616 841 Volume Total 221 147 85 Volume Left 0 26 53 Volume Right 79 0 32 cSH 1700 1323 685 Volume to Capacity 0.13 0.02 0.12 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 2 11 Control Delay (s) 0.0 1.5 11.0 Lane LOS A B Approach Delay (s) 0.0 1.5 11.0 Approach LOS B Lo Average Delay 2.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 34.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Econolite #197 -Future PM Traffic 06/29/2017 Synchro 9 Report Sam Schwartz Page 4 SimTraffic Performance Report 08/09/2017 3, Emerson Street & US 14/ Northwest Hwy Performance by lane Movements Served L T TR L T TR L TR L TR Denied DelNeh (s) 0.3 Total DelNeh (s) 6.8 8.5 7.6 8.7 7.4 8.3 55.3 72.7 82.7 67.1 23.3 4: Emerson Street & Prospect Avenue Performance by lane Movements Served LT R LT R LTR L TR Denied DelNeh (s) 0.3 Total DelNeh (s) 62.0 5.7 52.8 46.2 282.6 1.2 2.2 68.2 5: US 14/ Northwest Hwy Performance by lane Z Movements Served L T TR LT TR LTR LTR Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 Total DelNeh (s) 9.5 1.3 1.0 0.9 0.7 15.8 15.6 1.8 6: Prospect Avenue Performance by lane 1 Movements Served TR LT LR Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 Total DelNeh (s) 1.8 2.1 9.8 4.1 7: US 14/ Northwest Hwy Performance by lane L �,%; ; Al" �. Movements Served LT T T TR LR Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 Total DelNeh (s) 1.2 0.7 0.3 0.2 5.9 0.7 8: Prospect Avenue Performance by lane N r ilia f ...,,�. W Movements Served TR LT LR Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 Total DelNeh (s) 0.7 0.4 4.3 1.3 Total Network Performance u Denied DelNeh (s) 0.4 Total DelNeh (s) 45.4 Econolite #197 - Future PM Traffic SimTraffic Report Sam Schwartz Page 1 APPENDIX E Mount Prospect Downtown Transportation Study EXISTING SIGNAL POST WITH EXISTING PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTT EXISTING MAST ARM POST PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON AND POST EXISTING SIGNAL POST WITH PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN PUSH EXISTING MAST ARM POST WITH EXISTING PEDESTRIAN PUSH BU Sam 1000 W. IRVING 'K. SMITE I30 S�W3[�Z ITASCA. IL 60143 Engineeling, DSC. FA000 A: (6301 213 322T EXISTING MAST ARM POST PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON AND POST EXISTING SIGNAL POST WITH EXISTING PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON STING SIGNAL POST WITH STING PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON )POSED PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON ISTING MAST ARM POST PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON STUDY US 14 AND EMERSON ROAD EXISTING MAST ARM POST WITH EXISTING PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON EXISTING MAST ARM POST WITH EXISTING PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON EXISTING SIGNAL POST WITH EXISTING PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON ING SIGNAL POST WITH ING PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON OSED PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON EXISTING MAST ARM POST WITH EXISTING PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTC Sam 1000 N. IRVING PK, SUITE PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON STUDY sc�= SUITE .I 0 601<J 7inro" �nu,Dr.C. Fq%: f6301 213-3227 IL 83 (MAIN ST) AND PROSPECT AVE EXISTING SIGNAL P( EXISTING MAST ARM POST WITH EXISTING PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTT PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON AND POST EXISTING SIGNAL POST WITH EXISTING PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTOI PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTT EXISTING MAST ARM PO' Sam 1000 W. IRVINL RK, SCLWdi[Z IT PSCA 1 30L 60143 HLgIIICEDDg, I7.P.C. FAIL(: f6301 213-3222 EXISTING MAST ARM POST WITH PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON EXISTING SIGNAL POST WITH EXISTING PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON 'OSED PEDESTRIAN iBUTTON AND POST "ING MAST ARM POST WITH "ING PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON STUDY IL 83 (MAIN ST) AND US 14 APPENDIX muunw,wNI nmxy. C,) P I ." ESTIMATES Mount Prospect Downtown Transportation Study ENGINEERING Concept Cost Comparison Revision: Prepared by: Reviewed by: Date: TBO Date: 8/22/2017 SPH Date: 8/23/2017 Approved by: AC Date: 8/25/2017 This is an opinion of probable construction cost based on a concept level design and should only be used as an order of magnitude comparison and these values do not represent the full cost for construction. r , , r,+,rnrv,rr, rams �,x rrs, <,�, � , zrr.� i� r�ur� r r n irr „i,ri r rr,,,arriai b» rm m ar r mi mrr Uia w r rmc, Nn p 9 q i Y l�lil�11�"m a�� : W� i„�,Y �o.-u , �. r'i „i I�� �I r , � 1 r l 1 . , c , r , 1 1111�� 111 , , cNr��l����1�, , � r�111,!�',���.���Ill���l�� ��r�1»�r�,rr,m Number Item Option 1 Estimated Cost Option 2 Estimated Cost Option 3 Estimated Cost 1 Removals $69,200 $464,373 $411,378 2 Fencing and Crossings $135,008 $279,744 $225,220 3 Track Work $98,925 $156,000 $124,350 4 Platform $434,250 $728,250 $728,250 5 Station $731,400 $731,400 $731,400 61 Parking Lot 67,950 $87,255 $73,225 Labor and Material Subtotal: Contingency (20%): Construction Subtotal: Roadway Reahgnment: Construction Total: Land Acquisition: Relocations (Business): Relocations (Residential): Land Acquisition Total: Grand Total (Construction + Land Acquisition): $1,536,733 $307,347 $2,447,022 $489,404 $2,293,823 $458,765 $1,844,080 $2,936,427 $2,752,588 $0 $5,000,000 J $5,000,000 $1,944,080 $7,936,427 $7,752,588 $3,000,000 $2,200,000 $120,000 $40,000 $1,125,000 $1,150,000 $0 $4,245,000 $3,390,000 $1,844,080 1 $12,181,427 1 $11,142,588 BoardDocs® Pro Page 1 of 4 Agenda Item Details Meeting Category Subject Access Type Public Content Background Nov 13, 2018 - COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE AGENDA 4. DISCUSSION ITEMS 4.2 PRESENTATION OF DOWNTOWN PARKING AND TRANSPORTATION STUDIES Public Discussion This memorandum transmits the Downtown Parking Study and Downtown Transportation Study final reports. These reports are intended to satisfy Village of Mount Prospect Strategic Plan initiatives to examine parking and traffic issues in the downtown area and consider options for improving service levels. In addition, these studies help support initiatives within the Village's Downtown Implementation Plan by identifying existing and possible future issues related to traffic and parking prior to formally approving major redevelopment. Areas of focus within these studies coincide with Key Opportunity Sites within the Downtown Implementation Plan. In addition, the Downtown Implementation Plan gives recommendations in line with KLOA with regard to use of the Village garage and commuter parking lots. In addition to this broad scope, both reports also include discussion of opportunities to accommodate proposed redevelopment in the area. Downtown Parkina .Stud The Public Works Department team worked in conjunction with traffic engineers from Kenig, Lindgren, O'Hara, Aboona, Inc. (KLOA) of Rosemont, Illinois to inventory all available parking spaces in the downtown area and assess capacity utilization during varied time periods. Utilization was primarily assessed by means of physical counts during weekdays, weeknights, and on weekends. In general, this research indicated ample existing parking with peak utilization consistently less than 50% of capacity. Analysis also revealed that the Village -owned parking deck adjacent to the Village Hall is underutilized. In addition, empty parking spaces are abundant in all of the commuter parking lots during evenings and on weekends. The report further identifies spot locations where parking is more constrained. Notably, streets around Village Hall (Emerson Street, Busse Avenue, Northwest Highway (b/w Emerson Street and Main Street), Pine Street (b/w Central Road and Northwest Highway), and certain blocks of Prospect Avenue intermittently exceeded 80% or 90% utilization during midday hours. To mitigate these constraints, KLOA offers recommendations to improve utilization of the parking deck and commuter lots, upgrade pedestrian crossings to aid access to nearby available parking, modify on -street parking time restrictions to increase parking turn -over, and modify Pine Street to add more on -street parking. KLOA also examined parking impacts associated with potential redevelopment sites identified in the 2013 Downtown Implementation Plan. Several of the sites discussed in this plan are currently under varied states of development including the "Triangle" (20 West), "Post Office" (Park Terrace), and "Lions Park (Maple Street Lofts) projects. KLOA has concluded that redevelopment projects consistent with this plan, including those referenced, will likely have little impact on parking availability in the downtown area due to a design emphasis targeting transit oriented clientele and the fact that most project concepts include sufficient parking to sustain the proposed use. Michael Werthmann, PE (Professional Engineer), PTOE (Professional Traffic Operations Engineer), a principal at KLOA, will present the study's findings. https://www.boarddocs.com/il/vompBoard.nsf/Public 11/9/2018 BoardDocs® Pro Co_mmuter ParkinSL plan Page 2 of 4 In addition, Village staff will also present current ideas to accommodate commuter parking needs into the proposed Maple Street Lofts project. The plan includes the following elements: A proposed new parking deck on the Maple Street Lofts site. This garage is projected to have 250 parking spaces, of which 180 would be resident -only commuters. A proposed change to all sixty-three (63) E. Prospect Ave on -street commuter parking spaces to resident -only commuter parking spaces (they are currently open to any commuter). A proposed expansion of commuter parking to the existing Village parking deck on the north side of the railroad tracks adjacent to Village Hall. Fifty (50) spaces would be reserved for Mount Prospect residents that live north of the tracks, offering these spaces at a reduced fee to incentivize their use. Another 50 spaces would be available to all commuters at the regular rate. The net effect of implementing these improvements is to retain current commuter parking capacity, while improving traffic circulation near Emerson and Prospect Avenue during rush hours. The following information was collected and used to create this plan: Police license plate surveys for those parked in all Village commuter lots to help determine where the commuters reside. The goal of this exercise is to understand demand coming from the north side of the tracks, and allowing parking options which do not require them to cross the tracks headed south. This will help alleviate vehicle traffic during rush hours. Based upon data collected, approximately 60 residents utilizing the Maple Street Lot live north of the tracks. Village parking deck surveys conducted in 2017, which staff counted the spaces that were utilized in the deck over numerous days (during business hours). The results of this survey shows that the 4th and 5th levels of the Village Parking garage are rarely used, with a vacancy rate of over 97%; it is unlikely that allowing up to 100 commuters on the 4th and 5th levels of the Village garage will result in unmet parking demand by other users of the deck, as this use is seen on floors 1st - 3rd. Input and recommendations from both the KLOA parking study and the Downtown Transportation Study - Addendum. Currently, the Village offers 631 total commuter parking spaces with 285 reserved for residents. The proposed commuter parking plan will result in 626 total commuter parking spaces with 293 reserved for.residents. O Z The construction of a public parking garage off Maple Street will allow for up to 70 additional "visitor" or open parking spaces. These non -commuter spaces can be used to accommodate visitors, employees and customers to any nearby retail establishment, and to help honor off -site parking agreements which are in place currently satisfied by the Maple Street Lot. Additionally, these spaces will provide additional parking (28) spaces the Village provided the 28 unit Maple Street Townhomes in the Maple Street lot during the hours of &:00pm and 7:30am. In addition, the Village garage has excess capacity during non -business hours (Monday - Friday from 7 AM - 6 PM), as do the surface commuter lots. The KLOA study notes that these Commuter lots (East, West, Maple Street and E. Prospect Ave) have occupancy at 12.5% or less during Saturday evenings and Sunday afternoons (excluding Farmers Market/Car Show from these parking calculations). Better utilization of commuter lots, including Village garage(s), during non -commuter hours is a recommendation in KLOA's parking study; staff is looking to have a more formal policy in place that addresses longer -term visitor or overnight parking in these spaces. In addition, allowing nearby businesses to valet park in these lots on the weekends and after 6 PM when commuters are no longer using the lots. Downtown Transportation Stud Last year, the Public Works Department engaged Sam Schwartz Transportation Consultants of Chicago, Illinois (Sam Schwartz) to examine the efficacy of certain downtown Mount Prospect intersections including Central Road & Main Street, Main Street & Northwest Highway, Main Street & Prospect Avenue, and Emerson Street & Northwest Highway. This study elaborated a limited signal coordination and timing study (SCAT) conducted in 2016 and culminated in the attached 2017 Downtown Transportation Study final report. Part of the analysis was to evaluate the impact of the proposed Maple Street Lofts transit oriented development. The analysis considered trip generation and a capacity analysis in existing conditions and with the proposed redevelopment. The results show h t service levels are not materially impacted in terms _ of delay traveling through downtown intersections. Suggested improvements to pedestrian signals, train operations to clear Route 83 and the relocation of Police and Fire will result in further reductions in downtown delays. https://www.boarddoes.com/il/vompBoard.nsf/Public 11/9/2018 BoardDocs® Pro Page 3 of 4 Peter Wojtkiewicz, PE (Professional Engineer), PTOE (Professional Traffic Operations Engineer), Vice President at Sam Schwartz Transportation Consulting, and Kelly Connolly, PE (Professional Engineer), Project Manager at Sam Schwartz, will present their findings. Appropriate staff will also be in attendance to facilitate discussion. l�la I »tre+et'Loltts "�"ra�c 1Crn acik turd Representatives from the Maple Street Lofts development team, including developer Nicholas & Associates and their traffic consultants, KLOA will discuss traffic circulation and roadway impacts anticipated from the proposed redevelopment. " Current Proaress The Village is diligently developing many of the recommendations identified in these reports: • Notably, plans to construct pedestrian crossing improvements at Main Street and Busse Avenue have been completed and submitted to the Illinois Department of Transportation for permit review. Staff plans to construct the improvements in 2019. • In addition, separation of pedestrian crossing signal activation buttons at Emerson & Northwest Highway, Main Street & & Northwest Highway, and Prospect Avenue & Northwest Highway is also slated to take place during 2019. Staff is presently soliciting proposals from engineering to provide design services for this work. • Also, and very significantly, the Village is actively pursuing relocation of the Police/Fire Headquarters Building out of the downtown area thereby reducing the frequency of emergency vehicle prioritization (EVP) traffic signal interrupts. Both Police and Fire operations should exit the downtown area by 2020. • Staff is also involved in discussions with Metra and the Union Pacific Railroad to require inbound trains to stop for the station further east in order to allow the crossing gates at Main Street to raise while the train is stopped to board and alight passengers. This release of queued traffic will help reduce the amount of time train block Main Street. Presently, stopped trains block Main Street for 30 of the 90 minutes in the morning and evening peak periods. Staff is hopeful that this procedural modification can be implemented in 2019 without a platform extension. The next meeting to discuss this matter is scheduled for early December. 1.5--1.10 Mt IProspect Dowintow n p:"larking Study 9--24--2018„pdf (7,1.53 IKl:3) a 2017 transp::aortatiion study -- finaLpdf (12,930 KB) DowntownI rn plementationPlan. F, 201..8 transportation study -- addeindurrnI.pdf (31.8 Kl:3) F Mount l::,rospect Downtown Parkl nq Study Preserutation :11--07--1..8.1pcif (1,990 KB) MP Downtown Trans Presentation 11-13-18.pdf (9,122 KB) Village Hall Parking Garage Utilization Data 2005,2017.pdf (88 KB) • . •- • !.ta 2005 2017.pdf• [,," Village Hall Garage Surveillance Survey,2017.pdf (161 KB) Survey of Cornimuater (Lots 10--1.8--1.8.pdf (1.1.2 KB) Administrative Content Executive Content https://www.boarddocs.com/il/vomp/Board.nsf/Public 11/9/2018 BoardDocs® Pro Page 4 of 4 https://www.boarddocs.com/il/vompBoard.nsf/Public 11/9/2018 Prepared For: VILLAGE OF IN MOUNT PROSPECT List of Figures and Tables, ii 1. Introduction ......... ......................................... „»....,,...,....,.,.....»»..»„ „.,,.......I 2. Downtown Parking Surveys,..„,„„................„„„„„.,........,........»..,»,,.,..,.............2 3. Existing Parking Conditions,,. .............. ............................................. ........4 ParkingInventory .................. ................. _ , ................... » . , . , , ...............4 Parking Occupancy..........„ ............. ___ ..... ...»„»,». ,....................... ,,12 KeyFindings.............................................„.,,...................,.».,,,,..........23 4. Projected Parking Conditions .......................... . .. . ................... , , ...................25 Downtown Redevelopment Opportunities/Sites .... .. „ . . . ......... . .. .... ....... , , ....25 TriangleSite.......................................................................................27 ChaseBank Site..............,..,..............„ ............. ........... ........ .............. .,.,.28 LionsPark Site..„.................»»,.,.....,,..,,.......,........•..............„ ......•........29 Centraland Main Site...., ..............................................» ..»».....................31 PostOffice Site ............................... .„.,.................... ....».,.................. ,„»„32 Tri-State Site ................... ........... ___ ....... ».,....... ,............. ........ ....... ...33 5. Findings and Recommendations............ ....... . . . . . .. . . ...... . ........ „ » , „ „ , , , • .............. 34 Summaryof Findings ........................... ...,.,....................................... ... 34 General Recommendations ....................., ......................,...................,..35 Northwest Quadrant Recommendations.. . . . . ...... . .. . » ..... , , , , , , , , ... , , „ ,. , 3 8 Northeast Quadrant Recommendations— . . . . . . ........... . . . . . .. . . . . ......... » » .. , . „ , , ......48 Southeast and Southwest Quadrant Recommendations... , , ... .. , , ... » .................,.49 6. Conclusions .................. .»»»..,........ ......»,,.,.......,...,..».»».,,...,...................51 Existing Downtown Parking Supply ............. . ...... » » » .......... , ............ » . » , » . » , ... 51 Existing Downtown Parking Occupancy .......... . . .......... , ....... , . , , » ...................51. Projected Parking Demand ......................... » ..... , » , , ........., ............. .....52 Recommendations..... ......................... ..„..................», ,»,.» .............53 Appendix - Downtown Parking Surveys Figures IA. Public & Private Parking Locations —Downtown.. . ....... ..... .......... ...................... 5 1 B. Public & Private Parking Locations — Downtown Core Subarea .................... . . „ ... , ... , ...6 2. Public Parking Inventory — Downtown Core Subarea...............................................8 3A. Parking Time Regulations — Downtown......................................................... . . ..10 3B. Parking Time Regulations —Downtown Core Subarea ...................... ............... ........ I I 4A. Public Parking Utilization Weekday Midday — Downtown........................................19 4B. Public Parking Utilization Weekday Midday — Downtown Core Subarea......................20 5A. Public Parking Utilization Saturday Midday—Downtown..........................„..„..........21 5B. Public Parking Utilization Saturday Midday — Downtown Core Subarea .......................22 6. Future Redevelopment Sites„..,„.......................................................................26 7A. Conceptual Downtown Parking Map — Weekdays Before 6:00 PM .............................39 7B. Conceptual Downtown Parking Map — Weekday Evenings and Weekends....................40 8. Recommended Parking Time Regulations - Downtown Core Subarea ..........................45 9A. Pine Street Conceptual Parking Improvements — Alternative 1..................................46 9B. Pine Street Conceptual Parking Improvements — Alternative 2..................................47 Tables 1. Downtown Parking Inventory — Public and Private ............................... „ . , ..............„.4 2. Downtown Core Subarea Public Parking Inventory — By Quadrant ..............................7 3. Parking Inventory, Occupancy and Percent Occupied — Downtown Study Area..............13 4. Parking Inventory, Occupancy and Percent Occupied — Downtown Core Subarea. 14 5. Public Parking Inventory, Occupancy and Percent Occupied by Quadrant....................15 6. Public Parking Inventory, Occupancy and Percent Occupied — Specific Locations..„.., „„,16 7. Downtown Redevelopment Opportunities/Sites..................... „„„„,... , . , ., , .. , ,„, ............25 ii This report summarizes the findings from a parking demand assessment of the public and private parking supply in downtown Mount Prospect, Illinois. The study area for the parking assessment was selected by Village staff and generally follows the boundary of the downtown tax increment financing district. The study area consists of parking lots, a parking deck and on -street parking spaces. The parking spaces are both regulated and unregulated and are used by Metra commuters and downtown employees, visitors and patrons. This parking demand assessment was performed as a follow-up to downtown parking surveys performed by the Village over the past three years in which some residents and business owners expressed concerns about the current availability of parking in the downtown at various times. Several new downtown development projects have recently been approved by the Village or are in the planning stages. Those responding to the parking surveys, as well as Village leaders and staff, have also expressed concerns about the parking impacts that the new developments will have on future parking availability in the downtown. As such, the purpose of this study is five -fold, as follows: 1. Inventory the downtown parking supply and posted parking regulations 2. Document the utilization of the parking supply on typical weekdays and weekend days, including weekends where downtown events were hosted 3. Evaluate the parking data to identify locations where parking surpluses and deficits exist 4. Estimate the impact on downtown parking demand from new development projects 5. Recommend improvements to address areas of parking deficit The following chapters of this report include a description of the downtown parking data collection efforts, documentation and evaluation of existing parking conditions, estimation and evaluation of the future parking supply and demand upon completion of new downtown development projects, and a series of recommendations, policies and strategies to address areas of parking deficit. The Village has conducted surveys on downtown parking conditions over the past three years. The surveys, which have mostly focused on downtown business owners, include the following: 1. Downtown Parking Survey. Survey distributed electronically to downtown business owners in May 2018. 10 electronic responses and 13 written/verbal responses received. 2. Northwest Highway Businesses. Walking survey with paper handouts of businesses along Northwest Highway from Novak & Parker at Mount Prospect Road west to Shell/7-11 at Fairview Avenue. Survey performed by Prospect High School students on Prospect Gives Back Day in October 2017. 8 responses received. 3. Northwest Highway Businesses. Walking survey with paper handouts of businesses along Northwest Highway from Novak & Parker at Mount Prospect Road west to Capannari Ice Cream at Pine Street. Survey performed by Prospect High School students on Prospect Gives Back Day in October 2016. Approximately 10 responses received. Key findings from the downtown parking surveys are summarized below: 89% of business owners who responded are satisfied with downtown parking conditions. 50% of business owners who responded reported that their employees park on the street. Business owners who responded reported that their customers primarily park on the street with some parking on -site or other private lots. Most customers do not park in the public lots/deck. • 20% of business owners who responded reported that their employees park in the Village Parking Deck. 0 20% of business owners who responded indicated that there is inadequate parking for their employees. 55% of business owners who responded reported a willingness to walk up to 3 minutes to a parking location. The remaining 45% were willing to walk further distances. 9 Parking availability is most challenging during weekday afternoons and weekend evenings. 9 Parking availability is most challenging during the summer and autumn months. • Use of valet parking, shuttles and ride -sharing services for customers is generally not relevant to the business owners responding to the survey. 0 Most responding businesses are open on weekdays and weekends. 2 Several issues were conveyed by business owners who responded, including the following: • Lack of parking around restaurants on weekends (Capannari, Trezeros, Honey Butter, Le Peep, Dunkin Donuts, Brick City) • Need to preserve parking along Northwest Highway • Need for visible guidance signs for Village parking deck, particularly from Main Street (IL 83) • Farmers' Market customers parking in private retail lots • Enforcement of 2-hour parking regulations • Need for parking time regulations longer than 2 hours • Safety concerns crossing Northwest Highway to reach Farmers' Market • Employees parking in private lots that should be reserved for customers • Current parking issues will get worse once new developments are underway • Awareness of orange tags for parking in Village deck The downtown parking survey responses are contained in the Appendix of this report. It should be noted that the responses received represent just a sampling of opinions on parking in downtown Mount Prospect. 3 This chapter describes existing parking conditions in downtown Mount Prospect, parking usage characteristics, and an evaluation of parking supply and demand. The data presented in this chapter was determined from field reviews and parking occupancy surveys of the downtown parking system. Parking Inventory An inventory of the public and private parking spaces in the downtown Mount Prospect study area was performed by the Village. Figure 1A shows the location of these parking facilities with respect to the entire downtown study area. Figure 1B shows the parking facilities within the downtown core subarea. The downtown study area provides a total of 4,521 parking spaces, as shown in Table 1, including 1,356 spaces in public parking lots, 1,179 spaces on the street, and 1,986 spaces in private lots. Approximately 74 percent of the parking spaces in downtown Mount Prospect are located in off- street locations with the remaining 26 percent located on -street. In addition, the public parking supply comprises 56 percent of the total parking supply in the downtown area, with the remaining 44 percent reserved private parking. Table 1 DOWNTOWN PARKING INVENTORY — PUBLIC AND PRIVATE Public Parking Lots / Village Deck 1,356 Public On -Street Spaces 1,179 Private Parking Lots 1,986 TOTAL 4,521 0 Public Parking am Private Parking w On -Street Parking mi Off -Street Parking Total Downtown Parking Breakdown 4 LEGEND 119 MBUC CO—H PERMF PARKIN -D 4BG LOT to! PUBND PARKING Lor YM�11 PAWN,; 6Mt* M.Xom U-011 - WN"(1411011 pp.M ollmolg�l ull mmi"e, GAAM�" DOWNTOWN PARIGNO STUDY MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS SEE FIG* IB —,ZrA ulul, um m) vW ;Hfaow. II p t4has", o A* PUBLIC & PRIVATE PARKING LOCATIONS - DOWNTOWN -IGUR1A. FE-' uWiA�W Am"nT� 4J�Y,T 1W�Ctlui 7. A�1�Y��wtl fl�%INNNI� IMe,Hl�tl�lt �'FMU¢lu Uri4Bk& 4NYIRY"�V WNEN 67iW '�tW'� IIBrv!�77 4'dNIM N'o'�VY,C 'IWtlIGd �lI�Y�., !WY4 1N r 1 SCALE: N.T.S. Y i�,/s� -1. ,, �OC�C�pNIC ��lalhear I 40' LEGEND IIWNIINNW PERMM PPUBUCARMNGELGT AB PUBUC PARKING LOT FN aka anaNwfm DA',Km* LOT UNDER CONMUCTON PRIVATE PARKING LOT P" PRVATE PARKING GARAGE DOWNTOWN PARKING STUDY MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS PUBLIC & PRIVATE PARKING LOCATIONS - DOWNTOWN CORE SUBAREA ...... :�' The downtown core subarea offers the majority of parking for downtown businesses, commuters and events. Approximately 78 percent of the study area parking supply is located within the downtown core subarea. Of the 3,546 parking spaces in the downtown core subarea, 62 percent (2,209 spaces) are public spaces and 38 percent (1,337 spaces) are private spaces. For purposes of analysis, the public spaces in the downtown core subarea were separate into quadrants. Figure 2 shows the four quadrants of the downtown core subarea, including the northeast, northwest, southeast and southwest quadrants. Figure 2 and Table 2 show a breakdown of the public parking supply by quadrant. As shown, approximately 61 percent of the public spaces are in off-street locations and 39 percent are on -street. The northeast quadrant contains the largest concentration of public parking (42%) followed by the southeast quadrant (26%). Table 2 DOWNTOWN CORE SUBAREA PUBLIC PARKING INVENTORY — BY OUADRANT Off -Street Spaces 787 223 285 61 1,356 On -Street aces 51 p _ 120 287 295 � 853 TOTAL 938 343 572 356 2,209 a Downtown Non -Core Area au Downtown Core Area a Downtown Core Public Parking * Downtown Core Private Parking a Core Area Public On -Street ua Core Area Public Off -Street ■ Northeast Quad,, l ■ southeast Quadrant ■ North,•.+nt Quadrant • Soul h,•rest Ouadrant Downtown Core Subarea Parking Breakdown 7 NEW WE 111w XON 0901 = m w M, liffiAL, I= ftoo o u "ImAl Imlli01 I � �^iillu�IP I ....,,�.R 9 � �Gtlllllp�l�p� "�� �r W ��'"'�'%ors'"✓� h m LEGEND 4 �YLti4Mtlfk'C— C, 1 RGiYM1m, 9S �njRm DOWNTOWN OUADRANT SUB AREAS G i Ali PERMR PAR MINGELOT AR 5• ��u PUBUC PARMNG GARAGE ' PUBLIC PMgNG ON —STREET �w ,m aJNl TOTAL PUBLIC PARKING INVENTORY DOWNTOWN CORE SUBAREA QUADRANT OFF-STREET ON -STREET TOTAL NW 223 120 343 NE 787 151 93B SW 61 295 356 SE 205 287 572 TOTAL 0513 1,356 k.21S9 SCALE: N T.S. DOWNTOWN PARKING STUDY I � t n 1. REV. MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS PUBLIC PARKING INVENTORY - DOWNTOWN CORE SUBAREA wrvD�wra +d„o FN&01RG 2 On -Street Public Parking In total, there are 1,179 on -street parking spaces in the downtown study area spread over 54 blocks, as shown in Figure IA. In the downtown core subarea alone, there are 853 on -street spaces spread over 36 blocks, as shown in Figure 1 B. These spaces are all free for public use, with the exception of the commuter spaces along Prospect Avenue that have a $2 daily fee on weekday days. Several of the spaces are regulated during the daytime period between 7:00 A.M. and 6:00 P.M. The most prevalent time regulation is a 2-hour limit, with a few locations limited to 4-hour parking. Figure 3A shows the time regulations for the on -street parking in the downtown study area. Figure 3B shows the time regulations for the on -street parking in the downtown core subarea. Off -Street Public Parking The off-street public parking facilities are all located in the downtown core subarea. There are 13 total public parking facilities, consisting of 12 surface lots and one parking deck, as shown in Figure 1B. Five of the parking lots serve Metra commuters including four lots along the north side of the Union Pacific Railroad and one lot at Maple Street and Prospect Avenue on the south side of A, e railroad. The Village sells monthly permits to park in these lots or they can be used for a $2 daily fee. The commuter lots are free to the public after 6:00 P.M. on weekdays and all day on weekends. The other public parking lots and the Village deck are all free of charge with no time limits, with the exception of the Water Tower lot that has a 2-hour time regulation between 7:00 A.M. and 6:00 P.M. and the Village deck that has a 4-hour time regulation. The Village also offers orange tags to local businesses for employees to park in the deck free of charge. 0 SCALE: N.T.S. SEE FIG. 3B I von, MiN o`TwT a Am 11. im Imills - ID 14, 41, Ion, LEGEND PARKING LOT REGULATIONS000w 2 HOUR PARKING 7;00 A. TO 6:00 PM r1j GARAGE — 4 HOUR PARKING 111114 F4�A] 4 HOUR PARKING r2l PARKING LOT — PERMIT PARKING ONLY inA HOUR PARKANG —1 7:00 AM TO 6:03 PM r3 COMMUTER LOTS — FREE PARKING M-1AM 2 HOUR PARKING NO RESTRICTION 7:00 AM TO 6- PM SATURDAY. SUNDAY. MOND" — FRIDAY I HOLIDAY COMMUTER PARKING —DAYS ® LIBRARY PARKING' DOWNTOWN PARKING STUDY -, :� —Kill— I MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS PARKING TIME REGULATIONS - DOWNTOWN 1=1411-Ii, -2 1 F"MOUW.' 3A = CMI@k "W 011 10'a"p v IIITI!^:8k wo 400 wxi WAG IW' a 4n WIN RUN „fryuVmm 0= lull CtltlGID ftrvi@ N SCALE: N.T.S.. 4*0 e LEGEND PARKING LOT REGULATIONS 3 HOUR PARKING a' ):00 AM TO 6:00 PM O GARAGE - < HOUR PARKING FN A 4 HOUR PARKING O PARKING LOT - PERMIT PARKING ONLY IN 6.„4 HOUR PARKING TO 6:00 PM J:00 O COMMUTER LOTS - FREE PARKING AM NO REM MTI ):00 AM TO�6:00 PM SATURDAY. STUNDAY, 4' MONDAY - FRIDAY & HOLIDAY COMMUTER PARKING WEEKDAYS ® LIBRARY PARKING, WM1 b wecHEY. ER DOWNTOWNUPROSPECINGT, STUDY RE Yw. m,e : MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS PARKING TIME REGULATIONS -DOWNTOWN CORE SUBAREA n=K A`E 319 .... __. DU'kE 3B Off -Street Private Parking There are 74 off-street private parking facilities throughout the downtown study area, as shown in Figure IA, all of which are surface lots. Approximately 57 percent of these spaces (42 spaces) are located in the downtown core subarea, as shown in Figure 1B. The spaces are reserved for customers, employees and residents of the downtown businesses and residential buildings. Parking Occupancy Parking occupancy surveys were performed by the Village on seven days during May and June 2018. The survey days included a Wednesday and several Saturdays and Sundays, including weekends featuring events in the commuter parking lots such as the Lions Club Farmers' Market and the Bluesmobile Cruise Nights Car Show. The parking surveys were performed for all parking spaces in the study area, including on -street spaces, public parking lots and the Village deck, and private parking lots. Table 3 shows the parking utilization on each of the seven survey days for the downtown study area. The parking utilization for the downtown FARMERS core subarea on the seven survey days is shown in Table 4. Table 5 r shows the core subarea parking utilization by quadrant. Table 6 shows ®� the core subarea parking utilization by specific "hot spot" locations including the commuter parking lots, Village deck and library lot, and along sections of Pine Street, Emerson Street, and Prospect Avenue. 12 Table 3 PARKING INVENTORY, OCCUPANCY, AND PERCENT OCCUPIED - DOwN"'p'"OWN STUDY AREA On -Street Parking Occupancy 1,179 318 230 182 163 273 263 206 151 Percent Occupied 27.0% 19.5% 15.4% 13.8% 23.2% 22.3% 17.5% 12.8% Public Parking Lots Occupancy 1,356 271 192 198 169 848 602 183 127 Percent Occupied 20.0% 14.2% 14.6% 12.5% 62.5% 44.4% 13.5%a 9.4% Total Public Parking Occupancy 2,535 589 422 380 332 1,121 865 389 278 Percent Occupied 23.2% 16.6% 15.0% 13.1% 44.2% 34.1% 16.2%1 11.6%e Private Parking Lots Occupancy 1,986 635 452 530 495 817 591 557 482 Percent Occupied 32.0% 22.8% 26.7% 24.9% 41.1% 29.8% 28.0% 24.3% "'Me Metra West Lot was closed for the Car Show and Farmers' Market. Inventory was reduced by 140 parking spaces bThe Metra East Lot was closed for the Car Show and Farmers' Market. Inventory was reduced by 143 parking spaces. Mom h4trminp, Mid -Midday Eve fvenina 13 226 201 214 180 19.2% 17.0% 18.2% 15.3% 235 180 169 138 17.3%b 13.3%b 12.5%b 10.2% 461 381 383 318 19.3%b 15.9%b 16.0%b 12.5% 636 485 544 481 32.0% 24.4% 27.4% 24.2% Table 4 PARKING INVENTORY, OCCUPANCY. AND PERCENT OCCUPIED - DOWNTOWN CORE SUBAREA On -Street Parking Occupancy 853 244 196 155 134 197 210 187 122 Percent Occupied 28.6% 23.0% 18.2% 15.7% 23.1% 24.6% 21.9% 14.3% Public Parking Lots Occupancy 1,356 271 192 198 169 848 602 183 127 Percent Occupied 20.0% 14.2% 14.6% 12.5% 62.5% 44.4% 15.0%° 10.4%a Total Public Parking Occupancy 2,209 515 388 353 303 1,045 812 370 249 Percent Occupied 23.3% 17.6% 16.0% 13.7% 47.3% 36.8% 16.7%a 11.3%e Private Parking Lots Occupancy 1,087 383 284 361 295 524 320 334 318 Percent Occupied 35.2% 26.1% 32.3% 27.1% 48.2% 29.4% 30.7% 29.3% ° The Metra West Lot was closed for the Car Show and Fanners' Market. Inventory was reduced by 140 parking spaces n The Metra East Lot was closed for the Car Show and Fanners' Market. Inventory was reduced by 143 parking spaces.. 171 173 188 159 20.0% 20.3% 22.0% 18.6% 235 180 169 138 19.4%b 14.8%b 13.9%b 10.2% 406 353 357 297 18.4%b 16.0%b 16.2%b 13.4% 362 301 340 271 33.3% 27.7% 31.3% 24.9% Advpff 14 AMAWOJIM Table 5 PUBLIC PARKING INVENTORY, OCCUPANCY, AND PERCENT OCCUPIED - DOWNTOWN CORE SUBAREA BY OU'ADRANT Northwest Quadrant On -Street 120 59 48 54 44 30 42 52 34 44 Off -Street 223 29 58 28 40 164 111, 74 30, 21 Total 343 88 106 82 84 194 153 126 64 65 Percent Occupied 25.7% 30.9% 23.9% 24.5% 56.6% 44.6% 62.1%a 31.5%a 19.00% Northeast Quadrant On -Street 151 71 60 64 38 55 53 36 Off -Street 787 222 118 153 106 408 341 94 Total 938 293 178 217 144 463 394 130 Percent Occupied 31.2% 19.0% 23.1% 15.4% 49.4% 42.0% 13.9% Southeast Quadrant On -Street 287 42 32 17 21 81 83 44 Off -Street 285, 3 4 7 5 258 124 8 Total 572 45 36 24 26 339 207 52 Percent Occupied 7.9% 6,3% 4.2% 4,5% 59.3% 36.2% 9.1% Southwest Quadrant On -Street 295 72 56 20 31 31 32 55 Off -Street 61 17 12 10 18 18, 26 7 Total 356 89 68 30 49 49 58 62 Percent Occupied 25.0% 19.1% 8.4% 13.8% 13.8% 16.3% 17.4% '"'The Metra West Lot was closed for Whc Car Show and Farmers' Market Inventory was reduced by 140 parking spaces. 'The Metra East Lot was closed for the Car Show and Farmers' Market.. Inventory was reduced by 143 parking spaces. Mom , Morning Mid ;^:, Midday Eve _: Evenina IN 48 23 50 78, 46 43, 126 69 93 36.7% 20.1% 27.1% 39 45 41 59 53 83 183 72 105 76 122 228 113 164 129 13.0% 28.7%b 14.2%b 20.6%b 13,8% 25 33 45 83 32 9 18 20 12 111 34 51 65 95 44 5.9% 8.9% 11.4% 16.6% 7.7% 24 49 39 23 24 5 13 10 6 7 29 62 49 29 31 8.1% 17.4% 13.8% 8.1% 8.7% Table 6 PUBLIC PARKING INVENTORY„ OCCUPANCY, AND PERCENT OCCUPIED - SPECIFIC LOCATIONS AND FACILITIES Pine Street between Central Road and Northwest Highway Occupancy 19 18 15 13 13 7 15 10 13 9 14 3 18 Percent Occupied 94.7% 78.9% 68.4% 68.4% 36.8% 78.9% 52.6% 68.4% 47.4% 73.7% 15.8% 94.7% Emerson Street between Central Road and Northwest Highway Occupancy 47 37 33 40 26 29 31 22 22 Percent Occupied 78.7% 70.2% 85.1% 55,3% 61.7% 66.0% 46.8% 46,8% Prospect Avenue between Hi Lusi Avenue and Maple Street Occupancy 210 61 44 11 15 25 26 48 17 Percent Occupied 29.0% 21.0% 5.2% 7.1% 11.9% 12.4% 22.9% 8.1% Village Parking Deck and Library Lot Occupancy 498 132 36 113 53 184 174 20 46 Percent Occupied 26.5% 7.2% 22.7% 10.6% 36.9% 34.9% 4.0% 9.2% Commuter Parking Facilities West Lot 140 9 8 1 1 140 79 0 0 East Lot 143 32 37 10 11 143 92 35 14 South Lot 285 3 4 7 5 258 124 8 9 Prospect 63 0 0 0 0 58 51 1 0 Avenue - - - - - -�.. ~--- - - Total 631 44 49 18 17 599 346 44 23 Percent Occupied 7.0% 7.8% 2.9% 2.7% 94.9% 54.8% 9.0%' 4.7%a a The Metra West Lot was closed for the Car Show and Farmers' Market, Inventory was reduced by 140 parking spaces, b The Metra East Lot was closed for the Car Show and Fanners' Market, Inventory was reduced by 143 parking spaces. Mom =, Mornlnir Mid = Midday Eve = Evcnantt 22 22 23 36 46.8% 46.8% 48.9% 76.6% 43 42 46 19 20.5% 20.0% 21.9% 9.0% 141 34 49 26 28.3% 6.8% 9.8% 5.2% 0 41 25 24 0 0 0 13 18 20 12 12 3, 0 16„ 1 21 61 53 50 4.3%b 12.5%b 10.9%b 7.9% mo-Ar oW, 16 Downtown Study Area Parking As shown in Table 3, peak parking utilization of all parking in downtown Mount Prospect (public and private combined) occurred during the weekday midday period when 1,938 of the 4,521 spaces (or 42.9%) were utilized. The peak utilization of the public and private parking spaces in the study area also occurred during the weekday midday period when 44.2 percent and 41.1 percent of the spaces were utilized, respectively. ■ Total Parking Utilization a Public Parking Utlization as Private Parking Utilization Downtown Core Subarea Parking Table 4 shows that the peak utilization of all parking in the downtown core subarea also occurred during the weekday midday period when 47.6 percent of the parking was utilized. The utilization of both public and private parking also peaked at this time with 47.3 percent and 48.2 percent of the spaces utilized, respectively. A closer look at the public parking spaces during the peak weekday midday period indicates that the highest parking utilization occurred in the southeast quadrant of the core subarea where 59.3 percent of the spaces were utilized, as shown in Table 5, the majority of which was commuter spaces. The parking utilization in the northeast quadrant was also highest at this time (49.4%), the majority of which were cars parked in the east commuter lot, Village parking deck and library lot. The parking utilization in the northwest quadrant peaked on a Saturday evening when 62.1 percent of the spaces were utilized, much of which were on -street spaces. The parking utilization in the southwest quadrant peaked during the Saturday midday period when 25 percent of the spaces were utilized, most parking on -street. While the off-street public lots experience their greatest use during a weekday midday period, the on -street spaces experienced greater utilization on weekday evenings and Saturday afternoons, as shown in the bar chart below. On weekends during downtown events such as the Car Show and Farmers' Market, the utilization of public parking in the core subarea was less than 25 percent. 