Village of Oswego met Nov. 19.
Here is the minutes provided by the Committee:
Call to Order
President Troy Parlier called the meeting to order at 6:02 p.m.
Roll Call
Physically Present: President Troy Parlier and Trustees James Marter, Terry Olson, Pam Parr, Luis Perez, Judy Sollinger and Brian Thomas.
Staff Present: Dan Di Santo, Village Administrator; Christina Burns, AVA/HR Director; Tina Touchette, Village Clerk; Mark Horton, Finance Director; Jeff Burgner, Police Chief; Jennifer Hughes, Public Works Director; Rod Zenner, Community Development Director; Jenette Sturges, Community Engagement Coordinator, Marketing; Joe Renzetti, IT/GIS Manager; Jay Hoover, Building and Zoning Manager; Susan Quasney, Project Engineer; Karl Ottosen, Village Attorney; and Ryan Morton, Village Attorney.
Consideration of and Possible Actions on Any Requests for Electronic Participation in Meeting
There was no one who participated electronically.
Public Forum
Public Forum was opened at 6:02 p.m. There was no one who requested to speak; the Public Forum was closed at 6:02 p.m.
Old Business
There was no Old Business.
New Business
F.1. Wolfs Crossing Update
Director Hughes addressed the Board regarding the Wolfs Crossing project. The information came from a presentation developed for the final public meeting held on February 15, 2018 as prepared by the Village’s consultant, Benesch. The Village is concluding a study to determine future needs for the corridor. Wolf’s Crossing is located in an area designated as District 2 which is a medium density residential growth area with Wolf’s Crossing in the center of the anticipated growth.
The project study limits extend from Heggs/Eola Road on the east to Route 34 on the west. The corridor spans 4.4 miles from the City of Aurora through the Village of Oswego and Oswego Township. The corridor includes nine intersections that currently meet the manual of uniform traffic control devices (known as the MUTCD) warrants to install intersection control devices; meaning that signals or other improvements are justified today under current traffic. Two of the intersections are under the jurisdiction of the IDOT and one is under the jurisdiction of the City of Aurora. The remaining seven intersections are under the jurisdiction of the Village of Oswego. The plan for how and when these intersection improvements should be implemented is the focus of the study.
Purpose and Need
The Village is completing the study in compliance with the federal highway administration guidelines and the national environmental policy act (NEPA) to ensure that the project remains federally eligible for funding opportunities. The project is a major undertaking for the Village and securing of federal funding will be a critical component of building this project. The first step in the federal process is to assess the purpose and need for the project.
• 1994 Development
• 2014 Development
• Potential Development
The area in blue illustrates the undeveloped areas, which are now fully developed parcels along the corridor as of 2014. The green lines illustrate areas of land that contribute or will contribute traffic to Wolfs Crossing. The area in transparent blue shows areas that developed in the period from 1994 to 2014. The economy incurred a significant downturn during that 20-year period; resulting in a pause in development along the corridor. It is expected that those vacant lands (shown in solid blue) will someday be developed.
Traffic: Year 2040 Forecast
Anticipated traffic due to regional growth:
Existing traffic:
Potential Development
Planned Development
Studying the projected traffic on the corridor requires looking at several different contributors. Year 2040 is the planning horizon for the project. Existing traffic was counted by electronic video counters along the corridor to establish the baseline. The traffic estimates are computed by determining the projected trips based on the housing density for each available parcel and then adding on the anticipated traffic due to the regional growth of the area. The existing and projected traffic are added together to create the year 2040 forecasted traffic estimate. The estimates were calculated by the project team and submitted for review by the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP). CMAP is the agency responsible for projecting traffic growth for the Chicago region. CMAP concurred with the projections in July 2017
How Many Lanes
Once the traffic projections were complete, they were applied to the corridor to determine how many lanes will be needed to provide adequate lane capacity along the route. The yellow line illustrates the roadway centerline. The intersections are shown as orange circles and labeled above the yellow line. The green bars, below the roadway line, show the existing peak hour traffic as per the field counts conducted in late 2016. The peak hour traffic on Wolfs Crossing currently occurs during the weekday afternoon rush. Traffic is not uniform across the corridor, as some segments experience more traffic than others. The current peak traffic levels occur in the center of the corridor and at the east end.
