MEETING OBJECTIVES Update project status Review Community Advisory - - PDF document

meeting objectives
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

MEETING OBJECTIVES Update project status Review Community Advisory - - PDF document

COMMMUNITY ADVISORY GROUP MEETING #2 November 9, 2010 MEETING OBJECTIVES Update project status Review Community Advisory Group Meeting #1 Present Draft Purpose and Need Report 1 PROJECT STATUS CAG MEETING #1 Reviewed the public


slide-1
SLIDE 1

1

COMMMUNITY ADVISORY GROUP MEETING #2

November 9, 2010

MEETING OBJECTIVES

 Update project status  Review Community Advisory Group Meeting #1  Present Draft Purpose and Need Report

slide-2
SLIDE 2

2

PROJECT STATUS

 Reviewed the public involvement process

Context Sensitive Solutions (CSS) review Ground rules Role of the Community Advisory Group (CAG)

 Discussed the initial findings of the project team

Regional and future growth Traffic and crash data Context Survey results

 Defined the transportation problem from a user’s

perspective

CAG MEETING #1

slide-3
SLIDE 3

3

CAG MEETING #1

Turn Movements Signal Delay Alternative Transportation Signage Ramps Mobility & Capacity Weber Intersections Business Access Hard to Make Left Turns Traffic Light Timing & Too Many Lights Lack of Pedestrian, ADA, and Bike Facilities Better/Smarter Signage Through Traffic

  • vs. Highway-

Bound Traffic No Alternate Routes to I-55 Normantown Balanced Traffic so as not to Restrict Business Traffic Making Left Turns Delays at Traffic Signals Limited Alternative Transportation (Lack of Mass Transit and Park- N-Ride) Lane Markings and Merging Issues Ramp Access to I- 55 Ability to Handle Current & Future Growth Lack of Exclusive Turn Lanes Signals (Number and Timing) Bike Path Continuity Lane Markings (Double Lefts) Ramp Storage & Visibility Heavy Tractor Trailer Usage Improve Pedestrian Access Narrow Exit Ramps

Focus Question: What are the transportation problems at the I-55 at Weber Road interchange?

CAG MEETING #1

Other ideas from the workshop included:

 Intersections along Weber should be included in the project

study in addition to the interchange because there are also traffic problems there.

 Travel pattern information would be helpful to know how

trucks and cars use Weber Road and the interchange.

 Weber Road cannot be widened only over the interchange;

it would just push back congestion north and south of the interchange.

slide-4
SLIDE 4

4

CAG MEETING #1

Other ideas from the workshop included:

 The traffic counts should consider that all of the

warehouses and distribution centers near the interchange are not full.

 Limit truck traffic to specific times  Consider future development so that access to new sites

could be accommodated.

PROJECT STATUS

Identify Context Define Problem Evaluation Criteria Define and Evaluate Alternatives Identify Stakeholders Considerations

Stakeholder Considerations / Community Assets Environmental Considerations / Compatibility with the Environment Engineering Considerations / Transportation Needs

Preferred Alternative

slide-5
SLIDE 5

5

WHAT IS THE PROBLEM STATEMENT?

 Concise, but broadly written description of the

transportation problem(s) associated with the project

 Defines current conditions in addition to conditions

for the forecast year (2040)

 Incorporates larger community issues such as

economic development, visual identity, community character and livability

 Does not describe specific solutions

DRAFT PROBLEM STATEMENT

Development and forecasted growth in the communities around the I- 55 at Weber Road interchange present a need for improved

  • transportation. The transportation problems associated with the

interchange include operational issues, inadequate capacity, unsafe travel conditions, and the lack of alternative transportation.

slide-6
SLIDE 6

6 The operational issues at the I-55 ramps, Weber Road mainline, and Weber Road intersections include high-volume turn movements, inadequate lane marking and merging issues, poor signage, and traffic signal delays.

DRAFT PROBLEM STATEMENT

The high volume of truck traffic from warehouses and distribution centers, a lack of alternative north-south routes, and inadequate access to I-55 contribute to significant congestion around the interchange.