17 SOU 3Cd?LI i 5JLI 2W11 t ti?0 ICOU S 0) YA,okday Mjdday WwAddy C^eni:;�. SawlJay ib?idday Sdtul6ay L•.e11111E Sunday Midday Weekend IvLrt Dd',- P1:bht' 0I, lstf'pt i'ut:dii Off $Iro"Z Pnvdte IAA Str,el WHIMS Intel ^ ,, Iut:I Kitkin lap�(.ay Downtown Core Subarea Parking Utilization On -Street Public Parking Figure 4A shows the utilization of the on -street parking in the downtown study area during the peak weekday midday period. Figure 4B highlights the on -street parking utilization for the downtown core subarea. As shown in both figures, the highest utilization occurred in the commuter parking spaces along Prospect Avenue and the spaces along Northwest Highway between Emerson Street and Main Street in front of the Lofts at Village Centre where parking utilization exceeded 90 percent of capacity. The parking spaces along Emerson Street between Northwest Highway and Busse Avenue also experienced high parking utilization at over 70 percent of capacity. Figure 5A shows the utilization of the on -street parking in the downtown study area during the Saturday midday period and Figure 5B highlights the on -street parking utilization for the downtown core subarea. As shown in both figures, parking utilization exceeded 90 percent of capacity on several blocks, including on Pine Street (Northwest Highway -Central Road), Prospect Avenue (Pine Street-Wille Street), Busse Avenue (Main Street -Emerson Street), Emerson Street (Busse Avenue -Central Road), Wille Street (Prospect Avenue -Evergreen Avenue), and Pine Street (Prospect Avenue -Prospect Alley). The parking utilization exceeded 80 percent of capacity along Northwest Highway (Main Street -Emerson Street), Emerson Street (Northwest Highway -Busse Avenue, and Prospect Avenue (Main Street -Maple Street). 18 LEGEND an9o-199% PARKING UTUZATGN 90.99% PARKING UTU- -9% PARKING "IA - DOWNTOWN PARKING STUDY MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS � .rw IIIII r 19 f SEE FIG.4B �����mu � ma vuuw mw uwmrc wore w.� ? IIIII? ��� IryI Ull ^»„„, B ionmlmlmanm 11 ,,,,� fl�Y ✓ a . IIIk-- �"""� PUBLIC PARKING UTILIZATION WEEKDAY MIDDAY - DOWNTOWN m...... i? N9KMl ft 4A «. w r r w.,. r. m, IIL 'VXlvlYlw� llYl"0.°II flrvtllUlk'b 3�IllJ�A1 WC'!Wry @Pum $ twilw Ion" sm"a !WPW&U 4W,1via iYNW'7,% ra" = WYdew 4IIrvlaw 9 oil e- No LEGEND —1— PARKING UTIII ATION BO-BP'/. PARKING UTIUiATIONtaP I 71-9% PARKING UTIUZATION 4*0 III' MM "9% PARKING UILZTION III o d1Eam:EN DOWNTOWN PARKING STUDY PUBLIC PARKING UTILIZATION WEEKDAY MIDDAY - DOWNTOWN CORE SUBAREA FMiIkMN¢ �B ;e ;o � MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS ,�.er.« ��Ma��... LEGEND 0 —00% PARKING UTI TION 9 % PARKING UTU nOhl I 70-)99'6 PARKING UTUiAn0N -9% PARKING UNLIZAnON DOWNTOWN PARKING STUDY MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS I' 8 9 Y� ,,,,•", uuum www — SEE FIG. SEI mu '{ r mm,* arenw. i:a mmmmr � � �,m roi mmu r., �1 IIIII � III�� d �1°°°'mmN�r f IIIII �'• , r !� �..� 0JI S�4 t m nom 1141 14* NA ! ! I mm ! SCALE: N.T.S. Na'x a¢[KFO. FA � PUBLIC PARKING UTILIZATION SATURDAY MIDDAY - DOWNTOWN ....FIGURE: SA PY GYlm MI 0 UUIVUWR III IP 'NM'. : M'ANGM INININNM IM1 wls AIM HIM Ned 0 AMR spa ""� III d hill 14% j i .� ti P1 hl LEGEND 90-190% PARKING UTIIRATION 90A9% PARKING UTIUTATION 4 70 79% PARKING UTRIIATION -9% PARKING UIIU 7ON IIIIGII 4k SCALE: N T>5> DOWNTOWN PARKING STUDY PUBLIC PARKING UTILIZATION SATURDAY MIDDAY - DOWNTOWN CORE SUBAREA�9.;o-,;o MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS "all se The block of Pine Street between Northwest Highway and Central Road, which offers parking for Capannari Ice Cream, had a parking utilization over 90 percent on two of the weekend survey days, including a Saturday afternoon and a Sunday evening, as shown in Table 6. The roadways surrounding the Village Centre block (Emerson Street, Busse Avenue, Northwest Highway) experience high levels of parking utilization on weekdays and weekends. Prospect Avenue generally experienced a low parking utilization except for the commuter spaces on weekdays and spot locations on weekends, such as the block between Pine Street and Wille Street in front of Mia's Cantina, as shown in Table 6. Off -Street Public Parking Figure 4A also shows the utilization of the public parking lots and the Village parking deck in the downtown study area during the peak weekday midday period. Figure 4B highlights the parking utilization of these facilities for the downtown core subarea. As shown in both figures, the commuter parking lots were all utilized to over 90 percent of capacity while all of the other off- street public parking facilities were utilized to considerably less than 70 percent of capacity. The utilization of the Village parking deck and the library lot was less than 40 percent during the weekday, as shown in Table 6. Figure 5A also shows the utilization of the public parking lots and the Village parking deck in the downtown subarea during the Saturday midday period. Figure 5B highlights the parking utilization of these facilities for the downtown core subarea. As shown in both figures, all off-street public parking facilities were utilized to less than 70 percent of capacity. The Village deck and library lot were utilized to less than 30 percent of capacity on all weekend survey days and the commuter lots were utilized to less than 15 percent of capacity on weekends, as shown in Table 6. Off -Street Private Parking Several private parking lots experience high levels of parking utilization. During the weekday midday hours, the lots serving Busse Car Wash, PM Armor, Jack Alexander Salon, and Formula Automotive were near fully -utilized. On weekday evenings, the lots serving Busse Car Wash, Jack Alexander Salon, Formula Automotive, Busse Flowers, and Trezeros Kitchen were near fully - utilized. On weekends, the lots serving Clock Tower Place, Village Centre shops, Trezeros Kitchen, Mrs. P & Me, Post Office employees lot, Formula Automotive, 415 East Prospect Apartments, were well -utilized as were the Virginia Court retail center, Busse Flowers and Friedrichs Funeral Home lots at various times. Key Findings • The parking utilization in the downtown core subarea was under 50% of capacity on all survey days indicating an overall abundance of public parking. • There are spot locations, however, in which the public parking supply is heavily utilized during specific periods. • The peak utilization of both public and private parking facilities in the downtown core subarea occurs during the weekday midday period. 23 • During this time, the southeast quadrant of the downtown core experiences the highest parking demand (59.3%) due to high utilization of the commuter parking spaces in the South commuter lot and along Prospect Avenue. • The east and west commuter parking lots are fully -utilized on weekdays, and the south lot and Prospect Avenue commuter spaces are over 90% utilized. • During weekday evenings and on weekends, the commuter lots are significantly underutilized with over 85% of the lot capacity (more than 550 spaces) available for use free of charge. • The commuter parking lots on the north side of the railroad might receive higher use during off-peak times if pedestrian safety across Northwest Highway can be improved. • The Village parking deck and the adjacent and connected library parking lot are also significantly underutilized. During the peak weekday midday period there were still 314 empty spaces in the deck and library parking lot, and even more spaces were empty on weekday evenings and on weekends. • The limited amount of street parking on Pine Street in front of Capannari Ice Cream is heavily utilized on weekday evenings and weekends. Other public parking options are a block away or across busy Northwest Highway. • Street parking along Emerson Street between Northwest Highway and Busse Avenue is also heavily utilized due to the adjoining number of retail stores. The underutilized Village parking deck is %-block to the north. • Many downtown patrons perceive there to be a parking problem if they are unable to park in front of their destination or within view of their destination. In most cases, public parking that is convenient to the destination is available nearby but around a corner or out of the line of sight from the destination. These available spaces can be a much shorter walking distance away than the typical walking distance from the parking field at a shopping mall or regional center. • It is thus concluded, based on the findings from the public parking surveys performed by the Village, that there is an adequate supply of public parking in the downtown core subarea, with the exception of commuter parking. At spot locations where parking utilization is high, there is adequate public parking available within a short walking distance (i.e., one block or two). However, improvements are needed to guide motorists to these nearby parking opportunities and increase safety on the walk to and from these parking opportunities. 24 The future parking conditions in the downtown will be impacted by redevelopment projects within the study area. With the redevelopment of any parcel or site, the following changes in the parking characteristics must be examined: Type of Parking. The change in the type of parking (i.e., public vs. private) and/or the parking regulations (i.e., reserved parking, time restrictions, etc.), if any. Parking Inventory. The net gain or loss in the number of parking spaces resulting from the redevelopment project. • Parking Demand. The net gain or loss in parking demand resulting from the redevelopment. Downtown Redevelopment Opportunities/Sites The Village of Mount Prospect Downtown Implementation Plan, which was adopted in November 2013, identified six potential redevelopment opportunities (sites) in the downtown area. Table 7 lists and Figure 6 illustrates the locations of each of the redevelopment sites and indicates the current stage of redevelopment. Table 7 DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES/SITES Redevelopment Triangle Site Northeast corner of Northwest Highway Redevelopment under with Wille Street construction Chase Bank Site South of Busse Avenue between Emerson No changes to date Street and Maple Street Central and Main Site Northwest corner of Central Road with Existing building has Main Street been demolished Tri-State Site North of Northwest Highway between Has been redeveloped Elmhurst Avenue and Pine Street Post Office Site Northeast corner of Central Road with No changes to date Elmhurst Avenue Lions Park Site Bounded by Prospect Avenue, School Some buildings have Street, Lincoln Street and Maple Street been demolished The following summarizes each of the redevelopment sites, evaluates the potential changes they would have on the downtown parking supply and demand, and identifies any positive or negative impacts they would have on downtown parking conditions. 25 LEGEND ''... 0 xwxurn. Davtwmw"m wu O MANGLE SITE (UNDER DONSTRUCNONI ❑ CHASE BANK SITE 3❑ DENTRAL AND MAIN SITE ® T STATE SITE (REDEVELOPED) POST OFFICE SITE © LIONS PARK SITE _ 4 _ � s F II 3 q i SCALE: N.T.S. DOWNTOWN PARKING STUDY - Ac uy.ve -:—" MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS I FUTURE REDEVELOPMENT SITES I, w `` .�.. W' RiGweaE• B Triangle Site Site Location and Approved Redevelopment This site is located in the northwest quadrant of the downtown and is bounded by Main Street on the east, Northwest Highway on the south, Wille Street on the west, and a public parking lot on the north. When the parking surveys were performed, the site contained several surface parking lots and a vacant lot. A mixed -use, transit -oriented development (TOD) was recently approved for the site and is under construction. According to the approved development plan shown below, the development is to consist of the following: 73 apartment units • 4,600 square -foot restaurant • 78 private indoor parking spaces reserved for apartment residents ,F ........... i rr `f 4 .......— t," Triangle Site Plan yc �a n j 1 n ME i +T4ACHITECTS SMALL TRIANGLE SITE— PHASE I Aft MT. PROSPECT. I L INOIS Nl I S I p A r4 "M'WT #d&"_.yn 4943 Change in Parking Characteristics 9 Parking Inventory. The redevelopment of the site will result in a loss of approximately 59 public parking spaces in the northwest quadrant of downtown. The lost public spaces will be offset by a gain of 78 private parking spaces located within the development and reserved for the residents. 27 Parking Demand. It is anticipated that the parking demand of the residents will be accommodated by the 78 indoor parking spaces. Only restaurant patrons/employees and apartment guests are expected to generate additional parking demand that will need to be accommodated by the downtown public parking supply. Factoring in the captive market effects associated with the site's downtown location, it is estimated that the restaurant and apartment guests will have a peak parking demand of 50 to 75 spaces, which will typically occur during evenings. Impact on Public Parking Conditions Given the net loss in public parking (59 spaces) and the net gain in public parking demand (50-75 spaces), the approved development could effectively utilize a maximum of 110 to 135 of the current public parking supply in the downtown, typically during evenings. The following summarizes the impact of the project on public parking conditions. Downtown Core Subarea. When compared to overall parking utilization within the downtown core subarea, the development will have a limited impact on the availability of public parking. As discussed in the previous section, ample public parking is available in the downtown core subarea. Northwest Quadrant. Of the four quadrants, the northwest quadrant has the least amount of available public parking. During evenings, the public parking supply in northwest quadrant is utilized to approximately 25-62% of capacity with a minimum of approximately 166 to 234 public parking spaces available. Further, many of the vacant public parking spaces during the evenings are located in the 140-space Metra West Lot, which is located on the south side of Northwest Highway and accessed from the signalized intersection of Main Street and Northwest Highway. As such, the development will utilize a good portion of the vacant public parking spaces in the northwest quadrant of downtown. The Village parking deck is another convenient parking option on the opposite side of Main Street, but there is not a signalized pedestrian crossing at Busse Avenue. Chase Bank Site Site Location and Redevelopment Concepts The Chase Bank site is located in the northeast quadrant of the downtown and isy-- — j bounded by Busse Avenue on the north,,.'., Maple Street on the east, Emerson Street on�d;��� the west, and Emerson's Ale House and the Mount Prospect Police and Fire Department Chase Bank Site Improvement lan on the south. Currently the site contains a 6-, story office building, a Chase Bank with drive -through facilities, and 120 parking spaces. During weekday business hours, the parking spaces are reserved for the office building and Chase Bank. During weekday evenings (after 6:00 P.M.) and on weekends, the parking spaces are available to the public. 28 The Village of Mount Prospect Downtown Implementation Plan did not identify a specific redevelopment concept for this site. Instead it developed recommendations to mitigate the existing site's impact on the "urban fabric on an otherwise pedestrian -oriented streetscape found along Emerson Street and Busse Avenue". The recommendations included new landscaping around and within the site, enhanced access, parking and circulation, and other streetscape improvements (see inset previous page). Change in Parking Characteristics Parking Inventory. Even with the recommended improvements, the site is anticipated to maintain the existing 120 parking spaces. Parking Demand. Since no additional development density is anticipated on the site, the parking demand is expected to essentially remain the same. Impact on Public Parking Conditions As discussed above, the recommended site improvements are anticipated to have limited, if any, impact on the availability of public parking in this lot. It should be noted that if the site is redeveloped, the Village parking deck, which is located one block northwest of the site, has a significant amount of parking available to mitigate any potential parking loss and accommodate potential additional parking demand from the redevelopment. Lions Park Site Site Location and Redevelopment Concepts This site is located in the southeast quadrant of the downtown and is generally bounded by Prospect Avenue on the north, School Street on the east, Lincoln Street on the south, and Maple Street on the east. The site also includes a small parcel at the southeast corner of Prospect Avenue and School Street. In addition to the 285-space Metra South lot, the site includes several parcels that contain light industrial and manufacturing buildings and associated parking lots, service areas, and loading docks. Some of the former buildings on the block have been demolished. The Village of Mount Prospect Downtown Implementation Plan suggests the following two alternative redevelopment concepts for this site: Corce t A see inset : 228 residential units with 390 private parking spaces (1.7 spaces/unit) and the expansion of the Metra South lot to 435 parking spaces (increase of 150 spaces). 29 Concept B: 294 residential units with 492 private parking spaces (1.7 parking spaces/unit) and the expansion of the Metra South lot to 435 parking spaces (increase of 150 parking spaces). Change in Parking Characteristics Parking Inventory. Under either redevelopment concept, the Metra South lot would increase by 150 parking spaces. The remainder of the site, which currently contains land uses with private parking, would be replaced with residential uses with private parking. As such, the redevelopment concepts would result in a net gain of 150 public parking spaces. Parking Demand. Excluding the Metra South parking, the redevelopment would continue to contain private parking that would likely meet the needs of the development and/or the Village's parking requirements. As such, the redevelopment concepts would result in limited, if any, changes to the existing public parking demand. Impact on Public Parking Conditions The redevelopment concepts would have a positive impact on the availability of public parking in the downtown with limited, if any, increase in the public parking demand, and the addition of 150 commuter parking spaces on weekdays and general public spaces on weekday evenings and weekends. Maple Street Lofts Development The Maple Street Lofts development is currently proposed for the western portion of the Lions Park site. As currently proposed this Transit Oriented = Development (TOD) is to consist of the following (see 9��j,� yu inset): 0 257 apartments, 10,000 square feet of commercial space, and 318 private parking spaces (1.24 parking spaces per unit). 0 66 rowhomes and 132 private parking spaces (2.0 parking spaces per unit)., 250-space parking garage that will replace the existing 285-space Metra South lot. Maple Street Lofts Site Concept Plan<,,: 30 It is anticipated that the parking demand of the residents and a large portion of the residential guests will be accommodated by the private parking to be provided for the apartments and the rowhomes. Only the commercial patrons/employees and a small portion of the residential guests are expected to generate additional parking demand that will need to be accommodated by the downtown public parking supply. Factoring in the captive market effects associated with the site's downtown location, it is estimated that the commercial space and residential guests will have a peak parking demand of 25 to 35 spaces. In addition, approximately 35 public parking spaces in the Metra South lot will be lost with the proposed parking garage. When compared to the overall parking utilization within the southeast quadrant, the additional public parking demand and loss of parking from the development will have a limited impact on the availability of public parking. As discussed in the previous section, ample public parking is available in the southeast quadrant of downtown. Further, it is important to note that the development will be able to utilize the proposed Metra South parking garage on weekday evenings and weekends when significant parking is available in this facility. Central and Main Site Site Location and Redevelopment This site is located in the northwest quadrant of the downtown and is bounded by Huntington Bank on the north, Main Street on the east, Central Road on the lo' south, and single-family homes on thei west. The site is on the periphery of the t downtown core subarea and is currently n, vacant. It previously contained a small retail center with approximately 62 Central and Main Site Concept Plan ���'" private parking spaces, which has since been demolished. The Village of Mount Prospect Downtown Implementation Plan suggests the following two alternative redevelopment concepts for this site: Commercial Redevelopment (see inset): 12,000 square feet of commercial space with approximately 93 private parking spaces (7.75 spaces/1,000 sf). Residential Redevelopment: 60 residential units with 90 private parking spaces (1.5 spaces/unit). Change in Parking Characteristics Parking Inventory. Under either redevelopment concept, the parking supply on the site will remain private. The private parking capacity, however, will increase by approximately 45-50% (25-30 spaces). 31 Parking Demand. The parcel previously contained a retail center with private parking for the patrons and employees of the center. Under either redevelopment concept, the site would continue to provide private parking that would likely meet the needs of the development and/or the Village's parking requirements. As such, the redevelopment concepts would result in limited, if any, changes to the existing public parking demand. Impact on Public Parking Conditions The redevelopment concepts will not change the public parking inventory and will have limited, if any, impact on the availability of public parking in the downtown area. The redevelopment concepts will increase the private parking supply in the area by 45-50% (25-30 spaces). Post Office Site Site Location and Redevelopment This site is located in the northwest quadrant of the downtown and is bounded by St. Paul Lutheran Cemetery on the north, single-family homes on the east, Central Road on the south, and Elmhurst Road on the west. The site is on the periphery of the downtown core subarea and currently contains the Mount Prospect Post Office and two vacant, former residential parcels. The Village of Mount Prospect Downtown Implementation Plan suggests a mixed -use development for the site with the following uses (see inset): 144 residential units with 216 private parking spaces (1.5 spaces/unit) 10,000 square feet of commercial space with 40 private parking spaces (4 spaces/1,000 sf) Change in Parking Characteristics The parcel currently contains the Post Office with private parking for Post Office patrons, employees and vehicles/ trucks. Under the redevelopment concept, the development would provide private parking that would likely meet the needs of the redevelopment and/or the Village's parking requirements. As such, the redevelopment concept would result in limited, if any, impact of the existing public parking demand or inventory. Impact on Public Parking Conditions The redevelopment concept would likely have limited, if any, impact on the availability of public parking in the downtown. 32 Park Terrace Development The Park Terrace development is a recently approved townhome development that is to be constructed on the vacant parcels north of the Post Office site. As proposed, the development is to consist of 12 townhomes and 24 garage spaces and 20 private parking spaces (3.67 parking spaces per unit). The parking to be provided by the development exceeds both the needs of the development and the Village's parking requirements. As such, the development will have limited, if any, impact on the availability of public parking in the downtown. Tri-State Site This site was recently redeveloped, and its parking inventory and demand was captured in the existing parking conditions inventory and parking occupancy surveys. 33 Based on the findings from the parking surveys, and the evaluation of existing and projected parking conditions, recommendations were developed to increase utilization of the public parking supply and mitigate areas where the availability of public parking is constrained. Recommendations were developed for the entire downtown study area as well as specific locations where parking is currently constrained or may be constrained in the future. Summary of Findings As the parking surveys have shown, the overall parking supply within the downtown study area, as well as within the downtown core subarea, is more than sufficient to accommodate the peak parking demand. The following summarizes the results of the parking surveys: • The peak utilization of public parking (on -street and off-street) in downtown Mount Prospect was 44.2% and occurred during the weekday midday period. A minimum of approximately 1,400 of the 2,535 public parking spaces were available at this time. • The peak utilization of public parking (on -street and off-street) in the downtown core subarea was 47.3% and also occurred during the weekday midday period. A minimum of approximately 1,045 of the 2,209 public parking spaces were available at this time. While the overall parking supply in the downtown area and the downtown core subarea is sufficient to meet the peak parking demand, several specific areas within the downtown currently experience parking capacity constraints or are projected to experience constraints in the future. These locations include: • The northwest quadrant of downtown core subarea • Emerson Street between Central Road and Northwest Highway (northeast quadrant) • Busse Avenue between Main Street and Emerson Street (northeast quadrant) • Northwest Highway between Main Street and Emerson Street (northeast quadrant) • Pine Street between Central Road and Northwest Highway (northwest quadrant) • Sections of Prospect Avenue (southeast and southwest quadrants) 34 General Recommendations Better Utilization of the Village Parking Deck The Village parking deck has a total of 383 parking spaces and is centrally located between the northeast and northwest quadrants of the downtown core subarea. Currently, the parking deck is open to the public and regulated with four-hour time limits. In addition, downtown employees can park free in the deck by obtaining an orange permit tag from the Village. The results of the parking surveys have shown that the parking deck is significantly underutilized with a peak LV I utilization of 36 percent, which occurred on a weekday. A minimum of approximately 245 parking spaces were available when the parking survey was conducted. Given its convenient location to both the northeast and northwest quadrants, the following recommendations aimed at a better utilization of the deck. • Allow additional users to park in the deck, including commuters and overnight parkers o Commuters. The parking surveys have shown that commuter parking lots are currently over 90% utilized. Demand for commuter parking will likely increase as new residential developments are approved in the Village. To provide some relief for the high demand for commuter parking and to reduce circulation by commuters traveling between lots in search of parking, a portion of the deck could be reserved for commuters (daily fee and/or permits) on weekdays before 6:00 P.M. To entice commuters to park in the deck, which is less convenient to the train station/platfonns than the other commuter lots, a different commuter permit could be sold at a discounted rate. o Overnight Parker. Currently, limited overnight parking is permitted in several public parking facilities in downtown Mount Prospect. Demand for overnight parking will likely increase as well with the new residential and transit -oriented developments either under construction or proposed in the downtown area. Parking spaces in the deck could be reserved by Mount Prospect residents for overnight parking via the sale of daily guest permits or monthly/quarterly permits, similar to the permits sold by other communities such as Arlington Heights. • Extend the parking time limit within the deck from 4 hours to 6 or 8 hours to entice more long- term parkers to use the deck as opposed to other parking facilities and/or on -street parking. However, the time limits must be enforced to ensure that commuters do not park in the deck without a permit. 35 Evaluate the feasibility of improving the pedestrian crossing at the Main Street/Busse Road intersection to provide a safer pedestrian connection between the parking deck and the northwest quadrant of the downtown. This recommendation is discussed in more detail later. Better market the location and convenience of the parking deck and enhance the wayfinding signage in the vicinity of the deck, which is discussed in more detail later. • Allow valet parking operators to park in the deck during the evening. This recommendation is discussed in more detail later. Better Utilization of the Commuter Parking Lots During Evenings and Weekends During weekday evenings (6:00 P.M. to 1:00 A.M.) and on weekends, the commuter parking lots are open to the public. Similar to the parking deck, the commuter lots are significantly underutilized on weekday evenings and weekends. The peak utilization of the commuter lots on weekday evenings was 52 percent (273 available spaces). The peak utilization of the lots on the weekends was 11 percent (507 available spaces). The following recommendations were developed to better utilize the commuter parking lots during these off-peak times. Evaluate the feasibility of improving the pedestrian crossing at the Main Street/Northwest Highway intersection and/or add an additional pedestrian crossing on Northwest Highway to the west of Main Street to provide a safer pedestrian connection between the Metra West lot and the northwest quadrant. This recommendation is discussed in more detail later. Overnight spaces could be reserved in the commuter parking lots for those using Metra, to stay overnight in downtown Chicago or to travel out of town. Better market the location and convenience of the commuter lots and enhance the wayfinding signage in the vicinity of the lots, which is discussed in more detail later. Allow valet parking operators to park in the commuter lots on weekdays after 6:00 P.M. and on weekends. This recommendation is discussed in more detail later. 36 Enhanced Marketing and Wayfinding The parking surveys revealed that, in general, there is an adequate supply of public parking in the downtown core subarea, with the exception of commuter parking and a few spot locations where parking utilization is high at various times of the day. However, many downtown patrons perceive there to be a parking problem if they are unable to park in front of or within view of their destination. In most cases, public parking that is convenient to the destination is available nearby but around a corner or out of the line of sight from the destination. These available spaces can be a much shorter walking distance away than the typical walking distance from the parking field at a shopping mall or regional center. A robust marketing effort and an enhanced wayfinding plan for the downtown parking system is critical to achieving better utilization of the existing public parking system in the downtown. The Village deck is visibly marked at the entrance to the facility on Emerson Street, similar to the entry signs at the other public lots. To increase usage of the deck, additional signage could be installed on the west face (Main Street side) of the deck to guide motorists to the Emerson Street entry, similar to the public parking deck in downtown Des Plaines. The availability of public parking in the deck and the Chase Bank and commuter lots (weekday evenings and weekends only) should be marketed with wide distribution via websites, social media platforms, and through the Mount Prospect Chamber of Commerce. Pamphlets can also be developed and left with merchants and/or posted on information boards/kiosks. Wayfinding to the public parking lots in the downtown core subarea could be improved with a uniform and comprehensive wayfinding signage system that guides motorists to the respective lots. The Village currently has a commuter parking map, which works well and should be continued. 37 The Village does not currently have a downtown parking map for patrons, visitors and employees. The only available map currently identifies select downtown retail properties and parking facilities. Two maps could be developed for the downtown (non -commuter) users and can be printed back-to-back. Each map would depict all public parking facilities, regulations and time limitations. One map would be for weekdays before 6:00 P.M. The other would be for weekdays after 6:00 P.M. and weekends. Figure 7A shows a concept of the downtown parking maps for weekdays before 6:00 P.M. Figure 7B shows a concept of the downtown parking map for weekday evenings and weekends. Northwest Quadrant Recommendations The only quadrant within the downtown area that is close to experiencing any parking capacity constraints is the northwest quadrant. During weekday and weekend evenings, the peak utilization of the public parking spaces in the quadrant ranges from 25 to 62 percent, with a minimum of 166 to 234 public parking spaces available. Many of the vacant parking spaces during evenings are located in the Metra West lot, which is on the south side of Northwest Highway. In addition, a significant number of parking spaces are available nearby in the Village parking deck on the east side of Main Street. However, both Main Street and Northwest Highway are viewed by many as a pedestrian barrier to these parking facilities. Further, the TOD development under construction on the Triangle site is projected to utilize a good portion of the available public parking spaces in the northwest quadrant, particularly during the evenings. In addition to the recommendations outlined above, the following summarizes additional recommendations to help mitigate the potential parking capacity constraints in the northwest quadrant. Valet Parking Service Establish valet parking services with the restaurant establishments in the quadrant. One model is for each business to establish and manage their own valet service. An alternate model is to establish a single valet operation, managed by the Village or Chamber of Commerce, that would serve multiple businesses and would operate from a fixed centralized point. The valet service(s) should be required to park vehicles within the Village deck or the Metra West lot to better utilize these parking facilities and free up additional public parking in the northwest quadrant. 38 LEGEND PUBLIC PARKING FACILITIES ON-STREPT' PARKIN G 1HOUR OR LESS ON -STREET PARKING 2 HOURS OR GREATER 1� VILLAGE PARKING DECK O LIBRARY PARKING LOT �3 WATER TOWER LOT DOWNTOWN PARKING STUDY I f CONCEPTUAL DOWNTOWN PARKING MAP - WEEKDAYS BEFORE 6:00 PM I "wxMvf ;a,+o u. m,. MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS PK64NrtkE. 7A LEGEND PUBLIC PARKING FACILITIES ON —STREET PARKING 1 HOUR OR LESS ON —STREET PARKING 2 HOURS OR GREATER 1� VILLAGE PARKING DECK �P LIBRARY PARKING LOT �3 WATER TOWER LOT ® COMMUTER PARKING LOTS 5l CHASE BANK PARKING LOT DOWNTOWN PARKING STUDY CONCEPTUAL DOWNTOWN PARKING MAP - WEEKDAY EVENINGS AND WEEKENDSI., .,... '"'^, MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS Plu VME. TB'o Improved Pedestrian Crossings In order to better utilize the Village deck and the Metra West lot, and provide additional parking capacity for the northwest quadrant, consideration should be given to improving the pedestrian crossings along Main Street and Northwest Highway. The intent of these improvements is to enhance the crossings to provide for more efficient, orderly, and safe pedestrian connections between the northwest quadrant and these public facilities. Both Main Street and Northwest Highway are four -lane, arterial roadways that carry a high volume of traffic and are viewed by many as a pedestrian barrier. Main Street / Busse Avenue Intersection The Village of Mount Prospect Downtown Implementation Plan recommends several pedestrian improvements at the Main Street/Busse Avenue intersection, as noted below and shown in the inset. This intersection is presently unsignalized with no pedestrian crossings on Main Street. As such, it is a significant barrier to pedestrian travel between the Village deck and northwest quadrant businesses. Remove the existing southbound left - turn lane on Main Street and replace with a landscaped median with pedestrian refuge island. The raised median provides a protected midway point across Main Street if pedestrians are not able to cross the entire road at once. Southbound left -turn movement would have to occur from the inside through lane and are recommended to be prohibited between 7:00 A.M. and 9:00 A.M. and between 4:00 P.M. and 6:00 P.M. Install pedestrian crossing warning signs in the median and/or along the curb indicating that traffic must stop for pedestrians in the crosswalk. Install a high -visibility, ladder style crosswalk across the north leg of Main Street to provide an additional visual cue of the pedestrian crossing to motorists traversing Main Street. As indicated in the Village of Mount Prospect Downtown Implementation Plan, it is important to note that the recommendations are only conceptual and will require further study. In addition, since Main Street is under the jurisdiction of the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT), any improvements will require IDOT review and approval. 41 Northwest Highway Pedestrian Crossings The signalized intersection of Northwest Highway and Main Street includes a signalized pedestrian crossing between the Metra West lot and the northwest quadrant. However, the intersection only has standard parallel - line crosswalks on the east, south and west legs (see inset). To enhance the visibility of the pedestrian crossings, high -visibility, ladder style crosswalks should be installed on these legs. It should be noted that pedestrian countdown timers are not permitted at this intersection given its proximity to the rail crossing. The signalized pedestrian crossing is located at the east end of the Metra West lot and the southeast corner of the northwest quadrant, which can result in circuitous walking routes between the lot and the quadrant. Consideration should be given to performing the necessary studies to determine if an unsignalized pedestrian crossings can be installed on Northwest Highway west of Main Street. Given the following, the most appropriate location for the new pedestrian crossing would be at the central entrance to the Metra West lot opposite Wille Street, for the following reasons: • The location is at the approximate midpoint of the Metra West lot. • The location is at an existing intersection as opposed to a mid -block location. • The east leg of Main Street at this intersection currently has a striped median that could be replaced with a raised median providing a pedestrian refuge space, similar to the existing pedestrian crossing on Northwest Highway in downtown Des Plaines, IL. Once again, the appropriate studies would need to be performed to ensure that a unsignalized pedestrian crossing is appropriate along Northwest Highway and can be designed in a safe manner for pedestrians. Further, any pedestrian crossing will require IDOT's review and approval as Northwest Highway is under their jurisdiction. 42 Pine Street Parking Improvements The utilization of on -street parking on Pine Street between Central Road and Northwest Highway exceeded 90 percent at various times on the weekends. The high parking demand is primarily generated by Capannari Ice Cream and the Clocktower Condominiums. Currently, Pine Street has 18 angle spaces along the west side of the street. Parking is prohibited on the east side. The following recommendations should be considered. Modified Time Regulations Currently, all on -street parking along this block of Pine Street is regulated by a four-hour time limit. To increase turnover of these spaces, which are very convenient for Capannari Ice Cream customers, ;, w consideration should be given to reducing the regulated time limits on a portion of the spaces from four hours to 30 minutes, or to one hour at the,,%'�� maximum. A portion of the parking spaces should continue to provide four-hour parking to accommodate condominium guests on the east side of the street. Figure 8 shows the recommended modifications to the time regulations. Enforcement Enforcement is the most successful means to ensure that parkers observe the on -street parking regulations, particularly if the time limits are reduced. It is our understanding that the Village currently enforces the parking regulations. If possible, the Village should consider temporarily increasing the enforcement where the time regulations are changed, particularly during peak times. Physical Modifications to Pine Street The on -street parking capacity can be increased on the east side of Pine Street with physical modifications or widening of the street. The following two alternatives could be considered: 1. Alternative 1. Widen Pine Street by approximately 5 to 6 feet to accommodate approximately 13 parallel parking spaces on the east side of the street. When combined with the existing 18 angle parking on the west side, the street would have a total parking capacity of 31 spaces. Figure 9A illustrates this alternative. 2. Alternative 2. Restripe Pine Street to provide one moving lane in each direction with parallel parking on both sides of the street. The majority of Pine Street is wide enough to accommodate parallel parking on both sides. However, there are 3 curb extensions along the west side that would need to be reduced in size or eliminated. A total of approximately 24 parallel parking spaces could be provided along Pine Street with the restriping and curb modifications, which reflects an increase of 6 spaces over existing conditions. Figure 9B illustrates this alternative. 43 3. Alternative 3. Convert Pine Street to a one-way southbound road to accommodate approximately 13 parallel parking spaces on the east side of the street. This alternative would be similar to Alternative 1, but instead of widening the street to accommodate the parallel parking, the existing northbound lane would be restriped for parallel parking. When combined with the 18 angle parking spaces on the east side of the street, the street would have a total parking capacity of 31 spaces. Further studies should be conducted to determine the feasibility and costs of each alternative. 44 not 0915 ORP illum, ma m auurOi Iuuiuim 2mm sm was um Pwm low girm immu ........................ a, 440 4% DO LEGEND ICI 211OUR PARKING 7:W M TO 6:00 PM , HOUR PARKING 4 HOUR PARKING 7:00 AM TO 6m PM 2HO R PARKING 7:W AM TO 6:00 PM MONDAY - FRIDAY COMMUTER PARKING WEEKDAYS CONVERT FROM 2 HOUR PARKING TO 30 MIN OR 1 HOUR PARKING CONVERT FROM 4 HOUR PARKING TO 30 MIN OR I HOUR PARKING CONVERT FROM 4 HOUR PARKING TO 6 HOUR OR 8 HOUR PARKING DOWNTOWN PARKING STUDY MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS PARKING LOT REGULATIONS F-11 PARKING DE" - 4 HOUR PARKING F21 PARKING LOT - PERMIT PARKING ONLY F3� COMMUTER LOTS - FREE PARKING &PM-lAM WEEKDAYS RESTRIL N n4 UBRARY PARKING N WEEKENDS& HOUDAYS 440 �N SCAV NT,R M17 -_ IEI- I � ��� RECOMMENDED PARKING TIME REGULATIONS - DOWNTOWN CORE SUBAREA in - I PR . . T.I.FIGURE: , DOWNTOWN PARKING STUDY PINE STREET CONCEPTUAL PARKING IMPROVEMENTS n .