Loading...
Resolution 2009-05 i � STATE OF ILLINOIS ) )ss COUNTY OF KENDALL) RESOLUTION NO. 2009 - RESOLUTION OF AUTHORIZATION TO PARTICIPATE IN CONGESTION MITIGATION /AIR QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CMAQ) FOR THE ROUTE 34 TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, the City Council of the United City of Yorkville adopted strategic goals in 2008, including goals of enhancing recreational opportunities, increasing environmental consciousness and expanding pedestrian friendly transportation systems, and WHEREAS, the City Council supports providing a system of bike /pedestrian trails within the City of Yorkville, and the connection of said system to regional and state systems of trails, and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered submitting a bike /pedestrian trail grant application attached hereto as Exhibit "A" to the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP) to obtain funding, and WHEREAS, the City Council has learned that said program can provide up to 80% of eligible project costs, and WHEREAS, the project the United City of Yorkville has considered submitting consists of a bike trail that will link residents to one of the largest commercial areas, medical services, and the location of the government center for the county; and WHEREAS, no direct, off - street pedestrian access to this area currently exists; and I I I I I WHEREAS, the project would cross over Blackberry Creek and provide a safe, continuous alternative transportation method, thereby further enhancing regional transportation opportunities. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Mayor and City Council of the United City of Yorkville, that the United City of Yorkville hereby authorizes the funding of the 20% local match if awarded the grant funding and authorizes City Staff to make appropriate application to have Route 34 trail improvements included in the CMAQ Program. Passed by the City Council of the United City of Yorkville, Kendall County, Illinois this a_ A day of , A.D. 2009. CI Y CLERK ROBYN SUTCLIFF JOSEPH BESCO GARY GOLINSKI ARDEN JOSEPH PLOCHER i WALTER WERDERICH MARTY MUNNS ROSE ANN SPEARS _ BOB ALLEN Vim. D Approved by me, as Mayor of the United City of Yorkville, Kendall County, Illinois, this 0 day of J A 1J u, Pr►e A.D. 2009. MAYOR CMAP FY 2010 CMAQ PROJECT APPLICATION FORM BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES I. PROJECT IDENTIFICATION PROJECT SPONSOR CONTACT INFORMATION — NAME, TITLE, United City of Yorkville, Illinois AGENCY, ADDRESS, PHONE, E -MAIL (e -mail OTHER AGENCIES PARTICIPATING IN PROJECT required) Travis Miller, Community Development Director United City of Yorkville 800 Game Farm Road TIP PROJECT ID, IF PROJECT IS ALREADY IN FY 09 -12 TIP Yorkville, IL 60560 630.553.8573 tm i t lernvorkv i I le. i L. us II. PROJECT LOCATION Note: Projects not readily identified by location should provide a project title on the last line of the Project Location section NAME OF STREET OR FACILITY TO BE IMPROVED MARKED ROUTE # US 34 US 34 PROJECT LIMITS: NORTH /WEST REFERENCE POINT /CROSS ST/INTERSECTION MARKED ROUTE # MUNICIPALITY & COUNTY Eldamain Road County Route 7 Yorkville: Kendall County PROJECT LIMITS: SOUTH /EAST REFERENCE POINT /CROSS ST/INTERSECTION MARKED ROUTE # MUNICIPALITY & COUNTY Center Parkway Yorkville: Kendall County OTHER PROJECT LOCATION INFORMATION OR PROJECT TITLE III. PROJECT FINANCING & CMAQ FUNDING REQUEST TOTAL PHASE CMAQ FUNDS OTHER FEDERAL FUNDS STARTING COSTS REQUESTED List prior CMAQ funding here. YEAR (THOUSANDS) (THOUSANDS) FUND TYPE AMOUNT ENGINEERING PHASE 1 2010 $ 74,700.00 $ 59,760.00 $ ENGINEERING PHASE 2 2011 $ 74,700.00 $ 59,760.00 $ RIGHT -OF -WAY $ $ $ ACQUISITION CONSTRUCTION 2012 $ 821,575.00 $ 657,260.00 S (INCLUDING CONST ENG) ENGINEERING (FOR $ $ $ IMPLEMENTATION PROJECTS) IMPLEMENTATION $ $ $ ALTERNATIVES $ ANALYSIS $ $ TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 970 ,975.00 I $ 776,780.00 I g�r� x r �z SOURCE OF LOCAL MATCHING FUNDS: GEN -OP NOTE: IF SOFT MATCHING FUNDS ARE INTENDED TO BE USED, PLEASE CONTACT CMAP STAFF. HAVE THE MATCHING FUNDS BEEN SECURED (PROVIDE DETAILS): CMAP FY 2010 CMAQ PROJECT APPLICATION FORM BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES - PAGE 2 W. PROJECT EMISSIONS BENEFIT DATA TYPE OF PROJECT (CHECK PRIMARY USE): ❑x BICYCLE FACILITY ❑ PEDESTRIAN FACILITY MILES OF EXISTING BICYCLE /PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES INTERSECTING THE PROPOSED FACILITY: _17.57_ IDENTIFY INTERSECTING FACILITIES: Project provides critical linkage to over 17.57 miles of trail and sidewalk and will be a part of Yorkville's approximately 130 miles of planned trail network. From East to West: Center Parkway running north and south (sidewalk); Game Farm Road running south (trail — 2010); Cannonball Trail running north and south (trail north and sidewalk south); Beecher Road running south (trail); Sycamore Road running south (sidewalk); Diehl Farm Road running south (sidewalk) TRIP ATTRACTORS LINKED DIRECTLY TO THE PROPOSED FACILITY: From East to West: Traveling west from the Route 47/ US 34 intersection, the trail project links commercial and residential trip attractors including numerous businesses /restaurants and the Hillside Nursing home. It would then intersect with Game Farm Road /Somonauk Street. An intersecting trail, approved for 2010 construction, connects multiple public and private facilities: Yorkville Public Works /Parks Department Facility, Yorkville Grade School, Yorkville High School Academy, Yorkville High School, all high school athletic fields and tennis courts, Parkview Christian Academy, Yorkville City Hall, Yorkville Public Library, Yorkville Police Station, Beecher Community Center, and Beecher Park (the location of Yorkville's Labor Day Festival called Hometown Days which hosts approximately 45,000 people over the three day festival.) The project furthers community safety as currently high school students, during their lunch hour, walk along Game Farm and US 34, which currently has no bicycle or pedestrian facilities, to access a variety of • estaurants. Continuing the trail from Game Farm Road over the Blackberry Creek links to another residential development, the Kendall County government center, and a major commercial district, Kendall Marketplace, located just past Cannonball Trail. Kendall Marketplace features approximately 800,000 square feet of retail space including big box and lifestyle center development. The project would connect to existing trail in front of the new Rush Copley Medical Center, the current home of an urgent care center and future hospital site, and continue onto the Provena/Dreyer medical offices, another commercial center, and the residential development of Fox Hill. Two city parks are located in this development; Fox Hill East Park and Yorkville's Disc Golf Course located at Fox Hill West Park. Just beyond Fox Hill the trail will cross Rob Roy Creek and continue to Eldamain Road, the project terminus. The Plano YMCA is located at this intersection of US 34 and Eldamain, and future Plano trail is planned to connect to Yorkville also on the south side of US 34. I The project furthers trails built in conjunction with local developers and the Illinois Department of Transportation. It will connect Fox Hill, the government center, Rush - Copley, and Kendall Marketplace, which are all master - planned developments with internal trail systems that currently do not link together. Over 1,000 homes, or approximately 2,650 residents, are located within a half -mile of this facility. OFF - STREET BICYCLE FACILITY - PROVIDE TRAFFIC VOLUMES, SPEEDS AND PERCENT TRUCKS ON ADJACENT ROADWAY. IN ADDITION, PLEASE IDENTIFY EXISTING DESIGNATED BICYCLE FACILITIES IN THE PROXIMITY OF THE PROPOSED FACILITY. SUPPLY A MAP FROM RELEVANT BICYCLE PLAN(S), IF AVAILABLE. AADT — From Route 47 west to Cannonball Trail — 21,200 @ 11.5% trucks (2450); from Cannonball Trail to Eldamain Road 17,700 @ 11.0% (1950). Posted Speed — From Center Parkway to just east Cannonball Trail — 35 MPH; from just east Cannonball Trail to Sycamore Road — 45 MPH; from Sycamore Road to Eldamain Road — 55 MPH V. PROGRAM MANAGEMENT INFORMATION 'S RIGHT -OF -WAY ACQUISITION REQUIRED FOR THIS PROJECT? ❑x YES ❑ NO IF SO, HAS RIGHT -OF -WAY BEEN ACQUIRED? ❑ YES El NO INDICATE THE STATUS OF THE PRELIMINARY DESIGN: ❑ N.A. ❑ Not BegunEl Underway ❑ Submitted ❑ Approved ESTIMATED COMPLETION YEAR: 2012 VI. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND MAP 1. PLEASE DESCRIBE PROJECT. FOR OUTREACH, PROMOTION OR MARKETING EFFORTS GIVE SPECIFIC DETAILS 7F THE CAMPAIGN. DESCRIBE THE COORDINATION OF THESE EFFORTS WITH RESPECT TO OTHER SUCH CAMPAIGNS (SEE SECTION 1.6 ON PAGE 31 OF THE INSTRUCTIONS): The United City of Yorkville is the county seat of Kendall County. It has the distinction of being the fastest growing county in the nation. With a population increase of 77.5% from 2000 to 2007 (according to the United States Census Bureau). Between the 2000 decennial Census and the 2005 Yorkville Special Census Yorkville's population increased 81% from 6,189 to 11,204. Yorkville staff projected the 2007 population at 15,240, a 36% increase in population in two years. This burgeoning population requires both increased transportation planning and non- vehicular transportation opportunities to accommodate the concomitant increase ADT. The United City of Yorkville works with IDOT (Illinois Tomorrow Corridor Planning Program Grant) and IDNR (Bike Path Program) as well as local agencies and surrounding municipalities to update and implement its community shared -use trail plan. The project addressed in this application is a priority for ADT reduction, public safety, and the presence of regional trip attractors. US Highway 34 is the main east -west road between rural communities to the west of Yorkville and the southwest suburbs of Oswego, Aurora and Naperville. US 34, is a major commuter road, as well the home of a new business district, Kendall Marketplace, for the City of Yorkville with the construction of several big box stores and future outlot development featuring a lifestyle center. City staff has been working both with the Illinois Department of Transportation and their road improvement projects and any developers along US 34 to locate an off road trail along Route 34 to allow users to access the community centers, businesses, and schools. At the US 34/ Route 47 intersection, over 23,500 cars pass through this area every day. Truck traffic will continually increase as the commercial development grows along the US 34 corridor. The Illinois Department of Transportation has completed Phase I Engineering and hopes to begin Phase II Engineering for the widening of US 34 between Center Parkway and Cannonball Trail. The engineering plans include a 10' wide asphalt trail and improvements to the bridge over the Blackberry Creek. The off -road bicycle improvement within the constraints of the US 34 widening project will be engineered and constructed as part of widening project by the Illinois Department of Transportation with project reimbursement from the United City of Yorkville. The United City of Yorkville will be the lead agency for the remainder of the project, Cannonball Trail to Eldamain Road, coordinating the efforts among various entities, such as IDOT and local developers, to provide a continuous trail connection to Yorkville residents. 4n off road bicycle facility is desired given the traffic volume and percentage of truck traffic, as listed above. The construction of this facility will provide United City of Yorkville residents a safe, continuous alternative transportation method linking residents to one of the county's largest commercial areas, medical services, and the Kendall County government center. The project also meets objectives of United City of Yorkville Bike /Pedestrian Plans, United City of Yorkville Comprehensive Plan, and Kendall County Forest Preserve District Trails and Greenways Plan. 2. PROJECT MAP. PLEASE ATTACH A MAP TO THE APPLICATION FORM, INFORMATION MUST BE SUFFICIENT TO ACCURATELY LOCATE THE PROJECT ON A LOCAL STREET MAP, HAND DRAWN MAPS OR MAPS PRODUCED BY GIS SYSTEMS ARE ACCEPTABLE. MAPS FROM TELEPHONE BOOKS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED. 3. CMAQ FY 2008 PEDESTRIAN FACILITY SUPPLEMENT, IF THE PROPOSED FACILITY IS PRIMARILY A PEDESTRIAN FACILITY, COMPLETE THE PEDESTRIAN FACILITY SUPPLEMENT. 4. Planning Liaison Reviewed (see pp 18 -20 of application book for your Liaison; applications are due to the Liaison by January 23, 2009) ❑ Complete ❑ Missing information — must be completed before application will be processed ❑ Missing information that will result in immediate rejection I CMAQ FY 2010 PROJECT SCOPING REPORT FOR PROPOSED INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS, BOTTLENECK ELIMINATIONS, BICYCLE /PEDESTRIAN, AND COMMUTER PARKING FACILITY PROJECTS FOR PROJECTS FOR WHICH A PROJECT DEVELOPMENT REPORT IS NOT NOW BEING REVIE6VED PART I. OVERVIEW COMMON ROUTE NAME: US ROUTE 34 ROUTE MARKING: FAP 591 LIMITS: FROM: ELDAMAIN ROAD TO: IL ROUTE 47 COUNTY: KENDALL FIELD /SITE REVIEW DATE: JANUARY 5. 2009 FIELD REVIEW PARTICIPANTS: JOE WYWROT (CITY ENGINEER) JASON BAUER, TIM WEIDNER (ENGINEERING ENTERPRISES, INC.) JURISDICTIONS INVOLVED: UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE KEY PEOPLE: Name TRAVIS MILLER Name JOE WYWROT Title COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIR. Title CITY ENGINEER Phone /fax (630)553 -8573 / (630)553 -3436 Phone /fax (630)553 -8527 / (630)553 -3436 1 PART II. EXISTING CONDITIONS VERTICAL CLEARANCE RESTRICTIONS (existing profile /overhead structures): N/A HORIZONTAL RESTRICTIONS (ROW /sidewalks /curb & gutter /buildings): N/A UNUSUAL SOIL CONDITIONS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): I] wetlands ❑ cattails in ditches ❑ bogs ❑ dry land bridges ❑contaminated soil UTILITIES INVOLVED (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): ❑ electrical ❑ gas ❑ telephone ❑ cable ❑ sewer ❑ water ❑ pipelines ❑ other SPECIAL SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS (high accident spots and sections): N/A CROSSED OR ADJACENT BRIDGES: 19 Applicable (Complete and include one or more copies of Attachment 1) ❑ Not Applicable - SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS: 19 Applicable: Complete and include for each intersection: • one copy of Attachment 2 • two Input Module Worksheets (one for current conditions and one for conditions after the proposed project) • if signals are actuated, the Actuated Controller Properties page of the Input Module Worksheet • As many Actuated Controller Coordination pages of the Input Module Worksheet as warranted, i.e., based on extended side - street leading left -turn phases ❑ Not Applicable UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS NEEDING UPDATE: 0 Applicable: Complete and include for each intersection: • one copy of Attachment 3 • two Input Module Worksheets (one for current conditions and one for conditions after the proposed project) ❑ Not Applicable DRAINAGE DATA: ❑x Complete and include one or more copies of Attachment 4 RAILROADS: ❑ Applicable (Complete and include one or more copies of Attachment 5) 0 Not Applicable 2 PART III. ENVIRONMENTAL AND SPECIAL DATA 'documented (IDNR)- or possible wetlands: ❑x Yes ❑ No: Location(s) The ultimate trail system has crossings over the Blackberry Creek and the Rob Roy Creek. Improvements to the Blackberry Creek Bridge are currently being studied by IDOT in a Phase I Report and will be constructed by IDOT as part of the US Route 34 Roadway Improvements. Also, the proposed trail as Dart of this Droiect will connect into an existing Pedestrian Bridge over the Rob Roy Creek. Therefore, there is not expected to be any bridge improvements at these locations, however, there may be some Dossible wetlands adiacent to these creeks. Parks or Forest Preserve: ❑ Yes 0 No: Location(s) 4(f) Involvement ❑ Definite ❑ Possible Cultural resource involvement (check all that apply): • Historic district ❑ Historic structure ❑ Historical marker • Other eligible historic designations ❑ Other cultural resources Location(s) Adjacent land use (Check all that apply) 0 Residential 0 Office /Retail ❑ Schools ❑ Industrial ❑ Park or Forest Preserve 0 Other Institutional (KENDALL CO. CAMPUS) Hazardous materials (UST, LUST, other hazardous waste sites) ❑ Yes 0 No Potential contaminated soils: Local Acceptability (a federally accepted public involvement program will be prepared during project development) Is there local public support, generally? [9 Yes ❑ No Has the affected public been involved/informed? Z Yes ❑ No How? PROJECT DISCUSSED AT 1/27/09 CITY COUNCIL MEETING IMPROVEMENTS SHOWN ON CITY BIKE PATH AND PEDESTRIAN LONG TERM PLAN 3 PART IV. PROPOSED SCOPE OF WORK Engineering (Enter cost if eligible for federal funding): Phase I (preliminary design) $ 73,700 % complete 0 Months to complete 12 Phase II (plans, specs and estimates) $ 73,700 % complete 0 Months to complete 6 Right of way needed: 0 No ❑ Yes: Estimated cost $ Utility Relocation 0 No ❑ Yes: Cost $ Construction: Cost $746,875 Months to complete: 6 Calendar Year 2012 (INCL UDE DETAILED COST ESTIMATE FOR CONSTR UCTION ITEMS ON FOLLOWING PAGE). Proposed cross section(s) /dimensions (If applicable): Number of through lanes (Roads): Varies Pavement width 10 (BIKE PATH) Shoulder or parkway width: Varies Median: ❑ None ❑ Raised0 Flush ❑ Mixed Square feet (Parking) Project Length: 10,130' Check all that apply, and complete number where applicable. ❑ Intersection improvements (Number ❑ Bottleneck elimination ❑ New traffic signals (Number ❑ Traffic signal modernization (Number ) ❑ Signals to be interconnected (Number ❑ Structural improvements ❑x Pedestrian/bicycle accommodations (Describe ❑ Roadside Improvements (Retaining walls, below. Include limits and connecting facilities) positive