DRAFT PROBLEM STATEMENT

slide-7
SLIDE 7

7 The congestion around the interchange area results in motorist delays, prevents efficient access to local businesses, and contributes to elevated crash potential on I-55 near the interchange and at intersections along Weber Road.

DRAFT PROBLEM STATEMENT

There is no public transportation, bike path continuity, or pedestrian facilities near the interchange and Weber Road does not promote using alternative modes of transportation.

DRAFT PROBLEM STATEMENT

slide-8
SLIDE 8

8

PURPOSE AND NEED DEVELOPMENT

PROBLEM STATEMENT

  • CAG WORKSHOP
  • COMMUNITY CONTEXT SURVEY

ENGINEERING ANALYSIS

  • CRASH DATA ANALYSIS
  • TRAFFIC DATA ANALYSIS

PUBLIC AND AGENCY COORDINATION

PURPOSE AND NEED REPORT

WHAT IS THE PURPOSE AND NEED?

Need is a tangible fact based problem ; i.e. a transportation deficiency Purpose is an overarching statement of why you are pursuing the project; objectives that will be met to address the transportation deficiency

slide-9
SLIDE 9

9

WHY IS PURPOSE AND NEED IMPORTANT?

 Required by Federal law  1st chapter of Environmental

Assessment

 Explains the “why” of the project  Drives the analysis process  First standard to measure the

solution

PURPOSE AND NEED DEVELOPMENT

PROBLEM STATEMENT

  • CAG WORKSHOP
  • COMMUNITY CONTEXT SURVEY

ENGINEERING ANALYSIS

  • CRASH DATA ANALYSIS
  • TRAFFIC DATA ANALYSIS

PUBLIC AND AGENCY COORDINATION

PURPOSE AND NEED REPORT

slide-10
SLIDE 10

10

WHY ANALYZE THE CRASH HISTORY?

 Objective assessment of existing conditions  Reveals more information about crashes  Identify and incorporate potential countermeasures

Location Type Severity of Injury Road Conditions Lighting Conditions

HOW ARE CRASHES ANALYZED?

Crash Data Crash Data Crash Data

slide-11
SLIDE 11

11

CRASH RESULTS – WEBER ROAD

67% 19% 8% 6%

REAR END TURNING SIDESWIPE OTHER

CRASH RESULTS – WEBER ROAD

21 21 14 8 17 59 88 104 112 81 79 80 119 101 136 155 147 152 98 87 52 54 42 29 1:00 AM 2:00 AM 3:00 AM 4:00 AM 5:00 AM 6:00 AM 7:00 AM 8:00 AM 9:00 AM 10:00 AM 11:00 AM 12:00 PM 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 6:00 PM 7:00 PM 8:00 PM 9:00 PM 10:00 PM 11:00 PM 12:00 AM

AM Peak Period PM Peak Period

20% 32%

slide-12
SLIDE 12

12

CRASH RESULTS – INTERSTATE 55

58% 24% 10% 9%

REAR END SIDESWIPE FIXED OBJECT OTHER

6 12 4 5 8 23 17 24 21 12 12 11 15 15 25 50 54 40 32 23 11 17 11 8 1:00 AM 2:00 AM 3:00 AM 4:00 AM 5:00 AM 6:00 AM 7:00 AM 8:00 AM 9:00 AM 10:00 AM 11:00 AM 12:00 PM 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 6:00 PM 7:00 PM 8:00 PM 9:00 PM 10:00 PM 11:00 PM 12:00 AM

AM Peak Period PM Peak Period

CRASH RESULTS – INTERSTATE 55

19% 37%

slide-13
SLIDE 13

13

CRASH RESULTS – WEBER ROAD

Normantown Rd.

113

Rodeo Dr./119th St.

54

Remington Blvd.

195 111 485 365

Frontage Rd./Lakeview Dr.

215 127 1

Carlow Dr. Carillon Dr. Romeo Rd./ 135th St.