�,. „.. MT PROSPECT. ILLINOIS I ALTERNATIVE 1 - PINE STREET WIDENING DOWNTOWN PARKING STUDY PINE STREET CONCEPTUAL PARKING IMPROVEMENTS ""+fa '"' aE. MT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS ALTERNATIVE 2- PINE STREET MODIFICATIONS Iravft x, Northeast Quadrant Recommendations On -street parking on the following block was utilized to a high level on several of the days when the parking surveys were performed (see inset): • Emerson Street between Central Road and Northwest Highway • Busse Avenue between Main Street and Emerson Street • Northwest Highway between Main Street and Emerson Street The on -street parking constraint is primarily due to the parking demand generated by visitors to Village Hall and by the commercial businesses in the Village Centre development. Most of these on -street spaces are located adjacent to or in proximity to the commercial businesses and, as such, are very convenient and desirable. The following recommendations should help mitigate the parking capacity constraints on this block. Modified Time Regulations Currently, all on -street parking on this block is regulated by a two-hour time limit between 7:00 A.M. and 6:00 P.M. To increase turnover of these spaces, which are very convenient to the commercial businesses in the Village Centre development, consideration should be given to reducing the regulated time limits from two hours to 30 minutes, or to one hour at the maximum. Longer -term parkers can utilize the Village parking deck. On weekday evenings and weekends, longer -term parkers can utilize the Chase Bank and Metra East lots, which have ample parking available and are located just a block or two away. The modifications to the time regulations will both mitigate the on -street parking capacity constraints on the block and make better use of the Village parking deck, Chase Bank lot and Metra East lot. Figure 8 shows the recommended modifications to the time regulations. Marketing and Wayfinding Any modifications to the time regulations will require a strong marketing campaign to ensure that downtown patrons, visitors, and employees understand their parking options, particularly the longer -term parking options. As discussed previously, recommendations include developing public parking maps that clearly identify both the short-term and long-term parking options on weekdays and during weekday evenings and weekends. The maps should be available on the websites of the Village of Mount Prospect and the Mount Prospect Chamber of Commerce, as well as other Village media platforms. The maps can also be printed by the Village and distributed as 48 pamphlets to the Chamber of Commerce and downtown merchants. The maps can also be incorporated into information boards or kiosks. Wayfinding signage, as discussed previously, will guide motorists to the available long-term parking locations. Enforcement Enforcement is the most successful means to ensure that parkers observe the on -street parking regulations, particularly if the time limits are reduced. It is our understanding that the Village currently enforces the parking regulations. However, if possible, the Village should consider temporarily increasing the enforcement where the on -street time regulations are changed, particularly during the peak times. Southeast and Southwest Quadrant Recommendations Prospect Avenue Parking Improvements On -street parking along several blocks of the south side of Prospect Avenue were utilized to a high level on several of the days when the parking surveys were performed (see inset). These blocks are generally located between Pine Street and Maple Street. The on -street parking constraint is primarily due to the parking demand generated by the commercial businesses along the south side of Prospect Avenue, such as Prospect Place, Mrs. P & Me restaurant, and Mia's Cantina. Similar to the recommendations for the northeast quadrant, the following should be considered for Prospect Avenue. Modified Time Regulations Currently, all on -street parking along the south side of Prospect Avenue, between Pine Street and Maple Street, is regulated by a two-hour time limit between 7:00 A.M. and 6:00 P.M. To increase turnover of these spaces, which are very convenient to the commercial businesses along Prospect Avenue, consideration should be given to reducing the regulated time limits along the south side of these blocks of Prospect Avenue from two hours to 30 minutes, or to one hour at the maximum. Longer -term parkers can utilize the parking spaces along the north side of Prospect Avenue which are regulated by either two-hour parking limits or four-hour limits. Figure 8 shows the recommended modifications to the time regulations. 49 Marketing Any modifications to the time regulations will require a strong marketing campaign to ensure that downtown patrons, visitors, and employees understand their parking options, particularly the longer -term parking options. As discussed previously, recommendations include developing public parking maps that clearly identify both the short-term and long-term parking options on weekdays and during weekday evenings and weekends. The maps should be available on the websites of the Village of Mount Prospect and the Mount Prospect Chamber of Commerce, as well as other Village media platforms. The maps can also be printed by the Village and distributed as pamphlets to the Chamber of Commerce and downtown merchants. The maps can also be incorporated into information boards or kiosks. Wayfinding signage, as discussed previously, will guide motorists to the available long-term parking locations. Enforcement Enforcement is the most successful means to ensure that parkers observe the on -street parking regulations, particularly if the time limits are reduced. It is our understanding that the Village currently enforces the parking regulations. However, if possible, the Village should consider temporarily increasing the enforcement where the on -street time regulations are changed, particularly during the peak times. 50 This report summarizes the findings from a parking demand assessment of the public and private parking supply in downtown Mount Prospect, Illinois. The study area for the parking assessment was selected by Village staff and generally follows the boundary of the downtown tax increment financing district. The study area consists of parking lots, a parking deck, and on -street parking spaces and includes both regulated and unregulated parking spaces that are used by Metra commuters and downtown employees, visitors and patrons. The purpose of this study was to (1) inventory the downtown parking supply, (2) document the utilization of the parking supply on typical weekdays and weekend days, including weekends where downtown events were hosted, (3) evaluate the parking data to identify locations where parking surpluses and deficits exist, (4) estimate the impact on downtown parking demand from new development projects, and (5) recommend improvements to address areas of parking deficit. The following summarizes the findings and results of the study. Existing Downtown Parking Supply • The downtown study area provides a total of 4,521 parking spaces including 1,356 spaces in public parking lots, 1,179 spaces on the street, and 1,986 spaces in private lots. Of the total parking supply in the downtown area, approximately 56% consists of public parking spaces and 44% consists of reserved private parking. • Approximately 78% of the study area parking supply is located within the downtown core subarea. Of the 3,546 parking spaces in the downtown core subarea, 62% (2,209 spaces) are public spaces and 38% (1,337 spaces) are private spaces. • The downtown study area has a total of 1,179 on -street parking spaces distributed over 54 blocks and the downtown core subarea has 853 on -street spaces distributed over 36 blocks. • There are 13 total public parking facilities, consisting of 12 surface lots and one parking deck, with five of the parking lots serving Metra commuters. The commuter lots and the Chase Bank lot are available to the public after 6:00 P.M. on weekdays and all day on weekends. Existing Downtown Parking Occupancy The peak parking utilization of all parking in downtown Mount Prospect (both public and private) occurred during the weekday midday period when 1,938 of the 4,521 spaces (or 42.9%) were utilized. The peak utilization of the public and private parking spaces also occurred during the weekday midday period when 44.2% and 41.1 % of the spaces were utilized, respectively. 51 • The peak utilization of all parking in the downtown core subarea also occurred during the weekday midday period when 47.6% of the parking was utilized. The utilization of both public and private parking also peaked at this time with 47.3% and 48.2% of the spaces utilized, respectively. • The east and west commuter parking lots are fully -utilized on weekdays, and the south lot and Prospect Avenue commuter spaces were over 90% utilized. During weekday evenings and on weekends, the commuter lots are significantly underutilized with over 85% of the lot capacity (more than 550 spaces) available for use free of charge. • The Village parking deck is also significantly underutilized. During the peak weekday midday period there were still 314 empty spaces in the deck, and even more spaces were empty on weekday evenings and on weekends. • While the parking utilization in the downtown area and the downtown core subarea is operating under 50% of capacity, there are spot locations in which the public parking supply is heavily utilized during specific periods. However, there is adequate public parking available within a short walking distance (i.e., one block or two) of the spot locations. The following lists the spot locations that are experiencing heavy parking utilization. * The northwest quadrant of the downtown area and the downtown core subarea * Emerson Street between Central Road and Northwest Highway (NE quadrant) * Busse Avenue between Main Street and Emerson Street (NE quadrant) * Northwest Highway between Main Street and Emerson Street (NE quadrant) * Pine Street between Central Road and Northwest Highway (NW quadrant) * Sections of Prospect Avenue between Pine Street and Maple Street (SE & SW quadrants) Projected Parking Demand • The study examined the parking impact of 6 potential downtown redevelopment sites, as identified in the Village of Mount Prospect Downtown Implementation Plan. One of the sites has been redeveloped (Tri-State Site) and one of the sites is under construction (Triangle Site). The site that is under construction, a mixed -use transit -oriented development in the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Northwest Highway and Main Street, will eliminate 59 public parking spaces and is projected to have a public parking demand of 50 to 75 spaces. It is anticipated that the development will utilize a good portion of the vacant public parking spaces in the northwest quadrant of the downtown during evenings. The other 5 redevelopment sites are anticipated to have a limited impact on future downtown parking conditions as (1) most of the sites currently do not contain public parking, (2) the Village of Mount Prospect Downtown Implementation Plan assumes that each redevelopment will provide sufficient parking to meet the needs of the redevelopment and/or the Village's parking requirements, and/or (3) some of the parcels are located outside of the downtown core subarea. 52 Recommendations As part of the study, recommendations were developed to better utilize the public parking supply in the downtown and to mitigate area of parking deficit. The following recommendations are made: Better Utilization of the Parking Deck. The study has shown that the Village parking deck is significantly underutilized, particularly during weekday evenings and weekends. Several recommendations were developed to better utilize the parking within the deck, including (1) offering permits for additional users including commuters and overnight parkers, (2) extending the parking time limit from 4 hours to 6 or 8 hours, (3) evaluating the feasibility of installing a pedestrian crossing on Main Street at Busse Avenue, (4) marketing the deck better and improving wayfinding to the deck, and (5) allowing valet services to park in the deck. Better Utilization of the Commuter Lots. The study also has shown that the commuter lots are significantly underutilized on weekday evenings and weekends. As such, similar to the parking deck, several recommendations were developed to better utilize the available parking within the lots, including (1) improving the pedestrian crossing on Northwest Highway at Main Street and evaluating the feasibility of installing a new pedestrian crossing on Northwest Highway at Wille Street, (2) marketing the commuter lots better and improving the wayfinding to the lots, and (3) allowing valet services to park in the lots. Enhance Marketing and Wayfinding. Various measures have been suggested to better market the public parking facilities within the downtown, particularly the parking deck and commuter lots. Measure include (1) development of two downtown parking maps for patrons, visitors and employees, one for weekdays and one for weekday evenings and weekends, (2) developing pamphlets identifying all public parking facilities, regulations and time limits and distributing them via websites, social media, merchants, information boards/kiosks, and through the Chamber of Commerce, (3) developing a uniform and comprehensive wayfinding signage system that guides motorists to the public lots, and (4) installing signage on the west (Main Street) face of the parking deck. Valet Parking. Establish valet parking services with the popular restaurant establishments in the northwest quadrant of downtown. Individual services could be managed by each business separately or a single collective service could be managed by the Village to serve all uses in the quadrant. The valet service(s) should be required to park vehicles in the parking deck or the Metra West lot to better utilize these facilities and to free up additional public parking. New Pedestrian Crossings. In order to better utilize the Village parking deck and the Metra West lot, and to free up additional public parking capacity within the northwest quadrant, consideration should be given to evaluating the feasibility of installing pedestrian crossings on Main Street at Busse Avenue and on Northwest Highway at Wille Street. Modified On -Street Time Regulations. Generally, the on -street parking along the blocks experiencing parking constraints is restricted to 2 hours between 7:00 A.M. and 6:00 P.M. To increase turnover of these spaces, which are very convenient to the commercial businesses, 53 consideration should be given to reducing the regulated time limits from 2 hours to 30 minutes, or to 1 hour at the maximum. Longer -term parking is available within one or two blocks. Physical Modifications to Pine Street. Additional on -street parking capacity can be gained along Pine Street between Northwest Highway and Central Road with physical modifications or widening of the road. Two concepts were developed that could provide an additional 6 to 13 parking spaces along the street. Enforcement. To ensure the success of any changes in parking regulations, a temporary increase in parking enforcement will be needed, particularly during the peak times when parking is in the greatest demand. 54 55 2018 Downtown Parking Survey SurveyMonkey Q1 Where do your employees park? Answered:10 Skipped:0 On -site On -street Private Lot - Share Use... Village Parking Deck Public Lot - Metra and Wi... Other(please specify) 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES On -site 50.00% On -street 50.00% Private Lot - Share Use (Examples: Chase Lot, Village Centre, Prospect Place, Mt. Prospect State Bank) 50.00% Village Parking Deck 20.00% Public Lot - Metra and Wille Street Lots (after 4 pm & weekends) 0.00% Other (please specify) 10.00% Total Respondents: 10 # OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY) DATE 1 Safety issue teenage staff leaving late 5/14/2018 1:44 PM 1/12 5 5 5 2 0 1 2018 Downtown Parking Survey SurveyMonkey Q2 How would you describe available parking for employees? Answered:10 Skipped:0 Sometimes meets needs Often does not meet needs =- Does not nmeet eeds 0% 10% ANSWER CHOICES Exceeds needs Meets needs Sometimes meets needs Often does not meet needs Does not meet needs TOTAL 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% RESPONSES 30.00% 50.00% 0.00% 10.00% 10.00% IF MORE PARKING SPACES ARE NEEDED, HOW MANY ADDITIONAL SPACES? More passes needed for employees DATE 5/14/2018 2:08 PM 3 5 0 1 1 10 2/12 2018 Downtown Parking Survey SurveyMonkey Q3 How far would you be willing to walk from your work location to your car? Answered:9 Skipped:1 Zero to three minutes Three to five minutes Five to ten minutes Ten to fifteen minutes More than fifteen minutes 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Zero to three minutes 55.56% Three to five minutes 22.22% Five to ten minutes 22.22% Ten to fifteen minutes 0.00% More than fifteen minutes 0.00% TOTAL 3/12 5 2 2 0 0 9 2018 Downtown Parking Survey SurveyMonkey Q4 Where do your customers park? Answered:10 Skipped:0 On -site On -street Private Lot - Shared Use... Village Parking Deck Public Lot - Metra and Wi... 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEVER RARELY OCCASIONALLY FREQUENTLY ALWAYS TOTAL WEIGHTED AVERAGE On -site 14.29% 0.00% 14.29% 42.86% 28.57% 1 0 1 3 2 7 3.71 On -street 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 55.56% 44.44% 0 0 0 5 4 9 4.44 Private Lot - Shared Use (Examples: 33.33% 0.00% 16.67% 16.67% 33.33% Chase Lot, Village Centre, Prospect 2 0 1 1 2 6 3.17 Place, Mt. Prospect State Bank) Village Parking Deck 60.00% 20.00% 20.00% 0.00% 0.00% 3 1 1 0 0 5 1.60 Public Lot - Matra and Wille Street 40.00% 20.00% 20.00% 0.00% 20.00% Lots (after 4 pm & weekends) 2 1 1 0 1 5 2.40 4/12 2018 Downtown Parking Survey SurveyMonkey Q5 Parking is most difficult during the following days/times (choose all that apply): Answered:5 Skipped:5 Weekday mornings (8... Weekday afternoons (... Weekday evenings (af... Weekend 1Z Weekend limuuuuum"�IIP� II Weekend evenings (af.. ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES 0.00% Weekday mornings (8 a.m. to 12 p.m.) 20.00% Weekday afternoons (12 p.m. to 5 p.m.) 40.00% Weekday evenings (after 5 p.m.) 40.00% Weekend mornings (8 a.m. to 12 p.m.) 80.00% Weekend afternoons (12 p.m. to 5 p.m.) 60.00% Weekend evenings (after 5 p.m.) Total Respondents: 5 0 1 2 2 4 3 5/12 2018 Downtown Parking Survey SurveyMonkey Q6 Parking is most difficult during the following seasons (Choose all that apply): Answered:8 Skipped:2 Spring (Mar., Apr., May) Summer (Jun., Munn= Jul., Aug.) Fall (Sept., Oct., Nov.) Winter (Dec., Jan., Feb.) Not affected by seasonal — N/A - Does not llY apply to.... 0% 10% ANSWER CHOICES Spring (Mar., Apr., May) Summer (Jun., Jul., Aug.) Fall (Sept., Oct., Nov.) Winter (Dec., Jan., Feb.) Not affected by seasonal parking demands. N/A - Does not apply to business. Total Respondents: 8 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% RESPONSES 25.00% 50.00% 50.00% 25.00% 12.50% 12.50% 2 4 4 2 1 .I 6/12 2018 Downtown Parking Survey SurveyMonkey Q7 What is your overall perception of parking in Downtown Mount Prospect? Answered:9 Skipped:1 Convenient and easy to find... Less convenient t... Neutral. (Neither... Inconvenient and difficul... A deterrent to coming- 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Convenient and easy to find. (Very Satisfied) 33.33% Less convenient than other areas but good for a downtown. (Satisfied) 55.56% Neutral. (Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied) 0.00% Inconvenient and difficult to find. (Dissatisfied) 0.00% A deterrent to coming downtown. (Very dissatisfied) 11.11 % TOTAL 7/12 3 5 0 0 1 9 2018 Downtown Parking Survey SurveyMonkey Q8 Would the following customer parking alternatives be applicable to your business model or customer base? Answered:6 Skipped:4 Valet Parking Ride Sharing MMMMEW (Ober, Lift,... MEMENEEMEM Shuttle/Trolley (Example: — Other 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Yes iNo YES NO TOTAL Valet Parking 0.00% 100.00% 0 5 Ride Sharing (Uber, Lift, etc) 16.67% 83.33% 1 5 Shuttle/Trolley (Example: Customer parks in Parking Deck and is shuttled around downtown) 0.00% 100.00% 0 6 Other 0.00% 100.00% 0 1 # OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY) DATE 1 Shuttle/Trolley - Maybe 5/14/2018 1:44 PM 5 6 6 8/12 2018 Downtown Parking Survey SurveyMonkey Q9 What are your business hours? # RESPONSES 1 Sun - Thur, 11 am - 9 pm; Fri. - Sat, 11 am - 10 pm. 2 M - Th, 11:30 - I am: Fri, 11:30 - 2 am; Sat, Noon - 2 am; Sun, Noon - 1 am. 3 M - F, 9 -6; Sat, 9-4; Sun, 9- 3 4 9-5 5 Vary 6 Open daily from lam - 3pm 7 7-7, M-F: 7-2, Sat 8 9 - 5. M - F DATE 5/14/2018 2:08 PM 5/14/2018 2:01 PM 5114/2018 1:55 PM 511412018 1:52 PM 5/14/2018 1:44 PM 5/14/2018 1:41 PM 5/14/2018 1:36 PM 5/14/2018 1:33 PM 9/12 2018 Downtown Parking Survey SurveyMonkey Q1 0 Please provide any additional comments or suggestions about parking in Downtown Mount Prospect. Answered: 7 Skipped: 3 # RESPONSES 1 Keeping all downtown shared lots available to our customers. 2 Not enough parking for Capannari's or Trezero's or Honey Butter on weekends. 3 1 feel the village has done a great job feffing the public know what their parking options are and I truly feel there is adequate parking to serve our area. I believe the public simply needs to alter their routine, out parking garage is sa fe and in close proxin,iity, yet remains to be w mderused. 4 Years ago, Cathy Maloney, ElMhurst downtown consultant told me, "Don't worry these downtown parking problems will work therrwselves out. Who,i a downtown area attains, the tipping point of popular establishments people will not be so sensitive to parking issues." Look at downtown Chicago, talk about parking problems. 5 1 really thnk it's important to maintain parking on NW Hwy - Lofts/LePeep/Etc. I also think the VdIage garage should have a large "Parking" sign on 83 and perhaps enhance 83 entry for pedestrians, 6 We have issues with parking on Sundays when the Farmers Market is going on the street parking is filled up by customers of the Farrners Market and when there is no more street parking, Farmers Market customers park nn st6p mail parking lot. 7 2 hour parking limitations are rarely enforced. DATE 5/14/2018 2:08 PM 5/14/2018 2:05 PM 5/14/2018 2:01 PM 5/14/2018 1:55 PM 5/14/2018 1:52 PM 5/14/2018 1:41 PM 5/14/2018 1:36 PM 10/12 2018 Downtown Parking Survey SurveyMonkey Q11 For contact purposes, please provide the following information: Answered:8 Skipped:2 ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Contact Person 100.00% Business 100.00% Street Address 87.50% Address 2 0.00% City/Town 0.00% State/Province 0.00% ZIP/Postal Code 0.00% Country 0.00% Email Address 87.50% Phone Number 87.50% # CONTACT PERSON DATE 1 Michael McDermott 5/14/2018 2:08 PM 2 Chris Bozonelos 5/14/2018 2:01 PM 3 Tom Zander 5/14/2018 1:55 PM 4 Christy Watychowicz 5/14/2018 1:52 PM 5 Katie Dolan Dix 5/14/2018 1:44 PM 6 George Tselos 5/14/2018 1:41 PM 7 John Eilering 5/14/2018 1:36 PM 8 Erich Held 5/14/2018 1:33 PM # BUSINESS DATE 1 Canta Napoli 5/14/2018 2:08 PM 2 Mrs. P + Me 5/14/2018 2:01 PM 3 Picket Fence Realty 5/14/2018 1:55 PM 4 Law Office of Mark Watychowicz 5/14/2018 1:52 PM 5 Capannari Ice Cream 5/14/2018 1:44 PM 6 Honey Butter 5/14/2018 1:41 PM 7 Mount Prospect State Bank 5/14/2018 1:36 PM 8 Farmers Insurance 5/14/2018 1:33 PM # STREET ADDRESS DATE 1 90 E Busse Ave 5/14/2018 2:08 PM 2 100 E Prospect 5/14/2018 2:01 PM 3 400 W. Central Rd 5/14/2018 1:55 PM 4 518 E. Northwest Hwy. 5/14/2018 1:52 PM 11 / 12 8 8 7 0 0 0 0 0 7 7 2018 Downtown Parking Survey SurveyMonkey 5 106 W Northwest Hwy 5/14/2018 1:41 PM 6 299 W Central 5/14/2018 1:36 PM 7 800 E. Northwest Hwy 5/14/2018 1:33 PM # ADDRESS2 DATE There are no responses. # CITYITOWN DATE There are no responses. # STATE/PROVINCE DATE There are no responses. # ZIP/POSTAL CODE DATE There are no responses. # COUNTRY DATE There are no responses. # EMAIL ADDRESS DATE 1 Michael@cantanapliopizza.com 5/14/2018 2:08 PM 2 Chrisbozonelos@gmail.com 5/14/2018 2:01 PM 3 tomzander@gmail.com 5/14/2018 1:55 PM 4 Christy@LawMJW.com 5/14/2018 1:52 PM 5 george@emersonsalehouse.com 5/14/2018 1:41 PM 6 Jeilering@gsb.com 5/14/2018 1:36 PM 7 eheld@farmersagents.com 5/14/2018 1:33 PM # PHONE NUMBER DATE 1 847-670-1440 5/14/2018 2:08 PM 2 847-293-1339 5/14/2018 2:01 PM 3 847-259-8600 5/14/2018 1:55 PM 4 847-870-1200 5/14/2018 1:52 PM 5 847-668-0769 5/14/2018 1:41 PM 6 847-832-0480 5/14/2018 1:36 PM 7 847-637-5037 5/14/2018 1:33 PM 12 / 12 October 2016* walking surveys and paper handouts from PHS students Downtown Parking Results: ss = south side of tracks; ns = north side of tracks YES NO P Is parking an issue for owner/employees on ss of tracks? 1 4 2 Customers? 1 5 1 Is parking an issue for owner/employees on ns of tracks? 6 2 0 Customers? 7 0 1 Comments welcomed: parking behind LePeep says 2 hour, not enforced need more than 2 hours sometimes Farmers Market people take up all parking dangerous crossing from Farmers Market to parking Capannari does not have enough parking need more parking for Crave and Cleaners - okay Sat morning not Sat night not enough parking for LePeep on Sunday mornings bakery people employees park in lot and should not Athletico and Dry Cleaners should not be allowed to have their own spaces with signs October 2016* Students walked into businesses from Novak & Parker to Capannari Ice Cream October 20 7* walking surveys from PROSPECT GIVES BACK Day and comments/complaints/suggestions received in Chamber office RE: Downtown Parking inadequate parking at Trezeros Kitchen +Tap parking enforced in back of Athletico not in front not enough parking for Capannari's customers Honey Butter loses customers on Sundays (Farmers Market) Owner/Customer complaints Trezeros and Dog Play Day Care parking spaces issue complaints about employees parking where customers could be parking 83 and NW Hwy light is a nightmare how many spaces belong to owners behind UPS is that public parking for or Emersons and UPS no place for bakery customers on Paczki Day pave the gravel lot for more parking by bakery handicapped space always filled at Subway every day kids skateboarding at Oberweiss by cars not enough parking on north side of tracks between LePeep and Trezeros more signage to get to parking garage October 2017* Students walked into businesses from Novak & Parker to Shell/7-11 at Fairview and NW Hwy Summary, calls/comments re: Parking Survey for downtown MP for those who did NOT fill out survey monkey and did NOT turn inform Parking issues now, several anticipating more once development is underway Sunday morning a problem for Honey Butter Saturday morning lot full for Dunkin/Mt. Prospect Place (with 2 vacancies) Capannari parking full on Pine Many 'of business owners did not know about orange tags for parking garage Need to educate Brick City concerns known Remove handicap parking where Perfect Petal was (if appropriate) street parking - no handicap designation? Alley parking behind Brick City for residents of condos or patrons of Honey Butter and Brick City and Karma Hair Salon? Is parking behind Gathered public parking or for owners and staff of business Bakery trucks parking make it difficult to pull into lot sometimes Not enough parking not enough enforcement of 2 hour parking need more education/promotion of parking garage Sam Schwartz Consulting, L.L.C. a" 223 W Jackson Blvd, Suite iioi Chicago, IL 6o6o6 Sclrwartlz phone: (773) 3oS-o800 samschwartz.com Tranqvrt 1?011 Cwts'u 11 art Ls w r an n. To: Sean Dorsey, Director of Public Works Kelly Conolly, P.E. From: peter Wojtkiewicz, P.E., PTOE Date: October i5, 2o18 Re: Mount Prospect Downtown Transportation Study ADDENDUM #1 Sam Schwartz Consulting (Sam Schwartz) was retained by the Village of Mount Prospect to update its Downtown Transportation Study (March 2018) to reflect the proposed residential development, Maple Street Lofts, to be located along Maple Street between Prospect Avenue and Lincoln Street. The following memorandum serves as an addendum to the March report, documenting new data collection and Sam Schwartz's methodology for traffic demand forecasting and analyses for this study. Recommended improvements are documented to improve the functionality of the existing local transportation system and mitigate anticipated traffic -related impacts resulting from the proposed development. Study Area The study area for the original transportation study generally included the downtown Mount Prospect intersections on either side of the railroad tracks from IL 83 to School Street, both signalized and unsignalized locations, as well as at Mount Prospect Road. To evaluate the proposed development, the study area was expanded for this addendum to include the following additional intersections: 1. Maple Street with Lincoln Street 2. Maple Street with the commuter parking lot driveway 3. Lincoln Street with the commuter parking lot driveway 4. Prospect Avenue with (future) Elm Street 5. Lincoln Street with (future) Elm Street Existing Traffic Volumes Sam Schwartz conducted field visits to collect relevant information pertaining to the site, the surrounding street network, traffic volumes, traffic controls, lane geometry, and infrastructure at the study intersections. The Village of Mount Prospect collected new morning (7:00 to 9:00 AM) and evening (4:00 to 6:00 PM) peak period traffic counts in September 2018 to supplement previous counts collected in May 2017. The Existing Traffic volume diagrams for the weekday AM and PM peak hours are shown in Figure 1. Counts indicate the peak hour of traffic occurs 7:15 to 8:15 AM and 5:00 to 6:00 PM. It should be noted that northbound Maple Street was closed just north of Lincoln Street for Mount Prospect Downtown Transportation Study - ADDENDUM 2 October 15, 2018 construction from 7:30 to 9:00 AM during the morning counts so that all vehicles intending to enter the commuter parking lot from the west/south entered using the Lincoln Street driveway rather than the Maple Street driveway. Review of the existing peak hour traffic volumes indicates the following: Traffic on Prospect Avenue has decreased approximately 5 to 7 percent in the morning and evening peak hours, respectively, since the previous counts were collected in 2017. This may be in part attributable to the closure of the mill shop, Parenti & Raffaelli, Ltd., on Prospect Avenue and its relocation outside of downtown. Thus, traffic generated by Parenti & Raffaelli was generally eliminated from the study area. The existing 280-space commuter surface parking lot generate 185 trips (mostly inbound) during the morning peak hour and 130 peak hour trips (all outbound) during the evening peak hour. Additionally, the Appendix includes the Average Daily Traffic (ADT) map available from the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT). Daily traffic flow on the street network through and surrounding downtown indicates the primary traffic pattern avoids Northwest Highway through downtown, choosing to use Central Road and Mount Prospect Road to bypass the downtown area, and presumably, the delays experienced crossing IL 83/railroad tracks. This is indicated by the much lower traffic volumes on the segment of Northwest Highway between Central Road and Mount Prospect Road when compared to north of Central Road and south of Mount Prospect Road. Signal and Railroad Crossing Characteristics Peak period traffic congestion through the downtown area is caused by large traffic volumes crossing the Union Pacific (UP) railroad tracks at -grade, interrupted by a high number of commuter trains during the same peak period times, as well as emergency vehicles. The only two railroad crossings in the downtown area are IL 83 and Emerson Street. The traffic delays are compounded by the condition that the IL 83 and Emerson Street railroad gates remain down while Metra passengers board and alight the train, increasing the time traffic is stopped and significantly decreasing the efficiency of the three interconnected traffic signals along IL 83 and at Emerson Street and Northwest Highway. Data pulled from the IL 83 with Northwest Highway and Prospect Avenue signal controller shows that the crossing gates are down 32 to 34 of the peak 90-minute traffic periods. This signal and railroad crossing information is summarized in Table 1. Table 1: Mount Prospect Railroad Crossing Summary Average Daily # of Cycle Length Location Traffic Signal N/S E/W Phases Route Route IL 83 @ Northwest Hwy 13,900 10,900 10 & Prospect Ave No. of Train Min Gate nterruptions Down AM PM AM PM AM PM Peak Peak Peak Peak Peak Peak 160 170 17 14 34 32 Mount Prospect Downtown Transportation Study - ADDENDUM 3 October 15, 2018 Maple Street Lofts Development Plan A residential development is proposed on Maple Street between Prospect Avenue and Lincoln Street. The site is currently occupied by a 280-space commuter parking lot. The adjacent site was formerly home to Parenti & Raffaelli, Ltd. Mill shop, which currently sits vacant on the site. The proposed site consists of the following: • 257 residential units in two apartment buildings with a total of 306 residential parking spaces 10,000 square feet of ground -floor retail • 66 townhomes with two parking spaces per unit 250 public parking spaces in a three-story parking structure O On -street parking along Prospect Avenue, (future) Elm Street, and other internal streets Elm Street will be a new public street extending through the site from Prospect Avenue to Lincoln Street. A new street will also extend east from Maple Street. Access to the uses on the site will be provided via these new streets and a series of driveways on Lincoln Street that directly serve the rear -loaded townhomes. As part of the development plan, the Village is planning to relocate 100 commuter parking permits from the Maple Street facility to the Village Hall parking garage in an effort to balance the additional traffic generated by the residential units. Commuters residing north of the tracks will be directed to the Village Hall parking garage to reduce traffic across the tracks during peak periods. This initiative will also remove trips coming to and leaving from the Maple Street Lofts site during peak hours. The remaining approximately 180 commuter parking spaces will be reserved in the new public parking garage on the site. The other parking spaces will be available to the public, including customers of the retail component of the site, as well as other existing businesses and events. Trip Generation The estimate of traffic to be generated in the future condition is based upon proposed land use type and size. The Institute of Transportation Engineer's (ITE) Trig Generation, 10th Edition was used to identify traffic generated by the Maple Street Lofts development concept. Table 2 summarizes the peak hour trip generation estimates, as well as the applicable Land Use Code reference. The data for the residential units, the apartments in particular, indicate they will be transit -oriented dwellings with a lower vehicular traffic demand than traditional suburban units. Many of the trips expected to be generated by the site in the morning and evening peaks will be person -trips oriented to and from the Metra station. The table also summarizes the commuter parking trips that are currently entering and exiting the surface lot on the site and the portion that will no longer be using the Maple Street facility as they are relocated to the Village Hall parking garage. Note that the total trips never equal the number of parking spaces because the table shows the peak one -hour period and the trips are disbursed across a two to three-hour window, not all arriving or departing in the same hour. Mount Prospect Downtown Transportation Study - ADDENDUM October 15, 2018 Table 2: Vehicular Trip Generation Weekday AM Land Use / Size Peak Hour In Out Total Ma le_Stree't Lofts Mid -Rise Residential with Ground -floor Retail - 257 units + 10,000 SF Low -Rise Multifamily Housing (Townhouse) - 66 DU (LUC 221) New Residential/Retail Trips ..... ............. Commuter Parking Existing 280 spaces Relocation of 100 permits Commuter Parking Trips Weekday PM _Peak Hour _ In I Out I Total 20 55 75 65 30 95 5 25 30 25 15 40 25 80 105 90 45 135 170 15 185 0 130 130 -40 0 -40 0 -45 -45 130 15 145 0 85 85 4 New Trip Assignment The directional distribution of site -generated traffic is a function of several variables, including existing travel patterns, characteristics of the area street network, and characteristics of the surrounding neighborhoods. The resulting percentages are a best estimate using engineering judgment, familiarity with the area, and logical travel paths to likely origins and destinations for site users. The new residential/retail trips were assigned to the street network according to the directional distribution and are shown in Figure 2. The existing commuter trips captured in the traffic counts were assumed to remain on the street network to present a conservative worst -case scenario. However, 40 to 45 trips during the peak hour will actually be reassigned to the Village Hall parking garage and no longer enter or exit the site. The development -generated traffic was added to the existing traffic volumes to develop near - term future traffic conditions. The resulting Future Traffic volumes are shown in Figure 3. Capacity Analysis The operational effectiveness of transportation facilities is measured in terms of Level of Service (LOS). LOS ranges from LOS A to LOS F, with LOS A being the best level of operation for an intersection and LOS F being the worst. LOS A represents free -flow conditions where motorists experience a high level of comfort and convenience. LOS E represents saturated or at -capacity conditions, and LOS F represents oversaturated conditions. LOS at a signalized intersection is defined in terms of average control delay (measured in seconds per vehicle), which is the portion of total delay experience by a motorist that is attributable to the traffic signal. LOS A describes operations with minimal delays (up to 10 seconds per vehicle), while LOS F describes operations with delays in excess of 80 seconds per vehicle. At intersections with long cycle lengths, the quantity of red time that is allocated to an approach or movement may near or exceed that 80-second threshold, increasing the likelihood of poor LOS. The LOS criteria for signalized intersections, as defined in the Highway Capacity ManuaL Sixth Edition (HCM), are provided in Table 3. Mount Prospect Downtown Transportation Study - ADDENDUM October 15, 2018 Table 3: LOS Criteria for Signalized Intersections Level of Service (LOS) I Average Delay ................................................... A <_ 10.0 seconds B > 10.0 and <_ 20.0 seconds C I > 20.0 and <_ 35.0 seconds D 1 > 35.0 and <_ 55.0 seconds E > 55.0 and <_ 80.0 seconds F I > 80.0 seconds Transportation Research Board. Highway Capacity Manual, 2010. 5 For unsignalized intersections, total delay is defined as the total elapsed time from the moment a vehicle stops at the back of the queue until the vehicle departs from the stop bar on the stop -sign controlled approach. This includes the time required for the vehicle to travel from the last -in -queue to the first -in -queue position. The LOS thresholds for unsignalized intersections, which differ from those for signalized intersections, are summarized in Table 4. Table 4: LOS Criteria for Unsignalized Intersections Level of Service (LOS) I Average Delay A B <_ 10.0 seconds > 10.0 and <_ 15.0 seconds C > 15.0 and <_ 25.0 seconds D > 25.0 and <_ 35.0 seconds . ............ ._...... E . ............