A single travel lane can typically support traffic in the range of 1,200 to 1,350 vehicles per hour. Congestion occurs along the route and crash rates begin to increase. The yellow bar illustrates the approximate threshold at which Wolfs Crossing will begin to need an additional lane in each direction to accommodate traffic. All of the existing traffic is under that threshold today; although a few segments are getting close to the threshold. When the projected 2040 traffic is added to the graphic, all of the corridor east from Southbury Boulevard significantly exceeds the threshold. At some point in the next 20 years, the majority of the corridor will require two lanes in each direction with an additional turn lane (5 lane section) to ensure adequate capacity and safety on Wolfs Crossing. The challenge for the Village is to anticipate this growth and have the adequate lanes in place before the threshold is substantially exceeded.
Crashes
The team gathered crash data for the corridor for the period 2010 to 2016. The white boxes illustrate the total crashes incurred at each intersection during this time period. The two IDOT intersections, US 34 and US 30, exhibit the highest number of crashes. They also have substantially greater traffic as they are a state route. Of more significant consequence is the number of crashes on the local jurisdiction intersections of Douglas, North, Fifth and Harvey. Higher crash rates may indicate that these intersections are starting to experience capacity issues. Light blue indicates the rear end collision rate. As congestion increases along a corridor, drivers can be surprised by the need to stop for congestion, driving up rear end crash rates.
Considering Alternatives
To help develop and consider alternatives, the Village formed an advisory team for the corridor, known as the WolfCAT. The WolfCAT team consisted of several stakeholders that play an important role along the corridor. Staff invited any interested stakeholders to join the group at the first public meeting and it resulted in a dynamic and engaged group. They are an integral part of this project plan and their service to the Village on this important project is much appreciated.
• Corridor Advisory Team (WolfCAT)
➢ Three representatives of School District 308
➢ Two representatives from IDOT
➢ Twelve officials representing Oswegoland Park District, Village of Oswego, Oswego Township, Oswego Chamber of Commerce, City of Aurora, Oswego Fire Protection District, Kendall County and Will County
➢ Eight local business owners located on the corridor
➢ Eighteen residents located on the corridor
• WolfCAT Accomplishments
➢ Formulated purpose and need statement
✓ Enhance safety
✓ Reduce traffic congestion
✓ Improve mobility and operations
✓ Accommodate economic development
✓ Crash history
✓ Capacity analysis of existing traffic data
✓ Projected future traffic growth
✓ Existing mobility and operations (multi-modal)
✓ Address drainage inadequacies
✓ Minimize environmental impacts
➢ Recommended alignment
✓ The roadway centerline consists of a series of gentle curves to make the corridor feel more like a peaceful residential drive rather than a race down a commercial thoroughfare
➢ Recommended intersection types
➢ Recommended cross section
✓ Includes two lanes in either direction with a landscaped median, shared use path on the north right of way and sidewalk on the south side
Character of the Corridor
The WolfCAT spent some time understanding the role that Wolfs Crossing plays in the Village’s overall transportation network and what the character of the roadway should be. Looking at the area in general, US 34 is a state route, functioning as a commercial corridor designed to attract traffic. It is a straight alignment, four lane roadways with turn lanes at multiple locations to access local businesses. Wolfs Crossing is a residential corridor. The WolfCAT chose to honor the Village’s vision of bold, balanced and bountiful for the project. The corridor, when 5 lanes are needed, will include a vegetated median and native planting to help maintain the pastoral nature of the roadway corridor.
Traffic Signals vs. Roundabouts: Crash Potential
The WolfCAT spent some time learning about the differences between stop signs, traffic signals and roundabouts. The difference in these intersection control types is not simply in just the look and feel, but rather in the benefits that they provide.