barriers, etc.) • Train Station Improvements ❑ New /Relocated Train Station • Railroad Grade Crossing Improvements 0 ADA Access Improvements • Landscaping ❑ Commuter Parking (Number of spaces For all items checked above, describe improvements in the space below. Attach additional sheets if necessary. This moiect consists of constructing a new 10' wide bike trail from Eldamain Road to IL Route 47. The system will be constructed in existiniz R.O.W. and dedicated easements currently in place for the purposes of this bike trail. This trail system will be directly connected to the Rush - Copley Medical Center, the Kendall County Government Center, the Kendall Marketplace (193 -acre parcel with 800,000 s.f. of retail space), the Countryside Center, and various restaurants, commercial properties and residential subdivisions on US Route 34. Additionally, this trail would link to existine paths /sidewalks that connect to the nearby Yorkville High School. Grade School, Citv Hall, Public Library the Beecher Community Center, Drainage: Z Urban (Enclosed) 0 Rural (Open) Is detention required? ❑ No 9 Yes (If yes, check type below) • In line detention ❑ New outlets (Where ?) • Detention basin n Detention off -site Detention Already Design and Constructed in Adjacent Developments 4 DETAILED ESTIMATE OF CONSTRUCTION COSTS Item Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Total 1 BITUMINOUS MATERIALS (PRIME COAT) GALLON 6,200.00 $ 2.00 $ 12,400.00 COMBINATION CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER 2 REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT FOOT 480.00 $ 30.00 $ 14,400.00 3 EARTH EXCAVATION CU YD 4,820.00 $ 40.00 $ 192,800.00 4 AGGREGATE BASE COURSE, TYPE B TON 8,670.00 $ 20.00 $ 173,400.00 HOT -MIX ASPHALT SURFACE COURSE, MIX "C', 5 N50 TON 1,300.00 $ 85.00 $ 110,500.00 6 PCC SIDEWALK, 5" SQ FT 1,600.00 $ 5.00 $ 8,000.00 7 DETECTABLE WARNINGS SQ FT 580.00 $ 50.00 $ 29,000.00 8 RESTORATION SQ YD 6,760.00 $ 15.00 $ 101,400.00 9 PAVEMENT MARKING REMOVAL I FOOT 1,700.00 $ 1.00 I $ 1,700.00 10 PAINT PAVEMENT MARKING - LINE 6" I FOOT 1.700.00 $ 2.00 I $ 3,400.00 11 PAINT PAVEMENT MARKING - LINE 12" I FOOT 3,950.00 I $ 2.50 I $ 9,875.00 12 TRAFFIC CONTROL AND PROTECTION I EACH 1.00 I $ 15,000.00 I $ 15,000.00 13 SIGNAGE I EACH 10.00 I $ 500.00 I $ 5,000.00 14 TREE REMOVAL I EACH 20.00 I $ 500.00 I $ 10,000.00 15 TREES I EACH 40.00 $ 250.00 I $ 10,000.00 TRAFFIC SIGNAL MODIFICATIONS (PER 16 INTERSECTION) EACH 4.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 50,000.00 17 CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING I EACH 1.00 I $ 59,760.00 +� $ 59,760.00 I I I I 1 TOTAL COST OF CONSTRUCTION ITEMS $ 821 ,575.00 ESTIMATES MUST BE BASED UPON QUANTITIES AND UNIT COSTS WHENEVER POSSIBLE. LUMP SUM AMOUNTS ARE NOT ACCEPTABLE. 5 ATTACHMENT I - CROSSED OR ADJACENT BRIDGES FILL OUT OR ATTACH IDOT MASTER STRUCTURE REPORT FOR EACH (2 PERPAGE) Location: US Route 34 a) Waterway or facility crossed: _Blackberry Creek b) Roadway width (Face of curb to face of curb): _40 feet c) Structure width (Outside of parapet to outside of parapet): 43 ft — 2 in. Structure length: 108' d) Structure type (Concrete, steel or timber): Con crete Deck, Steel Gi rders e) Structure waterway opening (Clearance /freeboard consideration): Current Phase I Study Underway by IDOT District 3 Indicates waterwav opening characteristics (see _attached documents). Upon completion of the Phase I Report, IDOT is to reconstruct the bridge (see attached documents) with a new attached bike path to match the dimensions of the proposed (per this CMAO ap)lication) bike trail system. f) Channel conditions (Any debris or scour problems): No debris or scour issues g) IL Division of Natural Resources (IDNR) permits: ❑ No 19 Yes h) Approach conditions: Good Structure Jurisdiction, if other than sponsor: IDOT Location: Pedestrian Bridge over Rob Roy Creek (approximately 500' South of US 34) a) Waterway or facility crossed: _Rob Roy Creek b) Roadway width (Face of curb to face of curb): N/A c) Structure width (Outside of parapet to outside of parapet): 8'8" Structure length: _40' d) Structure type (Concrete, steel or timber): _Concrete Deck e) Structure waterway opening (Clearance /freeboard consideration): Adequate freeboard based on 1996 100 YR. Event. f) Channel conditions (Any debris or scour problems): No debris or scour issues g) IL Division of Natural Resources (IDNR) permits: ❑x No ❑ Yes h) Approach conditions: Good i) Structure Jurisdiction, if other than sponsor 6 Illinois Department of Transportation._ - . .. w- Memorandum To: George F. Ryan, District 2 Attn: Rick Powell WI R 200B � From: Ralph E. Anderson By: Todd E. Ahrens��//f�GG Subject: BRIDGES AND STRUCTURES J Date: April 17, 2008 FAP Route 591 P -93- 035 -07 Section (13)R -2 & BY SN 047 -0049 (Existing) Kendall County US Route 34 over Blackberry Creek We have received the Bridge Condition Report submitted with your memorandum dated March 18, 2008.. The BCR recommends complete - - - - -- - - -- - - structure replacement using stage construction. - After reviewing the BCR, we have the following comments: 1. Based on the need to add additional lanes, the proposed profile grade changes, and the desire to reduce the potential flood risk, we concur with your recommendation of complete structure replacement. Stage construction appears feasible. 2. The proposed urban roadway cross section of 14' -0' outside lanes, 12' -0" inside lanes, a 13' -0" center turn lane, and 2' -0" left and right shoulders with a separated 10' -0" bike lane on the south side is acceptable if it matches the proposed approach roadway template. 3. The bridge type, length, profile grade, and number and location of piers are subject to refinement during the TSL phase based on the results of the Hydraulic Report and Structure Geotechnical Report. 4. Please contact your District Geotechnical Engineer as boring data will be required at this structure. Our Central Geotechnical Unit can be contacted if assistance is needed regarding the subsurface exploration requirements or if any existing boring or foundation data is desired. Subject to the above comments, the Bridge Condition Report is approved. A Type, Size, and Location (TSL) plan, Structure Report, Hydraulic Report, Structure Geotechnical Report, proposed cross section and proposed plan and profile will be required for this project. GGE /bam0470049- 20080417 cc: George F. Ryan, District 2 -- Attn: Jan Twardowski ti/y /,y Summary Statement and Proposed Scone of Work Bridge Scope The existing structure is currently hydraulically sufficient and in good condition given the current roadway. However, due to additional development and traffic growth in the area it is proposed to widen the existing roadway to accommodate 5 lanes of traffic. Therefore the structure was analyzed hydraulically to verify that the existing opening would be sufficient with this additional width added. Upon analysis it was determined that widening alone to carry the proposed 5 lanes urban roadway section and 10 ft. shared sidewalk/bikeway would increase the flood damage potential of the site and is not recommended. Therefore, based on hydraulic analysis it is recommended to replace the existing structure with a two span, 209 ft. 2 in. inside face to inside face structure that would satisfy current policies and reduce the flood damage potential at this site. An Intersection Design Study was completed for the intersection just to the east of the structure, which included this location; and because of geometric considerations an approximate 2.5 ft grade raise will be required at the east abutment. Although the existing steel is in good condition, rehabilitation or reuse of the existing components do not appear to be economically feasible. Therefore, a complete cost estimate associated with this option will not been presented. However, possible reuse of some of the piling may be considered. The proposed structure would be complete structure replacement with a two span continuous steel structure supported by integral abutments and a pile bent pier. This structure would be positioned such that the proposed east abutment would be directly behind the existing east abutment. There would be no salvage of the existing structure. The cost associated with structure replacement would be $1,788,547.74. This is the most economical and therefore the recommended option. Bridge Cross Section: The proposed bridge cross section will consist of a roadway width 69 ft. face to face of parapets, and a 10 ft. sidewalk on the south side for a total out to out width of 83 ft. 2 in. See Exhibit 5 for details. Profile: The proposed bridge profile will be revised to include a sag curve with an approximate grade raise of 2.5 ft. at the east abutment. See Exhibit 7 for details. Horizontal Alignment: The proposed horizontal alignment will not be affected by the proposed bridge replacement. The existing and proposed centerline will remain at the same location. V. Maintenance of Traffic Traffic can be maintained utilizing stage construction during the replacement of the existing structure. i i t BRIDGE 43' -2" OUT ITO OUT (DECK SLAB) 1 -7 40' -0" FACE!TO FACE (PARAPETS) - 12'-0•' A• -n„ I r I DRIP NOTCH / FULL LENGTH i^ 4 o I L �— — - - -- _ '/a /FT. 3 / 6 /FT, iv / --------- - - - - -- / .. ------------------------ .