IL 53 Phase I Study W. Arsenal Road to US 52 Will County, Illinois - - PDF document

▶
il 53 phase i study
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

IL 53 Phase I Study W. Arsenal Road to US 52 Will County, Illinois - - PDF document

Feb 11, 2024 340 likes •506 views

IL 53 Phase I Study W. Arsenal Road to US 52 Will County, Illinois CAG Meeting #1 Stone City VFW January 27, 2016 Meeting Agenda 1. Welcome 2. Public Involvement Process 3. Existing Conditions 4. Public Meeting #1 Comments 5. Transportation

slide-1
SLIDE 1

1

IL 53 Phase I Study

  • W. Arsenal Road to US 52

Will County, Illinois

CAG Meeting #1 Stone City VFW January 27, 2016

Meeting Agenda

  • 1. Welcome
  • 2. Public Involvement Process
  • 3. Existing Conditions
  • 4. Public Meeting #1 Comments
  • 5. Transportation Issues Workshop
  • 6. Next Steps
slide-2
SLIDE 2

2

Project Team Introduction

  • John Baczek

– Project and Environmental Studies Section Chief

  • Kimberly Murphy

– Consultant Studies Unit Head

  • Chris Kersten

– Project Manager/Patrick Engineering

  • Stacie Dovalovsky

– Consultant – Clark Dietz

  • A collaborative, interdisciplinary

approach

  • Involves stakeholders in the

project development process

  • Reflects project surroundings –

“context”

  • CSS is flexible and addresses all

project aspects:

– Safety and mobility – Community and environment – The pavement and beyond the pavement

Context Sensitive Solutions (CSS)

slide-3
SLIDE 3

3

CSS Goals

  • Understand stakeholder’s key concerns
  • Involve stakeholders in the decision making

process

  • Apply flexibility in design to address stakeholder

concerns

  • Achieve a general understanding of agreement

among the stakeholders

CSS Groups

Community Advisory Group (CAG) Project Study Group (PSG)

slide-4
SLIDE 4

4

Project Study Group (PSG)

Group Members

  • Illinois Department of

Transportation

  • Federal Highway

Administration

Project Role

  • Collects and analyzes data
  • Promotes partnership
  • Ensures all requirements

are met

  • Renders the final decisions

Project Study Group (PSG)

Community Advisory Group (CAG)

Community Advisory Group (CAG)

Group Members Involved in CAG Property Owners Residents Businesses Non‐Profit Organizations Elected Officials Regulatory Agencies Policy Advocates Travelers and General Public

slide-5
SLIDE 5

5

CAG Project Roles

Community Advisory Group (CAG)

  • Provides insight to

issues and concerns

  • Identifies potential

solutions/ implementation

  • Serves as

communication conduit

  • Attend all meetings

CAG Ground Rules

  • All input from all participants in the process is valued and

considered.

  • All participants must come to the process with an open mind

and participate openly and honestly.

  • All participants must treat each other with respect and

dignity.

  • The project must progress at a reasonable pace, based on the
  • riginal project schedule.
  • All participants understand that topics will not be revisited
  • nce the issues have been addressed and a general

understanding is reached.

  • Members of the media are welcome to attend as observers,

not as participants in the process.

slide-6
SLIDE 6

6

Department Project Process

  • Identify

transportation issues

  • Development of

alternatives

  • Engage public
  • Identify

Funding

  • Develop

Plans

  • Acquire

Right‐of‐Way NEPA Process

  • National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) – 1969

– Primary national charter for the protection of the environment – Reasonable alternatives must be considered – Comprehensive environmental review (avoid, minimize, mitigate impacts) – Public involvement – Formal documentation/disclosure

slide-7
SLIDE 7

7

NEPA Process

EIS

EA

CE I/CE II

Phase I Project Schedule

slide-8
SLIDE 8

8

IL 53 Regionally Strategic Arterial Route 512 Limits

Peotone Road Interstate 80

slide-9
SLIDE 9

9

Municipal Limits Roadway Jurisdictions

slide-10
SLIDE 10

10

Other Studies Project Study Limits

slide-11
SLIDE 11

11

Crash Data Crash Categories:

  • Crash Location
  • Crash Type
  • Pavement Conditions
  • Lighting Conditions
  • Severity of Injury

Code Severity K Fatal A Incapacitating B Injury Evident C Injury Possible PDO Property Damage Only