• Crash potential for traffic signals
➢ Assigns right-of-way
➢ Tends to increase rear end crashes 5 percent-45 percent overall reduction in crashes compared to all-way stop sign
• Roundabout crash potential
➢ Reduces conflict points
➢ Conflicting vehicles only approach from one direction
➢ Reduces severity of crashes by keeping vehicles speeds low
➢ 60 percent - 70 percent overall reduction in crashed compared to an all-way stop
• Conflict Points
➢ Defined as a location where the travel paths of two different vehicles may collide
Conventional Intersection Roundabout
The conventional intersection on the left shows all the different operational spots in an intersection (conflicts) that could possibly result in crashes. These are shown as green, yellow and red circles. The roundabout graphic on the right shows the conflict locations in that configuration. In a conventional intersection, there are 32 conflict points as compared to 8 in a roundabout. The severity of the crashes are shown as green, yellow and red. 16 of those conflict points, in the conventional intersection, are cross type conflicts (red) and tend to be more severe due to their angular nature and often higher speeds.
Traffic Operations
Roundabouts also offer improvements in traffic operations. Traffic engineers quantify the operation of an intersection by the delay that drivers experience while traveling through the intersection. The project team looked at a roundabout at Harvey Road to compare the differences in how quickly traffic will travel around the intersection in the three different design scenarios.
➢ All-way stop (year 2016)- 76 seconds average delay
➢ Traffic signal (year 2040)- 23.9 seconds average delay
➢ Roundabout (year 2040)- 5.8 seconds delay
How a roundabout works
Understanding who has to yield is the key to understanding roundabouts. There are always yield signs posted at every entry to remind drivers entering to yield to pedestrians, cyclists and roundabout vehicles. Drivers should always proceed in a counterclockwise motion. Roundabouts can have more than one lane. The number of lanes required is based on the volume of traffic traveling through the roundabout. A roundabout is designed with special geometry that forces slower speeds around the circle; contributing to the reduced crash potential. Pedestrians will have access at the location that allows the shortest distance for crossing. The overall general rule when navigating a roundabout is that drivers in the circle have the right of way and anyone entering must yield to circulating traffic, as well as pedestrians and bicyclists. It takes a bit of time to get comfortable with their operation, but motorists say once they have used them, they truly appreciate the benefit that they provide.
• Nearby roundabouts
➢ Sullivan Road and Highland Road in Aurora
➢ Dugan Road and Granart Road in Sugar Grove
➢ Renwick Road and Drauden Road in Plainfield
• Golden Rule
➢ Drivers in the circle have the right-of-way
➢ When entering the roundabout, vehicle must yield to circulating traffic, pedestrians and bicyclists
Alternatives
The WolfCAT assisted in developing three alternatives. These were presented at the second public meeting on June 29, 2017. Fifty people attended. Alternative one is a corridor of all traffic signals. Alternatives two and three were a combination of roundabouts and signals. Attendees were asked to submit written comments on their favorite alternative. No votes were received for the corridor of all signals and an equal number of votes were received for alternative 2 and 3.
Proposed Plan
The team studied each intersection to assess whether or not a roundabout could be reasonably built without substantial impacts and if it would perform well in tandem with other intersection control. In looking at the property impacts, environmental and historic property impacts and the overall operation of multiple roundabouts running in tandem closely on a corridor, it was determined that four of the intersections can be designed as roundabouts at Southbury Blvd, Douglas Rd North, 5th Ave. and Harvey Rd. The five remaining intersections; Rt. 34, Roth Rd, Oswego East High School intersection, US30 and Eola/Heggs will be developed and/or remain as traditional traffic signals. Based on the 2040 traffic projections, the roadway cross section is recommended to be three lanes (one lane in each direction plus a turning lane) from Rt. 34 to Southbury Blvd, and five lanes (two lanes in each direction plus a turning lane) from Southbury to Eola/Heggs.