- - - - - -- -J ----- --- --------- --- -� - -- TF SLAB 7, 2 4,. I( I I I I I I (I ti- I I I I S SPACES 0 7' -4" = 36' -8" - -_ ' 3' -3" EXISTIN$ TYPICAL SECTION SN 047 -0049 \projects \ep035O7\details.dgn 1/22/2008 9:18:19 AM I 1ST US S4- 4 - 7' _ 36 1 r ' 1 F TUL, iS OMivw BRIDGE v 83-2" OUT t0 OUT ` 1'_7.. - 69' -0" FACE TO FAC� (PARAPETS) _ I• -7° _ - tn•_n•• 34'-6•' I I _ _2' -0'• i 14'-0" t7 _O 13'-0" 12'-0" 14-0" i i i 2% (TYP) �Jl ` rte II II II II II II Ij II I1 _ I II I I J-1 =1= c1!= PROPOSED TYPICAL SECTION SN 647-0049 LOOKING EAST \projects \ep03507\details.d 9 n 1/22/2008 9:14:35 AM i Bock to Back Abutment Length 214' 2" -i 2' Vertical Clearance Nil I it � Il II I ; I E N . H . W . v. l r , I F Streambed Elev. N Ei 606.30 - d N1 111 y Elev 603.50 I ' I � I � Elev. 606.80 t ' - 5 (50 yrI 605.5 ; , 12 ----- - - - - -- _ to Streombed (Typ. , d Piers) 1,2 Rt • L 1 • • � Elev 699.10 � � Q o Pb Ut • -�— 1 „ Proposed -- Steel H- Piles Possibly leExisting Driven to Refusal Steel H- Piles Driven to Refusal Possibly e Existing Steel 'H- Piles Driven to Refusal ELEVATION VIEW looking south :onsu1tlsmithl000755j- ts1.dgn 3/13/2008 10:59:25 AM `\ \ M om — \ -- --------- -- - - -- ^•°"�P uonlae.N °[n.m, - \\ --� �. r1F FtiyiRt7 I \,� IT 61 rid (`F `\\ --------- �f 02- 29 -201 -005 •---------- - - � - - E FL• 180.099 T OLS - — — - - -_4 - - - - -- 100 -------------- -- _ 600 FVC ,. STa ]^]•IS.]D SM FL• 1T9.D10 ` 7 !uo' \ - - - - -- n _ r _.1 ` \\ 100' - -I - - - -- i - -- I 620 ally 6,05 = - - - - - - - _ - - - .= :: -a' =• -: =' � = ='_ = = - 1♦Y _ - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ - - _ 1 _ _ _ _ nN0 V 6 ♦ 6 •00 `� u __ nor _- _- �- __ w w n e- . ^' R� Q� o e . u 61.00 a +r 9.90ie .e r __ n projects1ep035071pin1.dgn 3/13/2008 2:48:08 PM STA — + TO STA. .~` ,~- - �"- —'— . , -- --- " � � LIMITS O'��FNVIROrNORNf..�,�-CLJ-rAFZ, LE \PrOjeCtS\epO3507\pinl Agn 3 / 13 / 2 008 2:48:46 PM � ATTACHMENT 2 - SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS FILL OUT FOR EACH SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION Provide Existing and Proposed Conditions for Each Item Location: US 34 at Center Parkwav a. Conditions: On the HCM Input Module Worksheet, indicate /sketch the number of through and shared lanes, all designated turn pockets and the length of all turn pockets, lane width for all lanes, percent grade, free flow speed and saturation flow rate for all legs within the intersection, right turn on red allowed or prohibited, and provide separate right turn and right turn on red volumes. b. Type of controller ❑ Pretimed ❑ Semi - Actuated 0 Fully Activated If the controller is actuated, please provide a layout for all actuated legs of the intersection with the following information: detector distance from stop line, detector length, delay time and carry -over. If using IDOT's standard for detector loop layout, a copy of the standard containing the above required detector information will suffice. C. Pedestrian signals: ❑ No ❑x Yes: Locations: south leg, west leg (existing) — no chanize proposed d. Sidewalks /bicycle facilities: Z Sidewalk Z Bicycle /Multi -Use ❑ Neither Locations: NW & SW Quadrants (existing), Multi -use path (south leg) - _proposed e. Preemption (Railroad /fire /emergency vehicle): Z No ❑ Yes: Locations: f. Describe parking and parking restrictions and identify any bus stops in the vicinity. No parking or bus stops in vicinitv g. Do current signals meet MUTCD standards? ❑ No Z Yes h. Is intersection a part of a current signal interconnect system? 0 No ❑ Yes: Limits: Jurisdictions involved: i i. Operational deficiencies: i I 7 Check: Highway CapacIfy Manuol 2000 EM Before improvement both before and after ❑After improvement worksheets are required INPUT WORKSHEET p mg - p avim", Analyst Intersection G5 � -/_ do Agency orCompany �IZIZ_ Area Type ❑ CBD A Other Date Performed 111�lv9 Jurisdiction XDOT Analysis Time Period _wn-P24* Analysis Year 7.,we-)C1 C O> = Pedestrian Button Lane Width Through 61 grade= _4 Right include turning A N = Left bay length �2 !A- I . - - r f 7 Through Right 4- = Left Through Street Left + Right Left + Through + Right 7 g r a d e = 6 1 ^ - - ' 1 J X IlKly YP� -1 X al l �41 V OR WB NB SB Volume, V (veh/h) LT I TH RT LT TH RTI LT TH RT I LT TH I RTI % heavy vehicles, % HV Peak-hour factor, PHF Prutimed (P) or actuated (A) Start -up lost time, I (s) Extension of effective green time, e (s) Arrival type, AT Approach pedestrian volume? Vved (p/h) Approach bicycle vol me. vb1 (bicyclos/h) Parking (Y or N) Parking maneuvers, N (maneuvers/h) Bus stopping, N (buses/h) I C) I 0 Min. timing for pedestrians G,, (s) w D 01 _ :. - -. , -.- .., ��'��: J�� __ ...... x. <�;:.s ,:.7r�xur�t'�Ir 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 A G R A M Timing G G C, = G= 1Y= Y Y = Y = I Y = G= I Y 0 0 Y Y_ Protected turns A Permitted turns Cycle length, C = Pecles Wan I _s ­ ;YNA t e r : 7 a R �O Q -.2 1. RT volumes, as shown. exclude RTOR. 2. Approach pedestrian and bicycle volumes are those that conflict with right turns from the subject approach. 3. Refer to Equation 16-2. Chapter 16 - Signalized Intersections II Check: Highway Capacity Manual 2000 F-1 Before improvement both before and after OAfter improvement worksheets are required INPUT WORKSHEET °>+eife,'fahaMatlpii:' Analyst Intersection 4 '�O 3¢ e CEi�TE/z P,¢KY Agency or Company (,Nr/r- eiTy DAY I'! Area Type ❑ CBD A (Other Dale Performed /� /! /oq Jurisdiction XDOT Analys Time Period Analysis Year 2-1)0 i ',• �..h.`-�- nlsidtt�.. • %' :; r. ".. E�£,rr- r,',5t %�;,:l�Sl'?ro 5tw .•fy:r , gra "!;•sn;1i'•i-tt•FU�7�.: -r y. . :. '.']:! — rv'� ^ d:.r•: Y }7sLi '1 %:1 ?y 44 1 :.C( iFI 1 , ,•• ,.�.^ =�tti�'�;�:;'C'� �tw�_�,t>c de U e, ..� , T' Cn = Pedestrian Button :_ 0. E ...!_ = Lane Width ............_ .._...._ ..;.r ahavrkrlhkrov grade-- f/ j = Through =Right I'cv include turning Lea bay length _......... p N Through + Right Lea +Through striae Left +Right Left + Through +Right .ef% p y�`..i •. 'iay:: _ •''F� •' °tea �+�t; I+ � u y�� ' �'1�. t ��. �. r. ,,,u� r _ �.,tl!tic @T�q�riri7n r) •(r�n: u "'' c. 1: ;.,j +s, i�y�;���� ^ -i�'tv,it ;1a��n,�v •iM' Y v .... ....: ... ... _ � *r, r� $:_:�� ':1 -= -,- 3F`t - �t;� "a'�� � Ir�� 2 xi[7i'�i +� g, EB r l WB t' NB r l s8 Volume, V (veh/h) .. LT TH RT I LT TH RT I LT TH ! RTr LT TH RTr j f% heavy vehicles, % HV Peak -hour factor, PHF 1 I 1 1 I Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) I start-up lost time, I (s) I Fxlenslon of effective green lime, a (s) Arrival type, AT ! Approach pedestrian volume, v (p /h) I I Approach bicycle volume,z vu, (bicycles/h) I I I Parking (Y or N) Parking maneuvers, N (manewers/h) Bus stopping, N (buses/h) O Min. liming for pedestdans, G (s) '�+ •."y,1ya .'% �'!£Fi' :c'•.;::,fi : :• �.i i'!7i:'h''� iLl.': _ h .i Nd} / =.1' �:te ;4, '14:X? �! . � <�• � s!3' :�.` a }:'... �5. :.' ":.v 7 '�'+��.. � F'" � ,5'hL '�k-� ,; *.. ��� y� �'1'�'�fl'e . a� :.. .,;,.- r ..:ems � .. ':�:� __• .x - _ _ ' r iXi ? r. , ..:';hrli :. e;; . ; a' , ;� r; ai : •;i ii': <.:�S,.i.��M01?•'�.1•�.. :c�1. �> >'n�I i�.�''�'FiSi� sv: - D 01 02 03 _ 04 05 06 or 08 1 A G R A M I Timing Y= I Y= I Y= I Y= I Y= I Y= Y= ID Y = Protected � Protected turns I _ , Permitted turns I Pedits 'an Cycle length, C = s %;1VrtQs. ;' :h "t " i 1. a RT vat , , L IP' 0! �s N. z ` i s volu mes, as shown, exclude RrOR 2. Approach pedestrian and bicycle volumes are those that conflict with right turns from the subject approach. 3. Refer to Eauation 16 -2. 