Crash Type Injury Crashes A‐Injury Crashes B‐Injury Crashes Fatalities PDO Crashes Total Crashes Rear End Turning Fixed Object Angle Animal Sideswipe Overturned Other Pedestrian / Bicyclist Head On Total 140 25 85 5 282 422 Crash Type Injury Crashes A‐Injury Crashes B‐Injury Crashes Fatalities PDO Crashes Total Crashes Rear End Turning Fixed Object Angle Animal Sideswipe Overturned Other Pedestrian / Bicyclist Head On 5 1 3 5 Crash Type Injury Crashes A‐Injury Crashes B‐Injury Crashes Fatalities PDO Crashes Total Crashes Rear End Turning Fixed Object Angle Animal Sideswipe Overturned Other Pedestrian / Bicyclist 6 2 2 2 6 Crash Type Injury Crashes A‐Injury Crashes B‐Injury Crashes Fatalities PDO Crashes Total Crashes Rear End Turning Fixed Object Angle Animal Sideswipe Overturned Other 3 3 15 18 Crash Type Injury Crashes A‐Injury Crashes B‐Injury Crashes Fatalities PDO Crashes Total Crashes Rear End Turning Fixed Object Angle Animal Sideswipe Overturned 13 2 9 8 21 Crash Type Injury Crashes A‐Injury Crashes B‐Injury Crashes Fatalities PDO Crashes Total Crashes Rear End Turning Fixed Object Angle Animal Sideswipe 6 2 3 27 33 Crash Type Injury Crashes A‐Injury Crashes B‐Injury Crashes Fatalities PDO Crashes Total Crashes Rear End Turning Fixed Object Angle Animal 2 1 33 35 Crash Type Injury Crashes A‐Injury Crashes B‐Injury Crashes Fatalities PDO Crashes Total Crashes Rear End Turning Fixed Object Angle 19 3 11 1 26 45 Crash Type Injury Crashes A‐Injury Crashes B‐Injury Crashes Fatalities PDO Crashes Total Crashes Rear End Turning Fixed Object 18 3 12 1 39 57 Crash Type Injury Crashes A‐Injury Crashes B‐Injury Crashes Fatalities PDO Crashes Total Crashes Rear End Turning 38 8 24 1 50 88 Crash Type Injury Crashes A‐Injury Crashes B‐Injury Crashes Fatalities PDO Crashes Total Crashes Rear End 30 4 17 84 114

Crash Data

Crash Type Injury Crashes A‐Injury Crashes B‐Injury Crashes K‐Injury Crashes PDO Crashes Total Crashes *2009‐2013 Crash Data

slide-12
SLIDE 12

12

2015 Average Daily Traffic (ADT)

  • IL 53

– 7,300 vpd – 26,700 vpd

  • US 52 (Doris Avenue)

– 4,200 vpd (East Leg)

  • Mills Road

– 3,000 vpd (East Leg)

  • Laraway Road

– 7,900 vpd (East Leg) – 10,400 vpd (West Leg)

  • Schweitzer Road

– 1,400 vpd (East Leg) – 600 vpd (West Leg)

  • Millsdale Road

– 2,000 vpd (West Leg)

  • Manhattan Road

– 3,300 vpd (East Leg) – 4,200 vpd (West Leg)

  • Mississippi Road / Avenue

– 200 vpd (East Leg) – 3,700 vpd (West Leg)

  • Ira Morgan Street

– 400 vpd (East Leg)

vpd: vehicles per day

2015 Truck Percentages

  • IL 53

– Ranges from 9% to 32%

  • US 52 (Doris Avenue)

– 7% (East Leg)

  • Mills Road

– 14% (East Leg)

  • Laraway Road

– 15% (East Leg) – 54% (West Leg)

  • Schweitzer Road

– 25% (East Leg) – 26% (West Leg)

  • Millsdale Road

– 4% (West Leg)

  • Manhattan Road

– 4% (East Leg) – 8% (West Leg)

  • Mississippi Road / Avenue

– 13% (East Leg) – 3% (West Leg)

  • Ira Morgan Street

– 31% (East Leg)

slide-13
SLIDE 13

13

Stressing Network Situations

  • Laraway Road after train
  • IL 53 and Laraway Road after regional event
  • IL 53 during and after funeral procession
  • Number of trucks

Public Meeting #1 Comments

  • Safety
  • Traffic
  • Access
  • Drainage
  • Environmental
  • Speed Limits and Law Enforcement
  • Possible Geometric Improvements
slide-14
SLIDE 14

14

Transportation Issues Workshop Break

slide-15
SLIDE 15

15

Brochure

  • Project Constraints

– Design Constraints – Environmental Constraints

  • Improvement Types

– Access Management – Conventional Intersections – Alternative Intersections

Next Steps

slide-16
SLIDE 16

16

Thank You