_._ > 35.0 and <_ 50.0 seconds F _ > 50.0 seconds Transportation Research Board. Highway Capacity Manual, 2010 Synchro 9 traffic analysis software was used to analyze the study intersections for the weekday peak hours under both existing traffic conditions and projected future traffic conditions with the addition of site -generated traffic. The capacity analysis results from Synchro provide average vehicle delays and LOS for each study intersection. SimTraffic, the traffic simulation module of the Synchro software package, was also used to develop traffic simulations for the existing and future scenarios to further inform traffic operations and to assist in determining the effectiveness of the existing roadway system. Traffic signal timings for the signalized intersections were obtained from IDOT's system and verified in the field. Summaries of the capacity analysis results under existing and future projected conditions are presented in Table 5. Mount Prospect Downtown Transportation Study - ADDENDUM October 15, 2018 Table 5: Intersection Level of Service Comparison Existing Future Intersection/Lane AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak Notes Hour Hour Hour Hour IL 83 at Northwest Hwy (s) Eastbound L B B B B Eastbound TR C C C C Westbound L C D D D Westbound TR D D D D Northbound L A A A A Northbound TR A A A A Southbound L F E F E Southbound TR D D D D Overall Intersection C C C C IL 83 at Prospect Ave (s) Eastbound L F F F F Eastbound TR D D D D Westbound L E E E E Westbound T E E E E Westbound R E E E E Northbound L E E E E Northbound TR E E E E Southbound L C C C C Southbound TR A A A A Overall Intersection D D D D Emerson St at Northwest Hwy (s) Eastbound L A A A A Eastbound TR A A A A Westbound L A A A A Westbound T/R A A A A Northbound L C C C C Northbound TR C C C C Southbound L C C C C Southbound TR C C C C Overall Intersection B B B B Emerson St at Prospect Avenue Eastbound UT C C C C Eastbound R C C C C Westbound LT B B B C Westbound R B B B C Northbound A A A A Southbound A A A A Minor AP roach C C C C Maple St at Northwest Hwy Eastbound A A A A Westbound A A A A Northbound LTR B C C C Southbound LTR C C C C Southbound Appnoach/Overall C C C C Maple St at Prospect Ave Westbound A A A A Northbound Approach B B B B Maple Street at Lincoln Street _ Maintain AWSC Eastbound A A A A Westbound A A A A Northbound A A A A Southbound A A A A Overall Intersection A A A A Mount Prospect Downtown Transportation Study - ADDENDUM October 15, 2018 Table 5: Intersection Level of Service Comparison (Con't.) 7 Existing Future Intersection/Lane AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak Notes Hour Hour Hour Hour Elm Street at Prospect Ave TWSC Westbound L n/a n/a A A Northbound Approach A A Elm Street at Lincoln Ave . TWSC Eastbound L n/a n/a A A Southbound Approach A A School St at Northwest Hwy m Eastbound L A A A A Southbound A roach B C B C School St at Prospect Ave Westbound L A A A A Northbound Approach A A A A Mount Prospect Rd at Northwest Hwy (s) + Future condition Eastbound L D D D D shown with Eastbound TR F F F F improvements Westbound L E F E F planned by IDOT Westbound TR E E E E Northbound L A B A A Northbound TR A A A A Southbound L E E E E Southbound TR E E E E Overall Intersection D D D D Mount Prospect Rd at Prospect Ave (s) « Future condition Eastbound L F F F F shown with Eastbound R C C C C improvements Northbound T D D D D planned by IDOT Northbound L E E E E . Village should Southbound TR A A A A study eastbound Overall Intersection D D D D dual left -turn lanes (s) Signalized intersection, (AWSC) All -way Stop Control intersection. (TWSC) Two-way Stop Control intersection. Existing Traffic Operations All unsignalized intersections operate at LOS C or better. There are several movements and lane groups under traffic signal control that currently operate below LOS D during the peak hours. Signalized traffic movements or lane groups that currently operate at LOS E or LOS F include the following: • The southbound left -turn movement operates at LOS F during the AM peak hour and LOS E during the PM peak hour as it is under protected -only phasing. • The eastbound left -turn movement operates at LOS F during the AM and PM peak hour. All westbound movements operate at LOS E during the AM and PM peak hour. All northbound movements operate at LOS E during the AM and PM peak hour. r - " . w ar .Monrw 0 The eastbound through movements operates at LOS F during the AM and PM peak hour. Mount Prospect Downtown Transportation Study - ADDENDUM October 15, 2018 13 The westbound left -turn movements operate at LOS E during the AM peak hour and LOS F during the PM peak hour. The westbound through movements operate at LOS E during the AM and PM peak hours. All southbound movements operate at LOS E during the AM and PM peak hour. The eastbound left -turn movement operates at LOS F during the AM and PM peak hour. The northbound left -turn movements operate at LOS E during the AM and PM peak hours. Long queues were noted on eastbound Prospect Avenue at Mount Prospect Road. Synchro analysis shows the 95th percentile for the eastbound left queue to be approximately 275 feet during the AM Peak which is longer than the 150 feet of storage currently provided. Projected Future Traffic Operations The capacity analysis results show that almost all approaches and lane groups would operate at the same LOS as existing conditions and none would change beyond LOS D that are not already under LOS D, showing the increase in traffic is limited in its impact to LOS street operations. Alternatives Evaluation The overall purpose of the Downtown Transportation Study is to improve transportation conditions in the downtown. Through an alternatives evaluation, numerous improvement scenarios have been evaluated in the last several years. As detailed in the March report, however, traffic operations and the railroad signal system in the downtown area are complicated and highly interconnected, making a silver bullet solution difficult. Instead, the evaluation indicates several incremental improvements will overall result in marked operational improvements. Below is a brief summary of the alternatives studied and the outcome of those evaluations: Feasibility of At -Grade Crossing All railroads, including the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR), are generally opposed to any new at - grade crossings due to safety and maintenance issues. In the case of Mount Prospect, the UPRR has stated that for a new at -grade crossing, they would like to see three existing crossings closed. The Illinois Commerce Commission (ICC) is the final authority for the authorization of any at - grade crossing in the state, and the UPRR will have significant input with the ICC for a crossing on their line. The ICC also would prefer to close crossings rather than open new crossings and even has a Crossing Closure Incentive Program to provide incentives for communities to close at -grade crossings. Considering these policies and that the crossing would require approval or permitting from ICC, UPRR, IDOT, and Metra, permitting a new at -grade crossing would need significant political support to be approved by those agencies. Physically, the analysis of a third at -grade crossing at Maple Street shows it is feasible with right-of-way acquisition, roadway and sidewalk realignment, and modifications (loss of parking) to the existing Metra parking lot. It also improves traffic operations and delay for through and turning movements at the IL 83 signalized intersections. The cost analysis projected a cost of approximately $5 million. Feasibility of Underpass The Downtown Transportation Study evaluated an underpass at School Street but determined substantial impact to resident and business access along Northwest Highway, Prospect Avenue, Mount Prospect Downtown Transportation Study - ADDENDUM 9 October 15, 2018 and School Street due to clearance needed under the tracks and maximum allowed slopes. In addition, a grade -separated crossing also requires approval from ICC, UPRR, and IDOT and UPRR policy for adding a grade -separated crossing is to attempt to eliminate one at -grade crossing. A detailed cost analysis has not been completed for this alternative but would be expected at $20 million or more. Closure of Prospect Avenue Long traffic signal cycle lengths at two of three signalized intersections along Northwest Highway and IL 83 are required because the current signal sequences require safety clear -out phases. Those long cycles cause all movements to experience lengthier delays than if the cycle length were shorter. In 2016, Sam Schwartz studied the elimination of several signalized phases at IL 83 and Prospect Avenue which would significantly improve the downtown traffic signal system but would require that Prospect Avenue be closed with cul-de-sacs at its current intersection with IL 83. The shorter cycle lengths would improve LOS at the IL 83/Northwest Highway intersection, as well as other intersections on the closed loop system. However, this alternative was not received well by key stakeholders and the public. Traffic Management Center Sam Schwartz previously looked at cost estimates for the Village to construct a Traffic Management Center (TMC), similar to Lake County's PASSAGE system, that would provide advanced real-time management of signalized intersections on certain systems in the Village. Our basic analysis in 2016 estimated a cost for a TMC that could easily exceed $1.5 million to convert several closed systems and cost approximately $150,000 annually in staffing and maintenance. Move Train Station/Platforms The Metra station in Downtown Mount Prospect is a key component in attracting residents and businesses to the area. However, the current location of the station and loading platform parallel to Northwest Highway between IL 83 and Maple Street causes traffic operational problems. The Downtown Transportation Study evaluated relocation options that would allow trains to be parked in the station and a clear zone set between the front of the engine and the IL 83 and/or Emerson crossings, potentially allowing the gates to reopen while the train is loading. Platform relocation either eastward or westward would require moving the train station depot to a point near the center of the relocated platform. To provide the same width between the railroad tracks and Northwest Highway that exists at the current depot location, significant land acquisition and the realignment of Northwest Highway would be required. Sam Schwartz estimates that either an eastbound or westward relocation would require a minimum land acquisition of 1.0 acre and a cost of $12-14 million. It would also move the Metra station from the heart of downtown. Move Inbound Trains In discussions between the Village, UPRR, and Metra, Metra is open to instructing eastbound train engineers to hit a certain pre -determined mark with the last engine to maintain the required clear zone that allows the railroad gates at the IL 83 crossing to return to the upright position once the train passes through the IL 83 crossing. This operational change may decrease the time gates are closed up to 11 minutes during the peak 90-minute morning rush period and 4 minutes during the peak 90-minute evening rush. Moving the inbound trains may require that the south platform Mount Prospect Downtown Transportation Study - ADDENDUM 10 October 15, 2018 be extended eastward approximately 250 feet. The cost analysis projected a cost of approximately $900,000. Relocation of Fire Station out of Downtown The Village is currently in the process of relocating its Police and Fire Department from its downtown Station 13 location on Northwest Highway. According to the department's information, there are approximately 4,500 emergency responses per year out of that station. Considering that two units typically respond to each call, there are at least 2,000 traffic interruptions per year caused by the pre-emptions. Observations and signal controller information indicate there is, on average, one call during both the morning and evening peak hours, which impacts traffic for approximately two minutes on each occurrence and is typically compounding or lengthening an already occurring traffic interruption. Relocation of the station so that emergency vehicles may avoid IL 83/Northwest Highway congestion would allow normal coordination plans to run for approximately 10 more minutes at programmed offsets by eliminating the transition period. The following Table 6 was compiled to illustrate the estimated incremental improvements that both moving inbound trains and relocating the fire station will have on the peak 90-minute periods of traffic. Table 6: IL 83/Emerson Railroad Crossing Summary Morning (7:00-8:30) Train Emergency Evening (4:30-6:00) Train Emergency Vehicle Vehicle o c c CDo g m O O += Q C o Q i C ❑- t o a 2 C c`u .S p a`) .0 p E iv c C C y .O C d C C C coO C O N O E ,o O a).= O 73 O Ca O 00- O Z CD a wa O Z 10 O 0a.. O Z okZ Existing Condition 17 34 1 10 14 32 1 10 Improvements Relocation of Fire Station -1 -10 -1 -10 Move inbound trains -11 -4 Total (Projected Condition) 17 23 0 0 14 26 0 0 Pedestrian Push -Button Signals The current traffic signals at IL 83/Northwest Highway/Prospect Avenue and Emerson Street/Northwest Highway have one pedestrian push button on each corner. When pressed, the button calls for both crossings from the corner to be activated. This causes a false call in the unused direction which can create unnecessary green time for minor approaches and corresponding delays for major approaches. Morning pedestrian calls account for 22 seconds of delay per signal cycle (160 seconds total) and afternoon calls account for 16 seconds of delay Mount Prospect Downtown Transportation Study - ADDENDUM 11 October 15, 2018 per cycle (170 seconds total). By adding several push buttons and posts to these signalized intersections, pedestrians will be able to choose the crosswalk they intend to use, reducing the false calls and giving back green time to the highest traffic demand. The required process would be to submit plans and specifications to IDOT permits for approval and meetings with IDOT have indicated they are supportive of the improvement. IDOT Traffic Operations Department would handle coordination with ICC before IDOT ultimately issues the permit for construction. This is seen as a low-cost (approximately $65,000) improvement that would benefit traffic operations during 25 to 30 percent of the peak hour (five to six cycle lengths). Mount Prospect Road and Prospect Avenue This intersection is slated to be improved by IDOT and the signal timing may be adjusted by IDOT or one of their timing consultants after construction in the next five years. No street widening/capacity improvements are planned at this time. Field observations noted long queues eastbound on Prospect Avenue at Mount Prospect Road. The traffic volume distribution estimates approximately 10-20 vehicles will be added to the eastbound movements in the peak hours at that intersection under future conditions. Synchro analysis estimates this could lengthen the queue approximately 20-35 feet or one to two vehicles during the peaks. To accommodate the queues, Sam Schwartz evaluated the operational improvements of adding dual eastbound left -turn lanes on Prospect Avenue at the signal and the analysis shows the capacity improvement would reduce average delay by approximately 20 seconds and reduce eastbound queues by approximately 100 feet. The addition of dual lefts would require that Mount Prospect Road be widened (to approximately 35 feet) across the railroad tracks to accept the turning vehicles. Widening across the tracks is an expensive improvement considering a proposed crossing improvement would need to proceed through an ICC and IDOT approval process and involve train signal pre-emption equipment coordination. However, in the past, both IDOT and ICC have authorized geometric capacity improvements for existing railroad crossings. Signalization at Prospect Avenue/Emerson Street As part of the analysis, Sam Schwartz modeled the intersection of Emerson Street and Prospect Avenue under traffic signal control to test the operations compared to three-way stop sign control. The advantage of signalization is that the track clearance phasing will guarantee passage for both northbound traffic crossing the tracks through Northwest Highway and southbound traffic crossing the tracks through Prospect Avenue. The disadvantage, however, is that signalization will not significantly improve intersection LOS operations and it will degrade LOS at the Emerson Street and Northwest Highway intersection as more time will be required to be dedicated to clearance track phases, thus increasing the cycle lengths, for example from 85 seconds to 170 seconds in the PM period to match IL 83. The Emerson/Northwest Highway cycle length currently runs at half the length of the IL 83 signal cycles which has significantly reduced delays and queuing at the intersection. Move Permit Parking As part of the development plan, the Village is planning to relocate 100 commuter parking permits from the Maple Street facility to the Village Hall parking garage in an effort to reduce traffic demand in the immediate site area and balance the additional traffic generated by the residential units. The Village will target permit holders that live north of Northwest Highway to relocate to the Mount Prospect Downtown Transportation Study - ADDENDUM October 15, 2018 12 Village Hall parking garage where there is excess capacity and no need to cross the UP railroad tracks. This will reduce traffic crossing the tracks by 40 to 45 vehicles during the peak hour which will result in lower delays and shorter queues, particularly on IL 83 and Emerson Street. It also has the potential to offset over 30 percent of the traffic generated by the development, as summarized in Table 7. Table 7: Net New Trips to/from Site Land Use / Size Weekday AM Peak Hour Weekday PM Peak Hour In Out Total In Out Total New Residential/Retail Trips 25 80 105 90 45 135 Relocation of 100 permits �_.... �......_W Net Vehicular Trips -40 -15 0 ......... 80 -40 95 .... _. 0 90 -45 0 -45 90 Recommendations The evaluation indicates several incremental improvements will overall result in marked operational improvements. Sam Schwartz offers the following recommendations as incremental, near -term projects to improve traffic operations in the downtown area that have a high cost -benefit ratio (or are already planned). The Village should continue to work with Metra to instruct engineers on eastbound (inbound) trains to hit a certain pre -determined mark with the last engine to maintain a clear zone that would allow the railroad gates at the IL 83 crossing to return to the upright position while the train is loading in the station but has passed through the IL 83 crossing. This operational change will reduce the duration gates are in the down position by 11 minutes in the peak morning period and 4 minutes in the peak evening period. Metra may require that the south platform be ultimately extended approximately 250 feet east. Pedestrian posts and pushbuttons should be installed at the intersections of IL 83 with Northwest Highway and Prospect Avenue and the intersection of Northwest Highway with Emerson Street to improve the operational efficiency by eliminating unused green time caused by false pedestrian calls. This would benefit traffic operations during 25 to 30 percent of the peak hour (5-6 cycle lengths), and could reduce delay caused by unused vehicle green time up to 22 seconds per cycle length. Relocation of the police and fire station will minimize pre-emption calls through the critical cluster of signalized intersections, particularly during the peak 90-minute morning and evening rush periods, reducing signal offset transitions by approximately 10 minutes. • Neighborhood traffic control surrounding the Maple Street Lofts site should be provided as follows: o The intersection of Maple Street with Lincoln Street should remain under all -way stop sign control. Mount Prospect Downtown Transportation Study - ADDENDUM October 15, 2018 13 o The Elm Street (future) approaches at both Prospect Avenue and Lincoln Street should be under stop sign control, with Prospect Avenue and Lincoln Street remaining free flow (two-way stop controlled). o The new east -west street that will intersect Maple Street should also be under stop sign control with Maple Street remaining free flow. As part of the development plan, the Village should relocate 100 permit parkers from the Maple Street facility to the Village Hall parking lot. In order for this to benefit traffic operations and eliminate trips crossing the railroad tracks, the relocated parkers will need to reside north of the railroad tracks. This relocation can offset over 30 percent of the peak hour development -generated traffic to and from the site. As more pedestrian activity will occur at the intersection of Prospect Avenue and Maple Street with the development of the site, staff should evaluate pedestrian crossing placement and signage at the intersection in coordination with site plan development. Staff should continue to monitor traffic volumes and speeds on surrounding neighborhood streets in the future and consider traffic calming measures as warranted as part of the Village's traffic calming program. Additionally, the following longer -term alternatives have merit and should continue to be evaluated by the Village: In the long-term, the Village should pursue discussions with legislative representatives, the UPRR, and the Illinois Commerce Commission to determine if there is flexibility in the UPRR policy that requires three existing at -grade crossings be eliminated for one new at - grade crossing to be considered. The Village should further study the intersection of Prospect Avenue with Mount Prospect Road to determine the costs and implications of widening Mount Prospect Road over the railroad tracks to accept dual eastbound left -turn lanes from Prospect Avenue. Figures Figure 1: Existing Traffic Figure 2: New Site -Generated Traffic Figure 3: Future Traffic � 3 O1 0 < m Ln 3 n 3 o a c n m o o- r 3 n 0 3 H a �#�475 (510) 450 (490) ' 55 (40) 15 (25)/0 IL 83 (10) 5 (530) 495 —► (60) 55 ---! (520) 440 - (5) 5 (30) 60 (10) 10--j 015) 115—► 0 0) 10 Ln �15(50)'�10(15) 75 (180) i-105 (155) 80 (55) 30 (20) � Emerson $t (40) 30 (145) 130� (30)55� owo o - (20) " : ", 15 (30) �J -15 (80) - (5) 15 (45) ���iii 60 (-) 10 (5) 40 (20) H 15 (15) 5* (45) 10 ()5*� ((20)5� 1 r (0)- (-)65*� ONE O 5 N^ W 7 r 5 (45) o 0 (� �5(10) x_ -n v X 3 O N ry L.. F CD (D O 0 Ln 0 - €`' 3n 1 Parking Lot m n _ _ T o Ln _ �1 (15)10--A r (20) 15 10 W V A O (n O 105 (95) �565 (815) (10) 15 � (145) 80— (835) 745 (575) 475 ---- 0 85) 265 a L-c 15 (20) 20 0 0) Made St School St 4-5 (10) 1465 (635) 75 (80) Mount Prospect Rd Z 0 .t 0 Ln n m N f �H �5(15 (-) �J �5(05) A �U, `O (-) 10 (40) 1 tI (10))5 _� I (-) - (20) 35 (-) (-) III 07 Vt O N �o �25(15) t Elm St 5(10) g1`1�� Ir i-(-) (-) (-) - ` IL 83 Emerson St Maple St O I � ID 0 0) 20 CO Ln -(-) School st zz Z' Lill`` prat Prospect Rd �25(50) �5(5) ..-475 (510) i 455 (505) 160 (55) 15 (2S) I L 8 3 (10) 5 r (60) 60 (530) 495 ( (530) 455 (5) 5 (30) 60 � w c �15(50)' 10(15) o N f— 75 (180) 110 (165) (70) (20) �85 f-30 Emerson St (10) 10 (40) 30 015) LS (150) 140 (10)10� (30)55�ttt w = € AWN '^ a* (20) �` iL o c 15 (30) -+ 15(80) 15 (45) — 10 (5) �� (--(5) f---70(40) f-40(20) Maple St 15 (45) 10 (-) —► 70" t (85) 50 (5) _ it (1 ) 30* —► (10)45*� (20)5� (10)- (j n (5) 1 N O W N � � O 30 (60) * �500) o D a � CL M o- Ln 3 o u, K rD O rD N 3 n x O Lo�M as C o_ x x l 3 D w n O -0 Ln !D _ C i M E O OD O In M �0 >` r`O Elm St (10) 20— I I tae O (15)10� �I (20) 15 in z is c 15 (20) —2000) � o O VI V 'D n Ui �s 110 (115) 465 (45) 565 (815) ) 75 (80) School St Mount Prospect Rd (15) 15 (145) 80 (835) 745 (580) 480 —► 0 90) 275 -� t C9 Z O .+ o LA m A0KN0WLE['-)GMEN Mayor: Arlene Jurocek Paul Wm Hoefert A. John Korn John J Matuszok Steven S. Polit Richard F, Rogers Michael A Zadel F'I.AINNNG AND C.G..)r` NG °_. /` MISSON: Joseph P. Donnelly, Chairperson William Beattie Tom Fitzgerald Jacqueline Hinaber Jeanne Kueter Sharon Otteman Keith Youngquist m Ci.,,i%k,"Aa.T II V Bill Cooney, Director of Community Development Brian Simmons, Deputy Director of Community Development Consuelo Andrade, Senior Planner Nellie Beckner, Long Range Planner Jeff Wulbecker, Village Engineer Marianthi Thonopolous, Public Information Officer Heather Tabbert, Manager - Local Planning and Programs, Regional Transportation Authority Kristen Andersen, Transportation Planning Analyst, Metro Charlotte O'Donnell, Senior Planner, Service Planning Section, Pace Mike Janonis, Village Manager Dave Strahl, Assistant Village Manager G...)JTHEIRS: Downtown Merchants Association Mount Prospect Chamber of Commerce Mount Prospect Public Library K CUVE Sd/\AMA-''Y 8: 1 IE ASON I 1 to 1 1 1 aMliOVIri 1 IT I I d 'I I(H (J 10 1) P ov, 1, 1 u I I dy 10 1 )I c, I I ,in Flo I I I )k Ov Id IiI g AI I I (j o u, m 0 H EXE U -1-- 1 V E S U M M A R Y In August 2012, the Village of Muuril Prospect engaged a planning and design team led by The Lakota Group, a Chicago -based urban planning firm, to initiate a Downtown Implementation Plan process The Lakota team included Goodman Williams Group, (market and economic andlysis), Gewalt Hamilton Associates (transportation planning) and sparc, inc, (marketing and branding) to lend expertise and provide a comprehensive approach, The project, funded and coordinated through the Regional Transportation Authority's (RTA) Community Planning Program, encourages communities to create transit -oriented development (TOD) plans to support and enhance existing and future transit in addition to improving communities served by transit. This program allowed Mount Prospect to leverage its high commuter ridership of the Metro system to create a long range vision for an improved Downtown. This Downtown planning process built upon several other Village studies, including the Corridor Design Guidelines (2004), Comprehensive Plan (2007) and the Northwest Highway Corridor Plan (2011) previously developed within the past ten years The recommendations and strategies in this Plan report, considered Volume 2, summarize the creative design thinking and describe the new vision for Mount Prospects Downtown. Volume 1 of the Downtown Implementation Plan, entitled the State of the Downtown, provides the analysis of land use, physical conditions, demographics and real estate market conditions, transportation environment and community input that formed the basis for developing the vision further described. To guide the process, the Village established a Project Steering Committee comprised of Village community development, planning and public works staff and RTA, Metro and Pace representatives to direct the consulting team, provide periodic input, establish a community outreach program and evaluate data and plan alternatives. Several public outreach and community input methods were organized for this process aimed at achieving the broadest possible exposure to the Downtown planning process First, the Lakota a n� x IUIV team conducted a series of one -one and small focus group interview sessions with community leaders, civic institutions, developers, business and property owners and residents to gain an understanding of the issues and opportunities prevalent in Downtown Mount Prospect Second, three evening Community Open Houses were held over the course of this process to provide an overview of the planning mission, present ideas and concepts and invite participants to engage in positive dialogue about their community. The final method was to create an online presence by forming a project website and a project -specific Facebook page These venues were used for posting updates, concept plans and surveys, while also maintaining momentum and excitement for the process Overall, over 110 community members participated in the public open houses, with approximately 180 completed online surveys. To guide, focus and evaluate solutions and ideas throughout this process, a concise set of planning goals was established. These fundamental goals build from the principles established as part of the RTA Community Planning Program mission These goals include: Create a clear, documented and shared vision for the future of the Downtown that "sets the stage for funding strategies, capital improvement programming, new development and retention/attraction of area businesses Create and test a range of alternative development and urban design concepts and strategies that enhance and revitalize adjoining businesses and blocks within Downtown. Develop an optimal short and long-range land use strategy and development framework for the Downtown Attract land uses and development more compatible with the goals, needs, infrastructure and "character" of the community and build a critical mass of energy and activity to spur surrounding businesses and encourage future mixed -use redevelopment in the Downtown Maximize the transit -oriented nature of Downtown by improving traffic/parking , pedestrian and btycle circulation, and detailing potential improvements to the transportation network Establish a framework for future changes to development regulations that emphasizes high quality, sustainable site and building design. V After reviewing numerous alternative plan options for key sites in the Downtown and weighing community input, the Project Steering Committee directed the Lokota Team to refine and provide preferred options for each of the key opportunity sites In some cases, this resulted in presenting multiple development concepts for the some site that show alternative land uses, enabling flexibility in response to changing market conditions The Downtown Plan illustrated in this report defines a vision, along with suggested priority and catalytic projects and implementation steps to achieve the vision The Plan goes beyond focusing strictly on redevelopment concepts; it also includes conclusions regarding transportation enhancements, market analysis and a marketing strategy for Downtown, While significant effort and detail has been put into the full overall report, there are several key elements worth highlighting The following outlines important components that should form the fundamental building blocks for implementing the Downtown Implementation Plan, O .. The Plan visualizes and describes the potential redevelopment of six key Downtown sites, including vacant and underdeveloped land in prime locations and industrial parcels that are at odds with the surrounding Downtown land uses and character, A range of redevelopment scenarios and compatible, context -sensitive physical plans are presented with corresponding character imagery to communicate the potential for new, exciting and vibrant buildings and spaces within Downtown, The concepts depicted in the Plan delineate mixed -use, commercial and multi- family residential buildings comprising the infill sites in Downtown, bringing the right balance of land uses as informed by the real estate market assessment, v r n d , b .° # s r " 0 LEGENio p ETATEIVZV�,:LtT The Plan addresses challenges and opportunities presented by the Downtown market environment, The condominium projects developed over the last two decades tended to attract older households, leaving younger households underrepresented, Contemporary rental apartments, a market becoming increasingly strong in Chicago suburbs, will diversify the Downtown population. Demand will resume for townhomes and condominiums as the housing market continues to recover, While the Downtown business mix includes destination and neighborhood -serving retail stores, service providers are predominant. The Downtown core, including both new and vintage properties, has a high retail vacancy rate The Plan envisions an enhanced public realm that contributes to a distinct downtown experience Ultimately, it is this positive experience that draws customers to stores, restaurants and service businesses Additional demand and vitality will come from residents of the new units envisioned in the Plan Restaurants, a use desired by residents, are recommended for key development sites Eating, drinking and entertainment establishments may capture demand from both Metro commuters and neighboring suburbs that has been elusive. Key locations on redevelopment parcels could, however, accommodate stand-alone stores for select national retailers that would be strong anchors, as has been depicted in the Plan concepts. As recent experience has shown, chain retailers with smaller store formats expect higher traffic counts and pedestrian activity than is currently offered in the Downtown In addition to reimagining key sites, the Plan provides direction for upgrading and creating unique and distinctive streetscapes and public spaces One concept proposes developing a landmark public open space on the Triangle Site to accommodate special events This plaza could become an iconic space in the center of Mount Prospect's core mixed -use district. To complement the high quality streetscapes that ore found throughout Downtown, the Plan also envisions the creation of a Prospect Avenue District as a unique shopping street that has its own brand and identity, as defined by a series of streetscape enhancements and linkages to smaller meaningful plaza spaces A stronger Prospect Avenue District will help draw customers to the south side of the tracks and create a business environment that attracts local entrepreneurs. Other opportunities for creating great spaces are possible through existing business site improvements In several locations throughout Downtown, small or inefficient surface parking lots and setback areas are under-utilized and generally detract from the pedestrian environment. Improvements aimed at creating outdoor dining areas would help local businesses and provide added vitality to the public realm TRII - -S Through the public workshops and online surveys, the community strongly supported the idea of Downtown becoming safer, more accessible and convenient for pedestrians and bicyclists. A variety of transportation enhancement elements have been proposed for key intersections throughout Downtown, including shortened crosswalks and protected landscaped medians, as well as the integration of a dedicated bike lane on Prospect Avenue The Plan addresses parking in and around Downtown as it relates to businesses and Metro — including envisioning how future demand for Metro parking can be more efficiently incorporated into the Downtown, as it relates to potential new development. I"d"CVUPI"`COCOON I Ix The final component of the Plan outlines a number of ways that Downtown can link the physical components previously described On o marketing strategy to create excitement, community pride and regional exposure. Conceptual Downtown brandmorks, or logos, were created with different themes that relate to Mount ProspecFs history, character and context A brief marketing video was created to highlight many of Downtowns strengths and assets and a marketing strategy was outlined that touches upon methods in which Mount Prospect can communicate through multimedia, urban design, promotional collateral and scripted messaging to get the word out about Downtown The final Downtown Implementation Plan included in this document is intended as a basis, or starting point, for any future detailed development planning, design, engineering or Village initiatives that will be required leading up to the implementation of all or portions of the Plan It is a guide and, as an approved amendment to the Village's Comprehensive Plan, it will serve as the road map for the next wave of Downtown redevelopment and improvements, a benchmark for setting goals and developing budgets and a playbook for the management and promotion of the Downtown This document must be organic and adaptable to changing market conditions and should be updated and revisited at regular intervals 1 LEGEND i �N9r"WWW-� +�yy�yyr� � � PiB1Y41FYSTFEET 6 ., 1 NH yp ✓ A � .ww6 c4 NnRML RGAtr '� w, �" ve ": p % r, N, '�". BUSSE AVENUE px 4,dgyp AN'; "Ury '4. w J1 II EVERGREEN AVENUE \ 'NRudO.tONd AVENUE L STUDY AREA \ $1 ea K Or 06101cr paI WTDAR'Y \ %% I. —.I PRIMARY OPPOTUNITY SITES © SURFACE PARKING PARK / OPEN SPACE IL BUILDING FOOTPRINT \ \ \ll STATION WALKING RAW \ 4�.. N a h�j y w'"•.^Y "w uP CENTRAL ROAD n J .M"' ' �.pr�I�GWENII PARK p3 ^yN' V wxrNM EVERGREEN AVENUE n1I Aµ b � � II Lq 44 MILRURN AVENUE wxw wpP..wrwww.wr. .11,q I.,. �"k�"rw. LIONS �NxFn PARK ^" NORTH `v"°JI Al I` F1l �E: IC"C)W K_)II` 0 , IJ,�-,'o)) ,vn lrnpon Choi)') In. n';x0ir.r�r ,n 1h(' to aru„)riuy,i"Iol for r'/h l 1 owniov n I„ok" I r n', In fl"o ricm K'j In jl / ye'Rfm7 As Mount Prospect seeks to explore new development and revitalization opportunities in the years ahead, it will need a well- defined vision and framework to help guide its investment decisions, especially as economic conditions and trends change over time, Therefore, this Downtown Plan serves as the guidebook for elected officials, municipal staff, community residents, business owners, local organizations and potential investors, allowing them to make well-informed decisions regarding land use, transportation, open space, redevelopment, commercial district enhancements and infrastructure and capital improvements within Downtown Mount Prospect. _'T_ [--d E V I S 10 N The time horizon for implementing a Downtown Plan and working toward its community vision is usually 10 to 20 years, although the Plan should be reviewed and updated every five years to address local issues, needs and opportunities The Plan should be used on a daily basis to assist the community in making any land use or development decisions As previously described in the State of the Downtown report, which serves as Volume 1 of the Downtown Implementation Plan, the Plan serves several purposes: Development Framework Public Investment Guide Private Investment Guide Future Vision i As the second part of the Downtown Implementation Plan, this report describes the vision for Downtown —including the process and input —and identifies the implementation steps required to achieve it 1�00 .. . . ...... PHASE I PHASE ' I PHASE NTINULRD `�L!BI is EIVI 4Gt.V NT The public process for the Downtown Implementation Plan engaged the community on a number of levels, including: Stakeholder Interviews Public Meetings Online Surveys A summary of the initial community input was provided in Section 7 of the State of the Downtown report, which included stakeholder interviews and the first Community Open House and online survey Subsequently, two additional Open Houses were held in Village Hall, both followed by online surveys aimed at reaching a broader audience Overall, approximately 80 participants attended the last two Community Open Houses and over 100 members of the public participated in the accompanying online surveys ( ::Mlfl u.ii d )t (Dloon I .Ir wv, , The second Community Open House was held on February 21st, 2013 Participants were encouraged to review and provide feedback on a series of redevelopment, urban design and branding concepts and ideas derived from the Phase 1 analysis of the planning process, which included input from the community The following format was used: The consultant team made a brief presentation of the projects process to date and a review of more than 17 redevelopment concepts for the opportunity sites Participants were provided surveys on which to record their thoughts about the concepts during the open house session, which allowed them to rotate to various stations and review exhibits in detail, Comment boxes were provided to allow additional opportunities for participation An online survey was posted to the project website and linked to the project Facebook page, allowing further input into the process. The final Community Open House was held on July 10, 2013, Refined concepts based on Steering Committee and community input were organized around the room for review. The following format was used: The consultant team gave a presentation of the preliminary preferred plan for Downtown, including redevelopment concepts, urban design ideas, supporting market information and potential transportation improvements. Participants engaged in discussions with the consultant team to ask questions and provide feedback Comment boxes were provided to allow participants to leave input A final online survey was posted to the project website and linked to the project Facebook page, From this process, a shared vision has emerged, as depicted on the following pages 16 c>?, IDOM'd,K:)'� vu Over the past 20 years, Downtown Mount Prospect has experienced dramatic changes With the help of a series of visions and a Tax Increment Finance (TIF) District, Downtown was reshaped and reinvented from low scale buildings and large surface parking lots to a more urban mixed -use environment with row houses, townhomes and sizable condominium buildings, as well as a variety of restaurants, retail and service uses, However, despite its successes, the Downtown has seen its share of challenges, as it searches for a foothold coming out of the most recent economic downturn. The following describes some of the key considerations the Downtown Implementation Plan addresses with recommendations and strategies to make Mount Prospects Downtown more successful over the next 20 years: Ilse / 1� i r:� The train station makes Mount Prospect a highly desirable location for residents by connecting the Village to Chicago and the region As Downtown continues to transform, the Plan aspires to make Mount Prospect more than a stop on the map The vision foresees more Downtown residents and more reasons for visitors to make Mount Prospect a destination, 'i',::iv 7ew irk;:, ). cnYs The last influx of condominiums brought more residents to Downtown, most of whom were part of the Baby Boomer generation. However, changing real estate and demographic trends provide an opportunity to attract a new wave of young families and working professionals to Downtown. Businesses need customers and the Downtown population needs to reach a critical mass to reliably support new retail, restaurants and entertainment uses The Plan provides recommendations for new housing so the Downtown can retain existing businesses and attract new ones Js„7nhh,', Mount Prospect is welcoming and friendly. The Plan provides ideas for how the Village can embrace its charm and market its Downtown, creating more buzz and excitement in order to increase exposure and strengthen the business environment i w,, lc (i r?,, mid b�,t ^ Successful downtowns have people walking (and biking) around, The Plan provides concepts for improving some intersections and crosswalks and envisions how bike lanes could foster a safer riding environment and more active community for people of all ages Lur6 rj, t ��;,t�l� People are attracted to places and spaces that are well designed and well maintained, The Plan explores ideas for adding more appeal to both public and privately - owned spaces throughout Downtown and proposes to create a series of venues meant to bring people together —for coffee, food or conversation —while also looking great 5 KLY OPry"I'�..;..�I l.l'I ,IIV I `( `all T The following Downtown sites were determined during the planning process as the key sites on which to focus, More specific descriptions, illustrations and character images of the vision(s) for each of these sites follows in this section. The Downtown Implementation Plan delineates conceptual building massing, parking layouts and site design to illustrate how the area could be developed in a comprehensive, coordinated manner. Actual building locations, heights and densities, as well as landscaping and parking layouts will vary as property owners, business owners and developers generate more detailed site plans TRiANv!t Jilt The Triangle Site is comprised largely of vacant property and surface parking at the highly visible Route 83/Northwest Highway intersection. Its central location and proximity to the larger Downtown core on the north make it a high priority for redevelopment SE 3AN�,, SITE As the largest office property in Downtown, the building houses not only Chase, but also smaller local tenants, such as architectural firms, attorneys and financial service firms The site was primarily considered for physical enhancements to the parking lot, given its prime location along Emerson Street The largely vacant strip center development at the corner of Route 83 and Central Road was repeatedly brought up in stakeholder interviews and the Open Houses as a community eyesore. The majority of stakeholders noted their desire to see this property redeveloped and enhanced. 7'-ST1T_ S!T This former grocery store is located within the busy Northwest Highway corridor. A large majority of the property is comprised of surface parking lots, but its proximity to the Downtown core makes it a priority for redevelopment F C S T 0FFhCE S)TE The Post Office Site consists of the Post Office building, loading and parking areas, as well as a vacant parcel south of the cemetery. The Plan envisions a future scenario in which this property is redeveloped in the event the Post Office relocates or closes this facility _11JI',VS !? Rn SITE This 10.26-acre site is by for the largest redevelopment opportunity. This block currently consists of light industrial property and is considered to have the potential for large-scale transit -oriented development,. ?oCSP- T AVM \Ill DET; i; The stretch of Prospect Avenue between Maple Street and Central Road is lined with many of Mount Prospects most unique local businesses, The Plan proposes to highlight this area as a special district with pedestrian, bike, streetscape and branding enhancements x'm1wo.1. ROAD „LEGEND ET STUDY AREA L J µ p». N.El- NLH6IR RFRRY0.Pn 0'^L�Te.w`.7 ••M p"' �,' ....� a. w�as�a G rN-��p� G'*.. cd^anrsurvn. \. , � rtr BEAD r Z OleI N_ VV a . j E 4 Apyy.. �4"1" BU55E AVENUE r-?Y oNEN p & ,f kP "`( PARK 9P w '," IL9&AWIfNNO.EN A'w'4'Afll,E 'I� '^'*, ��°"� '4 L'4iWW6t40.M dUYMMPE 1rv, MILBURN AVENUE '^ a I( MNLGIM o" Auy6f'uC W PRIMARY CHARACTER CORRIDORS PRIMARY OPPORTUNITY SITES OPPORTUNITY SITES BUILDING FOOTPRINT (�) TRAIN STATION WALKING RADII LIONS PARK g� / NORTH / The Triangle Site includes the largely vacant block between Northwest Highway, Busse Avenue and Main Street, At approximately 089 ocres, this block currently contains a single -story restaurant and a single -story, multi -tenant retail building that fronts Main Street, The block is predominantly auto -oriented, consisting mostly of unscreened surface parking lots that lack internal landscaping North of this block a number of vacant parcels provide additional opportunities for redevelopment, Combined, these parcels represent an additional 036 acres One of the parcels contains a single story office building, while the others consist of lawn or surface parking that lacks landscaping As described in this report, this site does not include the existing Ye Olde Town Inn or Blues Bar properties, However, potential future redevelopment of this property could include these parcels if the proposed plan and land uses meet the goals and vision as described Combined, the Triangle Site represents 125 acres of land zoned B5-C, which allows for 80 feet height and 30 dwelling units per acre. No setbacks are required and parking requirements range from 1,5 spaces per unit of residential to 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet of retail or office space Previous plans for the site called for increased density levels and a PUD zoning designation, which allows 80 foot building heights and 80 dwelling units per acre The sites PUD status expired in May, 2013, The Plan describes two alternatives for developing this site, providing added flexibility in reacting to shifting market conditions. 