1 1 Chapter 16 - Signalized Intersections ATTACHMENT 2 - SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS FILL OUT FOR EACH SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION Provide Existing and Proposed Conditions for Each Item Location: US 34 at Game Farm Road a. Conditions: On the HCM Input Module Worksheet, indicate /sketch the number of through and shared lanes, all designated turn pockets and the length of all turn pockets, lane width for all lanes, percent grade, free flow speed and saturation flow rate for all legs within the intersection, right turn on red allowed or prohibited, and provide separate right turn and right turn on red volumes. b. Type of controller ❑ Pretimed ❑ Semi - Actuated 9 Fully Activated If the controller is actuated, please provide a layout for all actuated legs of the intersection with the following information: detector distance from stop line, detector length, delay time and carry -over. If using IDOT's standard for detector loop layout, a copy of the standard containing the above required detector information will suffice. C. Pedestrian signals: ❑ No ❑x Yes: Locations: Existing — none; Proposed — south leg d. Sidewalks /bicycle facilities: ❑ Sidewalk Z Bicycle /Multi -Use ❑ Neither Locations: Proposed: Multi -use path on east and west leas of intersection (south side) e. Preemption (Railroad /fire /emergency vehicle): ® No ❑ Yes: Locations: f. Describe parking and parking restrictions and identify any bus stops in the vicinity. No parking or bus stops in vicinity i. Do current signals meet MUTCD standards? ❑ No ❑x Yes j. Is intersection a part of a current signal interconnect system? ❑x No ❑ Yes: Limits: Jurisdictions involved: i. Operational deficiencies: Check: Highway Capaclify Manual 2000 FX_1 Before improvement both before and after ❑After improvement worksheets are required INPUT WORKSHEET M' AU)'' I N ""'Off-.414 55A Analyst Intersection � 34f- ems; 64 F Agency or Company Pl' Area Type ❑ CBD Other I Date Performed Jurisdiction Analysis Time Period _wn-PRak Analysis Year grade- .. ;:_:::: :r .. .... .... Pedestrian Button Lane Width grade= Through !2 Right include turning Left bay length Through + Right 9 ride= 462 , = Left + Through Z Street I Y = Left Right v. = Left + Through Right L grade-- R EB WB I NB I S LT TH RTC LT TH RTI I LT TH RTl LT TH RTI Volume, V (veh/h) I ! ' I ' ' i ' ' I ' % heavy vehicles, HV Peak-hour factor, PHF Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) Start-up lost lime, 1 (s) Extension of effective green time, e (s) f Arrival type, AT Approach pedestrian VOIUM8.2 v (p/h) Approach bicycle volume,2 Vbl, (bicycloslh) Parking (Y or N) Parking maneuvers, N, (maneuvers/h) Bus stopping, M (buses/h) Min. timing for pedestrians G (s) D 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 1 A G A R M Timing G G G G= G G G G 1Y= Y Y= Y Y Y Y Protected turns Permitted turns Cycle length, C s N 1V4 a v, 1. RT volumes, as shown, exclude RTOR 2. Approach pedestrian and bicycle volumes are [hose that conflict with right turns from the subject approach. 3. Refer to Eouatlon 16-2, Chapter 16 - Signalized Intersections Check: Highway Capacity Manual 2000' q Before improvement both before and after CKAfter improvement worksheets are required INPUT WORKSHEET mss' ' GertePa ►ilh`��'iiaGn_�= '�':�. ;;::.4:� - tu; �`;��iy� r� '.� A l Analyst Intersection 4-11t; 34 - @? 6W f r4,Qi�t � �• Agency or Company Ghs`7-aF/� Area Type El CBD ,�Olher Oahe Performed /� /�/0 9 Jurisdiction ..�`t�T Analysis Time Period nm ueak Analysis Year "`//l�a(��'�'(,��,: "zg •>4+' , @�: a_,_ ....;. � '� %. :: ,� e' vlcw;. , �. r3 "X :+J: k' ,. iJ '!P�ll�x -' *-i ttUM grade= ........... . _. CP = Pedestrian Button Lane Width i .. .. Shaxthonh/v,oy .•... -� i- .Y} glade- r 3` / t = Through Right include turning Left bay length N - = Through +Right 7 T. 3¢ � =Leff +Through '1 I 1 V L Cl V PAT( =Leff +Right i =Left +Through + Right .�/• ' j' ::dz•,5 ' � ,�� �`f,�i: • tiK ' :.f�?i�i::S�4= 4S�:ni.'•% �i M, i. 'iG7 yw+Atx � � _ .. .. .,. . --' :. ^r•.:gra '�: €�1v 3�: .:•5�:;'',,.J-•Fra.t ''; �...a�S�A',m'�s�v�"�+3,;^c3z i EB ' WB I LT TH I NB I SB I fly' TH RTI I U TH I RTt I LT I TH I RTr I Volume, V (vehm) % heavy vehicles, % HV Peak -hour factor, PHF I Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) Start -up lost time I (s) I Extension of effective green time, a (s) Arrival type, AT Approach pedestrian Volume, v I I I aed (p1h) I I I Approach bicycle volume, v (bicycles/h) I I I I Parking (Y or N) I N I I Parking maneuvers, N (manewers/h) Bus slopping, Nn (buses/h) j CJ I I U I 1I Min. liming for pedestdans, G (s) F .?S �( s S{ 1f3 � xt (/ !i - �•;,4rya rib r:;� :?i; {'< , }:s:r's M E MO , I - ,: 1 • .sa.!.:..x / ; 1 . ^l ! � !;�t• .: t w::'� 1: ofi rl g}�" �.. ' :;.s ..,srv x .;s9Ke•_. _ wtr._ �%r+z!)('Ma:n•�' tt D 01 02r r.1��;•r t 03 04 05 06 07 08 A G R A M I Timing IY= I Y= I Y= C G G Y= Y= I Y= I Y= I Y= J' Protected turns I ^ _ >< _ Permitted turns Pedgs an I Cycle length, C :.) ,. - tit •il' M1 31 .1 nR - ',-. • �:N tes.. , : . •.� •_ ._. €fi,� Div ......... _. , . ,.. •.: r LF, { .:: `. :'-[ ?��. _ ._:.... �.s, � Ts,:i�`)z` v fi' � _ ���;L.�6 '��� "'k.�y'��.2a1• �� t%FS� �s�.� ' f I. RT volumes ' as shown, exclude RMIL �k . „, 2. Approach pedestrian and bicycle volumes are those [hat conflict with right turns from the subject approach. 3. Refer to Eouation 16 -2. Chapter 16 - Signalized Intersections ATTACHMENT 2 - SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS FILL OUT FOR EACH SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION Provide Existing and Proposed Conditions for Each Item Location: US 34 at Cannonball Trail a. Conditions: On the HCM Input Module Worksheet, indicate /sketch the number of through and shared lanes, all designated turn pockets and the length of all turn pockets, lane width for all lanes, percent grade, free flow speed and saturation flow rate for all legs within the intersection, right turn on red allowed or prohibited, and provide separate right turn and right turn on red volumes. b. Type of controller ❑ Pretimed ❑ Semi - Actuated Z Fully Activated If the controller is actuated, please provide a layout for all actuated legs of the intersection with the following information: detector distance from stop line, detector length, delay time and carry -over. If using IDOT's standard for detector loop layout, a copy of the standard containing the above required detector information will suffice. C. Pedestrian signals: ❑ No Z Yes: Locations: All legs (existing) — no changes proposed d. Sidewalks /bicycle facilities: Zx Sidewalk Zx Bicycle /Multi -Use Z Neither Locations: _South leg east and west sides (existing sidewalk) Multi -use path across south leg (proposed) e. Preemption (Railroad /fire /emergency vehicle): Z No 17 Yes: Locations: NB, SB, EB, WB (existing) f. Describe parking and parking restrictions and identify any bus stops in the vicinity. No parking or bus stops in vicinity k. Do current signals meet MUTCD standards? Z No Zx Yes 1. Is intersection a part of a current signal interconnect system? ❑x No ❑ Yes: Limits: Jurisdictions involved: i. Operational deficiencies: 7 Check: Highway CapacIty m anucl , 2000 Before improvement both before and after ❑After improvement worksheets are required INPUT WORKSHEET ' w xF Wimlle'11 w R z Rif R, Q Analyst Intersecilon r/i 3 isr- AT Agency or Company tl 0 --ir-1 Area Type ❑ CBD Other Date Performed / //.V/ 9 Jurisdiction zoo Analysis Time Period -m-PRak Analysis Year - - - - - - - - - - - grade =C� o . 1 �... t � .. � ` Cj> = Pedestrian Button Lane Width .. ..... . ... Shcw North Arnie Through r P 0- Right include turning Left bay length 7a Through + Right grad = Z 4�- Left Through Street YN Left + Right f Left + Through Right 7Y r — T 7 - . d W4.1 };4d`. �.,2:$s�r"__,._...,� _ =* '� _P W& ;'-.A Z.; T - R%. ,- _ , ! A, K:�`, !�e V. 1 EB wo NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT' I LT TH RT I LT RT Volume. V (veh1h) TH % heavy vehicles, % HV Peak-hour factor, PHF Prelimed (P) or (A) Start-up lost Ii me, 1 (s) Extension of effective green time, e (s) Arrival type, AT Approach pedestrian VOIUMO,2 Vold (p/h) Approach bicycle VolUffle,2 v (bicycles/h) Parking (Y or N) N I N A) Parking maneuvers, N, (maneuvers/h) Bus stopping, N (buses/h) 1 0 I C9 Min. liming for pedestrians 3 G (s) 4 .1 M, sm Rt_,:` n D 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 1 A G R A M Timing G= G G G G G Y= I Y= I Y 0 Y= Y= Y= Y= Y= Protected turns _ !OS Permitted turns Cycle length, C s z _)t g, ps". g Yi` -- i 1. RTvafumes, as shown, exclude RMR. 2. Approach pedestrian and bicycle volumes are those that conflict with right turns from the subject approach. 3. Refer to Eauation 16-2. Chapter 16 - Signalized Intersections Check: Highway Capacity Manual 2000 I J Before improvement both before and after ]After improvement worksheets are required INPUT WORKSHEET I �° ��eile iryiiY,armaTlr''`:.:�,r;,;� :•��= `i;`; "�".'��„�;:1�� >~. - -r,. Analyst 6A, � 6 Intersection vs 3 ¢ 97" G4r�✓e+r'fce_ rgee Agency or company Area Typo ❑ CBD Other Date Performed I'llvle 9 Jurisdiction rao /— Analysis Time Period nm creak Analysis Year ?� >g tK.'. Q t , l' a ' }a:.:.: Sy A.•. :.,i'n n:v} t V :'( p ;K• , i ��:=' a�+ S� �# � � "1 ! F':;. -• 1 - _. , -- e•4•' >i.. ,.: :if' ..qfl. _ - Ys7.4i ro — , YiF?); �,sF. lSs:.aa.:g .�.....f: "�. - ):.. ... - �fi �_!'.i. `>* F4u2.;se! >.. ±3!ru��tu� `! � r i r grade=d CO = Pedestdan Button = Lane Width U shavrtau!arox Through �_ =Right ning include tur 1 - i4 — W-� N = Left bay length - � Y 9 M- I -- � ! -� I. N _ = Through + Right grade = N „ I. 3 ° \ _ N t�.. r� •'•'�� LeR +Through al Street qq =Left, Ri ht Left + Through +Right A g ::�j`�' i,yy LZ 3]:r i! \: -i'i.t Y� "L:��i t r MEN.-! �^�Y. •.- r t:PRtS, " Yi . . -. .<. .. _:. ,,..., gr�"''::. <+`:E:S ^;3?x:;ri' �.;:; � w L•. Q 9 ¢ s rL! �� x.' 3 i:_ii` •,, :i,.