The main goal of the NEPA process is to develop a preferred alternative that minimizes impacts to the environment. The gentle curve of the roadway alignment provides a unique tool to not only minimize impacts, but in several locations completely avoid them by shifting the alignment out of the way of the potential impact. For example, the Roth Road intersection has been shifted to eliminate impacts to the historic church on the northeast corner of the intersection.
Recommended Alternative
Project
• Cost= $60+ million
➢ Funding strategy
✓ Segment project to spread cost
✓ Diversify funding sources
o Surface transportation program (federal) - $2.5 million
o Local funds
▪ Loans
▪ Bonds
o Additional opportunities
▪ Additional STP funds (shared fund-contingency fund)
▪ State funds
▪ Other
• Land acquisition will be required
• Watermain system improvements needed
Roadway Section
Initially the roadway section in undeveloped areas of the corridor will have two traffic lanes in each direction accompanied by a multi-use path on the north side of the road. This can accommodate pedestrians and cyclists and will provide access to the existing developments on the north side of the road. An additional sidewalk would be added on the south side of the road to accommodate future developments on the south side of the roadway corridor.
Drainage
Drainage is a major consideration on the project. The yellow line at the top of this map depicts Wolfs Crossing. The five colored areas represent the watersheds that all drain to the road and then continue to drain across the roadway; ultimately discharging to the Fox River. Over 3,700 acres of land drains to Wolfs Crossing. This is a significant drainage area and it is important to ensure that the improvements leave the discharges in as good or better function than they are today. There are known flooding problems on the corridor already. The pink ovals show areas of known ponding and flooding as well as locations where stormwater has overtopped the pavement in the past. The study team has several plans to manage this flow which includes a series of small detention ponds (teal boxes) to store stormwater; allowing it to release through the discharge pipes under the roadway at a controlled rate. The discharge pipes, under the roadway, will be upsized and rehabilitated. Median bio swales will be built in the roadway center to create naturalized underdrains and infiltration basins; and a system of traditional storm sewer and shallow ditches will serve to create an entire drainage system to manage the stormwater on the corridor.
Project Cost
• Cost= $60+ million
➢ Funding strategy
✓ Segment project to spread cost
✓ Diversify funding sources
o Surface transportation program (federal) - $2.5 million; guaranteed for next year and a half
o Local funds
▪ Loans
▪ Bonds
o Additional opportunities
▪ Additional STP funds (shared fund-contingency fund)
▪ State funds
▪ Other
• Land acquisition will be required
• Watermain system improvements needed
• Work done all at the same time= 3 years
• Could take 20-30 years if segmented out
Project Phasing
The total expected cost for this project today without escalation is over $60 million. The Village does not have funds to build the entire project at this time, but many of the improvements are not yet needed. The Village intends to build sections of roadway as the need for the improvements evolve by leveraging federal funds, Village dollars, local developer participation and other funding partners along the corridor. The Village asked the WolfCAT to help prioritize what part of the project the community felt was most needed first. They unanimously agreed that the section along Harvey Road was most in need of cross-section improvements and was suffering the highest level of congestion. In addition, this location exhibits the highest level of crashes of the corridor.
The first project proposed is the Harvey Road roundabout and the associated legs on either side. The Village will also improve the drainage along this section (including detention) to reduce the known flooding that occurs. The Village has secured $2.5 million in federal funding, which they will match with Village funds to develop the first project. Construction for the project will begin in 2020, at the earliest. This segment will likely be built with one lane in each direction (3 lane section) as the five-lane section is not yet warranted based on current traffic and development known at this time. The final decision will be made prior to bid after additional traffic counts and the assessment of pending developments.