1 i%Incu l� Sil,�� iilr,,dcmninr�nI Di,dI cI The goal of the Entertainment District concept is to promote Downtown as a destination by creating a 'critical mass' of entertainmenl- oriented commercial uses in a centralized location As the centerpiece of Downtown, buildings and open spaces in the Triangle Site must feel inviting, feature a variety of site amenities and have a high aesthetic value. One to two story commercial buildings on the site should contain restaurants or entertainment - oriented uses that will draw people Downtown both day and night. The concept shown in Exhibit 83 proposes two new buildings working in conjunction with the existing two-story buildings north of Busse Avenue Building A provides 8,000 square feet of space, adequate for a restaurant, with landscaping and outdoor seating fronting an improved Busse Avenue. Another one-story building, Building D, provides a larger floor plate at 15,000 square feet. Both of these new buildings should be arranged to create a series of small outdoor seating and plaza spaces that are comfortable and highly - visible These spaces could be shared among multiple tenants or managed by a single user,. High -quality furnishings and lighting displays, and other unique branding and urban design elements, are encouraged to further support weekend and evening use The concept also depicts Busse Avenue as an enhanced pedestrian -oriented streetscape (Item C) with specialty paving, landscaping, benches and new lighting. Though typically open to cars, Busse is envisioned as a 'pedestrian promenade', easily able to be closed for temporary festivals and events The use of elements such as cafe tables and planters help to make the sidewalk feel like an extension of adjacent dining and entertainment uses One of the biggest challenges to the success of this concept is convincing patrons to use existing nearby parking, such as the Village garage which is located on the east side of Main Street or the Metro parking lot across Northwest Highway, 44 on -street surface parking spaces on Busse Avenue provide convenient parking for entertainment uses and also create an opportunity for short term or valet functions during peak restaurant hours. Strategic building placement and site design also accommodates 15 additional on -street parking spocos along Northwest Highway, in addition to those provided on Wille Street and behind the buildings to the north The closest Metro lot provides the potential for shared parking with 140 spaces that could serve the entertainment uses during peak times, such as nights and weekends, which are the times the Metro lot is not being fully utilized by commuters. Finally, in order to increase pedestrian connectivity through Downtown while also providing a greater connection to the Emerson Municipal Garage, intersection improvements are shown at Busse Avenue and Main Street Item E introduces a new landscaped median to calm traffic and provide a pedestrian refuge for those using this new crosswalk Additional information regarding this intervention is provided in the Access & Circulation sub -section of this report (pages 80-81) t2, IMF'ffMl`47A1K)tgf14011,5 The Village should engage and work with existing property and business owners on and adjacent to the Triangle Site. r rskre ,�,i� rat ,ri,�P , i;rrrral ire Establish a public -private partnership with the owners and operators of new Triangle Site developments that oversees maintenance and ensures access "hH "41u0drlcl `1crvt' I:Y, ..,.> frwa �iPr,uri.rd°i FbP'd-,JrrlO .rd �,U(RCS,Ord ii�,af yr i vr���ri t' rum The site's size and shape make it difficult to reach parking ratios currently required under Village Code C'On irle°r-exec phorru to r:p.sd'rrrnp pi.s�..l~'.�nlo ,kjnd.wro�&,, rn r:]rrjan P:j , trr.,te,r o p-de sty njn ox iPnfeu;d �,nvrro +mpnt. High traffic volumes on Northwest Highway and Main Street will remain a challenge to pedestrian safety and connectivity. Id re,,r„,tirW UKI'Cr+,rr rnrolG�, provcPncnt5 crrF (in Inte,rtddrl Prred ()f d vrlopscar4 Due to its proximity to the train station, the site serves as Downtown's "front door Main Street and Northwest Highway frontage has high visibility and average daily traffic counts, and They could also provide a catalyst for increased sales on the surrounding blocks The largest age group in the Village is between 45 and 55 years old, which is typically considered to be the peak earning years Nationally -owned retail and restaurant chains will most likely choose locations near Randhursi, "The scale of the buildings is good, but there should be some green space," "There seems to be a lot of retail vacancy, Downtown should focus on dining and entertainment." "Many people - and families in particular - are drawn to an area for non-commercial amenities, by having an inviting place to hang out, it would encourage people to stay and spend money." "A pleasant and defined street that could be used for festivals would be a great civic amenity" lbmt i� yaaur_pp!rbiorr_s _Lh CR'1mt; ;tl' AiTM fifWk Diatrick csrnrce wt.. . 13 The Landmark Plaza Development concept creates a marquee public space in the heart of Downtown. Ground floor commercial uses in both existing buildings (Ye Olde Town Inn and Blues Bar) and a new building frame the open space and provide a highly activated public realm. Building materials and styles respect the surrounding context, and are of high aesthetic value to reflect the site's significance within Downtown, In order to maximize the sites development potential, the western end of Busse Avenue is turned to connect to the north, allowing for consolidation of the remaining parcels In locating new development along the western edge of the site, visual impact on the existing condominium developments to the north is limited, and large areas of the site are preserved for public use. The new mixed -use development (Item A) shown in Exhibit 84 anchors the corner of Northwest Highway and Wille Street with a new, six - story, mixed -use building. A 5,000 square foot retail space on the first floor fronts Northwest Highway and activates a new signature greenspace 68 new residential units are M located on five floors above the retail space The building also provides 88 internal parking spaces to accommodate residential and retail parking Architectural features and forms - such as stepbacks, corner elements, and facade fenestration - are used to reduce the perceived bulk of the six -story building. The 0.6 acre 'Prospect Plaza' (Item D) is envisioned as an iconic open space, large enough to accommodate special events. Seating and landscaping are incorporated to promote comfort, while gateway, branding and artistic elements ensure the plaza is easily recognized Primary entrances and other key building features should front the open space and be clearly identifiable, encouraging public gathering all times of the day. Item F shows streetscope enhancements and 15 additional on -street parking spaces along Northwest Highway, combining with an ample landscape buffer to transform this busy auto - oriented intersection into a space that is comfortable and inviting to pedestrians In a similar fashion to the Entertainment District Concept, Busse Avenue is transformed into a 15 pedestrian promenade with specialty paving and streetscape elements (Item G 20 angled, on -street parking spaces accommodates parking for existing retail in the two-story buildings north of Busse Avenue. An enhanced pedestrian crossing (Item E), with a landscaped median and pedestrian is once again shown on Route 83, further connecting the site with surrounding civic and commercial uses 1 t�islfll%k fMP" EAAf"WT )P,J NO )TI S The Village should engage and work with existing property and business owners on and adjacent to the Triangle site, h"' in,Piirg of k vrr to„" ! :'rrrr_J d bwsar .do d dth,-,r drprro; rc -�:c qud c dJ v ,rat" rr. Though some public funding will be required to create a new open space, a:oird„p p nddC�cr' r a P vip,ry aka sus, Use density or other bonuses to incentivize higher quality products and other amenities The site's size and shape make it difficult to reach parking ratios currently required under Village Code t.'o "I _r :r;�r vr,P r,hr.rJ Pti d-o',r i + !" Q.i sr'Pr i s "n n-��:;ta t In :cr"p.rr Po d"t) d":';''.r o 4"�C, `�,-.7.':r l�r "�I� `1° ::':I li t-` 4VViin NTR""„W The site's 135-C zoning designation limits residential density to 30 units per acre. Achv,n,uiq 4evelopamenf as shown, rn tive (onc'c;• vwould r1erp;aida' op:pNov or 0-vo ugh as R'l.D de",i pnartrcurs. High traffic volumes on Northwest Highway and Main Street will remain a challenge to pedestrian safety and connectivity 61or,e>r.tson and cosswok unpcarva,.arwp d,s e'arr• on Nntasr'fprr;l por"f of ea.a lr.vrf, rt a� �"eras t To promote feelings of community ownership and pride in the new public space, orarpage Pho p,:acuOr c: Nn d"Aube palozo dr'*sfgr'r effrar.P.s. As this key opportunity site is being developed flhe Volllrurtr, ^a io uId Ilasun h r'u r,uc^unch Irg a.rso"irop uraure• n to promote this important addition to Downtown Mount Prospect. Due to its proximity to the train station, the site serves as Downtown's "front door Main Street and Northwest Highway frontage has high visibility and average daily traffic counts, and New residential development on the site is likely to be rental apartments in the foreseeable future Increasing residential units within the Downtown Creation of a landmark open space in the Triangle Site "A marquee civic space could attract people from surrounding areas, and local businesses could benefit from added exposure. "There ore other open spaces already located downtown Any new one would need to be worth the investment." "Picnicking and other leisurely activities would support the bakery and other nearby food service establishments" "Many people - and families in particular - are drawn to an area for non-commercial amenities, by having an inviting place to hang out, it would encourage people to stay and spend money." "A pleasant and defined street that could be used for festivals would be a great civic amenity" "Northwest Highway and Route 83 are very busy arterials, pedestrian safety along these streets is extremely important - especially if more people will be coming to this location" "A development of this nature would provide added density and a new open space, the "best of both worlds"," 18 Hm! I iq priwi ty_ is itto6y.. now: pui 1pc k»,pen S _apq in this location? #YI"Y��. IS 1M'� 4p�'1AiC41d,Y?Y �`Cti� �pin4nYikP,�, �I»:a..,lsrv�,iapm�pmvC strnee,p�: At approximately 2.10 acres, the Chase Bank Site is one of the largest properties in Downtown and is defined by Busse Avenue to the north, Emerson Street to the west and Maple Street to the east The site consists of a six -story office building with a large surface parking lot that lacks internal landscaping or landscape screening While the building brings a significant amount of office space to Downtown, the surface parking lot severely disrupts the urban fabric of an otherwise pedestrian - oriented streetscape found along Emerson Street and Busse Avenue The site is currently zoned B5-C which allows for 80 feet height and 30 dwelling units per acre. No setbacks are required and parking requirements range from 15 spaces per unit of residential to 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet of retail or office space 20 21 ( Ii;.rm-,, 13r:rril<.Sdc Iinn l_)rvct inuiit2 Within a context such as Downtown Mount Prospect, parking lots should have landscaped buffers and internal landscaping that create a pleasant pedestrian environment. As an important block in the Downtown core, the Chase Bank Site is no exception, and improvements should be made to increase the visual appeal of the Emerson Street and Busse Avenue frontages Accordingly, the concept in Exhibit 8.5 shows new internal landscaping and landscaped edge treatments that screen the surface parking and enhance the pedestrian experience along the public right-of-ways The enhanced parking lot design maintains the existing 120 surface parking spaces, while increasing circulation efficiency (Item B), The removal of the Busse Avenue entrance, and a decrease in other curb cut lengths reduces pedestrian -vehicular conflicts and the amount of impervious surfaces effecting the environment. At the key intersection of Busse Avenue and Emerson Street - a gateway into Downtown from the adjacent neighborhood and an important landmark opportunity - a simple corner plaza is shown (Item A) Landscaping, seating and other branding elements are incorporated in this space to further enhance the pedestrian experience. 22 This plaza space would relate to the existing Village Hall green space, as well as the planned open space on the northeast corner of Busse and Emerson (Item C). It would be an ideal location for a gateway feature, as well as an informational kiosk that would not only provide wayfinding to Downtown landmarks, but also highlight historical information about Mount Prospect. This plaza feature could be part of an overall Busse Avenue streetscape program (Item D) that links Downtown to the Mount Prospect Historical Society to the east, as well as any new development on the Triangle Site to the west. Another element of the Chase Bank Site LONLept is the inclusion of amenities that support the various community festivals and events, including the annual Downtown Block Party and Okioberfest celebration, which occasionally take place on the property. Incorporated into the corner plaza's design, these amenities could include outdoor dining areas and public utility connections r"PANCR, pocKri pom - VxbM 1'.. N ol." v.y 1, 1, W r,u, "". -11 P',- 011 23 Finally, the Chase Bank Site's centralized location and proximity to the Metro Station provides on opportunity to enhance the availability of car share, or related transportation alternatives within Downtown Thcsc arc an incrcosingly sought after feature for young households who prefer walkable neighborhoods, and this key location could serve as a highly visible home to advertise those alternatives 24 Reorganization of the existing parking lot will be required in order to establish appropriate landscaped buffer areas R"afory t ro,Pra!YP'<'ar i,l(mr, r;houkl mrnl mr've„^ a'ae+Ilb natu, N( end a,aiirnVH rarety. Special consideration will be required to accommodate the existing above ground vent, currently found in the center of the parking lot. 1py "o r.;,rp,rrr-r„c0W(verO �iibany new h0r-dnnll(-v !,crti7iatg The Village will need to work with the Chase Building property owners to plan for any public utility connections on private land, TheFc�y�arrd" <sf f� td'ar,:al t-r�orP,somNnog shouW br crjns�rleto(J as t.oa t (I ony+ti,Nnc parkmng i0 q:a argo norwwt on Regardless of ownership, designs for new perimeter landscaping, pocket parks and Busse Avenue improvements should present a unified visual aesthetic and coordinated spatial layout. The Vf ,'ay;ye i d r, ' , ! q "'dt,u,iRri rarsW� ra ty��r, irair� �i araortatr7aaP„� ri&,i' go and k,,-anmw tdon a ffots rn orraa-a,, fo rr, a'tr+rvr o ,yasr,�a °rw' a:rutkomr. Aesthetic improvements at the property's edges can have a Specialty food uses suited to Metro commuters, downtown office workers and nearby residents may prove valuable in this location. ... The addition of green space on the northeast corner of Emerson and Busse will allow for the expansion of Village festivals with new offerings. "The parking lot provides an important resource as a community festival ground." "This site isn't a major priority, but landscaping the parking lot would be a welcome improvement." "There seems to be a lot of retail vacancy, so a small restaurant type of use would be a good alternative in this location and also help to activate the corner." "The pocket park would be a nice amenity and a good way to tie the site together the Village Green." What.. iz powr,krp4rarrrn OF ti echaaa;,. Barn4 Si arnt� t? 25 1L \ .\ :,\ ,, i rrL The Central & Main Site is located on low, the northwest corner of the intersection of Central Road and Main Street (Route 83) The approximately 157-acre site is currently occupied by a strip shopping center and surface parking lot, both of which lack internal landscaping lot The a P` and parking screening. site is predominately auto -oriented with multiples vehicular curb cuts, some of which are located very close to the Central and Main intersection, u ..�causing safety concerns. The site is currently zoned B5 which allows 3-stories or 35 feet height and 16 dwelling units per acre While no front or side setbacks are required, the rear of the property will require a setback equivalent to any future building's height because it is directly abutting a single- family residential zone. Parking requirements range from 15 spaces per unit of residential to 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet of retail or office space U 27 Located at a busy intersection and a gateway to Downtown, this concept seeks to maximize the site's commercial potential. A one to two-story commercial structure is envisioned holding the intersection's northwest corner, thereby creating a more pleasant pedestrian environment. The concept in Exhibit 8.6 shows a new one- story, retail anchor building consisting of 12,000 square feet (Item A), oriented to pedestrian traffic along Central Road and Main Street. The building's architecture should avoid large expanses of blank walls, have a high -value building aesthetic and offer multiple pedestrian access points, The building size is consistent with that of a small market or pharmacy, both of which often rely on visibility and vehicular access. Just north of the building, an 83-space surface parking lot is provided, with a parking ratio of over 7 spaces per 1,000 square feet of built space. The parking lot is well adorned with perimeter landscape buffers and decorative fencing, and is adequately lit for safety concerns. Parking lot interiors should also feature landscaped areas, which can provide 28 opportunities for stormwater mitigation and other sustainability measures An access drive and ten additional parking spaces have been provided at the north end of the lot for First Merit Bank (Item B). To create a more efficient and safe circulation pattern, curb cuts have been consolidated, eliminating all but three vehicular entrances onto vey� the site The northernmost entrance on Main Street provides enough stacking space so that cars waiting to turn left into the parking lot do not back up into the Central Road intersection The remaining two entrances would provide additional options to help avoid congestion entering and exiting the lot. tIJ ifiijIMP �°°,; �y 30 1 I INW!'1 i `V1f I (AFS Environmental clean up may be required in redeveloping the site, "he 'r flaqo ,_ )t11rp .pc.or`uei:,rr1 i f7 e^rrM�ti t rsp�,::,rr ir'.vr4 p In�er,r,'P Landscaped parking lot buffers and a high -value building aesthetic should be required for any proposed development plans. or iv oa �mp:xrr , i go,^rvr uv ; (npk; ,�,voown <md ,, oJJ bc ta-,c,Ped c rr(:a:xdd ,ph ,r r urp7 0 v1W a) . lercc> pork, ,; lair>, <s ray '�'; i.:T prr,.. Y!'t.S, Di/'cif"; .7�J.i-" ^f'htlh t"J� I n^•n P l.in rrrrti:rn>m)pro` The Village should help to facilitate a shared parking agreement between the new commercial tenant and First Merit Bank In order to foster a pleasant pedestrian environment, nc v d .r,,f4oppvvO Jp . uk1 was 0,,r, c�,,, , PAY s'Pi,, c"GWGaa� yap ti.M P wnpuvc?°.°°, incentivize commercial development at this location Market analysis shows limited potential for new multi -tenant retail development in the near future, At a footprint of 12,000 to 15,000 square feet and parking rate exceeding 7 spaces per 1000 square feet of built space, the proposed development could accommodate a number of national retailers, Establishing a retail anchor in this location would "Downtown needs a small grocery or convenience store where people can get everyday groceries " "Addressing traffic and access issues will be a major challenge in redeveloping the site." "Locating new development closer to the right of way and pushing the access drives away from Central & Main will help to make the site more pedestrian friendly." 4` hat,t6xyaur op.fnno� of flea 14tail. Am:hor Devela m�tnt c n,ei9pi r'i to i i 1 � j I r ,i:i, nli.I I' d,,Pi When examined in context to surrounding land uses, residential development may prove to be a suitable alternative in this location Multi -story residential buildings would provide a transition from the taller multi -family development south of Central Road to the predominately single-family neighborhood to the north, The concept shown in Exhibit 87 consists of two four-story buildings (Items A), each with 30 residential units, Each unit averages approximately 1,000 square feet, with one interior parking space provided per unit within the building's first floor 36 additional parking spaces are provided in a surface lot located behind the building. In respect to the sites role as a key gateway into Downtown, the new residential development must be attractive, and help to foster a comfortable pedestrian environment. Buildings should also be well proportioned, using windows and other architectural elements to break up long facades and help identify living quarters Upper floors can be stepped back to reduce the overall bulk of the building and limit the visual impact on neighboring properties (Item Q while also enabling private outdoor spaces. 2 Additional ground level improvements, including deciduous trees, perennial landscaping and other urban design elements - such as fencing, and decorative street lights - are encouraged to provide a buffer between public and private realms To maximize safety, curb cuts are consolidated to include one entrance along Central Road and one entrance ulung Main Street at the northern end of the site This access point is also shared with First Merit Bank to the north (Item B), creating a more efficient circulation pattern. f r1 :"� f p �� MPIf MINIAIION N(YU )omv; Ieu:ahitJr ,hrsO � L,& ainsrn r'rs ihe p,r„srra.l , �Or; r,lrvP'sjpnsi!nf rkvO"r�vd.rN o n (ac4') ray a,)rlirr)r-frr7F new ucnst iu fion Specifically, variances for an additional one or two stories, increased density levels and lower parking requirements may be necessary. If considering the residential development concept alternative, further examination should be given to zoning designations along the north side of Central Road, in order to arRcu,Jr wi v N xs nhors ba,Nvfs;en ,cn y r- (Frnnrfy uses and Fhr l:)t„wrkvIn cr,:;iw. 1"pArrg;'i^ owl na�cv�s�)p .":v� vaxrY N�rurve Po WOr k; with ire�,ghbo oK' g "some ow kr,,, to address concerns over the impacts of new development. Environmental clean up may be required in redeveloping the site. fIrn `Jtillr,:sgp could r�rr rrr4„,r ,�w7r,rr P ail,�� �r� crr7r � r�tP��pr , vflrsrtr us on (r�Cc hvr Ira knl( Popg7ps Potential interest could come from a wide range of households - including commuters, starter households, singles and empty nesters. The concept provides an alternative residential product to Downtowns existing condominium development In order to be a feasible alternative, new residential development on the site "Residential uses could be good in this location as it would help to limit commercial on the north side of Central Road." "More people need to live downtown in order to support restaurants and businesses" "There may not be enough demand for new residential units at the moment, apartments could be good if they are well thought out." "If residential goes in here, other options are needed for where to put a grocer." Vlffw�t is �r+ar �ppnrc�nwca4 chi,. f�t�ic�erwl�a� f�v��ca�?rr�r�rat,cssrt�e t - 35 TR!-STATR SITE The Tri-State site is located along Northwest Highway between Pine Street and Elmhurst Avenue. The site is approximately 0.99 acres in size and is occupicd by a single -story retail building The building is centrally located on the site with two surface parking lots occupying the corners of the intersections. These lots lack internal landscaping, and although perimeter landscaping exists it does not achieve the goal of screening the majority of the parking lot. Although the building is located along the front property line of Northwest Highway, main entrances are oriented toward the parking lots rather than pedestrian traffic along Northwest Highway The site is zoned 135-C, which allows for 80 feet height and 30 dwelling units per acre No setbacks are required and parking requirements range from 1.5 spaces per unit of residential to 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet of retail or office space. .. 7 .irri"rir i rjI I.,i w�Iopii III ('srV "Irt Good visibility and high average daily traffic counts make this location viable for a variety of Lummeicial uses New commercial development at this location could be built Ito suit a number of potential uses, including new small -format restaurants or a national chain anchor. To accommodate this range of potential outcomes, two concepts were prepared as part of this plan demonstrating similar urban design goals through different forms, Creating a walkable, pedestrian -oriented environment should be a central goal of any new redevelopment. To achieve this goal, buildings should be located close to the public right-of-way and have clearly identifiable entrances Development at this location has the potential to provide outdoor cafe spaces, which activates the public realm These outdoor spaces can also utilize lighting to create intimate and unique dining experiences and bring people to Downtown during evenings and weekends. When fronting the public right of way, parking lots should also be screened to avoid auto -dominated environments, The concept shown in Exhibit 88 depicts the potential for a retail anchor development at this location, A new one-story, 12,000 square foot building (Item AI holds the corner of the Northwest Highway and Pine Street intersection. Primary pedestrian entrances are provided at this corner, along with a small outdoor dining opportunity. lust to the north and west of this new building, 55 parking spaces are provided in a surface lot. The lot is screened with landscaping along the perimeter and internally with landscaped islands 10 additional parking spaces are provided in the form of diagonal, on -street spaces along Pine Street (Item B), while 8 additional spaces ore provided as traditional parallel on -street spaces along Northwest Highway (Item C) In order to increase vehicular circulation efficiency and minimize pedestrian -vehicular conflicts, curb cuts are reduced to two total. One access point is located along Northwest Highway while the other is shared with the adjacent Mount Prospect State Bank to the north O 9 f Am Pa'pyJk jyy; f 1f % l t 4 FLAN AT ------... _ ....�. ® RETAIL REDEVELOPMENT O—Mory. 12'ODO square IW mud —0t 55 "1... parkmg spaces (a 511 000 w R I 9 DIAGONAL PARKING ON PINE STREET 10 an -sheet Parking spaces adjacent 10 retail 110V 1611 000 sq R ) A ELMHURST AVENUE ACCESS P13frury acmes ppuK br rttaJ anchor . Ia, r.W �en a..:unin�tl4 V�av^6�m�ryp O PARALLEL PARKING ON NORTHWEST HIGHWAY 6 awifiw,i a eel pamul parking spaces ( 6711.000 s neat raaall spa l 39 1 J.are Jere S�11Q „-i The second retail concept alternative, shown in Exhibit 8.9, demonstrates the potential for a small format retail redevelopment of the site. In this concept a new one-story retail building (Item 8), provides 7,500 square feet of space and is located at the corner of Pine Street and Northwest Highway Just to the north and west, a second one-story retail building (Item A), offers 6,000 square feet of space Outdoor dining opportunities are located in between these two buildings and just northwest of Building A. Both buildings front and offer primary pedestrian entrances along Northwest Highway, Behind these buildings, 54 surface parking spaces are provided with perimeter and internal landscaping Connections to the adjacent Mount Prospect State Bank parking lot increases the efficiency of vehicular circulation and reduces the amount of curb cuts required overall Additionally, 13 on -street parallel parking spaces are created along Northwest Highway. 40 O RETAIL REDEVELOPMENT 0- story, O0U squaw loot rats I Euamng PAM 111M outAOor dM1g opportunity ® RETAIL REDEVELOPMENT One-story, /.SOU square loot retail Euila,ng Paao wile ONGoor d"g opp —fty O SHARED PARKING LOT SH su — parteq spares (ill 000 sq It I PerMrM Iaxlsuping" w .U.n to other lots 0 PARALLEL PARKING ON NORTHWEST HIGHWAY 13 eEEeanat, onatreel p:=I parsing apaon ( U I DOO aq A. M-.W.M raBl' speu l 4 Coordination with Mount Prospect State Bank will be required to create functional vehicular entrances, access drives and preferred parking layouts OVN, h :r uukuua 1 . mmd� , u, p srk nq withln Ohm UOVV d OW , d y : Shared parking lots should be encouraged at every opportunity. Northwest Highway and Pine Street should be maintained as the site's primary frontages, k 5hodJ dr,rt luc c4ow d 0 hk,WO rat buOJ. n p, 0,00r Vehicular access points should not have a negative impact on the pedestrian realm L dd,M� r -b Good visibility and high average daily traffic counts make this location viable for a variety of commercial uses if the Central & Main Site is redeveloped for residential use, since the corner of Central & Main is the strongest commercial location If the'Entertainment District' concept is desired for the Triangle Site, Restaurant uses would provide synergy with adjacent Caponnari Ice Cream shop, "More restaurant space is desired downtown, and this location has a lot of potential for this type of use,° "A grocery store is desperately needed downtown. This would be a good spot" "This is an important location for people travelling through downtown. A one story building here might not make enough of an impression." "Parallel parking on Northwest Highway seems like it could be dangerous," More outdoor dining opportunities." What is ygyrm9pipion of tke Small Format R�t�Flw Ciaarru�lvxnent �ammc+�gst�", K)NGLY SUKE i0% 43 Ai/', i) ; i..7fiCvi Jr )pl)IPrl it While commercial use of the site deserves consideration, potential exists for more intense redevelopment. A larger mixed use development would provide a good balance between commercial and residential uses. In addition, a more substantial building in this location would serve as a strong 'book end for the western edge of Downtown. In this concept„ new development along Northwest Highway embraces the street and employs architectural features to emphasize corner retail entrances The concept shown in Exhibit 8,10 shows a new five -story, mixed -use building (Item A) sited along the Northwest Highway frontage, On the first floor, 7,500 square feet of retail space is located at the southeast corner of the site. 25 surface parking spaces (3 3 spaces / 1000 sf) support the retail space in a shared parking lot to the north (Item B) The four upper floors hold 52 residential units. Use of stepbacks and facade fenestration help to minimize the impact that this building will have on the street and surrounding uses A total of 2 parking spaces are provided per unit, with 78 spaces H 5/ unit) located internally on the first floor and underground, and an additional 26 spaces (5/ unit) in the shared surface parking lot. 44 An outdoor gathering area adjacent to the building's commercial space is also provided, which will be ideally suited for outdoor dining and gathering, Its features include interesting site elements and attractive landscaping that help the building relate to neighboring commercial and residential uses The building is intended to promote a pedestrian -friendly streetscope environment along Northwest Highway. In support of this goal, various Traffic calming measures are shown, including 13 additional on -street parking spaces (Item 0 and street frees Y ,� 016W:V � p r ` y r u m 1p reMIXED-USE I[ REDEVELOPMENT ,I.!. zw d',„re Mre'. pYtu U4ttl'W(NJKLL 52 res Ee—1 umis Te _—I I urMergrourM perk ., space. (1 51-1) 26 sh .-"A.0 spaces ( 51hm1) f I A SHARED PARKING LOT T - 25 w — P...q 10 GIl 000 W 11 I ' Perlmefer lubscapap erM wmeUlJr. IJ plher lol. 0 PARALLEL PARKING ON NORTHWEST HIGHWAY IJ WOl — on .heel pare lw Parking spaces 11 111 GDO sJ h d releil spiel �.i prA 4 f/A01JflI:NJA1K)1",1 Coordination with Mount Prospect State Bank will be required to create functional access points and preferred parking layouts il'rr°ar^rJ Pra�Jnri f I P; win , pryJrrrtarrri inc ,P:hr rip wlcnvcnr in drr,h[eOng ��iraro S.gnph(xint duvr.^Irapm(r, f on tiR� Wrr- Northwest Highway and Pine Street should be maintained as the site's primary frontages Prsr`knrt lok sProuW nO i,;re;+rrlJornlr�o 0 hraMC,f O,i,daairrcr, rrlr,ua�t N(x tp mlest P wr,: y The site's 35-C zoning designation limits residential density to 30 units per acre r`ir.Prwwhny dnvcopmpnl rd.r -,hown n, rmr eprr wrwrl equirp r pptr;wr,, t thi ow;j� () PO 1 I , rrf n;"finer The building height shown is permissible under Village Code, however oufv rrc,h n�,�frd rarr,ui wnt a osklenr s he net J:, iPrrt Ong FPSKIr. h r bMJiO(J.s. devefoi,eieer.rt oo N�ie �feir>pnnrN'� Jryb(enaf(ngtnPr,71fPeer; fbftr.,'ent u,rr,r New buildings should be carefully sited to create pleasant outdoor spaces, Good visibility and high average daily traffic counts make the corner of Northwest Highway and Pine Street an attractive retail location, A small food service use would provide synergy with adjacent Coponnori Ice Cream Shop Rental apartments would attract younger households, particularly Metro commuters to Downtown What is o, ;won st t e:Mixed ni QaS,Gewefqment 5an"6tf? "This could be a good location for a taller mixed use building, it would fit well with the surrounding residential buildings," "New development would enhance this location as a gateway into the Village" "There are some vacant residential units along Northwest Highway, use caution in building more." "A grocery store is still desirable in this location, consider this option if there is enough parking." "It would be great to have some additional open space here" M The Posh Office site is located at the northeast corner of Central Road and Elmhurst Avenue. While the Post Office site is approximately 3 22 acres, two additional vacant lots to the north provide an additional 0,96 acres of redevelopment opportunity, The combined 4,18 acre site is zoned B5, which allows 3-stories or 35 feet height and 16 dwelling units per acre, Though no setbacks are required in general, the eastern edge of the site will require a setback equivalent to any future building's height because it is directly abutting a single-family residential zone Parking requirements range from 1,5 spaces per unit of residential to 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet of retail or office space 4 Mixed IJsc Dnvr opmeiflp This concept explores the long-range potential for the land currently occupied by the Post Office, should it decide to downsize or Jule at some point in the future. While maintaining the Post Office in its current location is advised, the site offers a rare and important opportunity for large scale redevelopment and should be viewed accordingly. The concept shown in Exhibit 8,11 envisions the northern portion of the site as a residential development. Four residential buildings (Items A-D) are organized around a central, shared surface parking lot. 108 new residential units are created in total from these buildings, with heights ranging from 3 to 4 stories These residential buildings should be well designed and reflect the aesthetic character of the surrounding neighborhoods Where adjacent to single-family homes, the use of upper story stepbacks can help to minimize their perceived size. To promote feelings of security, building entrances and shared parking areas (Item E) should be clearly defined and visible from residential units 50 High -value landscaping and other amenities, such as walking trails and rich landscaping in common areas between residential buildings, should be provided and left open for public use during certain hours Along Central Road a mixed -use building is shown (Item R taking advantage of good visibility and high average daily traffic counts. This building creates a strong and welcoming pedestrian environment by embracing the street, and employing architectural features to emphasize corner retail entrances The four story building offers 10,000 square feet of retail on the first floor 36 residential units are located on the three floors above this retail space, averaging approximately 1,200 square feet per unit, 26 internal parking spaces and 26 surface parking spaces are reserved for the residential units, resulting in 1.5 spaces per unit. An additional 40 surface parking spaces is provided to support the retail component of the project. SHARED SURFACE PARKING LOT 421aaa— P ftlg aPaas (sea above) 10 quest W nun9 Spam$ (0 1 funtl) ICI "f f /0f:NIAl X1J NOH `I The Post Office should not be encouraged to move in the near future, however the Village should communicate with Post Office facility planners in regards to their intentions 4roh,, pe r;,Pon ,lu.,i 1, J b y h i, c ih_a� omy :ari ", in tlh,�ii. , �:'furcrid Ir,,;r Pri,'rh,,MIJ kx p.i,7, ::'1 vile r,,i ,rinirug 0i " p,Vc^ni l �o, Irani "� s,.oe Any near - term development proposal for the existing vacant parcel (northwest corner of the site, adjacent to the Cemetery) that obstructs or prevents a preferred long-range outcome should be discouraged Enabling development at this scale will require increased density. Accordingly, 111 u,� ', Ii r h JI i I' )! ,,nr �, r Pii m�balri , n �Ls �)e(i :rrdn n�l ! rn f,rras i s �h,', Landscaped buffers and semi-public open spaces should have a high aesthetic value and limit visual impacts on neighboring homes f l vv, deg,=In mcr h j)4I on,::I fiH n1",:r, l v dhiiri Flu r;�urr n ,:onPJ , irei:ci Good visibility and high average daily traffic counts enable mixed -use development along the Central Road frontage further benefiting local businesses, Larger -scale, long-term development of this nature will require construction phasing in order to avoid over -saturating the area's residential, real estate market. "The Post Office should not be relocated unless another downtown location is available." "This would be a good location to add new residential units Increasing density in the area would provide a big boost to downtown businesses," "The concept's community feel is nice, landscaping and other amenities is a nice addition." 'Consider other types of residential products such as townhomes / rowhomes' h t rs yaur_c �Oriraian ai st ~Q �� ;0n,Pa t? 33 The 10,26-acre Lions Park redevelopment site is generally bounded by Prospect Avenue on the north, Maple Street on the west, School Street on the cast and Lincoln Street on the south Also included in this redevelopment opportunity is the parcel on the southeast corner of Prospect and School, as shown in the aerial photograph to the right In addition to the 285-space Metro surface parking lot on the west edge of the site, the remainder of this block consists of light industrial and manufacturing buildings, large parking lots, service areas and loading zones Overall, the block has very little permeable surface or green space and, as noted in the State of the Downtown report, the property conditions and land uses are at odds with the character of Downtown. In addition to the less than ideal physical conditions and land uses, the site's potential for redevelopment is enhanced by its proximity to both the Metro Station and Lions Park, as well as the Prospect Avenue shops and restaurants The entire Lions Park site is currently zoned I-1: Limited Industrial District, which represents over 75% of the industrial zoning in the Downtown study area .. 55 I i,r,i.rs I Lli k ISHt( cinc l:in /4 The first redevelopment concept for the Lions Park site (Exhibit 8.12) envisions new multi -family residential uses in this location that would be better suited to the surrounding area and would provide a greater overall benefit to Downtown businesses This Jong -term scenario also accommodates Metro's expressed interest of increasing available parking through an expansion of the existing surface parking lot, meeting their 2040 projection of 100 additional parking spaces. For redevelopment of this site to occur, existing businesses would need to be relocated to other suitable locations within the Village, such as the Kensington Business Park, in order to accommodate this new transit -oriented residential development. The concept shows expanding the existing Village - owned lot used for Metro parking (Item A) with 150 additional spaces with improved circulation and landscape enhancements. To the east of the existing Metro lot, the concept depicts a group of 5-story multi -family buildings (Item B) - either apartments or condominiums - organized around internal shared surface parking and a central open space This plan represents just over 200 units and also includes internal parking spaces (inside the buildings) to accommodate residents A smaller -scaled residential building is shown east a of School Street (Item Q as a transition into the surrounding neighborhood This building would have approximately 24 additional units It is envisioned that these residential buildings be well designed to reflect the aesthetic character of the surrounding neighborhood and Downtown Architectural designs should break up long facades and help identify living quarters Additionally, the use of high quality materials and attention to site design relationships, such as internalizing drives and parking areas, will enhance the public realm and provide 'curb appeal New development should incorporate a central open space, or a series of smaller green spaces, to provide locations for gathering, socializing and/or recreation, while also lessening the impact of higher density development. In addition, appropriate building setbacks should be provided to create a continuous landscaped front yard along all perimeter streets I PLAN DATA EXPANDED MEM PARKING LOT (34Aactual .damnal W.— "W—d —.Wani — W.WC.P. e~.—dz 1435 [Wal P—) 0 RESIDENTIAL REDEVELOPMENT 1621 1—) S O W'y Aw.pt bWdmgs 2" o "`pt -as I 1.3W squaw fool wift) 204 Pn.— 9.,.9. paM1Yp sp.ma I I."-) , D2 --d .0— sp—. (O.W) 42 gued parlmo spa— 1024M) Appro 0 75 am, of sav",bk gisenapace RESIDENTIALREOEVIELOPMENT (0.620ae.) 1 f-61M "l—aded em pt bu" conftft uft (12.00 square fool unital 38 —ad 1=. Pa." WL.M 9 a-.t pahm .w— (0 2V—) 0 EXISTING MULTI -FAMILY DEVELOPMENTS 2 ftea—ly —dlap, bull-9. 1� 57 In an urban context such as Downtown Mount Prospect, parking lots should have a landscaped perimeter along with internal landscaping that creates a pleasant pedestrian environment In the event that the commuter parking lot is expanded, close coordination will be required to ensure that landscape improvements are made and permeable surface is added to help manage stormwater. 