•`}�t "i 'fi:(Sk7Ltt V\ OJf ' �..S '.A :St_� )' x EB W8 NB Sg Volume, V (veh/h) LT TH RTl ' LT TH RTr I '. LT TH RTt LT TH RTr I I I % heavy vehicles, % HV Peak -hour factor, PHF Pmtimed (P) or actuated (A) Start-up lost time, It (s) Extension of effective green time, a (s) j : : Arrival type, AT Approach pedestrian volume,z v (p /h) Approach bicycle volume,z Vb:c (bicycles/h) Parking (Y or N) I N I N I A) I N Parking maneuvers, N Bus slopping, N (buses/h) I p I I p I Min. timing for pedestrians 3 G, (S) Z-1 s . .•!.,,• -,y.; - ;;77 3-s:t�x {c4rt' - '�il�th'' ::1" _ "'e;; ��' t;s:- c•e.:�� =1 >. <`r�;tl'Y�!tc'- �.&• "� 'i� .os•��.a• .a•n :r N '• r��li'Y�Sl(1 � ��7,a -y:: : - .;E; -:;- .:,�= :i �• : .9r•'pa3;.:.,Ziir. o-r K )r...p ,.�, 1 � .�`Y. �F . - ._Y;r: "e. -.., .,.:,�'.' i s:; R• .�Pr".a:z= Rl #n.yiL}}*{` €�:k: J+fin,:;-t - 'F'= 146 2�•'" s+` ,v`_'. ;''nPur��!ti D 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 I A G R A M ' I Timin IY= I Y= I G- I G' I G Y= Y= Y= I G G G- Y= I Y= IY= Protected turns ^ �' Permitted turns I = Cycle length, C = s f� S. ".7,!`.,tt' , v'r” 'i P Y +'r •:x 1 " " , �N� far: °"7., 1. RTvol ala_.a;ut ..... .:: •;:.:- 1 'r`•.r -. "��` � ±'.!�!��1tiKfi �r " `w�i. a3'�:;.'i volumes, as shown, exclude RTOR . - 2. Approach pedestrian and bicycle volumes are those that conRic{ wdlh right alms from the subject approach. 3. Refer to Eauation 16 -2. Chapter 16 - Signalized Intersections ATTACHMENT 2 - SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS FILL OUT FOR EACH SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION Provide Existing and Proposed Conditions for Each Item Location: US 34 at Beecher a. Conditions: On the HCM Input Module Worksheet, indicate /sketch the number of through and shared lanes, all designated turn pockets and the length of all turn pockets, lane width for all lanes, percent grade, free flow speed and saturation flow rate for all legs within the intersection, right turn on red allowed or prohibited, and provide separate right turn and right turn on red volumes. b. Type of controller ❑ Pretimed ❑ Semi - Actuated 9 Fully Activated If the controller is actuated, please provide a layout for all actuated legs of the intersection with the following information: detector distance from stop line, detector length, delay time and carry -over. If using IDOT's standard for detector loop layout, a copy of the standard containing the above required detector information will suffice. C. Pedestrian signals: ❑ No Z Yes: Locations: Existing — all legs d. Sidewalks /bicycle facilities: Z Sidewalk Zx Bicycle /Multi -Use ❑ Neither Locations: East leg, north side, south leg, west side (existing) E &W sides of south leg — multi -use path (proposed) e. Preemption (Railroad/fire /emergency vehicle): ❑ No ❑x Yes: Locations: EB, WB, NB, SB pre- emption, existing conditions f. Describe parking and parking restrictions and identify any bus stops in the vicinity. No parking or bus stops in vicinity m. Do current signals meet MUTCD standards? ❑ No Z Yes n. Is intersection a part of a current signal interconnect system? Z No ❑ Yes: Limits: Jurisdictions involved: i. Operational deficiencies: 7 Check: Highway Capacity Manual 2000 0 Before improvement both before and after ❑After improvement , Worksheets are required INPUT WORKSHEET � zata.iivtar i 3 $" �j i'" Anal ��,� -0.J u . Ys Y Intersection V 5 31( A-r 065c•K efL AgencyorCompany u"( ci cF *c v_V•VtLLa Area Type ❑ CBD Other Dale Performed 1 1 14 109 Jurisdiction rn�T Analysis Time Period )M-p-Q`ak Analysis Year zOC_ '(', ..Y! l ., r:.,UY. :, Si' [ Ia`. I _ y .��..�de� grade = , r .cum. .... _....., .... ._..f..,. � 0n - Pedestrian Button N z. �. s : :.j • 5H N ---i = Lane Width del grade= d t = Through Right include turning Len bay length �` = Through +Right I VF In LV j grade = e�P ;X. N / us 3¢ = Len +Through 1 t Street PC0&��r'2rA-3 516NAt —S Y = Left +Right d 4` GS- ,: = Left + Through + Right ..r.:.9�:• :;}: _ ;P .2G:' _ ^ :r•r •,�r.t :?p:; iGsr 'rc 2r,7 z;'.`{s.r•� _%�i5 o. °� <r`s' -. v • - - 7 = t'i' C °'�::',1 _ ,� � *, . �.. F`;i 'g;§...'tx - t�q � ,3 d/t?..antl; "ut;��_• _ � �:- :, �� z. 7 ::�' , - .. .. - , :r.•, - . ........ ... ..„r: c.5'��� ?v�.,::i'sf.; ,•', �. � �i.::: �;`%_ �a�R�I> t f c�{. as3�%!€ x�' �s�'ri��"t`�- `�i`'S ta�i?3�',r•:d�,' f..... EB WB NB SB LT TH RTa�I LT TH RTI LT TH RTI LT TH RTI I Volume, V (veh/h) % heavy vehicles, % HV I I I Peak -hour factor, PHF ) , , I , i I i � -• I Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) Start -up lost time, I (s) Extension of effective green time, a (s) Arrival type, AT 1 I I I Approach pedestrian volume, v d (p /h) I I 1 1 Approach bicycle volume, v (bicycles/h) I 1 I 1 1 Parking (Y or N) 1 Parking maneuvers, N (manewers/h) I I + I Bus slopping, N (buses/h) Min, liming for pedestdans, G (s) ,T _ ::ll':. `' {:.-. .: F '; .1 4S4• •biF. - - :%F 9 . Si�HBI!'P �.�� • i I - i,• _ _ _ _ :;,��' ...hr`.`t: �5"• NO. '..i s xRSrci„crT.; , .hif i s; • °e • i U«M1e s ! -. .a... I ..!W` ? ;.�} =�:: �.e:i.e'js, .,;R ,. ^' .'R'�. .�"" _ r�5'•�7wj.1Z ., fi.. t'c , .. <. ,'fi! r`7 tic _ . s ..... ,........ ,.. y +�.. , .,. _ � • � - _- _.. -..:. : :1 < .......8 !' ..__ :., : , :fiiek'•�.��1�� - aY.�; uhc21� D of 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 1 A G R A M Timing G= G= G= - -_ G= G= G= ++ G Y = G= +` = Y= IY= Y= �Y= IY= IY= Y= J` Protected turns turns Cycle , _ Protected _ P ermitted d n length C s Ilk F L Y"fybiiLi -` F9, l(r' S ..... ... _ - - +, i:�. +_.4'I 7� SL t "Y . I4i�c 'k- � {: �il't % n °i'�sY. - .:.`.. :'i ... ... .... .. ...... .. %.i,,..., :,.:..,. _<....,.:`:� «..n �.; a.• u f »���?Bl,��h�ae: *. � 1. RT volumes, as shown, exclude RTOR - 2. Approach pedestrian and bicycle volumes are those that conflict with right turns from the subject approach. 3. Refer to EauaGon 16 -2. J Chapter 16 - Signalized Intersections Check: Highway capacity Manual 2000 Before improvement both before and after ©After improvement Worksheets are required INPUT WORKSHEET ` ejfelaf �ilc?l ii ja s'ai N _-1 i, Analyst Intersection V5.3 4 - A-r J3F.�f{ EfL Agency or Company u"( -D orry_ c;�, roe_KV Area Type ❑ CBD X Other Date Performed I 1 1110-1 Jurisdiction SDO Analysis Time Period Dm EL k Analysis Year 2a�q :• Yi�IL' ° C ` :et7O'I) ' .: ' it'fe:<<;- w ,; vr. S "P,... fi- �ES'�i x - ,.....:.. y.... ";e, S ys= JL: :.......:1➢ r• „.y. • -],� ifM �" � +« � � r � e� Y;1. 7 1 r a x ¢., .ti's _.. is _.. � ifxtii`• ' � V Z� y tx ?'$i��' Ira t 'rte Cry = Pedestrian Bulton T 05 = Lane Width _ I = Through _ v r � 1 1N f . � grade_ O o P Right -- ---• include turning _. ,. Left bay length Q —s �` = Through +Right grade= 1 t4 N V5 3¢ = Left +Through 1 1 h � A i Street N vc rr PA-m ' I' :. ;.j PGr �1 IAN 516NA4S = Lefl +Right I = Lefl Thr g 9 grade- } OU h + fZ ht °•.F �:,d'Si;iil�:`:':_ �:5:;::�� .`s�': �- 13: + "i3' C .'_" - aY' �k;e {'�- . LL fUlui} %aii�77iiyn =i•. - b •:.c.;, cr_.x�.. 314t {:. �•.:�'7� �v` =zs-' ;�Jo;B ✓.tL+' #G'' . .a �•. frtsxK� -. ..tii: ., e.STi`i»xi ^:!i::it,c. -U, f{ T Oi l x I k a rszZy moron c ta.� rr � F EB Wd NB S8 I LT I TH RT ' LT TH RTI LT TH I RTt I LT I TH RT I I Volume, V (veh/h) % heavy vehicles, % HV j III I Peak -hour factor, PHF Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) Start-up lost lime, I (s) Extension of effective green time, a (s) I Arrival type, AT I I I I 1 Approach pedestrian volume, v (p /h) I Approach bicycle volume,z VW, (bicycles/h)I I I 1 Parking (Y or N) ) fl I I fJ I Parking maneuvers, N. (maneuvers/h) f I I I I I Bus slopping, N (buses/h) 1 O I O I CJ I Min, liming for pedestrians s) ( I a ss I I I 1 °IS! tf ; °= F:,. x�t, '1,'. 'a'.;r.:i`! f` " {6•',ti.: :VYS'f; ;tkY3 •T. i•r' x .` .r F ` u y �; � T t "a: ( _ ^ {{ 3 f'i�. Y Pi i ti' x ` 1: .- ..6?t't�TY.?"45�!?.tSS'YS i:�+:ir e{��, 7 +f,+ - &x ;stvs_i , kd!!'i�l "V T ::, li -N D 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 1 A G R A M Timing Y (Y= I G= G= G- G= G= _ G . = Y= Y= IY= Y= Y= IY= :7 Protected turns I _ Permitted turns Ped s an Cycle length, C - s �t AN �. .;.