The project team identified additional project segments and preliminary priorities. Projecting traffic growth on the corridor is related to local traffic from developments and regional traffic growth. Priorities may change if growth occurs differently than expected. The Village has made best guesses and will monitor traffic and crashes. There is a plan in place to be ready to accommodate growth if and when development restarts on Wolfs Crossing. It could take up to 20 years to construct all of the segments, but the plan is to make sure that the corridor is built responsibly and consistently rather than in a piecemeal and disjointed manner. The following projected priorities are based on current congestion, future projections and crash rates:
• Project 2 – the segment east of Harvey
• Project 3 – Douglas north intersection
• Project 4 – US 30
• Project 5 – Eola/Heggs
• Projects 6- 10 would most likely occur in the later years and as traffic and safety issues present the need
Property required
In order to build the required lanes, medians, parkways and intersections, it will be necessary to acquire additional right of way from property owners along the corridor. The parcels that are needed to build Wolfs Crossing are shown in purple. For the majority of the parcels, the Village will need to obtain additional strips of property from land owners (highlighted in red). In a few instances, the amount of property that will need to be acquired impacts the property to such an extent that it will not be viable. In those cases, it will be necessary for the Village to acquire the entire parcel. There are six total parcels that will need to be acquired in their entirety. Staff contacted the individuals prior to this meeting and have notified them of the expectation. Parcels will be acquired as funds become available and the roadway widening demand arises. In some cases, it could be up to 20 years before the additional property is needed for right of way purposes. Property acquisition will be performed in accordance with federal land acquisition procedures. Brochures are available regarding the federal land acquisition process. A review appraisal by an independent appraiser is prepared to provide a second opinion on the value. A map is available for reviewing properties intended to be acquired.
Watermain- System Improvements
• Dark blue lines are the water lines
• Will need to construct a new watermain ($5.8 million)
• Might be able to do in phases
• Separate from any water source needed
Next Steps
• Complete Phase 1- late Fall 2019; meeting scheduled for tomorrow to get approval
• Select Project 1- Harvey Road intersection
• Negotiate contract for Phase 2 engineer (requires IDOT approval); takes 6-9 months
• Phase 2- Project 1- Spring 2020-Fall 2021
➢ Engineering; can go quickly or be delayed
➢ Land acquisition; can go quickly or be delayed
• Phase 3- construction- Spring 2022-Fall 2024
➢ Bid and award construction contract (requires IDOT approval)
➢ Construction- ~2 years
• Difficult getting through the State process
• Turnover at IDOT
Board and staff discussion focused on Eola to Rt. 34 is defined as an SRA (Wikiduke Trail); will pass through Hudson Pointe project; nine major intersections; Heggs Rd is under construction to come to Rt. 30 at a 90 degree angle; environmental impacts; project needs to be a regional significance; impacts down the road; concerns with schools on the north side of the road; how to move fire equipment through the corridor; mindful of businesses, artifacts and historical sites; infrastructure; alignment; unique landscaping; intersections will be lit at night; east leg of Douglas would become a dead end; storm sewer to be included; project could cost up to $100 million; new developers coming in could help pay; a lot harder to negotiate; impact fees meant for infrastructure related to growth; no development on the south side of Wolfs Crossing since the recession; $6-7 million in impact fees from Hudson Pointe project; hoping for development to start and extend south; need to watch the debt position, limit and capacity; a small portion of the $60 million is costs for Heggs Rd; only tying in to Heggs Rd; Heggs Rd is an Aurora project and it is not a priority for them; whether there is any money set aside and budgeted for Phase 2; needing to have the plans and bids ready in hopes of getting more money; not enough engineers for all the projects; prices will go up; distance for each section varies; dream would be to construct the entire project at once instead of segmenting it out; having the lobbyist help look for funds; how to pay for the project; not tearing up the storm sewer twice; water rates could pay for the watermain; keep taking the next step that the Village can afford; being shovel ready for possible funds coming in; waiting to do certain sections; worried about scaring off developers; residents are coming to the Village to request the purchase of their homes along Wolfs Crossing; only paying for something once; being mindful; worried about funding drying up; keep planning for the project. There was no further discussion.
Closed Session
There was no Closed Session.
Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 7:05 p.m.
http://www.oswegoil.org/pdf/11-19-19-cotw.pdf
Alerts Sign-up