5£t f h or h,shodr q ho p r r, 17ri tFv, sid s F ,,i,;,r l , iP I v hor 7t ,,rl: Ain,c4opmonj Land purchases and other direct efforts will likely be required and should be budgeted for in advance, The Village should work directly with the sites existing businesses to relocate in an area better suited for industrial use li7i`sir, ,r„ ��i+, rrr,a�°rrf� r`. J 6,x, mm rW"tr�h PtiC'rwh.,M Nr, spe, F s crib 1,:l Successful development of the site may require densities high enough to encourage multi -family residential similar to the level shown 4 ,a, ai , _ ,1r, aho ,rr 5hiw,l hv p,,.Yof on onooi,jqfnq it JTr O+o,:r' t'n ara,rP use cdt hl pS 4[, ,, ia` e) Close coordination with Metro will be required to manage the expansion of the commuter parking facility. +1 Eirrrrr:�,rlinm,r Jh •i ild ht. ` I rW, h +: My it y i ON),Uaad, Potential size of the overall site accommodates a range of residential products and densities The site is the most significant opportunity in the downtown to capture demand generated by proximity to the Metro Station and from good regional access. Redevelopment should be carried out in phases to avoid over -saturation of the local residential market "Its a good idea to provide additional housing close to the train station," "A mix of unit types is preferred, providing housing for people with a wide range of incomes "Adding more Metro parking is helpful, especially if the areas population grows" "The existing businesses are still valued and appreciated by the community. Don't uproot them unless there is on alternative location, and the market can handle the new residential development." VV, ak La your 90nionof the IL corns- f?ar C corrcopt" 59 Another long-term scenario for the Lions Park site accommodates increased residential density, using a structured parking deck to minimize the space required for Metro parking (Exhibit 813) By consolidating Metro parking into a structure, the southeast corner of Prospect Avenue and Maple Street, as well as the southeast corner of Lincoln Street and Maple Street, would open up for redevelopment The alternate concept depicts a mixed -use building on the Prospect and Maple corner (Item A), enabling commercial space that could take advantage of high levels of foot traffic provided by Metro riders, as well as the potential influx of new residents to this area The concept shows approximately 7,500 square feet of commercial space in a 4-story mixed - use building Approximately 30 residential units would be located in the top three floors of this building 0 The Metro parking structure (Item B) would be located mid -block with access points from Maple Street The parking structure is depicted as a 3-story (4-level) structure, which would ultimately provide approximately 450 parking spaces — an increase of 165 spaces from the current number If developed, unique facade materials, 'living walls, and other elements should be used to soften the visual impact of the structure.. The remaining block would build upon the previous redevelopment concept (Item 0 An additional residential building is shown fronting Maple Street at the corner of Lincoln, which would bring the total number of residential units on this block to 240, With this scenario, the entire block would be fronted with multi -story residential buildings, providing a highly -visible transit -oriented development and active use to the south side of Downtown a ;� rn ��iC,r• ;1r 61 P P"'WRKI G (.-7ANA �MPHMENWKDN Close coordination between the Village, future developer and Metro will be required to manage the transfer of property, financing of a parking garage, and planning/phasing of development, As Metro does not generally fund the replacement of existing commuter spaces within parking decks, additional funding sources will be required Additionally, during each step of the redevelopment process, the amount of commuter parking in the station area should remain at its current level, resulting in no net loss of spaces during any of the phases As noted in the State of the Downtown report, the occupancy rate for this lot is around 90% 0 Ariordy uhc>Crkl h pA'cy_cd orkvong dhe "Nfc a p(-)4-,wm4 dop. ICjq,co: e rd' ,vP pmr,A Land purchases and other direct efforts will likely be required and should be budgeted for in advance, The Village should work directly with the site's existing businesses to relocate in an area better suited for industrial use, OW V/a"'UCA Yy'4f°;'V'1 bPo :l r i of hho crcsuniourr'ufy, ret jkmrng them fAjvvhce o!"v"ra ld Ao,spwect n rrfka Successful development of the site may require densities high enough to encourage multi -family residential similar to the level shown .A d c,r onnp irj: rrr should he tOaca rL on cr'rr rnn artur g N oNn (Ind° howrdt Usc, err the pob(y lave:f For a deck of this location, r " ( a !,Ih i,,y r �t with oIn �wdznr:hou,,' 1 be ,,mnr� ,ial �o ;h)Ohr,i/e. r .00ter. of the structure The parking deck should have !"nrryy, co driv� cai, , ¢r lrrir7+ vc iha "irr,,,h prytli`r'n �ohri�n "hc dcr,irc oi",d cRow ro� .udHC Or',,"r,ts rrr rta;,, which is more desirable. (� ahon rhcx&jhe.ytr .afro � , 7d= `� hN'l� Itt d i ', fpr' I rye " ✓,I 1JppoM.,t I'1(., uossih�e ey;pr Pr ,+JPP d:ri'' fllti u"7ll �din thu;' f r ;, d This would increase the cost of the original structure only minimally. Potential size of the overall site accommodates a range of residential products and densities The site is the most significant opportunity in the downtown to capture demand generated by proximity to the Metro Station and from good regional access. Redevelopment should be carried out in phases to avoid over -saturation of the local residential market Though a structured parking facility will require significantly greater costs, it will also I :: i.h,rkRz-,a In addition to new development, there are a number of opportunities to improve existing businesses, buildings and properties within Downtown that could have a positive impact on the area's transformation, One particular example developed as part of this Plan is for Jake's Pizza, located on the northwest corner of the Elmhurst Avenue and Northwest Highway intersection Currently, an oddly -shaped surface parking lot exists in front of the restaurant, resulting in a poor pedestrian environment, The parking lots single entrance off of Northwest Highway and lack of curb separation along Elmhurst Avenue further reduces efficiency and creates access issues Based on the community's enthusiasm for outdoor dining and the significant parking supply that exists on Elmhurst Avenue, one recommendation is to replace the surface lot with a new dining area, Exhibit 8.14 provides a photosimulation illustrating what the proposed plaza might look like Pavers, cafe tables, buffer landscaping and improved business signage are just a few of the amenities that could be Is employed to create a space of this nature An added benefit of this concept is the potential synergy that would be created upon the redevelopment of the Tri-State site, This concept serves as an example of how curb appeal reflects upon a community's character and how relatively simple investments in a property can result in meaningful spaces Property owners throughout Downtown can participate in implementing the Plan by improving building facades, signage, parking lots, street frontages and sites Most of the suggested enhancements listed above are eligible for support through the Village's Focacde Improvement Program offered in the TIF District Many community members expressed that the Metro Union Pacific Northwest railroad tracks not only form a physical barrier, but also a mental obstacle creating two distinct commercial districts for Downtown Mount Prospect. South of the tracks traditional buildings line Prospect Avenue and contain some of Downtown's most notable and unique businesses The character of this area is decidedly different than the main commercial core north of the tracks. This is in large part due to Prospect Avenues ample sidewalks and unique boulevard configuration While some community members have long expressed a desire to overcome this physical and mental barrier and unite these two districts, a different strategy emerged out of this planning process The concept of promoting Prospect Avenue as a unique district was very well received during public input gathering Public realm improvements such as streetscope enhancements and branding elements for a Prospect Avenue District' were among some of the most popular concepts overall. The Prospect Avenue District concept as shown in Exhibit 8,15, seeks to create a unique commercial district that has its own brand and identity, setting it apart from the rest of 6161 Downtown, Reconfiguration of Evergreen Avenue can increase the safety and efficiency of vehicular circulation south of the tracks It also can provide the opportunity to create a "Prospect Avenue Gateway Plaza" where branding elements can be incorporated info a small "people space" at the intersection of Prospect Avenue and Main Street Special paving, unique from the north side of the tracks, can be incorporated into parking lots and intersections making the area more inviting to pedestrians by calming traffic and defining pedestrian space. Designated bike lanes and curb bump -outs can also work to slow vehicles and make the district more inviting to other modes of transportation, such as walking and biking. Improved medians with gateway and branding elements incorporated will also help create an identity for this designated district. By fostering a high -quality public environment, the goal of the Plan is to spur private investment in existing buildings and attract new businesses to the area. po your hike 66 ikakv_(pLon gtIrm Pros o�vrtn os a aanirfoo tfistrict"? N'B 19A,Qk the! ideas, presonte4 Cot,PronPect Arenye? How htTh a priority is it to provide enhancements similar to those shown? IMPLEMENTATION CASE STUDY: MARION STREET, OAK PARK, ILLINOIS In late 2006, the Village of Oak Park decided to move forward with an aggressive timeline for reopening Marion Street to vehicular traffic by constructing a high quality streetscape design, Historically, Marion Street has been a key north/south roadway in Downtown Oak Park, linking the main east/west shopping street - Lake Street - to the commuter train and elevated train stations. Marion Street was converted into a pedestrian mall in the late 19705 along with Lake Street. Lake Street was reopened to traffic in the late 199os while Marion Street remained a pedestrian mall,.. Over the years, the Marion Street Mall suffered From significant vacancies and from limited property maintenance. By Thanksgiving 2007, two blocks of streetscape improvements along Marion Street were completed, including brick streets, historically inspired lighting, stone sidewalks and sustainable design features. The response from the private sector to the improvements was significant with a dramatic increase in private investment in building improvements and new tenants and businesses.. Marion Street is now "the place' in Oak Park to locate a business. The Village implemented similar enhancements on two blocks of South Marion in 2011. RN 68 METRA UNION PACIFIC NORTHWEST LINE 7�) IRANSPOIRIAH N E II.-M HIS OVERVIEW The dynamics of mobility in a downtown are unique insofar they link multiple purposes and destinations with multiple modes of travel This is opposed to a typical retail -only shopping destination, whereby people may arrive by car or on foot, visit their destination, and be on their way, In a mixed -use downtown, such as Mount Prospect, there are multiple reasons for arrivals and departures. Included are public transportation such as Metro or Pace, shopping, restaurants, residences, banking, doctors/dentists and institutional amenities. Accordingly, trips to the Downtown hopefully could mean multiple stops using one mode of travel With this factor in mind, fostering smooth linkages to land uses, and more specifically parking, is a key design objective for both vehicular and non -vehicular modes of travel. If people arrive by automobile, connections and circulation must be convenient, safe and easy, encouraging one -stop parking for multiple destinations Likewise, those travelers arriving by mass transit, bicycle or as pedestrians need to know that their stay and travel will be simple, safe and enjoyable The assets of this Mount Prospect's Downtown are many. However, challenges do exist, such as the need to link both the north and south areas, which are physically separated by the Union Pacific (UP) Northwest rail line and Northwest Highway - a major arterial roadway,. There are numerous general strategies that can be done to "connect" the Downtown A street intercept survey carried out by the project team found that most people either drive to one area (either north or south) and stay there, or make a separate vehicle trip to the other area A number of nearby communities - including Highland Park, Wilmette and Glenview - have demonstrated success in dealing with related issues Building on these examples, the following general strategies are recommended for Downtown Mount Prospect: Physical streetscope enhancements that link the connective paths Focused support for mass transit facilities including clearly defined paths to train and bus Traffic/pedestrian signals that allow for adequate crossing times. Improved access to major destinations, such as Metro parking. Ample parking opportunities on both sides of the tracks including Metro expansion,. More efficient vehicle circulation that reduces pedestrian/automobile conflicts, Integrated designs for bikes and pedestrians. Throughout this section, a series of detailed recommendations are provided that address the overall objective of the Plan, and relate specifically to the seven general strategies discussed above. 71 Downtown Mount Prospect is an ideal mass transit hub It not only features a conveniently located Metro Station with a frequent schedule of trains, but also two Pace bus routes serving populated areas to the north and east and a. The routes appear to be very well scheduled and integrated with the commuter rail schedule Therefore, focus should be on supportive features that provide optimal access (for all modest, circulation and parking, including: ADA domes, or tactile warning paving, installed where needed, especially in areas proximate to the station or stops Reconfigured kiss and ride / drop off locations that improve circulation and safety New bike lanes on Prospect Avenue providing an easier ride to the station Preservation of land near pedestrian facilities for future Metro parking. Is OW. III "O"R ..." F III ANIIV EAR- MASS A fundamental objective of the Downtown Implementation Plan is to create an environment that is pedestrian and multi -modal friendly, encouraging people to use transit, bike or walk. The existing transportation system and network in Downtown provides multiple transit options including extensive service by Metro and Pace. Additionally, the pedestrian network including sidewalks, marked crossings, and pedestrian traffic controls is generally very good However, in order to better accommodate users of these systems, some improvements should be implemented Accordingly, the following system enhancements should be made: ADA dome plates, or tactile warning paving, should be added to all required intersections. Where needed, crosswalks should be restriped and enhanced as Continental Style,. Traffic signals with pedestrian countdown signal heads should be added where applicable It should be noted that this is not possible at intersections next to the rail line. Further study is needed at Route 83 and Central Road to determine if further traffic control is required to enhance pedestrian safety, Right turn on red prohibition for some movements may be warranted. Reconfiguration of certain intersections and crosswalks should be implemented to make pedestrian movements a priority, while not degrading the performance and operations of motorized vehicles Three intersections are discussed in detail in the Access and Circulation section of this report They include the intersections of Route 83 (Main Street) with Busse Avenue, Northwest Highway (US 14), and Prospect Avenue and the intersection of Central Road and Northwest Highway. 73 An issue that was explored as a part of this planning effort was the concept of a grade separated pedestrian crossing, or pedestrian bridge, across Northwest Highway and over the tracks This issue has been previously discussed at the Village level and was reestablished as an issue by many residents during this planning process. Notwithstanding the benefits of a grade separated crossing, implementation of this idea presents many challenges to the Downtown - not the least of which is cost However, the design elements of this feature are generally the greatest obstacle, Due to the structure's potential location with respect to the rail line and Northwest Highway, the height of the bridge would require a significant amount of right-of-way throughout a busy area of the commercial core. The structure must reach a 20 foot minimum vertical elevation before crossing the tracks and a similar height over Northwest Highway Additionally, the American Disabilities Act has prescribed standards for the design of ramps leading to public facilities including pedestrian bridges. These standards limit the 74 maximum slope and height of each ramp, thus elongating the approach to a potential bridge Even with the employment of alternative design methods such as switchbacks, which stagger approaches requiring smaller spaces, the related structure support features shill require significant space or the use of an elevator. If a simple approach ramp was constructed, it would require an extension of approximately 480' from the edge of the curb line at the roadway or over the tracks These requirements would greatly add to the overall cost of improvements and limit the possibility of it being constructed within the Downtown area right-of-way. However, further west of Downtown, there is an alternative being discussed that would utilize existing public right-of-way to link two parks on either side of US 14, and would also be designed to accommodate bicycle users Bicyclists are important users in a comprehensive transportation system, In order to make Downtown Mount Prospect a more bike friendly place, certain policy and physical changes are needed. Successful downtowns generally prioritize non auto modes Mount Prospect already approved a Village -wide bike plan, and as a matter of policy, this plan needs to be prioritized and implemented. Specifics of the plan and other recommendations are: The existing bike route along Emerson should provide signage through Downtown. The proposed bike route extensions in the Downtown area, including along Busse Avenue (east of Emerson); Owen Street (Central to Northwest Highway); Pine Street (north of Central); as well as the Northwest Municipal Conference plan for Central Avenue, should be a priority with a plan for implementation and required roadway and signage, As a long range objective, and as part of the Northwest Municipal Conference Northwest Highway Plan, a proposed multi use path would be located along the roadway in the Union Pacific right- of-way This will require rather detailed discussions with the Union Pacific Railroad Consequently, the identified interim plan should be implemented, as described further below. As previously described as part of the improvements envisioned in the Prospect Avenue District, an interim plan for routing bikes through the Downtown area recommends implementing an exclusive on -street lane or shared lanes on Prospect Avenue, depending on the location This concept, depicted on the following page, would utilize the existing paving width between the raised center median and sidewalks and simply redistribute this space by clearly defining areas for automobiles, parking and a separate bike lane. 75 Essentially, instead of having 22 feet for a travel lane and parking, as shown in the Existing Condition cross-section on the top, 10 feet is provided for a vehicle travel lane, 7 feet is given to n parallel parking lane and the remaining 5 feet is striped as a bike lane. Other amenities, such as flexible plastic bollards (which will bend if they are struck by a car) and a completely painted bike lane can be added to this, if desired, This redistribution is depicted in the cross-section on the bottom Also of note in this scenario is the location of the bike lane adjacent to the median, which places the bicyclist on the driver's side of the automobile, as well as avoids the conflict point of having a bike lane next to a parked car, which often results in car doors being opened into the path of a moving bike, One strategy for implementing this and other pedestrian/bike improvements that modify curbs or street intersections would be to create a pilot program, or test run, using plastic cones, temporary signage and paint as a relatively inexpensive way to "case" motorists, bicyclists and pedestrians into the potential reconfiguration This can be done for a period of time to observe behavior patterns and general success prior to making a more permanent, and costly, change 7B I ;`,IS HNC) I'Iwtt...")POSLD U_A,1 u11ON InOM OF WAY A �. Bicycle parking is also an important part of creating a bike -friendly community There are bike racks in the Downtown area, however, they are not conveniently located and provide limited spaces Adding bike racks within close proximity to the stores in Downtown is recommended, Also, requiring bike parking in the design of all new buildings at redevelopment sites should become part of the review check list. Many Mehra commuters ride their bikes to the train station On warm days, bicycle racks fill up quickly and commuters are forced to lock their bikes on the fence surrounding the station. It is recommended that additional commuter bike parking should be added to the Mehra station. Bike parking can take on many forms and can add to the appeal of streetscapes and public spaces 77 (.camrmcir'ud and Re.,�&.mfucd Parking is an important part of the functionality of the Downtown area. As part of the study, parking occupancy counts for on street spaces were completed. Overall, as a district it was determined that the quantity of parking in the Downtown area is adequate. In some prime areas, however, such as the on street spaces along Emerson and also along Northwest Highway, there are fewer available spaces as porkers tend to use these for longer time periods at the expense of customers needing a shorter turnaround time. This can be a critical piece to the economic well-being of smaller merchants. Accordingly, certain regulations and controls are recommended that will improve the parking in the Downtown area. These include: 78 1 I I � r,., Providing short term (30 minute) parking located near store fronts where businesses are quick turnover, such as along Emerson Street, as well as Northwest Highway between Emerson and Main Street. The Village shall continue to evaluate and modify its parking policy for the parking garage to maximize use and promote economic development. Take steps to further promote the Emerson Municipal Garage's overnight guest parking policy Continue to evaluate the signage in this deck to ensure the parking policy is clear Designated employee parking areas to eliminate employees parking in the most convenient spaces near store fronts. Where possible, add additional on street parking for new developments Many plan concepts previously discussed have depicted new on street parking spaces. Another important parking recommendation is to add more Metro commuter parking to meet their projected demand of 100 additional spaces. The Metro commuter lots were 92% full during the most recent Metro parking survey in 2010. An expansion of the commuter lot on Maple Street is possible as shown in the Lions Park redevelopment site concept Its location, directly across from the Metro train platform, is ideal for the creation of an additional 150 spaces, as well as providing a pedestrian path directly to the station, The second option for expanding Metro parking is to consolidate the parking into a structure. This concept, including the challenges, partnerships and costs, was described previously in this section, as an option that would more efficiently use the land and provide additional opportunity for transit -oriented redevelopment in the area. 79 Many intersections are primarily auto -oriented, which may be problematic in a downtown centered around a train station and trying to emphasize non -vehicular travel. Three key areas were analyzed to determine how they could better serve all modes of travel in a safer and more efficient manner. The following exhibits show potential improvements for each of the areas Each of the ideas shown is conceptual and warrants further study prior to being implemented. A brief description of the improvements shown on the exhibits is discussed below. The intersection of Route 83 and Busse Avenue currently has no pedestrian supportive features such as a crosswalk or traffic control. Given the importance of this intersection, which links the east and west sides of the Downtown commercial area, including Village Hall and the Emerson Municipal Garage to the Triangle Site, it was determined that a new geometric design may be necessary A pedestrian refuge by wuuiis of a median along with a crosswalk and some limited vehicular access through the intersection were major design elements explored. North Side Pedesri ion Re`uGe Center! In order to accommodate a pedestrian connection across Route 83, the existing southbound left turn lane on Route 83 would be removed and converted into a landscaped median with a pedestrian refuge and new pedestrian crosswalk Southbound left -turning movements would be limited and not allowed during the peak hours of 7-9 AM and 4-6 PM Roadway operations on Busse Ave would remain unchanged The pedestrian refuge provides a protected midway point for people to stop if they cannot cross all at once. The addition of a striped crosswalk with appropriate signage gives motorists a visual cue to be aware of pedestrians, PUBLIC ACCESS DRIVE ` a n "OSSE AVE41JE J' 'rIII rj �"1cx I i/it„ , The intersection of Central Road and Northwest Highway presents multiple challenges with its skewed angle, the rail crossing, and a fifth leg formed by Prospect Avenue. Accordingly, crosswalks on all approaches should be realigned to shorten the crossing distance in a more perpendicular fashion. Sidewalks should be extended along Northwest Highway to meet the new crosswalk location The realignment of this crosswalk would decrease the crossing distance from roughly 130 feet to 60 feet, making it easier for pedestrians - primarily senior citizens and children - to safely cross Safety medians should be installed along Central Road to provide pedestrian refuges An additional safety median on the west side of the intersection would eliminate eastbound left turns and the existing sub -standard left turn lane. Prospect Avenue should be realigned to intersect Central Road at an angle closer to 90 degrees �j�jyl�'pUJIr1/d11R7�luudr�u�� r,�ulpm r/%/��'� %� i vi/%//alrjGr���/r„ , O/i/imrrr Wmµ"' x"fJ r ,✓ � �✓�� �, I �J�✓ " r (� i 1 ����� /i / „',,,,..,, o Ir /i „ ,, , %, , i % ' � 1 r, v �,�y�rf�����l,I'(���1✓IJ�911��� ,,r„' r,: CENTRACROAD 11 !.alp Ime Route 83 at Prospect Avenue and Evergreen Avenue is a complicated five leg intersection, The railroad tracks and the skewed intersection angle are obstacles for pedestrians and motorists, A concept that could improve operational efficiency is described below. Evergreen Avenue would be narrowed and converted to operate as a one-way, westbound street. Northbound left turns onto Evergreen Avenue from Route 83 would be allowed, however the impact this turning movement would have on traffic flow will deserve additional study, The existing cross section of the Evergreen Avenue roadway is wide enough to accommodate angled parking spaces on the north side which could be used for "kiss and ride" operation, This provides a convenient pick-up/drop-off location for Metra commuters In order for this operation to be more effective, the crosswalk on Prospect Avenue west of Route 83 should be realigned to provide a shorter crossing distance for train users 84 � r NEW PLAZA WITH GATEWAY & BRANDING OPPORTUNITIES °VOW. 'KISS AND RIDE" PARKING AREA WITH STREETSCAPE ENHANCEMENTS Np „ t ak w, %i% HE1P'A "gym, r i ,,,,d u'J_ _ Downtown Gateway #I Z t Henry Sc. and Route 83 (southwest corner) DOWNTOWN MT. PROSPECT Downtown Gateway 42 Route 83 and Milburn Ave.. (northeast corner) DOWNTOWN MT. PROSPECT Downtown Gateway #3 Central Rd. and Maple Sr. (northwest corner) DOWNTOWN MT. PROSPECT The enhancement of key gateways into Downtown Gateway #4 Central Rd. and Northwest Hwy. (southwest corner) DOWNTOWN MT. PROSPECT Downtown Mount Prospect should focus on high -impact locations, such as along Route Downtown Gateway #5 Northwest Hwy. and Maple St. (northeast corner) DOWNTOWN MT. PROSPECT $3, Northwest Highway and Central Road, i Wayfinding #1 Route 83 and Central Rd. (northwest corner) PARKING. LIBRARY VILLAGE Gateway projects are smaller, more focused HALL,. SHOPS improvements than most other urban design Wayfinding #2 Central Rd. and Emerson Sc. (outhwru corner) PARKING, LIBRARY. VILLAGE HALL. SHOPS initiatives and can be accomplished relatively Wayfinding #3 Central Rd. and Emcrson St. (southeast corner) PARKING. LIBRARY. quickly and independently of other projects VILLAGE ALL H. SHOPS It can also achieve a significant visual Wayfinding #4 Emerson St. and Northwest Hwy. (northeast corner) PARKING, LIBRARY, impact relative to its project size, A team of VILLAGE HALL, SHOPS professional design consultants should be Wayfinding #5 Route 83 and Busse Ave. ( outheast corner) PARKING. LIBRARY. VILLAGE HALL. SHOPS engaged to develop the construction bid documents and the entire process from design Wayfinding #6 Busse Ave, and Emerson St. (southwest corner) PILLAGE HLIBL, SHOPS through construction should be about twelve to Wayfinding #7 Emerson S[. and Northwest Hwy. (southwest rornrr) PILLAGE eighteen months. HALL SRHOPS Wayfinding #8 Central Rd.. and Northwest Hwy. (northwest corner) PROSPECT AVENUE 541OPS The design process for a new Downtown wayfinding signage system should be a high Wayfinding #9 Prospect Ave. and Route 83 (southeast corner) PROSPECT AVENUE SHOPS priority going forward. Following the completion Information Kiosk #I Busse Ave, and Emerson St. (northwest corner) DOWNTOWN MAP of a Wayfinding Design Master Plan the Village should budget for wayfinding signage Information Kiosk #2 Busse Ave. and Route 83 (southwest corner) DOWNTOWN MAP installation Once installation points have been p Information identified, a bid package should be developed I'i Kiosk #3 Adjacent to the train station in visible location DOWNTOWN MAP for regional and national professional Signage Information Kiosk #4 Prospect Ave. and Route 83 (southwest corner) DOWNTOWN MAP fabricators, Including the time to fabricate and install the signs, wayfinding signage for Information Kiosk #5 Northwest Highway and Emerson (northwest corner) DOWNTOWN MAP Downtown could be accomplished within a Information Kiosk #6 Midblock on Pinc Strect (near Campanarii) DOWNTOWN MAP Year Special District Identifier Prospect Avenue Corners and Medians DOWNTOWN BRANDMARK uy MIUL RPM IT AM z LEGEND ODWNTDWN GATEWAY SPECIAL DISTRICT IDEMIFlER ............... . 41L PORN "Mut A�" 11 � �: wowm galow Ile PARK NORTH I ; , ' 1 ' " j � !' j , , <; t 87 MAI K[.. _I ING S1 R I, d C Establishing a unique identity or brand for a downtown area can be a valuable tool for attracting investment This identity should be based on how a community sees and expresses itself. The message established by a unified brand represents a powerful marketing tool, helping to raise awareness and create broad interest in the area As a component of the Downtown Implementation Plan, the consultant team developed a series of ideas for branding Downtown These included both a variety of concepts about a new brandmark—or logo —and a related series of vignettes about Downtown that were formed into a video and played at the second Community Open House The overall approach was to take a fresh look at Mount Prospect's identity and meld that identity with the physical Plan to provide a voice, visual impact and positioning - and eventually a new, or refined, Downtown culture and attitude The characteristics and assets of Downtown Mount Prospect are only as successful as the ability to connect them together both physically and figuratively The figurative sense involves communicating through branding by touching upon what Mount Prospect has to offer and guiding the audience to connect the dots This subtle invitation to participate creates a heightened awareness of what Downtown currently has to offer and what it could potentially become. Both brandmark themes presented represent characteristic architectural, historical and contextual aspects of Mount Prospect. The first family of brandmarks (Exhibit 8.20) echoes the historic Tudor style elements prevalent in many of Downtown's older buildings, some of i which are still part of the urban fabric Each of the variations within this concept creates the letters "M" and "P" using repeated geometric forms framed within a square or rectangle, as often seen in details of a Tudor fa4ade. No less than 15 of these variations were developed, highlighting the potential to expand this idea into a "community pride marketing campaign in which these become window stickers for Downtown businesses or bumper stickers for residents to display. The second brandmark theme (Exhibit 8.21) was built around Mount Prospects history and context of development —the train line and transportation elements that shaped Downtown over time The circular logo represents a figurative telescope view of an interconnected series of roadways and their juxtaposition with the railway system The diagonal lines forming the 'M" are symbolic of the orientation MOUNT HISTORIGTRAGITIONAL PROSPECT GREAT PLACE TO' WORK' of Northwest Highway as it passes through Downtown and the small circle of the "P' represents the sun rising, as a tribute to Mount Prospects picturesque qualities. The concept is depicted using a range of materials and colors, showing how the brandmark could be displayed as a representative landscape (with grass and a yellow sun) or a more modern black and silver version Each of these brandmarks equally embrace Mount Prospect's location and context by portraying those unique elements in a positive manner. While both concepts received support, no single idea or identity emerged during the public process However, clear support and interest was shown for the idea of branding in general, suggesting that further study and community engagement on the matter are warranted Examples of how either of these brandmarks can be implemented are shown below, such as within signage families (gateways, kiosks, directional signs and street signs), in addition to being used in websites, on letterhead, brochures and other Downtown marketing materials How 696 a priority is it to create uniqu_e___ fxfentr y s + rraenks,frar t an Downtown? 9 Downtowns positive attributes were further expressed in a short motion graphics video that played at the Community Open House Within each screen capture has shown) the viewer finds one or more of Mount Prospects strengths, characteristics, qualities or success stories and reminds them that these are the elements that make Downtown unique, The intention of the video is to not only highlight these strong points, but also to toe the line between what Downtown has and what Downtown could become. The video is intended to stir feelings of pride and excitement for Downtown's future :0 .1AR,KFTiNG 5T5ATE y, The marketing strategy for Downtown is to implement the brandmark and characteristics/ assets of Downtown shown in the video with the framework previously identified and described in the preceding Plan narrative Some of the key elements of a marketing strategy for Downtown include the following: i 11 bon lr[An' , ('')j:'q )1 im 11 hks, Implement a signage family, including wayfinding signs, street signs, Village gateways, street corner kiosks; large banners or billboards at the train station (for rider exposure) and banners at Village Hall and/or the Library. A preliminary wayfinding plan is included in this report, providing a benchmark and starting point for the implementation of a Downtown signage family. Create a micro -site within the Villages Website and dedicated social media campaign to attract stakeholder participation and a concurrent print campaign, including items such as posters, brochures, leave behind postcards for retail placement, brandmark window stickers and other printed literature and event -centric marketing IMPLEMENTATION CASE STUDY, EVANSTON, ILLINOIS BRANDING PACKAGE Downtown Evanston's management entity, EVMark, conducted a detailed branding study in 2009. This study usod significant outreach to business owners, the community and visitors to identify key attributes associated with the Downtown. The development of these attribute lead to the creation of a new logo and tagline for the Downtown, as well as the renaming of EVMark to Downtown Evanston This brand was then extended through to websites, signage banners, advertisements, letterhead, and other materials associated with the Downtown. :sa SIGNAGE + WAYFINDING VEHICULAR GATEWAY/ KIOSK PARKING DIRECTIONAL IDENTITY LOCATOR MONUMENT T-shirts, hats and vehicle magnets or bumper stickers could be created, allowing for a very mobile and extremely swift spread of the campaign. i A script for an "elevator speech" could be created to allow a common verbal positioning of the campaign This script would also free up the speaker to expound on the spirit of the campaign by sharing a personal story or Iwo relating to the campaign This brings in the human element and touch sometimes missing in public/downtown/city campaigns Mount Prospect has strong leaders at the helm - from the Village Board and staff to the Chamber of Commerce and other organizations. During the planning process, these leaders have seen the potential within the proposed Plan elements, which is the first step to carrying this through to success Additionally, the general support from the community indicates that a more comprehensive branding process be undertaken for Downtown Mount Prospect, fma st your rwrraa�„9pinwon unee Can rapt &, Tudor Style In i.cat our qp #r q 'n;9n of S fle # cancept 131 Aft eco���ai,��a�ci eiy4e IMPLEMENTATION CASE STUDY: ELMHURST, ILLINOIS Elmhurst, Illinois recognized the need for identity and directional signs to key City Centre locations and destinations. In order to promote a unified downtown, all wayfinding signs incorporate an Elm leaf motif that was custom designed and fabricated from cast iron. The combination of the decorative leaf motif and clear, high contrast lettering, has helped to brand the City and City Centre as well as provide directional wayfinding. 'u£6YIOT;R„AR GATEWAY / KM5K PARKING OMCTIdIMX IDENTITY LOCATOR MONUMENT 9 This Implementation Strategy outlines and describes key initiatives and catalytic projects, policy changes, public -private partnerships and other important action items necessary for achieving the planning principles and objectives set forth in the Mount Prospect Downtown Implementation Plan In essence, the Strategy provides the blueprint for community action and involvement in moving fundamental revitalization initiatives forward and in building momentum for more significant reinvestment and positive change in the future, In addition, the Strategy should also serve as the primary reference guide on Plan implementation for the Village and its partner organizations, including the Downtown Merchants Association, the Chamber of Commerce, and other stakeholder groups and interested parties; such as business owners, community organizations, developers and investors and local residents .......... 9- TMPLEM� ........ ....... N FA I ION Due to the current state of the economy at the time of preparing this Plan vision, redevelopment is anticipated to occur over the next 10 to 20 years During this time horizon, redevelopment is likely to occur based on one or more of the following approaches: Incremental site -specific redevelopment by individual property owners that either redevelop or sell to developers or businesses that then develop the sites. Redevelopment initiated by a group of property owners in partnership with a master developer. Redevelopment initiated on larger consolidated sites by a master developer that assembles properties. Strategic public acquisition of key properties in order to package a land assemblage for solicitation of a master developer to redevelop the properties. The four options noted reflect various levels of public involvement and investment Complexities inherent in infill redevelopment typically require higher levels of public involvement, especially associated with land acquisition, bridging of financial gaps and "setting the stage" with public infrastructure and facilities The Village could initially limit its involvement in the redevelopment process to active marketing of the Plan to the business and development communities and create the appropriate regulatory framework necessary to spur investment by revising its development codes No,,Nf,°✓�2r, rllt it=,rlt%i.re hc'.aVU a irrG'7i9 � Ir,Cl ,Cola^ b'1',i�li,,�. N,1 )a^I✓ I, t,,7i,;Mr ,rri,l o, N4_n/c the I'1oo 'A,i,cm This may involve strategic property acquisition and forming public -private partnerships for catalytic projects that would generate momentum and have more positive financial and fiscal results. 97 C ,' MUNICAHON AND C::00R[.