�,Y��^+��s:�,s 's'y7 ,,,eY� Y .4,'•'I#sw" , }f z '1 I. RT volumes, as shown, exclude RMR ' i ` I 2. Approach pedestrian and bicycle volumes are [hose that conflict with right turns from the subject approach. I 3. Refer to Eauagon 16 -2. J Chapter 16 - Signalized Intersections ATTACHMENT 2 - SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS FILL OUT FOR EACH SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION Provide Existing and Proposed Conditions for Each Item Location: US 34 at Sycamore Road a. Conditions: On the HCM Input Module Worksheet, indicate /sketch the number of through and shared lanes, all designated turn pockets and the length of all turn pockets, lane width for all lanes, percent grade, free flow speed and saturation flow rate for all legs within the intersection, right turn on red allowed or prohibited, and provide separate right turn and right turn on red volumes. b. Type of controller ❑ Pretimed ❑ Semi - Actuated 0 Fully Activated If the controller is actuated, please provide a layout for all actuated legs of the intersection with the following information: detector distance from stop line, detector length, delay time and carry-over. If using IDOT's standard for detector loop layout, a copy of the standard containing the above required detector information will suffice. C. Pedestrian signals: ❑x No ❑ Yes: Locations: Existing — none;_proposed,_south leg d. Sidewalks/bicycle facilities: 19 Sidewalk Z Bicycle /Multi -Use ❑ Neither Locations: south leg, east and west sides (existing) multi -use path (east and west sides, south leg) - proposed e. Preemption (Railroad/fire /emergency vehicle): ❑ No ❑x Yes: Locations: all approaches (existing) f. Describe parking and parking restrictions and identify any bus stops in the vicinity. no parking or bus stops in vicinity o. Do current signals meet MUTCD standards? ❑ No M Yes P. Is intersection a part of a current signal interconnect system? Z No ❑ Yes: Limits: Jurisdictions involved: i. Operational deficiencies: 7 Check: Highway Capacity Manual 2000 ® Before improvement both before and after (After improvement w orkshee ts are required y { bra INPUT WORKSHEET ,: tv�1 /f � fJ �' a C37T„r'_t - � ;.t t , wl,:�•s,�. €a�'- ,4�':iyy : f.,�f. — Analyst Interseelion U5 3¢ Ar SYG4mOIZ4 AID. Agency or Company VN r'ca r e rT Y' of YaZ-K V1 i.4E Other Date Performed 1 I 1 g l 09 Ju risdiction DoT Analysis Time Period 111 npa {( Analysis Year 2at.q l l`4RiO „ hi Sl,((� F: a 1,, �?::7 •.1iTN;�gI Nj. ?>: - r= ra •N 2> r. LirC•.. . .:. � � . _••c: ;:�>• 'i.x._ l;d�S' i 'F"f l+ 3� U � F grade= CJ /U ( ....:-.._.._ __ - •'t- :• p� CD = Pedestrian Button �,w = lane Width ShowWhArtm _. Y f `N grade= G = Through Right include turning Left bay length \ Through +Right grade � Left +Through Street Left +Right left + Through + Right ! I2 1 ) r �•. FM .'.�i�.d.7s�`I'1:'.-t:t{,;.:�y; N�r'::'':�'3'^- _:XF' ^'' "sue?”, tit. :1 Vi'''i 3' -� .a r .' � + f �', 1, ,ri�,�: , . 4- :�"ail4� �_ .rs.i • =u.s:.: S.� ...;5 ?i�+a+vir.:i':ts'•a'�ia z-'hrt�aM" =1=3 �ikt7bYji� .t�4TYii.- zY �� I 2nit._ti h EB Wa ! NB Se LT TH Ri I LT TH Volume, V (vefi/h) Ri I LT TH RT I LT 7H RTt I I I ' I I ' % heavy vehicles, % HV Peak -hour factor, PHF I ' I Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) Start -up lost time, h (s) I Extension of effective green lime, a (s) Arrival type, AT Approach pedestrian volume, 2 v oed (p/h) I I I Approach bicycle volume,z vhj, (bicycles/h) I I I Parking (Y or N) I N I IJ I N Parking maneuvers, N (maneuvers/h) I Bus slopping, N (buses/h) I C) 1 D j Q Min. timing for pedestrians 3 G (s) I �.35� /i8{� f� y�/�j � ): < {kS''�•i i•� = =jtF'- :ni'!= °!w> "et C.y ;aa '+G =ilt.�.: {e jff+Fs.�.�rY�kS. __ '� E I _7y'' ` �i•! :I�� •-:'S—•i: r.Y[r•Pl�if a�� :.: �. -:.:' '<" �ii.. ,G;i lr,Yt•`J'a -< G}. 1I .,, -, ,51•:5' }a`,�.�:x.. °5X4: �..• _ -..v - ,.f. r • �i��'.�+ `fi � � - • � ^.. _ INS . 1 v: �4 D of 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 I A G R A M I Timing Y= Y- Y= Y= Y= Y= Y= - Y= I Protected turns _ , Permitted turns I an Cycle length, C t Ped�s s J Tip_ r` - ' <a V t'•E �. i. _.. ..,. . ti t ' • ._r,. `ri` °.i�', -,:. 'i?�; �'.�s8f�7`.' ' � h�� �.,�.r .. •�: , � ' �� • '' � �< . 4•��:.;'. � .,.; +3 +i w_,_S.aS. ��-'- �''� -� � to - 'i j.'�� ,� ^. F:7�'Y :<4 ' ".' +Z,9 .. 1, RT volumes, as sham, aoctude RTDR 2. Approach pedestrian and bicycle volumes are [hose that conflict with right alms from the subject approach. 3. Refer to Eouatlon 16 -2. Chapter 16 - Signalized Intersections Check: Highway Capacity Manua12" El Before improvement both before.and after. (After improvement , Worksheets are required y ! Fy INPUT WORKSHEET Analyst Intersection US 34 Ar 6Yc4 Mo2.c xv Agency or Company VNrMb erTY ar Y0e- K•Vie.LE AreaType ❑ CBD Xother Date Performed 1/1,1 Jurisdiction 1:D0 r Analysis Tim Period t11 Weak Analysis Year 2 rx q c?�.T gg �'F.t.� 'r :•grirCl " a. s, �..:.` .;x.�ii �• rti -Z Y t` .b" u =� tp' +.. ro'r ;w tQ . a. ..! ..a- :\�r.:i.�, .,::Iz:e•ka: > °.�:�C.F�,:'Y `Ytl +•. 3_::��i�... �Ya "'47< �eiF u r,,,: p . Co = Pedestrian Button Lane Width Showftthhrm I . �... ,.. . grade= �•/� ? = Through =Right — _ include turning r = Left bay length 7t4 = Through +Right grade= o LA F _ F U5 3¢ = Left +Through _� �� Street ' f (UC77 u5• FNT t4 I = Left + Right Left +- Through + Right `'t �� r�l����'_ t: ��rs' smr- .��e!iL��� "•'��.1,)'',�:'' = -j .,.. �.;�'�,!:`,.....� �;��:;'�``.i�;`,'�.�;., F 'S��` i� a'1K. ...- - v.:��J'." '��. ..' '_s.5��•iL+?S. =.a !� �'�d_r�,t,( * ;. a f�� ` e B NB LT TH RTt I LT H RTt I LT TH I RTt ' LT TH ` RTe Volume, v (vehlh) J' % heavy vehicles, % W j I Peak -hour factor, PHf ' Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) Start-up lost time, li (s) Extension of effective green time, a (s) Arrival type, AT Approach pedestrian volume? v I I I f>ea (pmt I I Approach bicycle volume,z v (bleyoles/h) I I I I Parking (Y or N) Parking maneuvers, N, (manewers/h) Bus slopping, Na (buses/h) 1 C9 I O ( p i Min. timing for pedestrians 3 G (s) I Z _? s Cc I j I l i Ji �,+�„�� -j�r�„ ` ':•`nkrr.r.;.:•• - - •� - _;� ... i�'r�'t' O:+S.ary;,• - .r - ,�iir,(. x3?• /1 S :Jifiv:r }iX9. .P,G_'r }' ..F'"" .•r kt'�(r„�• -�. � 3�•,!?.��� - � I D 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 A G R A M Timing IY= Y- Y= Y,.3 I Y= I Y= I Y= I Y= I Protected turns _ ` it _ Permitted turns Cycl length, C = f k(d so '(Nr�f$s�. � �..•:' .:'e,, . . �I:t -C. 3 '� {��,�ll�r .. ( .7 _ Y �• ,•. ,:: •i _ t.' -a: `Ia4:� : ��e - : � '• r"�`,'',�'�•7.' 7 cLl..lt � :t" k%''a?�t.'JL F, r' •' _ - °°1r ' � 1. RT volumes, as sham, etoMe RMP ; = - 2 Approach pedesWan and bicycle volumes are (hose that conflict YA(h right turns from the sub)ed approach. a. Refer M Eonalinn 15 -2, Chapter 16 - Signalized Intersections ATTACHMENT 3 - UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS NEEDING UPDATE FILL OUT FOR EACH UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION (2 {PER PAGE) Provide Existing and Proposed Conditions for Each Item Location: US 34 at Diehl Farm Road a. Conditions: On the HCM Input Module Worksheet, indicate /sketch the number of through and shared lanes, all designated turn pockets and the length of all turn pockets, lane width for all lanes, percent grade, free flow speed and saturation flow rate for all legs within the intersection. b. Traffic Control (4 -way stop, two -way stop, etc.) _Two -way stop (existing and proposed) C. Other Conditions: d. Sidewalks /bicycle facilities: 0 Sidewalk Eg Bicycle /Multi -Use ❑ Neither Locations: existing — south leR, east and west sides (sidewalk) proposed — south leg, east and west sides (multi -use path) d. Special Problems: Location: a. Conditions: On the HCM Input Module Worksheet, indicate /sketch the number of through and shared lanes, all designated turn pockets and the length of all turn pockets, lane width for all lanes, percent grade, free flow speed and saturation flow rate for all legs within the intersection. b. Traffic Control (4 -way stop, two -way stop, etc.) C. Other Conditions: d. Sidewalks /bicycle facilities: ❑ Sidewalk ❑ Bicycle /Multi -Use ❑ Neither Locations: d. Special Problems: 8 Check: Highway Capacity Manual 2000 0 Before improvement both before and after El After improvement yorksheets are required INPUT WORKSHEET Analyst Intersection v- 34' A -r D E54 L - r-Aem PP Agency or Company tk•' t j> --w( or Ke. Area Type ❑ GBO �Other Date Performed I I I q ) 0 9 Jurisdiction T00 Analysis Time Period _wn-peak Analysis Year - 2 , Q-) `I N grade= 0 1 . ........ CP Pedestdan Button ... .......... .... ... Lane Width grade= Show North Arrow Through Right include turning Left bay length Through + Right Left + Through Street Left + Nght 0% Left + Through + Right grade= EB B. WB I NB SB Volume, V (veh/h) LT TH RTI LT TH RTI LT TH RTI LT TH RT ' � I ' I � ' I ' % heavy vehicles, % HV Peak-hour factor, PHF Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) Start-up lost time, 1 (s) Extension of effective green time, e (s) Arrival type, AT Approach pedestrian VOIUMO,2 Vod (p/h) Approach bicycle volume,2 Vb1' (bicycles/h) Parking (Y or N) Parking maneuvers, N, (maneuvers/h) Bus stopping, N (busesth) Min. timing for pedestrians , 3 G P (s) am " J � D 01 02 03 04 05 06 OT 08 I A G R A M Timing G G= (3 G Y Y= 1Y= Y= Y= Y= Y= Y_ Permitted turns Protected turns P an Cycle length, C s 'We 1 VR._, 4 1 0 01 1 RE '�N - 'a 1. RT volumes, as shown, exclude RTOR 2. Approach pedestdan and bicycle volumes are [hose that confild with right (ums from the subject approach. 3. Refer to Eauation 16-2. Chapter 16 - Signalized Intersections Check: Highway Capaclly Manual 2O00 El Before improvement both before and after NAfter improvement , Worksheets are required INPUT WORKSHEET taByrr• �rj_;.: :r. >:,;' ti +:a a;{: -yhg�"ft7 .... l�!)� Q lI1dUOlZ.,i -'� { :. "..: .t +F':•�= ;+�t�s`.srt:�'S!krti_�� � . � i}l # n, . a ��a yy U ,fd Analyst Intersection rX 3 Ar _ DrEaFL ;:'A 2M tom. Agency or company tk-' tTcD Gm w Kd>v_y.V ru£ Area Type ❑ CBD �Olher Dale Performed 1 119 lag Jurisdiction SDo T" Analysis Time Period nm Ineak Analysis Year 2ovg 10110 t e�.rJ .U' i? ' ., ...