CRASH ANALYSIS

Observations:

 Three fatalities; all involved alcohol/drug impaired

drivers and occurred on I-55

 Rear-end and same directions sideswipe collisions

were predominant

 Most crashes occurred during peak hours, in daylight

and under dry pavement conditions

slide-14
SLIDE 14

14

PURPOSE AND NEED DEVELOPMENT

PROBLEM STATEMENT

  • CAG WORKSHOP
  • COMMUNITY CONTEXT SURVEY

ENGINEERING ANALYSIS

  • CRASH DATA ANALYSIS
  • TRAFFIC DATA ANALYSIS

PUBLIC AND AGENCY COORDINATION

PURPOSE AND NEED REPORT

HOW IS TRAFFIC DATA COLLECTED?

slide-15
SLIDE 15

15

HOW IS TRAFFIC DATA COLLECTED?

Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP)

AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (ADT)

2010 ADT (Existing) 2040 ADT (No Build)

slide-16
SLIDE 16

16

HOW IS TRAFFIC EVALUATED?

Assessment of Operating Conditions

 Capacity Analysis  Simulation Models  Standard of Measurement:

Level of Service (LOS)

TRAFFIC ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY

LOS A

slide-17
SLIDE 17

17

TRAFFIC ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY

LOS B

TRAFFIC ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY

LOS C

slide-18
SLIDE 18

18

TRAFFIC ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY

LOS D

TRAFFIC ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY

LOS E

slide-19
SLIDE 19

19

TRAFFIC ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY

LOS F

TRAFFIC ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY

LOS A LOS B LOS C LOS D LOS E LOS F

slide-20
SLIDE 20

20

PURPOSE AND NEED DEVELOPMENT

PROBLEM STATEMENT

  • CAG WORKSHOP
  • COMMUNITY CONTEXT SURVEY

ENGINEERING ANALYSIS

  • CRASH DATA ANALYSIS
  • TRAFFIC DATA ANALYSIS

PUBLIC AND AGENCY COORDINATION

PURPOSE AND NEED REPORT

PROJECT PURPOSE

The purpose of the proposed action is to identify transportation solutions that will address congestion and mobility problems in the Weber Road corridor identified in the study area, improve community connectivity, and improve access for commercial and residential users of I-55 and Weber Road.

slide-21
SLIDE 21

21

PROJECT NEEDS

 Address operational deficiencies  Improve capacity  Improve safety  Increase access to alternative transportation

PURPOSE AND NEED REPORT

Traffic signal delay Unacceptable level of service on Weber Road and I-55 ramps High volume turn movements Inadequate lane marking Merging issues Poor signage Traffic signal delay Signals (traffic/ pedestrian) Street lighting/ pedestrian lighting Roadways compatible to existing businesses Roadways compatible to existing commuting patterns

Need: Address Operational Deficiencies

Technical Analysis Problem Statement Stakeholder Input

slide-22
SLIDE 22

22

PURPOSE AND NEED REPORT

Projected increase in traffic volumes Substandard geometrics (travel lanes, intersections) High volume of trucks No alternate north- south routes Inadequate access to I- 55 Congestion Industrial centers and commercial areas Commuter corridor Congestion and delay

Need: Improve Capacity

Technical Analysis Problem Statement Stakeholder Input

PURPOSE AND NEED REPORT

High number of crashes Multi-modal conflicts High number of rear- end and sideswipe collisions Crashes data consistent with congestion Motorist delay Prevents efficient access Congestion Traffic Safety Congestion and delay

Need: Improve Safety

Technical Analysis Problem Statement Stakeholder Input

slide-23
SLIDE 23

23

PURPOSE AND NEED REPORT

Lack of transit options Bicycle/pedestrian access is limited Lack of pedestrian, ADA, and bike facilities Limited alternative transportation choices Improve pedestrian access and bike path continuity Handicap accessibility Sidewalks and pedestrian crossings Bike lanes/recreation facilities

Need: Increase Access to Alternative Transportation

Technical Analysis Problem Statement Stakeholder Input

PURPOSE AND NEED REPORT HOMEWORK Please read and review the draft Purpose and Need Report

slide-24
SLIDE 24

24

MEETING TIMETABLE THANK YOU!

Community Advisory Group Meeting #3 Purpose & Need/Evaluation Criteria November 30, 2010