-) NAl! ION Key participants in the implementation of the Actively engage with local developers Downtown Plan must include the following and issue Requests For Proposals for entities: potential redevelopment, as necessary V;LLA =E C 1( L'NT PRO-�rrC The Village will play an integral leadership role in implementing the Plan The Villages continued active participation in promoting, coordinating and facilitating public improvements and redevelopment within the Downtown study area will be critical for successful implementation. The Village will also need to provide or identify technical and financial resources Key roles and responsibilities will include: Ensure that ordinances that govern development, including zoning, building codes, infrastructure and design standards support the redevelopment proposed in the Plan. Coordinate with other public agencies, property owners and developers to ensure that future development conforms to the Plan 0 Administer technical and other assistance to businesses, property owners and developers. Assist with relocation of existing businesses, where appropriate, to other suitable locations within the Village to allow for redevelopment of key sites Assemble sites for new development where necessary Initiate more detailed studies and plans for local transportation, public open space and infrastructure improvements. Seek out grants and funding sources for public improvements and property consolidations Open regular communication/ coordination channels with local businesses and property owners. A number of community organizations, including the Chamber of Commerce, Downtown Merchants Association, Small Business Development Center and the Mount Prospect Library play important roles in business promotion, attraction and retention in Mount Prospect. The Village should maintain regular communication with these organizations to ensure efforts for many Plan initiatives are distributed to the correct organization and are not being duplicated The Village will need to continue to coordinate with the Northwest Council of Mayors on regional issues, including implementing bike connections and regional roadway improvements, especially as they relate to the immediate neighbors, Des Plaines, Arlington Heights and Prospect Heights. Public transportation agencies that will be involved in implementing the Plan may include: cI r,, r The Village should r'r,,1r1;r1f( rCJ1' rr > , ;)�rG, i� r, r,;rvrl ,I it rrnf Jr,l1, fnlllr wlr .s w l c! r+rrEr.. ono, f,:',ufrr Irrlin� ,tiF t,,rl .rlh�u rrtrl f enF i„t nif us kn ilih,, voill,in such as parking, bus shelters, bike racks and facilities and access. The RTA currently provides implementation assistance to communities that have completed tronsi[-oriented development plans. They can help identify grant funding sources, assist with coordination with Metro and Pace and also provide funding through their Community Planning program to fund TOD zoning updates and organize developer panels with the Urban Land Institute i i� The Village should rr P ru e n:r mov rr (rn rn �, , ;� tr, �i , �Irr:: rr rh I ir..frr„>n H x: fi, to maintain and improve parking and access near the existing train station site, as well as to evaluate and maintain safe and efficient track crossings at key Village intersections. , i -i � :4 lv,I rro, ;rho, The Village should frr,i v � rlu; m ri In° r,'t ilr it oar )fJ',,r � _�Iw n!�ry, 13h(wn in 'he Harr, such as new bump outs, pedestrian crossing/crosswalk changes, potential median enhancements, parallel parking additions, signalization changes and geometric intersection modifications with IDOT Northwest Highway, Central Road and Route 83/Main Street are all roadways under IDOT jurisdiction Preliminary transportation enhancement concepts were sent to IDOT for initial review and were generally well received as potential future improvements However, any roadway changes will require further detailed study prior to implementation, �YNIRi4H "1��0" pace 61rC ;iglu Developers, property owners, local businesses and financial institutions will play a key role in the phased implementation of the Plan and redevelopment of Downtown: i ,� i , The Village should okcn on hvH Jr n i eat` (x fa g r'r i e rk r H, rN,r1 ;r �tor an(I rrrmmF rr rrrl niHv krt,H -, to 0o i 'rtnwn particularly for the key larger target sites following the goals and objectives of the Plan. Village planners and the consultant team have already engaged many local developers regarding many of the opportunity sites as depicted and described in the Plan. This communication and should be on -going. I,,'rrl , ;ni;,,:; ;,,i 'i,,s; rl/'r,n+l j,, The Village, along with the Downtown Merchants Association, Chamber of Commerce, Small Business Development Center and Mount Prospect Library, established a regular communication forum and outreach program for assisting both existing and potential business and property owners within Downtown to determine their development needs.. This program, called II+' <lh" m JII°„dfwd nno' o rr r i +w uv +rt rtyr! "n Ov_ st tu, , f th lmplemunmrn 10 on,, With Village support In achieving the Plan vision, local lenders can assist and facilitate redevelopment by providing preferred financing options for projects within Downtown The Village should f 7, rC for new and existing property redevelopment or enhancement. An important early step toward Plan implementation should be the identification of achievable priority actions and catalytic projects An outline of priority actions and projects has been organized into a framework matrix to serve as an checklist and can be found at the end of this section Actions such as development code changes and simplification of the development process are extremely valuable, low cost priority items that can be implemented in on early time horizon and set the stage for future redevelopment and reinvestment Once this framework has been established, the Village can focus on strategically implementing P priority or catalytic projects These are projects which include the opportunity sites that are expected to create the most vitality, investment and redevelopment in the area because of their high visibility, strategic locations and large sizes. Additionally, the implementation of these projects would begin to address optimal land use and development opportunities as envisioned in the Plan. As identified in the narratives of several opportunity site concepts, achieving a preferred development outcome will likely result in exceeding existing development regulations. In general, hho ncc+,„ nvo, a L, (,r Yr �s�i ]t � ) i I J � J - In ,fi d( l i ho�n YI JJ i i (,S� Or p,u' i a v it,Aw m r! , k:o it wuoiijl ! v (owi', i '_i,¢r,l„ ir,;,nR rrr f ihc� for Downtown, These changes should be examined in conjunction with other tools that exist within the development approval process In conjunction with a change in Downtown zoning, the Village should r : �m,tdc. d, n,p Au)' k A Corridor Design Guidelines document was developed for the Village in 2004, but is nearly fen years old. A Downtown Design Guidelines document would focus more on the core of Mount Prospect and would build from the character, materials and aesthetic that has already been established Prior to considering development proposals, the Village should � t`'hn h,vy of rr ns,, t she J ah , r I rho.: r o� ),q rr ° f'ua,i: �o J;;,Y �i Y it "i i'::d. o "s sl :Pfau do 1 i I :4r chvcJr:�p:,vrr nt The Village should undertake a more thorough, detailed examination of key urban design elements for the guidelines such as street, building, parking, site, landscape, streetscape and signage design These guidelines would not only encourage higher quality, "context sensitive projects, but would help facilitate a streamlined, predictable review process for all development and reinvestment within Downtown. JTI\EI_T C APLE CLSVN As discussed and illustrated earlier in the Plan, ax kcy goal of 0ia-s Non tsa Phc rre:raFion ofr, a aarlrrpla& Prt1.apa„d Avrrrouo 00iicl, e:ir wrall os o d(Xus an fwlc; hen ctu 0y. troclsrapc, as p oc d of new de,vel<'afxne rrl ailc:ang l'rarsse Aw,r ilue^ This unique streetscape design would complement the on -going streetscape character found in the rest of the Downtown area, A comprehensive, detailed streetscape design plan and linked pedestrian open space system and implementation strategy/program should be undertaken that provides a holistic vision for enhancing Downtown's key streets Most notably the focus should first be placed on Prospect Avenue as a key local shopping street for the community. As noted, additional focus on Busse Avenue should also be tied into this new system A streetscape/open space program should include conceptual and detailed design, cost estimates and prioritization of projects based on capital improvement budgets, new infill development and acquisition of funding or . rants g fiie rhpiru^rnv ,li,wPfr'9r'I of one rap rrirrm,, of hhkPy t Pa i " t�t:ari a ,cw r,:)o.,d k fe, c r.:rrr, i,1 r,. f cr cc,,Wytc psr rvct thoa prnpa u; s . +n ,n ,�,-Jr, VO7 c,,l w vs; SivN,�GE DF3C3,1\1 FhI �:R.AiVI As part of or a separate task from a Downtown streetscape program, o vrs,u ally c iP ochve a,rrrd r lanai l.)owr mown wray{rnvaiirig anrl sy.s ern tnr,orpo< citrprg er arraicprurc,lafe: lvoc.ndrnr:rrk OP— tees MO �JerPo W fasr iila al .Ila�.rlPcs<f wrihhl 01 ayeateDr,;nr raRrjwn rar&caThis program, aimed at directing motorists, visitors, pedestrians and bicyclists into and around Downtown destinations, can be easily phased over time The program can eventually be expanded to a more regional level directing motorists and bicyclists from community gateway points and landmarks, such as Randhurst Mall, to Downtown, Several ideas for how a unified signage family could look were described previously in the Plan vision section Ideally, any signage developed will relate to or incorporate a new brandmork or Downtown logo A strong wayfinding system should address the following signage types: Downtown Gateways/Directional Signs Key Destination/Public Parking Directional Signs Informational Kiosks/Maps Regulatory Signage Bike Route Directional Signs Seasonal Banners Street Signs Other Downtown Brand Graphics A preliminary wayfinding and signage plan were provided as part of this report, diagramming where each of the key signage types could be located, This can be used as a starting point to understand how a comprehensive system would work together. 101 Going forward, Downtown Mount Prospect is envisioned to be a unique destination within the greater Chicago region and on -going efforts to brand and market its retail, service and recreational offerings and attractions, as well as promote the area's revitalization potential to investors, developers, new businesses and future residents will be especially important Such activities will be critical to communicating the Downtown's characteristics as well as the goods and services it offers to shoppers, visitors and potential investors Therefore, as previously described in this report, an over- arching branding/marketing strategy for Downtown can be used to develop marketing materials and advertising campaigns, organize targeted promotional/special events, conduct more effective public relations activities and coordinate with any planned Downtown signage and wayfinding system mpy,,c,r focused on enhancing Downtowns overall image and increasing sales for existing businesses and restaurants Organizations that could play partnership roles in such program include the Village and the Chamber of Commerce. Implementation action steps in developing the program may include: It is :,�nni,�p�(a,%4t+R �:,rrvo:!i� ", L, 7nPrng cindmv) h)ri 4,'�it �d,h°rm )ivni:wn I'Avmt"' _,m1s;, �.pxa'"rdJgr 0'OhrlO,t r: beyond what was conducted as part of this planning process A graphic design portfolio building upon a new Downtown brandmark, and the different types of marketing and promotion activities that could be undertaken to attract certain customer segments, can be prepared as part of the study. Roles and responsibilities of who will manage and support the Downtown marketing program can also be determined rr�rTr,)r, SJr li /✓1CaCr:'u-ici Mc kHPe-og Olo wntown , ,-om ,r ^ c.�l, r.rriPuior om-1 °r,^v wrosf o nrri ^rr ^e.Pc will be a k y �ocu,,; of rarr hr Pw f)owvr,km n brrrmr"ing crnrr'm orkotr i,.t ,prcrc,)tam Just as important is promoting Downtowns progress in the revitalization process and creating a heightened awareness and "buzz" about new business openings, living opportunities, entertainment offerings and special events and festivals "Image building' advertisements in targeted publications, including those in nearby areas and in the broader Chicago metropolitan area, might be effective in informing those who might not know about Downtown's progress and its assets and attractions ai r i� �i,ti '(;lr,i hol, In conjunction with the Entrepreneur's Cafe, the Village should in,sr.nw �h l r:r cNo g, chrja mcv a cwnrJ+7ra,rr r.^r., r,Feniir, n rec,' )itrrec (it Y r, rlr, v ,+olrjpd Cross-fertilization of local Chamber of Commerce and Downtown Merchants Association initiatives, as well as current Village supported downtown marketing should be calibrated into a cohesive plan, onp fhor on avlo iP Pra,7,pr-r i t t.rrrirp(,, o,^'nmo� ranr,1 cl'+n errfer w M,i � 7�ewr r)pnrnrr1 rrrrr:l r,lcpo hIn ps cuO s+ o,n r �orrol oncl �irinr! I�rrr�.^p„ +r,afl,,rn Irk ' Consistency in message is critical to promoting Downtown efforts, so ultimately having one point person for organizing and delegating tasks would be ideal, Currently, a number of organizations and community leaders are involved in these activities, including community development and planning staff. This downtown business "navigator" role should be provided with the necessary tools and resources to administer these services Some tasks involved with this role may include: Maintain an up-to-date inventory of all businesses and vacant storefronts with data that can easily be communicated to brokers and retailers Marketing pieces that contain demographic and market data from this study would also be useful. Host more special events or activities in the Downtown, or tie in with events hosted by other groups Develop promotional campaigns that encourage residents to shop and dine in the Downtown, as described above, Work with existing businesses to upgrade their storefronts and marketing activities, including websites Explore other downtowns with similar conditions and, when the time is right, talk to local business owners about establishing a second location in Downtown Mount Prospect. t13 The Village, in partnership with other entities, will need to work to initiate the redevelopment of the key opportunity sites in Downtown Each site may necessitate a slightly different approach to its redevelopment depending on the site, existing buildings, developer interest, ownership of property and available financial resources and incentives Many other variables affect the ability and timing of these projects to move forward These include, at a minimum, ability to acquire parcels, public -private partnerships and financing and leadership change or turnover fhPIaI n Is r0 ',I'm/'rN�a� r, x i01�v yv onidupdare,,J u ri,�r'; r h,r.J lip i7':;n ,t i iu" uric I Most widely discussed and recognized as the key target redevelopment site in Downtown, this is seen as an opportunity to infill a highly -visible portion of the Downtown core on the north, The plan was envisioned as either an entertainment district or as a larger -scale mixed -use development. Within each scenario, a high value has been placed to including meaningful public space, either in the form of smaller plazas or as a recognizable landmark park. Both concepts envision a pedestrian friendly environment coupled with controlled vehicular access points and limited parking, as well as a place to host a variety of community events, markets and passive recreational opportunities uirrr Side The Chase Bank Site - including the Emerson Street and Busse Avenue frontages in particular - is a key gateway location connecting Downtown with the surrounding neighborhoods to the east. Future improvements in this vicinity should emphasize continuity, with a priority placed on creating a successful and seamless pedestrian realm that connects the site to the Downtown core. Public and private investment should be coordinated to preserve and enhance the location's capacity for civic festivals While current market conditions suggest that substantial redevelopment of the site is unlikely at this time, increased economic viability could come in the form of temporary or flexible, small- scale commercial uses along the perimeter of the property. Such proposals should be carefully examined to avoid negatively impacting the objectives stated above, The Central and Main Site is envisioned as a location for either a small market or pharmacy or multi -family residential, depending on the market The Village has continued to talk to potential developers and commercial real estate brokers to both gauge and generate interest in the sites redevelopment. With its high visibility and currently underutilized condition, this redevelopment opportunity is seen as a high priority. The Tri-State Site is located proximate to the heart of Downtown's core, yet currently fails to odd to the activity level and vibrancy of Downtown With redevelopment as a mixed -use building, additional residents would be brought Downtown —potentially a younger population of people. This site may also capture the interest of a commercial developer, which would activate this portion of Downtown. This site is seen as a medium priority Ii<i Ir.,,il ` I( The Lions Park Site represents Downtown Mount Prospects best transit -oriented development opportunity The site has the potential to support a significant population of new residents, which will have ideal access to the Metro Station, as well as all that Downtown has to offer both south and north of the tracks As a component of this redevelopment, an expansion of Metro's parking has been shown —one by expanding the existing surface parking lot and the second option replacing the lot with a parking structure The redevelopment of this overall site would require property acquisition from a number of different property owners as well as assistance with relocating businesses In addition, coordination and continued dialog with Metro will be critical Ultimately, this could be a phased development, although planned and approved at the same time, allowing the absorption of residential units at a pace the market can handle This is not seen as a high priority redevelopment, but is viewed as a significant development with the potential to change the complexion of Mount Prospect's Downtown. Maintaining parking for Metro commuters remains a major consideration in any strategic land use decisions. Of all of the redevelopment sites, the Post Office Site is viewed as the longest term opportunity. Its redevelopment hinges upon the future of the Post Office branch and whether it remains a viable and necessary function The Plan simply provides a potential scenario in order to guide land use policy and decision making in the event this facility is no longer viable In keeping with the goal of providing a critical mass of residents Downtown to strengthen businesses and economic development, this site is seen to have the potential for multi -family housing „105 PV, :;1FF P II Al As noted, many of the recommended improvements and projects may require financial assistance to be implemented Where possible, local, state and federal funding sources should be used to leverage private sector dollars. The following are key financing tools, programs, and potential funding sources to be considered: Probably the most common means the Village can use to tackle public improvements is to fold these projects into the regularly evaluated and updated Capital Improvement Planning and Programming Capital improvement funding could be used to support various projects outlined in the Plan, including: -Road and Street Improvements -Pedestrian Safety Enhancements •Streetscape Implementation -Parks and Plazas ,Public Parking Improvements •Signage and Wayfinding Programs -Public Building Interior and Exterior Improvements Recognizing that public budgets ore shrinking, and therefore limited In the current economy, the Village should u),,akp-4c, sh ^i ,t firm'+rya or,,,t)orfvi u r s v,,n' i of c+ toa% bru7 e+; c::: u,iilu'iMt/Pi iVu TtnPt.l hIr rl lq�R';�, 4,_,r_i1nnj11,., ri,.ix Piond, Depending upon the Village's bond rating and current bond/debt load and retirement, the Village may investigate the ability of long- term bonds for specific portions of the Plan in order to jump start redevelopment activities R'Sombnlg fin w ,,&a.: �r�tl, r ,t r.�� kwc, , p ^ri ,po Of ,I r &x rr k, Ma:n�ve iu,:rr..&, do are qiiiAun, ti , Mna;:;d wm w:hutd n � w, ,m„ Ord` t w key �ydre:. inir r u�iclk�ni, �V Han r"V,,':Yt 5hcoh4 )nsjkt oct". The Village should consult their finance expertise to evaluate these opportunities. Another option for the Village to consider to spur redevelopment, particularly for the privately held redevelopment sites, is the use of property tax abatement In order to entice new retail and commercial development or redevelopment, the Village could s,t,r w tun a re rr ru'��:�Fal�tu ]d r,,i'tp� t,r� rabra+`"mu,rnt PNa.rtram (�'o tf'iow key "ieve G,p_]nTeof oppoOwNhes, The tax advantage may be justified in the additional redevelopment costs necessary to develop within the Village as opposed to the other "more greenfield" commercial developments in surrounding communities This structure may provide a competitive advantage to Mount Prospect from competing interests in neighboring downtowns and surrounding regional malls and retail centers Ir"x liu i:a'i1(�ni l in("Ilo tm i1 Tax Increment Financing (TIF) is a program that allocates future increases in property taxes from a designated area to pay for improvements only within that area The Village has a history of utilizing TIF and has the ability to make public improvements to meet some goals of the Plan Currently, the TIF boundary is located entirely north of Northwest Highway and covers a portion of the Downtown study area Under TIF, the increases in taxes from new development and redevelopment of existing structures, or increases in taxes due to equalization or rate changes are all allocated to the Village The other districts continue to share the taxes that were being paid prior to creation of the district. All properties in the district are assessed in the same manner as all other properties and are taxed at the some rate IF is not an increase in taxes; it is only a re -allocation of how they are used Increases in property taxes are due to reassessment and rate increases, not TIF, There are three general categories of activities that may be supported by tax increment funds: -Public Improvements • Development/Redevelopment/Rehabilitation -Administrative Support and Financing TIF is one of the few funding mechanisms available to local governments and has proven to be very effective in spurring redevelopment and public improvements within communities. An SSA is a taxing mechanism that can be used to fund a wide range of special or additional services and/or physical improvements within a designated geographic boundary Funding is obtained through an additional property tax levied on properties within the designated boundary An SSA can provide support services (i.e, maintenance of public improvements), infrastructure upgrades and/or land and building improvements (generally exterior), To establish an SSA, a majority of the property owners and registered voters within the proposed boundary must not object to the additional taxation required to fund programs and services An SSA may be particularly suited to maintaining infrastructure improvements and providing additional marketing and other special services in Downtown. An SSA can provide a tailored set of services and/or infrastructure upgrades that provide concrete benefits to its property owners The common services and activities provided by SSAs are: Infrastructure Improvements Land and Building Improvements Support Services TRH �i;;r 0PTATCv FLINIDNG CURS ES Under restructuring of the new federal transportation bill, MAP-21, a new program was created called Transportation Alternatives that encompasses both the Transportation Enhancement and Safe Routes to School. Any program listed is subject to change or elimination NINirc,,r, dI f:'1N The goal of ITEP is to allocate resources to well - planned projects that provide and support alternate modes of transportation, enhance the transportation system through preservation of visual and cultural resources and improve the quality of life for members of the communities ITEP requires communities to coordinate efforts to develop and build safe, valuable and functional projects in a timely manner, Under ITEP, the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) works jointly with other state agencies, local governments, interest groups and citizens in enhancing the transportation system and building more livable communities The enhancement program allows the opportunity for the public to become directly involved in a 107 transportation projects Public participation is encouraged throughout the entire program planning, development and implementation process For more information: http://wwwdotstate it us/opp/pdf/2013%20 New%20Guic1eIines-May%2017.pcIf The Transportation Alternatives Program was created by consolidating the Transportation Enhancements, Safe Routes to School and Recreational Trails programs. The TAP provides funding for programs and projects defined as transportation alternatives, including on - and off -road pedestrian and bicycle facilities, infrastructure projects for improving non -driver access to public transportation and enhanced mobility, community improvement activities and environmental mitigation; recreational trail program projects; safe routes to school projects, and projects for planning, designing, or constructing boulevards and other roadways largely in the right-of-way of former Interstate System routes or other divided highways. HE The Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP) administers the TAP program for the Chicago region For more information: http://wwwfhwo,dot.gov/map2l /guidance/ guidetap.cfm oncy::filori /=,iti<�r,lir�i i <:',nd ! n t._1,Ira lfy r iru0ir,;rr�;irr�i�i l"rr�r;��.�ri� `J,�/;,")1 The Congestion Mitigation and Air Ouality Improvement Program Hnances projects that will contribute to improving air quality and reducing congestion in regions that do not meet federal air quality standards. It is apportioned to states on a formula basis The Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP) CMAO Project Selection Committee recommends a proposed program to be implemented from among the submitted proposals. The committee retains the prerogative to select the best projects in each year The CMAP MPO Policy Committee programs the region's CMAO funds The four criteria for ranking projects are: reduction in nitrogen oxides; reduction in vehicle miles of travel; trips eliminated; and reduction in volatile organic compounds The RTA is currently seeking FY 2014-2018 CMAO funding for a pilot program that would allow communities to implement small scale access to transit capital improvements stemming from RTA Community Planning projects If successful during this current CMAO cycle, the RTA may continue and expand the program and seek additional projects in late 2014/early 2015. For more information: http://wwwfhwadot.gov/environment/aiguality/ amaq/ OFEN SFACE FUNDING SOUR'_.`: ), 1 mi7 'lot ,-f%-at7d I, i d /v.',( iii,,itior1 �+jn+_ �Pjw�wjm ),C�SIAL.)1 The Open Space and Land Acquisition and Development Program (OSLAD) provides grants to local municipalities for the acquisition and development of land for open space, parks and bike paths. Funding assistance is awarded on a 50 percent matching basis with grant awards up to $750,000 for land acquisition and $400,000 for development and renovation initiatives The Illinois Department of Natural Resources administers the program. For more information: http://wwwd nrsta te.il,us/ocd/newosla d l .htm h:ai,:l , fJrflh�i (_.:)ri.� i s,llu::>n 1 ui"J ,L'vl i ` , I i The Land and Water Conservation Fund is a federally funded program which also supports a 50% matching basis Both grants look at park and open space initiatives that provide for a variety of community open space and recreation needs with an eye towards Best Management Practices and sustainability. For more information: http://wwwnpsgov/lwcf/ Once the Plan is approved, key implementation strategies and actions have been outlined in the following charts, including: Initiative/Project/Programs Priority Responsible Parties Implementation Tools/Funding Sources • Actions/Key Tasks Cost Level • General Timeline 0-2 YEARS: IMMEDIATE EFFORTS -Land / Property Acquisition Feasibility -Land Acquisition & Assemblage -Chose Bank Building Parking Improvements -Comprehensive Wayfinding & Signage Program -Key Intersection Improvements •At Grade Crossing Initiatives -Facade and Site Improvements 2, 19 i 1 A °' : I`v 11 Al ; 1 ' 1,1 1 1 101,1 -Triangle Site Redevelopment -Prospect Avenue District Streetscape -Central & Main Site Redevelopment •Tri-State Site Redevelopment -bons Park Site Redevelopment -Downtown Master Plan Update & Evaluation Post Office Site Redevelopment im �m mm m m Identify and Pursue Grants/Funding Sources for Wage Planning Staff all priority action plans and initiative. HIGH • Vilage Engineering Staff • Vilage Funds • Vlage Board Downtown Zoning Code Changes HIGH • Vi9age Staff • Pi..g/Zoning Commission Wage Funds PF Wage Boord • RTA • Plannmg(Zoning Consultant Explore options for establishing a Special Service Area(s) • Vilage Staff •Vilage Board for all or portions of Downtown HIGH • Business/Property Owners Vilage Funds • Chamber/Downtown Association Develop Downtown Branding and Marketing Program HIGH . Village Staff Searing Committee Kbomber 1 Downtown Association I Wage Funds SSA Business Owners) • Other Grants • Village Staff • Village Funds Develop Business Development/Recruitment and Retention Strategy HIGH • Chamber of Commerce Dawntcwn Association • Chamber / Downtown Association Funds •- Steering Committee • SSA ... ................._ ........._____ _.._..,... .., ... ___Business/Property Owners • Other Grants ---- • Village Staff • Wage Funds Develop Downtown Design Guidelines Medium • Planning/Zoning Commission TIF • SSA _....�.•. ... ...._... ..m._., _ .•..�._,.,.�.... • Other Grants Coordinate and Implement Redevelopment Opportunities Vilage Staff with Yearly Capital Improvement Program Medium • Village Board • Wage Funds Plammg/Zoning Commission Comprehensive Downtown Sreetscape Design Vila g Saff Wage Wage Funds (extension of existing projects) Medium .^ Wage Board • fiEP ' SSA Steering Committee • Other Grants Identify and Pursue Grants/Funding Sources for ° Compile list of potential sources and due dates 0-1 year all priority action plans and initiatives • Identify requirements for each submission Identify responsible groups/parties for preparing the submission Ongoing ' Redefne downlown districts Lf necessary) ^ Amend standards for heights, parking. densities shown m plan $$ 0-1 year Downtown Zoning Code Changes Revise downtown within village comprehensive plan ° Delme goals and opportunities for economic development , Explore options for establishing a Special Service Begin disa,ssions with I—mess/property awri Areo(s) • Establish potential SSA boundary $ 0- 1 year for all or portions of Downtown �. ' Determine feasibility of program • Engage in open communily/busness/merchant process $ 42 year Develop Downtown Branding and Marketing Program Identify theme, develop concepts and strategies Create branding/marketing implementation plan ,,,,,,,, ......... _....... ......... ......... ...._. _ ..... Establish village-supporled entity and steering committee ....._ .. ....,_,„��. ....._,�...�°..-.,,,,....... Develop Business Development/Recruitment and Collaborate with other orgadmilicns ^ Creole staff support structure or hire part time director $$ 0-2 years Ongoing Retention Strategy • Undertake proacllve retention and attraction activities • Monllor/monage activihes • Develop detailed building site, public makn landscape standards Develop Downtown Design Guidelines Coordinate with mining amendment efforts $$ 0-2 years - Create a working committee Coordinate and lmplement Redevelopment ^ Establish priorities based on plan ^ Create budget eslimates for priority public prolecls $ 41 years Opportunities • Define brand, events and promotions Ongoing With Yearly Capital Improvement Program • Develop phased approach to brand Implementation Comprehensive Downtown Streetscape Design ° Establish priorities based on Plan $$ 0-2 years (extension of existing projects) " Create budget estimates for priority public prolecls ........,... .... ...........1. ..... ..._.__ ,,....._. ,...., .. 1. ill Land / Property Acquisition Feasibility HIGH • Vilage Staff Village Board �N ^ Village Funds TIF • General Revenue Bonds Chase Bank Building Parking Improvements (page 20) HIGH • Village Staff ^ Prvate Financing Vilage Funds Ouse Bonk Building Property Owners TIF ....... ...... ^ Vilage Staff ... •Wage Funds Comprehensive Wayfinding and Signage Program (page 86) HIGH ^ Village Board ° ITEP and other Grants SSA TAP TIF Vilcge Staff •Vilage Funds Key Intersection Improvements (page 80) HIGH • Village Engineers • ITEP and other Grants- • SSA Village Board IDOT • TAP Land Acquisition and Assemblage Medium ^ Vilage Staff Commission Pillage • Vllage Funds �P Granl • Village Board Board • TIF Village Staff /Vilage Board Pnvale Funds Triangle Site Redevelopment (page 81 Medium • Developer TIF Properly Owners General Revenue Bonds • Village Funds ......... , Village Funds.... Prospect Avenue District Streetscape (page 66) Medium Village Staff • Village Board • frEP Gant ^ SSA ° Steering Committee • TAP 1 ^ Other Grants . Vilcge Staff • Private Funds Central and Main Site Redevelopment (page 26) Medium Village Board TIF • Developer General Revenue Bonds ^ Village Funds q • Develop target area ccquisiBon list Land I Property Acquisition Feasibility Negotiation/dlsatsswn of property ownerskp $$$ IPp%I Develop appraisals for acquisitions Negotiate offers and/or pub6dprivate partnership opportunities • Initiate discussions with Chase owners Acquire property on the northeast corner of Busse/Emerson to create park Chase Bank Building Parking Improvements (page 20) space $$ • Identify funding structure/sharing • Construdion management Comprehensive Wayhnding and Signage Program Identify funding far design assistance I, (page 861 ' Conceptual detailed design $$ Ceordmete with any new Prospect Avenue sireetscape design • Identify issues, establish priority projects Key Intersection Improvements (page 80) • Create a timeline and budget for improvements $$$ Continue dialogue with IDOT • Design and consirucllon • Develop public/private parinershp agreements Land Acquisition and Assemblage ^ Create RFP/developer recruitment strategy $$ . Project structuring and finance sources • Negoticte property/development agreements Triangle Site Redevelopment (page 8) * Determine revenue sharing scenarios $$$ Finalize buildhg plans/permns • Construction management • Identify funding for design assistance Prospect Avenue District Sneetscope (page 66) Conceptual detailed design $$$ ` Create overall budge' and phasing for implementation .......,........................ .......... ..------------- -- ..,...,.. .w..,,,,.., .m ...,... ...m ..,........-.,. .. ..,....... .-.-.mm • Conduct necessary site reme Irction 0-3 years Ongoing 0-1 year 0-2 years 0-2 years 0-1 year Ongoing 0-5 years 0-5 year Negotiullate p operty/develop e t agreement [��ncl aim .F......,. Fi at e Redevelopment (page 26) $$$ 0-5 years ze bing plans/pe Is Construction management .......--- 113 n• on - Wage Staff - Private Funds Tri-State Site Redevelopment (page 361 Medium Village Board . TIF D—Inprr General Revenue Bends • Properly Owner • Village Funds Vdoge SIoH __. ......... ......... ...•.. Village Funds . At Grade Crossing Initiatives (page 80) Medium Village Board ITEP Gant CMAQ Unon Paafic wets TAP Facade and Site Improvements (page 64) Medium Property Owners Village Funds Village Staff . TIF Wage Staff Downtown Master Plan Update and Evaluation Medium Planrmg Zoning Commission Wage Funds Want " Vilage Board TIF - Wage Staff - Pnvate Funds Lions Park Site Redevelopment (page 54) low •Vilage Board • General Revenue Bonds Developer • Village Funds Property Owners • ¶F • Village Stall ------- Post Office Redevelopment (page 48) law Paste Ace Facilities 3aH * Private Funds General Revenue Bonds WageSite Board Developer ^ Village Funds 1114 I ! � I ' 115 : I I , American with Disabilities Act (ADA) Federal civil rights law signed in 1990 providing comprehensive oversight and protections for people with disabilities The law also identifies a series of accessibility standards for the built environment including, but not limited to, curb and access ramps, sidewalk and door entry widths, etc Average Daily Traffic Count (ADT) The daily total volume of traffic for a particular roadway, indicating the intensity of its use. Bollard Low post, typically made of metal or concrete, primarily used to block automobile access Branding Bement A physical object that employs various aesthetic qualities distind to a specific area Streetscape elements - including lights, signs, benches, planters and other furnishings - can be used in concert to reflect and promote the identity of a place Brandmark An identifying symbol or logo that conveys a theme or identity, which can be used in a variety of applications Bump Out A physical extension of a street curb, typically extending the width of a parking lane and located at the end of a black Bump outs can help to reduce crosswalk distances, reduce traffic speeds and create additional space for streetscape amenities The physical application of bump outs (size, placement and design) should be context sensitive Business Inventory A description of the nix of specific busness types within an area am G ' [� \ / �DA T Capital Improvements An investment in the public realm by way of infrastructure improvements, such as construction or repairs, that is intended to enhance the value of surrounding property. Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP) The official regional planning organization for northeastern Illinois (Cook, DuPage, Kane, Kendall, Lake, McHenry and Will counties), overseeing the comprehensive planning efforts of the greater Chicago Metropolitan area Context Sensitive Implies consideration of the surrounding natural and built environment in the design process in order to achieve a development outcome that is beneficial to an area in whole Continental Style Crosswalk Continental or 'zebra' crosswalks use a series of highly - visible, wide, white stripes placed perpendicular to the direction of travel in a roadway Development Standards A set of predetermined regulations meant to control the performance and design aspects of development within a parcel or property. Typical factors include building location and size, density, parking ratios, architectural materials and land use, among others Dome Plate See Tactile Warning Paving. Facade Fenestration The pattern of openings in a building envelope, such as windows, doors, skylights, curtain walls, etc, designed to permit the passage of air, light, vehicles or people Grade Separated Crossing An intersection of travel ways (auto, train or pedestrian) at different heights Typical examples include pedestrian bridges and highway underpasses Greenfield Development New construction on land that had been previously undeveloped. such as wilderness or farmland living Wall Also commonly known as a 'green wall', it is the vertical use of vegetation an a building's facade. Median A physical element separating travel lanes. Mixed Use A development that includes two or more physically integrated land uses on one site or within one structure Multi -modal The coexistence and synergistic relationship of multiple modes of public transportation within a specific location or area Northwest Municipal Conference (NWMC) A regional council of governments located in the Chicago region that works to organize, promote and establish various planning policy initiatives and programs forking Ratio The relationship between physical parking spaces to the size and nature of a business or development, typically measured by spaces per unit (residential) or spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor space (commercial/office) In Mount Prospect parking ratios are based on land use and size, and requirements con vary widely within on individual property. Note An ' indicates definition source is "The Language of Towns & Oties', by Dhiru A Thadani Fbdestrian Countdawin Signal l leod A brier, located & (s crosswalk, providing .0 pedeso an with a clecii indication of the Nine left to cross the stresn FL-deshrian 1'omenade A space., possage way or corridor', usuolly miniaining urbon design and aneetsosice elements that is designed and intended pi monly for use by people Fbirimeable Surface A paved area that accommodates the direct infiltration of mraier and runoff info the grmind Planned Unit DcNeloprneirit PUN A ovocess and aF.rj-.)Ilcohon of zoning in which land being develop: ed is unique in ih size and/or rickins, and has Oie potential for greater common good than by- ighl' development; hereADy being a candidate for an independent review and approval process See the Village of Mow q ProspecCs Whage Code 6 speafic d4. inihons nrld mfppor ftng u ifor matics Primary Fri Indicates the main pircipei ty of i Ighl of way line of o parcel Typically obulting an imporInnI street of civic space, a lr.njilding's rnoin facade and entiariasshould fsl and forernosl address the prisnory fronloge FfroW.y Fox Abatemerit A planned, lernpofray reduchon in the amount of loft a proper[yowner must rnny Caribeused osatool tooffirict new develop rient, Pbblic-Rivate Fbirtneiishiip Combined efforts of governing bodies, busiviess leaders individual citizens to ackieve a shored vision or goal Revenue Bond A loan issued by a municipality to finance a ismied, horn which the increased iricorne will lce used lov repayment. Regiond lira nsporkshon Aithority OUN The Chicago RTA is specialized unil of local govei nrnenB Ili& assists rronsip agencies in the manogernenr, funding, ond operation of public transportation in the greater Chicago region Sgriages Family A group of wayfinding arid rdentily elements hat share a common and unified aesthetic % kelfidder Person or group of ir cople Involved in a gover ning agency, of a busiviess/pinsperly awnei, with a direcl involvement in Downtown decision making &epback l'errn describing a consistent wolf recession a[ cerian heigHs of a building, often accompanied lay a Change in archilled ural style, form ar building use. Step backs icomi nrig after the first few sIntie-s of a building con provide an added benefit of reducing Ifre visud L.m.ilk of cy structure, from the sueet level rimwute,.,,r The vroier from rain arid snow that flows ovor the land smi lace , and is not absorbed in Is the grouv i d ar(p %iopping mter Also commonly known 05 0 SWo M011', it is 0 gMupirig of one to two-stovy reloil spaces arranged side by side, and accomisoned lay a predominant parking I& Sinis shopping centers are typically auto -oriented in nakins and generally doiniscl from a liligh qualify pedeslricin ervorronment "Facifle Warning FbVhg Raised or ts,xkjred poving inalei kil, typically used at a stierel corner car driveway enlroncc,. Io ndfcate-, the ritenniphon of a sidewalk or podesirian arena [ransit Orienked l . )welopinent GON the is rocess of p6nning and developing i eol estate cenlerex.i around, and lorcgely dependevil- on, voi, ous modes of public I romprsi ohnn Ransil onented development is generally mean/to be compad, walkable, inixed use and at a high enwigh density to, support tronspoi olion alisri riative.s. l6dor Syle An architectural style from rnecievd England, commonly knaorn for ilis use of georneIric wood froffllna4 and a simple, color palette Uiban Design 11he study and proclic.c.., of designing buildingi gra.jips of Lm.jddings, spaces and landscapes wilhin villoges, leawri.s, rind Wayfinding Sginage J S inset signs plinconds, kiosks, billboards or oiiher visual information sources that provide directions of guide People to amenities rind londmarks. loning The division of fand by legislalive slatutes, code.,i, ordinances, or' requIrshons info orecis krimn as zones the uses and densiIiies, allowablc within each zone are specified, together wilh Many iules Foi the: ricture of buildings, sigricige isorking cind other elements of use "' Note An * ndiccies ceRniijon soi.wce is 'D,e ongijoge of Towns & Glies", by Dhinu A lhadon! 