•.L {1'V- F'F�': ",�; ,.er�•.;'srxiit+ -'_• 5z..' 9 r�, ,iF ..�.::'�;y<,��.,n`v am y . , ` G 4- kaika�icf 87 yvY y } grade - - 3 % ;— - =•- - ,' 1 Q pl CA = Pedestrian Button Lane Width grade= = Through Right include turning _N = Left bay length = Through +Right grade = = LeR + Through •� Slreel t = LeR +fti hl - l-- ru�-rr usr% PaTpI g -j- grade- O = Left + Through +Right f ♦� }� / ] .iii: :l: ,. :.;.ysi :- ,E.. } '.l'S1i1l :sa h 9 � 1. �7�. ..�1 °- y �iT� ' Rt %• �:�.�' ; "�'Y>I:d �'� E�. . -_. .. ... ..-!1: •rrs.. :. .i�': .,.,E;S� ±.»z'- ., "i }�'- (!jr�'at5y.Rr= - %i?t'�' ",4, �•- EB' ... .. I wa .��`..L���J NB I SB LT I TH i RTI i LT i TH I RTt I LT I TH i RT i LT I TH I RTr Volume, V (vehfi) + I 1 1 % heavy vehicles, % HV Peak -hour factor, PHF Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) I 7 7 I 7 l l 7 l I Start-up lost lime, I (s) Extension of effective green time, a (s) Arrival type, AT Approach pedestrian volume, voed (p/h) I I Approach bicycle volume, v (bicycles/h) I I I I Parking (Y or N) t�1 Parking maneuvers, N. (manewers/h) j f Bus slopping, N (buses/h) I n 1 Min, liming for pedestdans, G (s) f t .n?S� Hates �� 4y..J � f �l�' - "`': . '.1� °i� i +7a�:z-r -, rr�.� ��k•Er - - -* •,.�.•- 1 • .:;:.. ;l.. tr . P .t om@ {' - .r: i <` _.:, . Y��:, i a1�..:.' •A M 7�7fi. •3 <r. �,iJ i ,. d'MtE1t. • e'a: .���{. ?'r " ^- .lit.li� ?_ +�-; _ �-a_,.. .• - i .�{ r,.a ���}S > 'fJ n ...• -x.. :;:'. ..... ,_,.. ?'C4`'.'.;rt/'.` �t D .. H1 02 03 04 05 06 0T 1 08 A G R A M I I Timing Y= I = I Y= Y= (y- G= G= G Y = f _ I Y= Y= I Y= Protected turns I _ _ �' _ Permitted turns feds�rian I Cycle length, C = s , I� 1. RTvolumes, as shown, exclude R rAN ! . R' . "�' -I WIT o , TO w r;.i 2. Approach pedestrian and bicycle volumes are those that conflict with right turns from the subject approach. 3. Refer to Equation 16 -2 Chapter 16 - Signalized Intersections ATTACHMENT 4 - DRAINAGE DATA COMPLETE FOR EACH DRAINAGE BASIS (2 PER PAGE) Location: Route 34 a. Existing drainage type (Open/closed): Open ditches b. Existing drainage problems: None C. Flood plains (Transverse /longitudinal): Crosses Blackberry Creek Flood plain (Str. 047 -0049) d. Regulatory (FEMA) Floodways: Blackberry Creek e. Major drainage structures: Roadwa brid p_e047 -0049 f. Outfall conditions: Clear outfall to Blackberry Creek, then on to Fox River : N/A Comments (Realignment/cost nment/cost artici ation/'urisdictional transfer g• ( g p p J ) Location: a. Existing drainage type (Open/closed): b. Existing drainage problems: C. Flood plains (Transverse /longitudinal): d. Regulatory (FEMA) Floodways: e. Major drainage structures: f. Outfall conditions: g. Comments (Realignment/cost participation/jurisdictional transfer): 9 !,fix;. i�.",.•c, .. _r. -1 , - r` ,.,.nl.��.,__ '-.,I n�r, WIN p t Akppfp H AL1CAF 0 FUTURE BIKE PAT 1,500 ? t' r • I r p u I ' m - - EXISTI .AT ��� , �____ �■ FEET �v mr, CMAQ APPLICATION BIKE PATH �I� r'��i I r 4' I " �rt>Mi� ♦ r ��a t, � I� '�;�'�h I ' I �, - '� a 1 I V .PARK V- Ir' fi 1�� FOREST PRESERVE 3 °t - a ♦ T niFv STATE OWNED OPEN SPACE Y �•, OTHER COMMUNITY RESOURCE+ - .A. Randall Markef /ace t � 1 �' �- ' � � r, r: Y�'nT h 1 ,✓ t ,, n ,; C I • _ r I - r � s; Y `L •at � i 1 1 , I � rt c Y � Frr - a - r, w'�' ��s� � s V r - i J ♦ r � J a - >,r t 3' -' - � +,�e; u9 , I ariu.. ,} " •�, titer � 4 f ;1 ` rcY , / I - - a 'Z r�R� F`im CA, t" 1' _ - 'd ,•t �� ,,5 � ',' � C " _ i'�i yr"�i l,> ! e - I, r jlr', a a : FICA I(r' - - C,7 _ C' y ✓': 1 ,r I'x Os +[ �3arti a 4 l h F ?w• a , .}4, >2 Isy,• ,, j' nP�,r � - s � � i � - "t '"; y 7 _ ' I' l - I! I "!'� 1 +s, � � -.-:,a 1 � - • i�'�,�^ ` 4 1 J!... ,. ' T q'Nq rA� C,ountryside. � i I i pfd , a ING l�;r , •; " ew+ .a�,: -r o -? I'1 `1aA«Nl^ p r L ¢ Center 1 -�F „q 1 w-n�_ . i '� ' 1 �I, r - 4�a•,' TI y ' , , I EXIST I Z a G r .. ! �.4_..,.. 1 .ya aet A PEDESTRIAN . a a va�r C� � !n, . BRIDGE ,; , < ,;'��,r „,' r,, :,< r Copley r' e t Oar. -1,,,� � ., .f - ( �� -'�• . � j : S:I ,W,� k , ! f' '''n",x n. 1 a - i n ” jl "�`s `.+�' •, Ri'A. � p ' ur r7 �r - `i ' - - - . _ -_ v - Fiy t - 1 `1 •. �k �'i� • , I• ^ � �. r7 l„ - If -1 - - - 7 y' i .t� r ��' �r_ :� 1 -�' -- ' "� �f 1 - � I ' � -���� j „trn� r yN�'i: '� ��..� jr r(.7jaau �., P� YR�� \Fn7 , •,uF 1�'1 r; -r 't ` i I - r� . 1 � � � J' - �' };J r - i� I r r „f � i' ,- .. - "�'d` .��.. t t �ih' ;.�z;,'.' ,�.,' (!�, "fr'IW 1„ r 1�I�•°'61 t c I I _ Y 1 ('J 1 4 - ...� r ' � 1 •�)r�t Xi - T - 1 , ; �,l r - r,4 ° 1 - J x �BeeClTer "n'+ _ art _ m >M ,,{,•;# - r• •. _ , Center � ., r r ,� ; w .. � =4, W _ rl , I t , r -� i�rrur r r M,v '( � 7 .J arr l'- ',1,1'!J i ���,�w` • r>y;rly.An "�il �4��` . } 1 � - .,,;1 I - ' h I - 1 ( - t } %� :rora " r • ' 1r ' _.r'�s r S:; �. it -;, 4r 1 r*i Fd, 45 A' I �r! } ,, IT ;_uVtil�Ca ® SCHOOL'. © LiBRARY POST OFFICE REGCENTER a L� POLIC'c ., 0 PUBLIG':fORCS COURTHOUSE CANOE LAUNCH SPRANG r i ' Sr 1'" ® FIRE rl C -01rNA4EM © PARK,, 0. GOLF COJRSE ' e �v l }},lr ? � - �t1�RRD �.>., r • ' ,�tv`� w �, i r ii �lb' Y' �,�,T,�+'�'w'��"�:�Y'�i:::: °�n. Pig" �- rr vl. _ - ,,.-: ,_,.. .._._M _. I •�.. _ -.., ... �.. .r ,� I ' - . ., .� ,. , ,_ - - � I ` �— •."x`a, "''�' _ �o W: :1Ud�.�`SCil:1u,�'�r`""r.�w.':. ',le.h� "r sh... -t .'J.�.�r -r.� .ru, - i '`? - r .a. _ ' ©:' ✓. ,1� I j Engineering Enterprises, Inc. N 9 CONGESTION MITIGATION 9 P I I I; 5z '.''.me. =l AND AIR QUALITY (CMAQ) PROJECT LOCATION Sugar Gro e, ,Iflrnols 80554 U.S. ROUTE 34 PROJECT APPLICATION BIKE TRAIL f: ''�• UNITED QTY OF YORKVILLE, ILLINOIS N O P T H H Gl5�PU9ilC'YGR%V; 'c;9 ?•YLOd!E'G. ? ?e __ Cr;O US..' mXD :: ?o? 679W 1983 STATEPLANE EAST PPS'204FEET - - % _ �_c. °:?SES 1.'t, ..09 Congestion Mitigation /Air Quality Improvement Program Transportation Control Measure Committal Agreement One copy of this page must be completed and signed by each sponsor of proposed FY 2010 CMAQ projects. The project sponsor certifies that it is willing and able to manage, maintain, and operate the project(s). The project sponsor possesses legal authority to nominate the CMAQ project proposal(s) and to finance, acquire, and construct the proposed project(s); and by this committal agreement the sponsor authorizes the submittal of the CMAQ project(s), including all understanding and assurances contained therein, and authorizes the person identified as the project contact to act in connection with the proposal(s) and to provide such additional information as may be required. The project sponsor will cause work on the project(s) to be commenced within a reasonable time after receipt of notification from the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning that the project has been selected and that the project will be carried to completion with reasonable diligence. Whereas the CMAQ program funds transportation control measures (TCM), the sponsor agrees that, if selected, the project(s) may be included as a TCM in the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for attaining the applicable national ambient air quality standards. Inclusion of CMAQ projects in the SIP will follow procedures established by the CMAQ Project Selection Committee. The sponsor will provide any tracking information required in a timely fashion. Name: Valerie Burd (Please print) Title: Mavor (Please print) / -a 7- ©q (Signature) (Date) Project Sponsor: United City of Yorkville CMAQ PROJECT MILESTONE SCHEDULE Sponsor: United City of Yorkville Contact Information Project: US Route 34 Bike Trail Municipal Contact Travis Miller (630/553 -8573) Scope of Work: Construct Bike Trail Along US Route 34 Council /Liaison Kane Kendal Council of Mayors/ Mike Sullivan Section # : TBD Consultant Engineering Enterprises, Inc. TIP #: TBD Consultant Contact Jason Bauer (630/466 -9350) TIP Year: TBD IDOT TBD Construction Cost $810,575 Completed? If Yes, When If No, When Is es o) mple m t o ted� Completion Expected? Notes e IDOT Phase IKick -off Meeting 1st State /Federal Coordination Meeting No February 2010 No June 2010 Categorical Exclusion Concurrence Design Variance Concurrence No July 2010 Submit Draft Phase I Report (PDR) No July 2010 allow 3 to 6 months for IDOT review No Auqust 2010 Public Hearing/Meeting (or N /A) Submit Final Phase I Report (PDR) No August 2010 allow 1 to 3 months for IDOT review No Jaunary 2011 Phase I Design Approval No March 2010 f Phase li a ' s • Submit Pre -Final Plans and Estimates ":, =.• allow 1 to 4 months for IDOT review No July 2011 Submit Final Plans (PS&E) tFiigfit -6 .W No September 2011 f- ay,.(only comp; fete ,if�your,profe�t,Keq,U�,�res�f iight�fW�y, � r Right -of -Way Kick -off Meeting - - - -- - • - ° • - • - ••• N/A ROW Negotiations Initiation allow at least 9 to 18 months N/A ROW Acquisition Complete ;- Construction Letting _4 _ No Jaunary 2012 See IDOT Local Roads' Mechanics of Project Management "Federal Aid Project Initiation to Completion" Flow Chart for sequence of events and estimated review times. Prepared by: Jason M. Bauer, P.E. Date: January 9, 2009