117 ALOP-AF JSAW Presentation Outline f ir,r i it 1 , f I I r I I I I r N 1 I � I � I f I I I >I 1 i I � 1 1 �� l i�1 ll Il I II 1 1 1 1 D l Purpose and objectives Study area and data collection Parking supply Parking demand Recommendations Downtown Parking Study Mount Prospect, IllinoisEa.flry�w��q„�„, „„. Purpose/OWlectives 1 J I JI I I I I I I 1 � I 1 II �� !! I Ill lli llll l II J /J 1� II111 11111��111 Il �ll1111111111/11l 1l1 I rll lI I I ! � ICI ! Cll ! 11 � �1 1111 I III I II � 1I11 J I / /� lull llllllllll�/>�1l//J/J//%/ ��1�11111I111J11��11��IIICIIIII�I�I/I��IOI��III1j000�IIIII���0111111//, �//� 111�//C%'�ICCIII'�l�/�I>�CO��lllll/III�IfIII�II�I�IC�III�J/�JJJ�I�11101 �II�IJIJJJJ�I11��>�1�����������1��11111��1>%1�11/1/1l//////////��111�1111��1/ll�l�%��01/////%00111���11%l� Inventory the downtown parking supply Document the parking demand on typical weekdays and weekend days and during downtown events Evaluate the parking data to identify locations where parking surpluses and deficits exist Estimate the impact of proposed planned developments on downtown parking demand Develop recommendations to address areas of parking deficit Downtown Parking Study Mount Prospect, Illinois KoNgAjOdTtlWMI,O ra, b^10 , Study Area land Data Collection t , r r r r r r r r f j , f r f „r, f f f f i 0 r ( 1 I l I I 1 1 � II Ifl J111 I (1111 lll� J,1J j 11 I IU�II II JJ I („I�IIII11010���If�J�J1�11�«f1011JOJ � � III�II 11> ,IIJrJ 1 JI � l I 1 1C1�IJlJ�I1��11�,1�I1/J/llr l f l�l � � �� 11 11 I I J �l,lll� ��1����I��y�rl���0������/�il�//I�1��II���/�����J���111���>1�1I���>I������II�III�II���I�l>11����1%��I�DII��J1���11rIIIJ�I1�lllJlllllll�����1�!��s�II,1�1�1�J111I�J�DJIDJIJIII�I1�Jlrrlllllllll/11//////1/llllllll�l Two study areas a General downtown area [3 Downtown core subarea Village inventoried all public and private parking spaces Village performed occupancy surveys 11'"'` Seven days in June and July 2018 U3 One Wednesday and several weekends 1' Weekends surveys included typical days and downtown events (Farmers' Market and Car Show) Downtown Parking Study Mount Prospect, Illinois X�„��,�, SEE FIG. I B z � N LEGp END PI-BMUC -tR AND OR _ I I'll 11 PUBLICPARRMfi -c PAPKWG GARAGE PUBLIC -ING - T LOT -R .-- ATE PARKING LOT PRM- PARKING GARAGE STUDY DOWNTOWN PARKING , MOUNT PROSPECT, I�,NOIS PUBLIC & PRIVATE PARKING LOCATIONS - DOWNTOWN .... .. 01,4"VAM: IA m {ryNAYF C2'b( yr Ni'd N U'"�v 1nN b/b Yi ti' 1Mrm P'. 111j. min No" 'moo` k01m m ry SCALE N T S I� 9fGfV v Q� �qr» � Yp w I1 ;afll+I�`•» Ilv,�r d , Ou ra„, Null I(a�, CNN Xvo wPtt10 �m. E NN�iv wo "'to "Awl, 'low Yb - w..... rt LEGEND ,.... PMR C OOw1-14 AND OR Ilk, PERMIT PARKING LOT =� R'wM9c NIIM ou 14w" tlh,NO Wdl II.AAdl a �^ PUBIIC PARKING ONSINEET 1,14111 b ® LOT UNDER CONSTRUCTION. 3 PR— PARKING LOT 'old Ally 11� PRIVATE PARKING GARAGE dt0)p NINII� puWN' aEaEau DOWNTOWN PARKING STUDY PUBLIC 8 PRIVATE PARKING LOCATIONS -DOWNTOWN CORE SUBAREA ` REN, MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS �.�. FIGURE. 18 �+«,_� •»»���__ Downtown Parkin Supply f r � I r i 1 C 1 f I f 1 I 1 J l I f 1 I 1 >I r >1 r ( 1 I U I I1 C� � / 11111I� I 1 1 11 11 � �/ 1 1 1111,111�11 I � 1 II ) //1 C I 1 I 111 �),/IIIIIIIIITI�II 1111, 1� � (III llll I I �111 J111111111111111111111/I I 1 �� 1I1 I I II I I I 1. Il I I11 � )11<111111 IIJ11/>�/��lll� 11/ � I�1/11 IIJ I � I I 11 1 ll 111� IIIIJII l IIIIIIIII.IIIIII��l��1�1 1 ll1l �I II I I Ili 1 Jl! � 1 11 1�/`ll/11�1���C���lJ1�I1�D�����J111J���1l�lIlIJ��I��1I111111�111��1����JJ11f,IIlIIJIIIIJ,II�II l�l // x ��I�//��ll���I1 Jl11111I1IJI��IJII�IJJIIIIJIIII�����D�1�1�/l/%////l>�I/C/ll/������ GG�����CI1�����1�' �aJJ�JJJJJI>l��I�I1�1�:����JJJJJJ JJJJJJ�JJJJ JJJJ fJJJII�� ,1� /'/C�/I/Illl/ Public vs Private Parking (4,521 total spaces) FO Public Private Downtown Parking Study Mount Prospect, Illinois Core vs Non -Core Parking (4,521 total spaces) �1� Core -Area Non -Core Area Downtown Core Parking Supply, / I r py I i I r rru+p rr r 1 I I l I I 1 � 1 1 I I r r 1 llI[I�fIIJI�I���lll 1 � II�IIUIII�IIf�I�Il�l�lll((II((Illl�llllll l>r ll Illr I11 �1I lll�lll l 1111 ��l 1, l� 11 � I � 1 1 Public On vs Off Street Parking (2,209 total spaces) AM Off -Street On -Street Downtown Parking Study Mount Prospect, Illinois Public Parking/Quadrant (2,209 total spaces) 11a Northwest Northeast Southeast Southwest 7frIgPM �p,tkn[4p'�a^gncr,Ci°M#gpmupq �M1xrrrr+.�rnww, IlfM1r Downt,D'�iwn Core Maxi'mum Parki Total Parking Utilization (Wednesday Midday) ml Occupied Spaces Downtown Parking Study Mount Prospect, Illinois Unoccupied Spaces 0 to Utilization Public Parking Utilization (Wednesday Midday) im Occupied Spaces Unoccupied Spaces Downtown iCore Public Parkin 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,045 m 500 812 util'i ization 515 2,209 388 353 406 0I�9J�l�Il�l 0 Im IN Weekday Midday Weekday Evening Saturday Midday Saturday Evening Sunday Midday Weekend Event Day FIRMINBOn-Street x�-Off-Street Total Capacity Downtown Parking Study 'A Mount Prospect, Illinois AKIMErna a ,ry H� A, . Downtown Core Parking Util'izatioll 9 a 1 0 t 0 Sioecific Fad i ies or Areas 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Village Deck Village Deck Commuter Lots Weekday Weekend Weekday ni Occupied Downtown Parking Study Mount Prospect, Illinois Ilf'°�'� Commuter Lots Weekend Unoccupied NW Quadrant NW Quadrant Weekday Weekend Existing Parking Conditions Downtown core sub -area has 21209 public parking spaces Maximum parking utilization is less than 50 percent Village deck is underutilized and commuter parking lots are underutilized on evenings and weekends Spot locations with capacity constraints Several streets around Village Center Pine Street between Central and Northwest Highway Sections of Prospect Avenue Parking available in a short walking distance (1 to 2 blocks) of the spot locations Downtown Parking Study Mount Prospect, Illinois %1.,od5�tl*Ab LEGEND PARKING OfIIIIpTON PAUIIIIIATON RKING -11% PARKING -I—ON — PARKING -u 11014 DOWNTOWN PARKING STUDY MOUNT PROSPECT, ILUNOIS Im WN 111110111, lip 0 WIT, Ilm HAvdm mm MW 'um WE', . ...... . I �Ww71 wU Aht ok Ll "loo AtI,, 44,, VI 4% Asps I( NgpyA 114[; PUBLIC PARKING UTILIZATION WEEKDAY MIDDAY - DOWNTOWN CORE SUBAREA I m ! -w IIOD, omm' » sttln ;y»r ,m r1A �imw O11. pllGll� YNN 69. -% 1, fYKA 1:Iv»d,N II[�� re 1�4 � uYl 4,l GYP a � dU �6dNl "'"w"y� I llll " " ro LEGEND go- imb PanclNG imuunoN �Wle �'V p 6 I N-R9 P N NG UIiIRATI N �al0a' dP, N M s�,. IP i xrr�m o-c .w NG unuurroN w» II�M1y Vu �aryltlie N�"�I DOWNTOWN PARKING STUDY MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS PUBLIC PARKING UTILIZATION SATURDAY MIDDAY DOWNTOWN CORE SUBAREA ewr r„ m„m ... _. .... RGURE 5B � Planned/Proposed Triangle TOD Project N Elimination of 59 existing public parking spaces 13 Projected public parking demand of 50 - 75 spaces (evenings) Other developments - limited impact on parking conditions Minimal loss in existing public parking as sites generally contain only private parking Developments are anticipated to provide sufficient parking to meet majority of their parking demand u0 TOD developments �i�x° Shared parking opportunities with downtown parking facilities Downtown Parking Study /rim OA, Mount Prospect, Illinois pn,a�g, ,aermi rnriw, 0,111n v,�A�N9'� ..,lma'x. Recommendations t r r 7 r f r f r r � r I i � I � f I I 1 I r I 1f i I � I 1 1 I � 1 I I 1 I 1 1 �1 ����IIII�IIICCC�I�llll�l J 11 � II I I1 � 1 I I I I I I ���ll��lflJllf�l>aI1111J1„���JJ�I����IJJDIIII I I II 1111I111 I I I� II.JII�JJJIIIJIIII(�C��J�J�IIII�I��1fI�IJ�11111>III���1111J��J��JI�IIUJJJJJJ�JJ������1������1��������1��������/I�l /' I� J��1.1 11I1/ 111I `1111�I �� IfiJ� I 11 � I D Better utilization of the Village parking deck Offer permits for additional users (employees & commuters) Extend parking limits from 4 hours to 6 or 8 hours Market the deck better and enhance wayfinding to the deck h°f Allow valet services to park in the deck IDOT currently reviewing Village's permit application to install a pedestrian crossing on Main Street at Busse Avenue Improved pavement markings Installation of pedestrian refuge island Installation of overhead signage Downtown Parking Study Mount Prospect, Illinois K,..dq.U-49n tl"klun*At-ana Recom p lm o ri �Il�il�N s Better utilization of the commuter lots Market the commuter lots better and enhance wayfinding to the commuter lots � Allow valet services to park in the commuter lots G,,A;; Northwest Highway with Main Street intersection pedestrian improvements to be implemented in 2019 Evaluate the feasibility of installing a new pedestrian crossing on Northwest Highway at Willie Street Downtown Parking Study Mount Prospect, Illinois K"1q „.,lOdgrOMO440MA.411., 11M Re c �o �rn �ni e �n d a tio r r I r I � I r f + T f I � f ! r 1 1 II 1 I 1 1 JI Il IIIII l 1 1 � UJJJJJJJJ��..JJ J, JJ � ���llf I J J,J�J�JJJJJ11I�1)�9,II,II f 11�JflI�J111111JI1f1,1111J h�111J111� I l � � �III01��1111111�1111/IIIJ1l,/r!�I�I���IJ� ll//l/ I C I ��ll Cl I1�1 911 I I I I I III II J���C�I��1'�IIDl1�I1JD���f Illl�/���1'�,II����IIIIGI��I/l0���1�11����11���IIIJJJJ111JJJ1J���J��l�l'I��III�II�I�III�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII/I/I/I/I/I/�J�'1rIJ1��JJ111JJI11J111111J�DIIIIII�JJIIJIJJ11Jr1J111����/////////l/��i Enhance marketing and wayfinding Develop downtown public parking maps and pamphlets identifying public parking facilities, regulations, and time restrictions Establish a uniform and comprehensive wayfinding signage system Install additional signage on Village deck Valet parking 1� Northwest quadrant Individual services vs single collective service �n Required to use Village deck or commuter lots Downtown Parking Study �" Mount Prospect, Illinois A.Iip. tvldgy#a % C7"Hxerun�JMkwda.a,I SCALE N i S LEGEND L .,� PUBLIC PARKING FACILITII .: ON -STREET PARKING 1HOUR OR LESS ON -STREET PARKING 2 HOURS OR GREATER G' VILLAGE PARKING DECK C' LIBRARY PARKING LOT VIATER TOWER LOT p m DOWNTOWN PARKING STUDY CONCEPTUAL DOWNTOWN PARKING MAP -WEEKDAYS BEFORE 6:00 PM MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS N q NiBL'FRR 10. J. M1kl I&��dL.ra v'.r. I � Ire i u I y y UHW LEGEND "•..• PUBLIC PARKING FACILITIES j 'r,� ON —STREET PARKING I HOUR OR LESS ON —STREET/ PARKING O 2HOURS 2 HOURSS OR GREATER VILLAGE PARKING DECK f �m O AddNR,AY4r K'✓M,ddY.�R4r iJti.R' l 03 WATER TOWER LOT ® COMMUTER PARKING LOTS ,•' ! � I fly � f� :W' O CHASE BANK PARKING LOT c 4 DOWNTOWN PARKING STUDY MOUNT PROSPECT, ILL1N013 Izr CONCEPTUAL DOWNTOWN PARKING MAP - WEEKDAY EVENINGS AND WEEKENDS Pnwecr ... �a 1 Recomr,riendations Modify on -street time regulations, «`f Increase turnover of convenient/desirable spaces �; Reduce time limits from 2 hours to 30 to 60 minutes On -street parking around the Village Center and portions of Pine Street and Prospect Avenue Pine Street modifications ii'Increase on -street parking �!`nJ Alternatives include widening of the road or conversion to one-way street Downtown Parking Study /rim Mount Prospect Illinois m n� rro�e m�,u run 011 .11, uuf1. SCALE 42'S a C, Owl, Na $ °'N �LJO Q � °h. N& pWM� � � Aryl miw�w �❑ � �'°o� AI4,,. LEGEND 2 HDUR PARR NG 00 ANI TO E.00 PM A R HOUR PARING D�1 a HWR PTARYJe G LPL , p0 AM .00 PM ® 2 NWR PARKING MoNonY TFf— COMMUTER PMIUNG WEEKDAYS CO—RT FROM 2 HOUR PARING D V ALN OR %HOUR PARING lips TON. MINROR I HOIGIP PARINOG INm11'011 IR W4 A HOUR PARING 10 ..1ft. 1P. B HOUR PARING DOWNTOWN PARKING STUDY MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS rmk� i CNC Inllmy kkll 44 eNu� aNhl� CVpg tiI�I w PARKING LOT REGULATIONS �1 PARKING D— -A HOUR PA G O PA-NG LOT PERFAIT PARKnlG ONLY �9 CD!Lh— LOTS - FREE PING PM-N WEEKDAYS NO RESTRICTION WEEKENpS A HOLIDAYS ® UB A RY PARING b RECOMMENDED PARKING TIME REGULATIONS - DOWNTOWN CORE SUBAREA µ;wT m;a aMoc B %„ �(�/z: Wojtk�evOcz, c4tudy Area Traffic Count Intersection 11r Maple Street Lofts Site Metra Station I A n PreviOUS StUdy Year 2010 2010-2015 2016 2016 Study IL 83 Sid, al Timing Study (IDOT Work Order) Incremental signal timing implementation doAgnal TMri Re -study (IDOT Work Order) ew traf I counts i11r im"rng implementation Signal Timing Study (Village -funded) New train station • Signal equipment comparison • Closure/geometry of Prospect Avenue • Traffic Management Center Downtown Transportation Study (Village -funded) • Expanded study area • Grade-separated/at-grade crossing feasibility • Platform & relocation alternatives • Pedestrian posts & pushbuttons z 2018 Addendum to include Maple Street Lofts Existing Traffic ;�v; o.. 01 t 1 �tol JILpdt 5: �20 I L saw J L V", Old Peak Hours 7:15-8:15 AM 5:00-6:00 PM Lincoln St 0 I , 'VA j L PQCI ae Parkinq Lot 7-Ir J I L J U-,,O,�-25) $1 10 --j (-)95---o 164 os, 115,-- (20)85- hgwe 1: E�Onq Traffic Pea I Ho 5 7 A Sam t., sc kv a tz 'AM Movement impacted PM .."o 0_,. by Maple Street closure (5 () � ". P mu v Not to Scale w Emiii,xdisting Traffic mu p it IIII sip [ cults Main St IL 83 @Northwest Hwy "'140,1P,,t C C Main St/IL 83 @ Prospect Ave,e ` Emerson St @ Northwest H�� %D B D B Emerson St @ Prospect Ave C C Maple St @ North"���;°,y ��`irty Maple St @ Pros*t Av4 C B C B Maple St @Lind ,, „St„ N' c���W��lr°"<r, A A School St @,W;LtQ Hwy B C School r� Pray °`Wt*, A A Mourif spect RW N(Trthwest Hwy D D Mount r -°erect Rdfr : Prospect Ave D D 7 Elmo I g Qperations Tluraffi:l' Signal System • Critical intersection cluster • 160-170 second cycle length (Emerson half -cycle) • Trains and EV causes system to be offline or "in transition" half of 90-minute peak period • Emerson cut -through 5 W T rh C (D A 0� fD ct O 3 N Vf M A m 6 ala x• AM M M I O S. £- rF 3 C^L Gq CL -1 O -h � � A rF �• =r t43Et 4 K llf--lE I 83 t{ 5— 3r%60� Y w 15 (501 '`-10(15) -a (180) +--110 (165) --8?(70) 30(20) Emerson 5t _ _�_4_. 15i 15 (45) 70 (40) 1853 so P,01 5 b �[[ L 30 (601 o y D 'a=a3 f-5(10) Elm Sto E,p i 3 x o a ' N a o o (15 ?1? (20} _ I H� N l N v D W `O 'o vvi rn F co io .x � o n x a 11011 1 �/ � �3 1�. —565c8,51 (15) 15— (145) 80 �1 (835) 745 580) 490 / I (190)275�.. - -_ err iR ° 5 (30) 4 40(20) ffm Mount Maple St School St i Illlillll a ille Lafts Tli�l a iiic Trip generation F rojections using nstitute o Transportation Engineers (ITE) data 25 in/80 out in AM Peak a 90 in/45 out in PM Peak Assigned to study intersections based on estimated routing 5 Land Use / Size Maple Streol Lofts Mid -Rise ResMential wfth Gr& lwleRaul 257 units m 10,000 SF Low-RiseldtiPlmt;�rrnla lid YVeekd�ay AM Weekday PM ="Peak Hour Peak Hour In '�pr Total In Out Total 20 55 75 65 30 95 5 25. 30 25. 15 40 25 80 1 105 00 45 135 tj re 1mra ff Capacity Analysis Results Main St IL 83 @ Northwest Hwy C �i, � C C C Main St/IL 83 @ Prospect Ave % /� """I III D D D Emerson St @Northwest Hwy Oft B B Emerson St @ Prospect_ Ave "m C C C Maple St @ Northwest Hwy C � C C C Maple St @ Prospect Ave % %j/ !% B B B Maple St @ Lincoln St "', , fl0,,e , x '�,!� A A A Elm St @ Prospect Ave jggp " .., \ n/a n/a A A Elm St @ Lincoln St r n/a n/a A A School St @ Northwest �'',y j B C B C School St @ Prospect Ave 4 A A A A Mount Prospect Rd @ Northy j �Wy D D D D Mount Prospect Rd @ Prospect Ave D D D D 7 Improvement F Illli l I I of w llmi Irni s mul Illllluu king • Can offset 30 % of new 'ii pekday AM Weekday PM peak hour Land Use / Size Peak Hour _. ___ __ Peak Hour ......... residential retail trips p In Out Total. In Out Total � � Maple Street ��rt� e To benefit railroad Mid -Rise Residential viu15 GM1111164 aI Retail 257units ,O , �® 55 75 i;5 30 95 crossing traffic permit �-Ru�lnmoly�� °n� :: 5 2530 25 15 AO_ � W �p 1lR]�N ne) T 66 D P ��i � '221i i holders must reside north of tracks ,HawFasidentY1/ietaiiTrips ,_.. 25 80 105 90 45 135 meter spaces170 15 1215 0 130 130 r0boatinru 00 ,p0 permits -40 0 -40 0 -45 -45 - ommutar Parking Trips 130 15 145 i 85 5 I�rn 13 rove °' s EXISTING SIGNAL POST G EXISTING MAST ARM POST WITH EXISTING PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON AND POST EXISTING SIGNAL POST EXISTING PEDESTRIAN PROPOSED PEOESTR'IA Improves 5-6 cycles1'� during peak 90-minute w«� 8 periods 1)I I* "gym EXISTING MAST ARM POST WITH PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON EXISTING SIGNAL POST WRH EXISTING PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON AND POST EXISTING MAST ARM POST WITH EXISTING PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON j E)OSTING SIGNAL POST WITH EXISTING PEDESTRIAN PUSH Main St/IL 83 with Northwest Highway Main St/IL 83 with Prospect Avenuu #014 Emerson Street with Northwest 8 SIGNAL, POSTW IT14 O PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON EX STING MAST ARM POST WITH EXISTING PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON ip im N En' iiii�"geii°wy V6IIII iiii IIII lnteirruptions 2,000 signal system interruptions per year Average 1 per 90- minute peak period Impacts system for up to 10 minutes Relocation of thef1r station can cuts stem y e, �'trar�rorvae��i�rrf� I e cati bf Fite Station interruption time by'=eir,(trains up to 25 % ..... TIOi"1l"'Orloje ed Condit➢on) 8 Morning (7.0%,01, Evening (430-BrBD) -` Emergency �u Ur ii E ency Vehicle Vehicle 2 CL 0 O `m c c r r E 2p c ° a ° z t7a z wa z 5_ z 17 34 1 10 14 32 1 1 -1 -1 -1 -111 11 ....... -4 11 17 23 0 ® 14 � 26 0......._ � ........0 i Ilan Extension • 2,000 signal system interruptions per year Average 1 per 90- minute peak period Yellow = 580 ft. extension Inbound & outbound trains clear Main St Blue = 250 ft. extension Inbound trains clear Main St n6 'hinpro%tement Site I''lan Ir" III'III gym' IIon Traffic control recommendations • Continued site plan coordination Maple/Prospect pedestrian cross On -street parking • Parking garage access dri io Other Findings Mount PIrospect Road Capacityar r identifiedto reduce queu Aveon Prospect Requires widening of Mou n° Prospect Rd across tracks • UP/ICC coordination Ott,wr Finding, !���easflbility of at -grade crossfing • UP policy requires 3 other at -grade closures for 1 new • Recommend continued coordination on policy flexibility • $5 million Other Finding mfi�l�n IWY� I III g i , � IIWIi I i 6IIIIIIWIII °f wi e iir Illl • Significant impact area UP policy requires 1 at -grade closure for I new • $20 million ............. Areas for Reconstruction: Roadway Commercial Commercial Driveway Residential Driveway Other IfIW IGW, Findings Platform Relocatia���i Moves train station out of downtown area • $12-14 million Inbound & outbound trains clear Main St & Emerson St .............. Existing Station Platform: 971 ft Longest Rush HourTraln: 1080 FL 11 Cars (85 ft. per car) =935 ft. 2 Engines (72 ft. per engine) =144 ft ±. 5: . 11 9 � . .� . y » i i k Attachment C: Village Hall Parking Garage Surveillance/Counts - 2005, 2017 (Available Spaces in Garage During Morning and Afternoon) rUESDAY Date Time Floor Empty Available Percentage Spaces. Spaces Empty 1/17/2017 n/a LL n/a 41 n/a 1/17/2017 n/a l n/a 68 n/a 1/17/2017 n/a 2 n/a 84 n/a 1/17/2017 n/a 3 n/a 85 n/a 1/17/2017 n/a 85 n/a 1/17/2017 n/a #/a 20 n/a Totan/a n/a Date Time Floor Empty Spaces ! Available Spaces Percentage Empty 1/18/2017 11:15 AM ILL 1 41 2.44% 1/18/2017 11:15 AM 1 22 68 32.35% 1/18/2017 11:15 AM 2 27 84 32.14% 1/18/2017 11:15 AM 3 46 85 54.12% 1/18/2017 11:15 AM 4 80 811 5 94.12% 1/18/2017 11:15 AM 51 20 20 100.00% Total 1 196 383 51% Date Time Floor Empty Available Percentage I Spaces Spaces Empty 1/19/2017 10:15 AM LL 1 4 41 9.76% 1/19/2017 10:15 AM 11 31 68 45.59% 1/19/2017 10:15 AM 2 26 84 30.95% 1/19/2017 10:15 AM 3 41 85 48.24% 1/19/2017 10:15 AM 4 82 85 96.47% 1/19/2017 10:15 AM 5 20 201 100.00% Total 2041 383 53% FRIDAY Date Time Floor Empty Spaces Available Spac4 Percentage I Empty 1/20/2017 11:15 AM LL 1 3 411 7.32% 1/20/2017 11:15 AM 11 47 681 69.12% 1/20/2017 1/20/2017 11:15 AM 11:15 AM 21 3 35 46 84 85 41.67% 54.12% 1/20/2017 11:15 AM 4 81 85 95.29% 1/20/2017 11:15 AM 5 20 20' 100.00% MONDAY Date Time Total Floor 232' Empty Spaces 383 Available Spaces 61% Percentage Empty 1/23/2017 11:15 AM LL 6 41 14.63% 1/23/2017 11:15 AM' 1 37 68 54.41% 1/23/2017 11:15 AM 2 22 84 26.19% 1/23/2017 11:15 AM 1 31 45 851 52.94% 1/23/2017 11:15JA 4 85 94.12% 1/23/2017 11:15 5 �2O 20 100.00% Total 383 55% 2017 Date Time Floor Empty Spaces Available Spaces Percentage Empty 1/17/2017 3:00 PM LL 10 41 24.39% 1/17/2017 3:00 PM 1 37 68 54.41% 1/17/2017 3:00 PM 2 30, 84 35.71% 1/17/2017 3:00 PM 3'' 42 851 49.41% 1/17/2017 3:00 PM 4 82 85 96.47% 1/17/2017 3:00 PM 5 20 20 100.00% Total 221 383 58% Date Time Floor Empty Spaces Available Spaces Percentage I Empty 1/18/2017 3:30 PM LL 1 9 411 21.95% 1/18/2017 3:30 PM 11 32 68 47.06% 1/18/2017 3:30 PM 2 35 84 41.67% 1/18/2017 3:30 PM 3 44 85 51.76% 1/18/2017 3:30 PM 4 81 85 95.29% 1/18/2017 3:30 PM 5 20 201 100.00% Total 221 383 58% Date Time Floor Empty Available Percentage Spaces Spaces I Empty 1/19/2017' 3:30 PM LL 10 41 24.39% 1/19/2017 3:30 PM 1 32 68 47.06% 1/19/2017 3:30 PM 2, 28 84' 33.33% 1/19/2017 3:30 PM 3 41 85 48.24% 1/19/2017 3:30 PM 4 82' 85 96.47% 1/19/2017 3:30 PM ! 5 201 20 100.00% Total 2131 383 56% Date Time Floor Empty Spaces Available Spaces Percentage I Empty 1/20/2017 5:20 PM LL 23 41, 56.10% 1/20/2017 5:20 PM 1 40 68I 58.82% 1/20/2017 1/20/2017 5:20 PM 5:20 PM 2 3 68 621, 84 85' 80.95% 72.94% 1/20/2017 5:20 PM 4 82 85 96.47% 1/20/2017 5:20 PM 5 20 201 100.00% Total 295 383 77% Date Time Floor Empty Available Percentage Spaces Spaces I Empty 1/23/2017 3:15 PM LL 7 41 17.07% 1/23/2017' 3:15 PM 1 24 68 35.29% 1/23/2017 3:15 PM 2 26 84, 30.95% 1/23/2017 3:15 PM 3 43 85 50.59% 1/23/2017 3:15 PM 4 81 85 95.29% 1/23/2017 3:15 PM 5 201 20 100.00% Total 2011 383 52% 1of3 H:\VILM\Village Hall\Parking Deck- 2017\Final_Report_ and _Attachments_03-03-2017\Attachment_C_Village_Hall_Parking_Garage_Su"eillance_2005,2017.xlsx Attachment C: Village Hall Parking Garage Surveillance/Counts - 2005, 2017 (Available Spaces in Garage During Morning and Afternoon) 2017 TUESDAY Date Time Floor Empty Spaces Available Spaces Percentage Empty Date Time Floor Empty Spaces Available Spaces Percentage Empty 1/24/2017'' 10:15 AM LL 1 41 2.44% 1/24/2017 3:00 PM LL 8 41 19.51% 1/24/2017 10:15 AM 1 41 68 60.29% 1/24/2017 3:00 PM 1 40 68 58.82% 1/24/2017 10:15 AM 2 29 84 34.52% 1/24/2017 3:00 PM 2 26 84 30.95% 1/24/2017 1/24/2017 10:15 AM 10:15 AM 11 3 4 40 81 85 85 47.06% 95.29% 1/24/2017 1/24/2017 3:00 PM 3:00 PM 3 4 40 81 85 85 47.06% 95.29% 1/24/2017 10:15 AM 5 20 20 100.00% 1/24/2017 3:00 PM 5 20 20 100.00% Total 212 3831 55% Total 215 383 56% WEDNESDAY Date Time Floor Empty Spaces Available Spaces Percentage Empty Date Time Floor Empty Spaces Available Spaces Percentage Empty 1/25/2017 9:45 AM LL 6 41 14.63% 1/25/2017 2:35 PM LL 5' 41 12.20% 1/25/2017 9:45 AM 11 44 68 64.71% 1/25/2017 2:35 PM 11 12 68 17.65% 1/25/2017 9:45 AM 21 30 84 35.71% 1/25/2017 2:35 PM 21 13 84 15.48% 1/25/2017 9:45 AM 31 41 85 48.24% 1/25/2017 2:35 PM 3' 42 85 49.41% 1/25/2017 9.45 AM 4 81 85 95.29% 1/25/2017 2:35 PM 4 82 85 96.47% 1/25/2017 9:45 AM 5 20 20 100.00% 1/25/2017 2:35 PM 5 20 20 100.00% Total 222 383 58% Total 174 383 45% THURSDAY Date Time Floor Empty Spaces Available Spaces Percentage Empty Date Time Floor Empty Spaces Available Spaces Percentage Empty 1/26/2017 11:30 AM LL 1 41 2.44% 1/26/2017 3:50 PM LL 11 41 26.83% 1/26/2017 11:30 AM 1 32 68 47.06% 1/26/2017 3:50 PM 11 33 68 48.53% 1/26/2017 11:30 AM 2 25 84 29.76% 1/26/2017 3:50 PM 21 40 84 47.62% 1/26/2017 11:30 AM 3 43 85 50.59% 1/26/2017 3:50 PM 3 42 85 49.41% 1/26/2017 11:30 AM 4 82 851 96.47% 1/26/2017' 3:50 PM 41 82 85 ! 96.47% 1/26/2017 11:30AMI 5 201 -2031 201 100.00% 1/26/2017` 3:50 PM 51 20 20 100.00% Total 383 53% Total 228 383 60% MONDAY Date Time Floor Empty Spaces Available Spaces Percentage Empty Date Time Floor Empty Spaces Available Spaces Percentage Empty 2/6/2017 n/a LL n/a 41 n/a 2/6/2017 2:30 PM LL 7 41 17.07% 2/6/2017 n/a 1 n/a 68 n/a 2/6/2017 2:30 PM 1 25 68 36.76% 2/6/2017 n/a 2 n/a 84 n/a 2/6/2017 2:30 PM' 2 33 84 39.29% 2/6/2017 n/a 3 n/a 85 n/a 2/6/2017 2:30 PM 3 38 85 44.71% 2/6/2017 n/a 4 n/a 85 n/a 2/6/2017 2:30 PM 4 82 85 96.47% 2/6/2017 n/a 5 n/a 20 n/a 2/6/2017 2:30 PM 5 20 20 100.00% TUESDAY Date Time Total Floor n/a Empty Spaces n/a Available Spaces n/a Percentage Empty Date Time Total Floor 205 Empty Spaces 383 Available Spaces 54%' Percentage Empty 2/7/2017 11:00 AM LL 2 41 4.88% 2/7/2017 2:30 PM LL 2 41 4.88% 2/7/2017 11:00 AM 1 27 68 39.71% 2/7/2017 2:30 PM 1 2 68 2.94% 2/7/2017 11:00 AM 2 18 84 21.43% 2/7/2017 2:30 PM 2 14 84 16.67% 2/7/2017 11:00 AM 3 35 85 41.18% 2/7/2017 2:30 PM 3 33 85 38.82% 2/7/2017 11:00 AM 4 82 85 96.47% 2/7/2017 2:30 PM 4 82 85 96.47% 2/7/2017 11:00 AM 5 20 20 ° 100.00/ 2/7/2017 2:30 PM 5 20 20 100.00% Total 184 383 48% Total 153 383 40% 2 of 3 H:\VILM\Village Hall\Parking Deck -2017\Final_Report_and_Attachments_03-03-2017\Attachment_C_Village_Hall_Parking_Garage_Survei l lance_2005,2017.xlsx Attachment C: Village Hall Parking Garage Surveillance/Counts - 2005, 2017 (Available Spaces in Garage During Morning and Afternoon) 2017 WEDNESDAY Date Time Floor Empty Spaces Available Spaces Percentage Empty Date Time Floor Empty Spaces Available Spaces Percentage Empty 2/8/2017 10:30 AM LL 6 41 14.63% 2/8/2017 2:30 PM LL 5 41 12.20% 2/8/2017 10:30 AM 1 37 68 54.41% 2/8/2017 2:30 PM 1 13 68 19.12% 2/8/2017 10:30 AM 21 37' 84 44.05% 2/8/2017 2:30 PM 2 26 84 30.95% 2/8/2017 10:30 AM 31 40 85 47.06% 2/8/2017 2:30 PM 31 41 85 48.24% 2/8/2017 10:30 AM 4 82 85 96.47% 2/8/20171 2:30 PM 41 82 85 96.47% 2/8/2017 10:30 AM 5 20' 20 100.00% 2/8/2017'' 2:30 PM' S 20 20 100.00% THURSDAY Total 222 383 58% Total 187 383 49% Date 2/9/2017 Time 11:40 AM Floor LL Empty Spaces 5 Available Spaces 41 Percentage Empty 12.20% Date 2/9/2017 Time 4:10 PM Floor LL Empty Ispaces 1 18 Available Spaces 41 Percentage Empty 43.90% 2/9/2017 11:40 AM 1 20 68 29.41% 2/9/2017 4:10 PM 1 30 68 44.12% 2/9/2017 11:40 AM 2 25 84 29.76% 2/9/2017 4:10 PM 2 40 84 47.62% 2/9/2017 11:40 AM 3 41 851 48.24% 2/9/2017 4:10 PM' 3 46 85 54.12% 2/9/2017 11:40 AM 4 81 851 95.29% 2/9/2017 4:10 PM 4 82 85 96.47% 2/9/2017 11:40 AM 5 20 20 100.009,. 2/9/2017 4:10 PM 5 20 20 100.00% FRIDAY Total 192 3831 50% Total 236 383 62% Date Time Floor Empty Spaces Available Spaces Percentage Empty Date Time Floor Empty Spaces Available Spaces Percentage Empty 2/10/2017' 10:51 AM ILL 8 41 19.51% 2/10/2017 5:45 PM LL 29 41 70.73% 2/10/2017 10:51 AM 1 11 68 16.18% 2/10/2017 5:45 PM 1 39' 68 57.35% 2/10/2017 2/10/2017 2/10/2017 10:51 AM 10:51 AM 10:51 AM 2 3 4 31 40 82 84 85 85 36.90% 47.06% 96.47%, 2/10/2017 2/10/2017 2/10/2017' 5:45 PM 5:45 PM' 5:45 PM 2 3 4 64 67 82 841 85 85 76.19% ' 78.82% 96.47% 2/10/2017 10:51 AM 5 20 20 100.00% 2/10/2017 5:45 PM 51 20 20 100.00% Total 192 383 50% Total 1 301 383 79% IVIONDAY Date Time Floor Empty Spaces Available Spaces Percentage Empty Date Time Floor Empty Spaces Available Spaces I Percentage Empty 2/13/2017' 10:45 AM LL 8 41 19.51% 2/13/2017 n/a LL n/a 41 n/a 2/13/2017 10:45 AM 1 32 681 47.06% 2/13/2017 n/a 1 n/a 68 n/a 2/13/2017 10:45 AM 21 20 841 23.81% 2/13/2017 n/a 2 n/a 84 n/a 2/13/2017 10:45 AM 31 43 85 50.59% 1 2/13/2017 in/a 3 n/a 85 n/a 2/13/2017 10:45 AM 41 82 85 96.47% 2/13/2017 n/a 4 n/a 85 n/a 2/13/2017 10:45 AM 5 20, 20 100.00% 2/13/2017 n/a 5 n/a I20 n/a Total 1 205 383 54% Total n/a Inja n/a 3of3 H:\VILM\Village Hall\Parking Deck -2017\Final_Report_ and _Attachments_03-03-2017\Attachment_C_Village_Hall_Parking_Garage_ Surveillance_2005,2017.xlsx Attachment B: Parking Garage Volume Data (2005, 2017) February 2017 2005 South Driveway # inbound vehicles Tuesday (2pm-12am) Wednesday 486 1113 Thursday 1039 Friday 1030 Saturday 634 Sunday Monday 489 1082 Tuesday (12am-2pm) 651 TOTAL 6524 AVERAGE 932 South Driveway # outbound vehicles Tuesday (2pm-12am) 229 Wednesday 362 Thursday 314 Friday 289 Saturday 114 Sunday 94 Monday Tuesday (12am-2pm) TOTAL 'AVERAGE 322 130 1854 265 North Driveway # outbound vehicles Tuesday (2pm-12am) 506 Wednesday 760 Thursday 730 Friday 776 Saturday 533 Sunday 384 Monday 763 Tuesday (12am-2pm) 247 TOTAL 4699 AVERAGE 671 2017 South Driveway # inbound vehicles Monday (1pm-12am) 715 !Tuesday 1116 Wednesday 1058 Thursday 1061 Friday 1049 Saturday 735 Sunday 563 Monday (12am-ipm) 535 TOTAL 6832 AVERAGE 976 South Driveway # outbound vehicles Monday (1pm-12am) 266 Tuesday 411 Wednesday 342 Thursday 360 Friday 347 Saturday 129 Sunday 80 Monday (12am-lpm) 122 TOTAL 2057 AVERAGE 294 North Driveway # outbound vehicles Monday (1pm-12am) 741 Tuesday 752 Wednesday Thursday 712 714 Friday 698 Saturday 578 Sunday Monday (12am-ipm) 476 219 TOTAL 4890 AVERAGE 699 1 of 2 H:\VILM\Village Hall\Parking Deck- 2017\Final_Report_and_Attachments_03-03-2017\Attachment_B_Parking_Garage_Volume_Data_2005_2017.xlsx Attachment B: Parking Garage Volume Data (2005, 2017) February 2017 2005 North Driveway # book return vehicles Tuesday (2pm-12am) 129 Wednesday 267 Thursday 263 Friday 215 Saturday 193 Sunday 170 Monday 240 Tuesday (12am-2pm) TOTAL 108 1585 AVERAGE 226 Aisle to Library Parking # inbound vehicles Tuesday (2pm-12am) 168 Wednesday Thursday 306 249 Friday 273 Saturday 254 Sunday 198 Monday 139 Tuesday (12am-2pm) 88 TOTAL AVERAGE 1675 239 Aisle to Library Parking # outbound vehicles Tuesday (2pm-12am) 231 Wednesday 332 Thursday 249 Friday 276 Saturday 251 Sunday 203 Monday 128 Tuesday (12am-2pm) 49 TOTAL 1719 AVERAGE 246 FIPWA North Driveway # book return vehicles Monday (1pm-12am) 294 Tuesday 311 Wednesday 257 Thursday 251 Friday Saturday 270 285 Sunday 297 Monday (12am-1pm) 159 TOTAL 2124 AVERAGE 303 Aisle to Library Parking # inbound vehicles Monday (1pm-12am) Tuesday 205 361 Wednesday 354 Thursday 381 Friday 350 Saturday 263 Sunday 186 Monday (12am-ipm) 116 TOTAL 2216 AVERAGE 317 Aisle to Library Parking # outbound vehicles Monday (ipm-12am) 253 Tuesday 362 Wednesday 355 Thursday 391 Friday 347 Saturday 265 Sunday Monday (12am-1pm) 198 73 TOTAL 2244 AVERAGE 321 2of2 H:\VILM\Village Hall\Parking Deck- 2017\Final_Report_and_Attachments_03-03-2017\Attachment_B_Parking_Garage_Volume_Data_2005_2017.xlsx Attachment C: Village Hall Parking Garage Surveillance/Counts - 2005, 2017 (Available Spaces in Garage During Morning and Afternoon) 2017 TUESDAY Empty Available Percentage Empty Availabl Percentage Date Time Floor Spaces Spaces Empty Date Time Floor Spaces Filled Spaces a Spaces Empty 1/17/2017 n/a LL n/a 41 n/a 1/17,/2017 3:00 PM LL 10 31 41 24.39% 1/17/2017 n/a 1 n/a 68 n/a 1/17/2017 3:00 PM 1 37 31 68 54.41% 1/17/2017 n/a 21n/a 84 n/a 1/17,/2017 3:00 PM 2 30 54 84 35.71% 1/17/2017,n/a 3 n/a 85 n/a 1/17/2017 3:00 PM 3 42 43 85 49.41% 1/17/2017 n/a 4 n/a 85 n/a 1/17/2017 3:00 PM 4 82 3 85 96.47% 1/17,/2017 n/a 5 n/a 20 n/a 1/17/2017 3:00 PMJ 5 201 0 20 100.00% Total n/a n/a n/a Total 221 162 311 83 58% WEDNESDAY Date Time Floor Empty Spaces Available Spaces Percentage Empty Date Time Floor Empty Spaces Filled Spaces Availabl Percentage a Spaces Empty 1/18/2017 11:15 AM LL 1 41 2.44% 1/18/2017 3:30 PM 'LL 9 32 41 21.95% 1/18/2017 11:15 AM 1 22 68 32.35% 1/18/2017 3:30 PM 1 32 36 68 47.06% 1/18/2017 11:15 AM 2 27 84 32.14% 1/18/2017 3:30 PM 2 35 49 84'', 41.67% 1/18/2017 11:15 AM 3 46 85 54.12% 1/18/2017 3:30 PM 3 44 41 85 51.76% 1/18/2017 11:15 AM 4 80 85 94.12% 1/18/2017 1 3:30 PM 4 81 4 85 95.29% 1/18/2017 11:15 AM 51 20 201 100.00% 1/18/2017' 3:30 PM 5 20 0 20 100.00% Total 196 3831 511YG Total 221 162 383 58% THURSDAY Empty Available Percentage Date Time Floor Empty Filled Spaces Availabl Percentage Date Time Floor Spaces Spaces Empty Spaces a Spaces Empty 1/19/2017 10:15 AM 1LL 4 41 9.76% 1/19/2017 3:30 PM LL 101 31 41 24.39% 1/19/2017 1/19,/2017'' 10:15 AM 10:15 AM 1 2 31 26 68 84 45.59% 30.95% 1/19/2017 1/19/2017 3:30 PM 3:30 PM 1 2 32 281 36 56 68 84 47.06% 33.33% 1/19/2017 1/19/2017 10:15 AM 10:15 AM 3 4 41' 82 85 85 48.24% 96.47% 1/19/2017 1/19/2017 3:30 PM 3:30 PM 3 4 41 82 44 3 85 85 48.24% 96.47% 1/19/2017 10:15 AM 5 20 20 100.00% 1 1,/19/2017 3:30 PM 5 20 0 20 100.00% Total 1 204 383 53%1 Total 213 170 383 56% FRIDAY Date Time Floor Empty Spaces Available Spaces Percentage Empty Date Time Floor Empty Spaces Filled Spaces Availabl a Spaces Percentage Empty 1/20/2017 11:15 AM LL 3 41 7.32% 1/20/2017 ' 5:20 PM LL 23 18 41 56.10% 1/20/2017 11:15 AM' 1 47 68 69.12% 1/20/2017'' 5:20 PM 1 40 28 68 58.82% 1/20/2017 11:15 AM 2 35 84 41.67% 1/20/2017 5:20 PM 2 68 16 84 80.95% 1/20/2017 11:15 AM 3 46 85 54.12% 1/20/2017' 5:20 PM 3 62 23 85 72.94% 1/20/2017 11:15 AM 41 81 85' 95.29% 1/20/2017 5:20 PM 4 82 3 85 96.47% 1/20/2017 11:15 AM 5 20 20 100.00% 1/20/2017 5:20 PM 5 20 0 20 100.00% MONDAY Date 1/23/2017 Time 11:15 AM Total 1 Floor LL 232' Empty Spaces 6 383 Available Spaces 41 61% Percentage Empty 14.63%' Date 1/23/2017 Time 3:15 PM TotaIj Floor LL 295 Empty Spaces 7 88 Filled Spaces 34 383 Availabl a Spaces 41 77% Percentage Empty 17.07% 1/23/2017' 11:15 AM' 1 37 68 54.41% 1/23/2017 3:15 PM 1 24 44 68 35.29% 1/23/2017" 11:15 AM 2 22 84 26.19% 1/23/2017 3:15 PM 2 26 58 84 30.95% 1/23/2017 11:15 AM 3 45 851 52.94% 1/23/2017 3:15 PM 31 43 231 85 50.59% 1/23/2017 11:15 AM 4 80 85 94.12% 1/23/2017 3:15 PM 41 81 4 85 95.29% 1/23/2017 11:15 AM 5 20 20 100.00% 1/23/2017 3:15 PM 5 20 0 20 100.00% TUESDAY Total 210 383 55% Total 201 163 383 52% Date Time Floor Empty Spaces Available Spaces Percentage Empty Date Time Floor Empty ' Spaces Filled Spaces Availabl a Spaces Percentage Empty 1/24/2017 10:15 AM LL 1 41 2.44% 1/24/2017 3:00 PM LL 8 33 41 19.51% 1 of 4 H:\VILM\Village Hall\Parking Deck - 2017\Final_Report_and_Attachments_03-03-2017\Attachment_C_ Village _Hall_Parking_Garage_Sumeillance_2005,2017xlsx Attachment C: Village Hall Parking Garage Surveillance/Counts - 2005, 2017 (Available Spaces in Garage During Morning and Afternoon) 2017 1/24,/2017 10:15 AM 1 41 68 60.29% 1/24/2017 3:00 PM 1 40 28681 58.82% 1/24/2017 10:15 AM 2 29 84 34.52% 1/24/2017 3:00 PM 2 26 58 841 30.95% 1/24/2017 10:15 AM 3 40 85 47.06% 1/24/2017 3:00 PM 3 40 45 851 47.06% 1/24/2017 10:15 AM 4 81 85 95.29%' 1/24/2017' 3:00 PM 4 81 4 85 95.29% 1/24/2017 10:15 AM 5 20 20 100.00% 1/24/2017 3:00 PM 5 20 0 20'' 100.00% Total 1 212 383 55% Total 215' 168 383 56% WEDNESDAY Date Time Floor Empty Available Percentage Date Time Floor Empty Filled Spaces Availabl Percentage Spaces Spaces Empty Spaces a Spaces Empty 1/25/2017 9:45 AM LL 6 41 14.63%' 1/25/2017 2:35 PM LL 5 36 41 12.20% 1,125/2017 9:45 AM 1 44 68 64.71% 1/25/2017 2:35 PM 1 12 56 68 17.659/. 1/25/2017 9:45 AM 2 30 841 35.71% 1/25/2017 2:35 PM ! 2 13 71 84 15.48% 1/25/2017 9:45 AM 3 41 851 48.24% 1 1/25/2017 2:35 PM 3 421 43 85 49.41% 1/25/2017 9:45 AM 4 81 85 95.29% 1/25/2017 2:35 PM 4 82 3 85 96.47% 1/25/2017 9:45 AM 5 20 20 100.00% 1/25/2017 2:35 PM 5 20 0 20 100.00% Total 222 383 58% Total 174 209 383 45% i iTHURSDAY Date Time Floor Empty Available Percentage Date Time Floor Empty Filled Spaces Availabl Percentage Spaces Spaces Empty Spaces a Spaces Empty 1/26/2017 11:30 AM LL 1 41 2.44% 1/26/2017 3:50 PM LLHHH 11 30 41 26.83% 1/26/2017 11:30 AM 1 32 68 47.06% 1/26/2017 3:50 PM 1 33 35 68 48.53% 1/26/2017 11:30 AM 2 25 84 29.76% 1/26/2017I 3:50 PM 2 40' 44 84 47.62% 1/26/2017 11:30 AM 31 43 85 50.59% 1/26/2017 3:50 PM 3 42 43 85 49.41% 1/26/2017 11:30 AM 41 82 85 96.47% 1/26/2017 3:50 PM 4 82 3 85 96.47% 1/26/2017 11:30 AM 51 20 20 100.00% 1/26/2017 3:50 PMJ S 20 0 20 100.00% Total 203 383 53% ITotal 2281 155 383 60% MONDAY Date Time Floor Empty Available Percentage Date Time Floor Empty Filled Spaces Availabl Percentage Spaces Spaces Empty Spaces a Spaces Empty 2/6/2017 n/a LL I n/a 41 n/a 2/6/2017 2:30 PM LL 7 34 41' 17.07% 2/6/2017 n/a 1 n/a 68 n/a 2/6/2017 2:30 PM 1 25 43 68 36.76%', 2/6/2017 ,n/a 2,n/a 84 1 n/a 2/6/2017 2:30 PM 2 33 51 84 39.29% 2/6/2017'n/a 3 n/a 85 n/a 2/6/2017 2:30 PM 3 38 47 85 44.71% 2/6/2017 n/a 4 n/a 85 n/a 2/6/2017 2:30 PM 4 82 3 85 96.47% 2/6/2017 n/a 5 n/a 20 n/a 2/6/2017 2:30 PM 5 20 0 20 100.00% Total n/a n/a n/a Total 205 178 383 54% TUESDAY Date Time Floor Empty Available Percentage Date Time Floor Empty Filled Spaces Availabl Percentage Spaces Spaces Empty Spaces a Spaces Empty 2/7/2017 11:00 AM LL 2 41 4.88% 2/7/2017 2:30 PM LL 2 39 41 4.88% 2/7/2017 1 11:00 AM 1 27 68 39.71% 2/7/2017 2:30 PM 1 2 ! 66 68 2.94% 2/7/2017 11:00 AM 2', 18 84 21.43% 2/7/2017 2:30 PM 2 14 70 84 16.67% 2/7/2017 11:00 AM 3 35 85 41.18% 2/7/2017 2:30 PM 3 33 52 85 38.82% 2/7/2017 11:00 AM 4 82 85 96.47% 2/7/2017 2:30 PM 4 82 3 85 96.47% 2/7/2017 ! 11:00 AM 5 20 20 100.00% 1 2/7/2017 2:30 PM 5 20 0 20 100.00% Total 184' 383 48% Total 153 230 383 40% WEDNESDAY Date Time Floor Empty Available Percentage Date Time Floor, Empty Filled Spaces Availabl Percentage Spaces Spaces Empty Spaces a Spaces Empty 2/8/2017 10:30AM LL 6 41 14.63%, 2/8/2017 2:30 PM LL 5 36 41 12.20% 2/8/2017 10:30 AM 1 37 68 54.41% 2/8/2017 2:30 PM 11 13 55 681 19.12% 2of4 H:\VILM\Village Hall\Parking Deck - 2017\Final_Report _and _Attachments _03-03-2017\Attachment_C_Village _Hall _Parking_Garage_Sumeillance_2005,2017.xlsx Attachment C: Village Hall Parking Garage Surveillance/Counts - 2005, 2017 (Available Spaces in Garage During Morning and Afternoon) 2017 2/8/2017 10:30 AM 21 37 84 44.05% 2/8/2017 2:30 PM 2 26 58 84 30.95% 2/8/2017 10:30 AM 3 40 85 47.06% 2/8/2017' 2:30 PM 3 41 44 85 48.24% 2/8/2017 10:30 AM 4 82 85 96.47% 2/8/2017 2:30 PM 4 82 3 85 96.47% 2/8/2017 10:30 AM 5 20 20 100.00% 2/8/2017 2:30 PM 5 20 0 20 100.00%' THURSDAY Date 2/9/2017 2/9/2017 Time 11:40 AM 11:40 AM Total Floor LL 1 222 Empty Spaces 5 20 383 Available Spaces 41 68 58% Percentage Empty 12.20% 29.41% Date 2/9/2017 2/9/2017 Time 4:10 WILL PM 4:10 PM Total Floor 11 187 Empty Spaces 18 30 196' Filled Spaces 23 38 383 Availabl a Spaces 41 68 49%' Percentage Empty 43.90% 44.12% 2/9/2017 11:40 AM 2 25 84 29.76% 2/9/2017 4:10 PM 2 401 44 84 47.62% 2/9/2017 11:40 AM 3 41 851 48.24% 1 2/9/2017 4:10 PM 3 461 39 85 54.12% 2/9/2017 2/9/2017 11:40 AM 11:40 AM 4 5 Total 81 20 192 851 20' 383 95.29% 100.00% 50% 1 2,/9,/2017` 1 2/9/2017 4:10 PM 4:10 PM 4 5 Total 82 20 236 3 0 147 85 20 383 96.47% 100.00% 62% FRIDAY Date Time Floor Empty Spaces Available Spaces Percentage Empty Date Time Floor Empty Spaces Filled Spaces Availabl eSpaces' Percentage Empty 2/10/2017 10:51 AM LL 8 41 19.51% 2/10/2017 5:45 PM LL 29 12 41' 70.73% 2/10,/2017 10:51 AM 11 11 681 16.18% 2/10/2017 5:45 PM 1 39 29 68 57.35% 2/10/2017 10:51 AM 2 31 841 36.90% 2/10/2017 5:45 PM 2 64 20 84' 76.19% 2/10/2017 10:51 AM' 3 40 851 47.06% 2/10/2017 5:45 PM 3 67 18 85' 78.82% 2/10/2017' 10:51 AM 4 82 85 96.47% 2/10/2017 5:45 PM 4 82 3 85 96.47% 2/10/2017 10:51 AM 5 20 20 100.00% 2/10/2017 5:45 PMl 5 20 0 20 100.00% Total 192 383 50%j 1 Total 3011 82 383 79% MONDAY Date Time Floor Empty Spaces Available Spaces Percentage Empty Date Time Floor Empty Spaces Filled Spaces Availabi a Spaces Percentage Empty 2/13/2017 10:45 AM LL 8 41 19.51% 2/13/2017 n/a LL n/a n/a 41 n/a 2/13/2017 10:45 AM 1 32 68 47.06% 2/13/2017 n/a 1 n/a n/a 68 n/a 2/13/2017 10:45 AM 2 20 84 23.81% 2/13/2017 n/a 2 n/a n/a 84 n/a 2/13/2017 10:45 AM 3 43 85 50.59% 2/13/2017 n/a 3 n,/a n/a 85 n/a 2/13/2017 10:45 AM 4 82 85 96.47% 2/13/2017 n/a 4 n/a n/a 85 n/a 2/13/2017 10:45 AM 5 20 20 100.00% 2/13/2017 n/a 5 n/a n/a 20 n/a Total 1 2051 383 54% Total 3 of 4 H:\VILM\Village Hall\Parking Deck - 2017\Final_Report_ and _Attachments_03-03-2017\Attachment_C_Village_Hall_Parking_Garage_Sumeillance_2005,2017,xlsx Attachment C: Village Hall Parking Garage Surveillance/Counts - 2005, 2017 (Available Spaces in Garage During Morning and Afternoon) 2005 TUESDAY Empty Available Percentage Date Time Floor Spaces S aces Emptyg Time Floor Empty Available Percentage p Spaces Spaces Empty 10/11/2005 11:00 AM LL N/A 41 N/A 3:00 PM LL 6 41 15% 10/11/2005 11:00 AM 1 19 68 28% 3:00 PM 1 15 68 22% 10/11/2005 11:00 AM ,2 29 84 35% 3:00 PM 2 27 84 32% 10/11/2005 11:00 AM 3 42 85 49% 3:00 PM 3 65 85 76% 10/11/2005 11:00 AM 4 85 85 100% 3:00 PM 4 85 85 100% 10/11/2005 11:00 AM 5 Total 20' 195 20 383 100% 51% 3:00 PM 5 Total 20 218 20 383 100% 57% FRI DAY Empty Available Percentage Time Floor Empty Available Percentage Date Time Floor Spaces Spaces Empty Spaces Spaces Empty 10/14/2005 10/14/2005 11:00 AM 11:00 AM LL 11 1 6 19 41 68 15% 28% 3:00 PM 3:00 PM LL 1 6 15 41 68 15% 22% 10/14/2005 11:00 AM 2 2911 84 35% 3:00 PM 2 27 84 32% 10/14/2005 11:00 AM 3 42 85 49% 3:00 PM 3 651 85 76% 10/14/2005 11:00 AM 4 85 85 100% 3:00 PM 4 85 i 85 100% 10/14/2005 11:00 AM 5' 20 20 100% 3:00 PM 5 201 20 100% Total 201 383 52%1 Totall 218 383 57% MONDAY Date Time Floor Empty Spaces Available Spaces Percentage Empty Time Floor Empty Spaces Available Spaces Percentage Empty 10/17/2005 10:30 AM LL 1 7 41 17.07% 2:00 PM LL 10 41 24.39% 10/17/2005 10:30 AM 1 27 68 39.71% 2:00 PM 1 45 68 66.18% 10/17/2005 10:30 AM 2 33 84 39.29% 2:00 PM 2 33 84' 39.29% 10/17/2005 10:30 AM 3 53 85 62.35% 2:00 PM 3 57 85 67.06% 10/17/2005 10:30 AM 4 85 85 100.00% 2:00 PM 4 85 85 100.00% 10/17/2005 10:30 AM 5 20' 20 100.00% 2:00 PM 5 20 20 100.00% Total 225 383 59% Total 250 383 65%. TUESDAY Empty Available Percentage Time Floor Empty Available Percentage Date Time Floor Spaces Spaces Empty Spaces Spaces Empty 10/18/2005 9:30 AM LL 10 411 24.39% 2:00 PM LL 12 41 29.27% 10/18/2005 9:30 AM 1 22 68 32.35% 2:00 PM 1 30 68 44.12% 10/18/2005 9:30 AM 2 25 84 29.76% 2:00 PM 2 22 84 26.19% 10/18/2005 9:30 AM 3 50 85 58.82% 2:00 PM 3 51 85 60.00% 10/18/2005 9:30 AM 4 85 85 100.00% 2:00 PM 4 85 85 100.00% 10/18/2005 9:30 AM 5 Total 20 212 20 383 100.00% 55% 2:00 PM 5 Total 20 220 20' 383 100.00% 57% WEDNESDAY Date Time Floor Empty Available Percentage Time Floor Empty Available Percentage Spaces Spaces Empty Spaces Spaces Empty 10/19/2005 10/19/2005 9:30 AM 9:30 AM LL 1 10 29 41 68 24.39% 42.65% 2:00 PM 2:00 PM LL 1 9 15 41 68 21.95%' 22.06% 10/19/2005 9:30 AM 2 29 84 34.52% 2:00 PM 2 20 84 23.81% 10/19/2005 9:30 AM 3 54 85 63.53% 2:00 PM 3 45 85 52.94% 10/19/2005' 9:30 AM 4 85 85 100.00% 2:00 PM 4 85 85 100.00% 10/19/2005 9:30 AM 5 20 20 100.00% 2:00 PM 5 20 20' 100.00% Total 227' 383' 59% Total 194 383 51% Page 1 of 1 H:\VILM\Village Hall\Parking Deck - 2017\Final_Report_and_Attachments_03-03-2017\Attachment_C_Village_Hall_Parking_Garage_SurveiIlance_2005,2017.xlsx Commuter Parking Lots October 18, 2018 License Plate Survey COMMUNITY EAST LOT I WEST LOT I EAST -PROSPECT MAPLE LOT MOUNT PROSPECT 85 56% 53 38% 9 15% 269 ARLINGTON HEIGHTS 17 1.1% 50 36% 16 27% 0 DES PLAINES 3 2% 2 1% 11 18fa, 0 NAPERVILLE 1 1% 0 0% 0 0% 0 NILES MARENGO 1 1 11.% 7% 0 0 0% 0% 0 0 0% 0%,0 0 MUNDELEIN 1 1% 0 0% 0 0% 0 VERNON HILLS 1 1% 0 0% 0 0% 0 ADDISON 1 1% 0 0% 0 0% 0 PARK RIDGE 1 1% 0 0% 2 3% 0 ALSIP 1 1% 0 0% 0 0%'' 0 GLENVIEW 1''' 1% 2 1% 1 2%' 0 OUT OF STATE 3 2% 1 1% 0 0% 0 BUFFALO GROVE WHEELING 2 14 1% 9% 3 7 2% 5% 2 5 3% 8% 0 0 CHICAGO 1 1% 1 1% 0 0% 0 PROSPECT HEIGHTS 13 9% 8 6% 9 1.5% 0 ELK GROVE VILLAGE UNKNOWN OUT OF TOWN 1 4 0 1% 3% 0% 0 3 0 0% 2% 0% 2 0 0 3% 0% 0% 0 5 9 BATAVIA 0 0% 11 1% 0 0% 0 CAMPTON HILLS 0 0%1 11 1% 0 0% 0 ITASCA PALATINE 0 0 O%r 0%1 1, 4 1% 3% 0 0 0% 0% 0 0 SCHAUMBURG 0 0%1 1' 1% 1 2% 0 LAKE ZURICH 0 0% 1' 1% 0 0% 0 SKOKIE LA GRANGE MAYWOOD 0 0 0 0%'' 0% 0% 1 0 0 1% 0% 0% 0 1 1 0% 2% 2% 0 0 0 TOTALS 1 1521 1 140 601 1 283 TOTALS 416 67% 83 13% 16 3% 1 0% 1 0% 1 0% 1 0% 1 0% 1 0% 3 0% 1 0% 4 1% 4 1% 7 1% 26 4% 2 0% 30 5% 3 0% 7 1% 0 0% 1 0% 1 0% 1 0% 4 1% 2 0% 1 0% 1 0% 1 0% 1 0% 0% 621 100% Note: Total "621" is the total number of vehicles parked that day, not the total number of spaces available downtown. BoardDocs® Pro Page 1 of 1 Agenda Item Details Meeting Nov 13, 2018 - COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE AGENDA Category 5. MANAGER'S REPORT Subject 5.1 As submitted Access Public Type Information Public Content Administrative Content Executive Content https://www.boarddocs.com/il/vomp/Board.nsf/Private?open&login 11 /9/2018