Submitted By
Jack Chalabian, Transportation Commission Chairperson Bill McKenna, Village Engineer
Reviewed By
Click here to enter text.
Agenda Item Title
Title
A Motion to Reject the Transportation Commission's Recommendations for the Use of a Traffic Calming Toolbox to be used in the Development and Implementation of a Neighborhood Traffic Management Program for Residential Streets
End
Overview
Overview
One item on the Transportation Commission's approved work plan is to develop a traffic calming toolbox in order to provide a list of accepted options to address traffic problems on residential streets in the Village. A traffic calming toolbox is one component of a Neighborhood Traffic Management Program (NTMP). Such a program provides a process for identifying and addressing problems related to speeding, vehicle crashes, excessive vehicle volumes, and pedestrian/bicycle safety on residential streets in the Village.
The Transportation Commission has completed its development of a draft traffic calming toolbox for use in a NTMP. The Commission is tonight submitting its draft traffic calming toolbox to the Village Board of Trustees for review and approval. The Commission voted unanimously at its July 24, 2017 meeting to submit the draft traffic calming toolbox.
Body
Staff Recommendation
Staff has concerns and does not support the inclusion of speed humps, speed tables, raised crosswalks, and raised intersections as tools which are included in the traffic calming toolbox due to impacts to operations for the Fire Department. Staff recommends modifying the Transportation Commission's recommended toolbox to remove these items.
Fiscal Impact
Expenditures for implementing traffic calming measures varies from inexpensive ($500 to $3,000) for "Level 1 - No Traffic Flow Changes" measures up to expensive (in excess of $10,000) for "Levels 2/3 - Some/Significant Traffic Flow Changes" and "4 - Street Closures" measures.
Included in the exhibit D traffic calming measures summary table are recommendations for the funding source for the various traffic calming measures. The recommendations call for the Village to provide one-hundred percent funding for some measures and for the petitioners to pay for some measures by means of a Special Service Area (SSA) tax.
The inexpensive Level 1 costs are typically already included in the Village's annual Public Works budget.
One Transportation Commission recommendation is for the Village Board and the Commission to discuss funding mechanisms for the expensive traffic calming measures. This discussion would provide insight to the Commission as to how the Village Board would like to fund the expensive traffic calming measures. This insight could be used by the Commission during is evaluation of traffic calming petitions.
Background
An item to develop a traffic calming toolbox for use in traffic calming was first added to the 2015 Transportation Commission work plan in order to provide a known list of accepted options to address traffic problems on streets. The item was carried over into the Commission's 2016 and 2017 work plans. The Transportation Commission started on the development of the toolbox in March of 2016. The toolbox was developed over twelve Commission meetings. The Commission voted unanimously at its July 24, 2017 meeting to submit the draft traffic calming toolbox to the Village Board for review and approval.
The Transportation Commission is making three recommendations to the Village Board:
1. Review and approve the draft traffic calming toolbox documents as submitted.
2. Review and approve the recommended funding mechanism for expensive traffic calming measures.
3. The Village should continue on to the next phase of developing a Neighborhood Traffic Management Program.
Upon approval, Village Staff and the Transportation Commission will take the approved traffic calming toolbox and incorporate it into a NTMP document for use by the Village and its residents.
Exhibit A is a tabular matrix of the thirty-four traffic calming measures the Commission wants to be included in the traffic calming toolbox. The matrix indicates if Village Staff concurs with a recommendation and also indicates the type of Village Board action required for implementing each measure. Staff did not concur with four of the Commission's proposed measures. Reasons for its non-concurrence will be given farther down in the commentary.
Exhibit B is a revised resident petition for requesting that the Village remedy perceived traffic problems at locations throughout the residential neighborhoods. The existing petition that has been in use for many years is focused on the petitioners requesting a specific traffic calming device, such as a stop sign or a diverter, to address a perceived traffic problem. The revised petition has shifted the focus of the petition so that the petitioners instead indicate the types and severity of perceived traffic problems to be remedied and then allow the Transportation Commission to evaluate the petition using the traffic calming toolbox scoring table and list of available traffic calming measures in order to recommend the most appropriate solution to address the perceived traffic problem.
Exhibit C is a "scoring table" that allows for the consistent and objective evaluation of the causes that result in resident generated petitions for traffic calming measures at locations throughout the Village. The table measures six criteria: crash history, vehicle speed, vehicle volume, the proximity of pedestrian traffic generators, the proximity of designated bicycle routes, and community interest. Each criteria is assigned a maximum possible score. The total possible maximum score is 100 points. The table includes metrics for each criteria to assign points ranging between zero and the maximum possible for that criteria. The Transportation Commission has decided that a minimum score of 25 points is necessary in order to submit a petition to the Commission for review and recommendation.
Exhibit D is a tabular listing of thirty-four traffic calming measures that the Transportation Commission has decided can be used to remedy the traffic problems indicated in the petition. The table groups the measures into four categories of increasing severity. The four groups are comprised of: no traffic flow changes, some traffic flow changes, significant traffic flow changes, and street closures. The use of this grouping allows the Commission to start with the less severe measures and then work its way up to the more severe measures if necessary. By inference, the cost of implementing a particular measure is generally directly proportional to the severity of the measure.
The Commission has deemed two of the measures to be not bicycle friendly. They were recommended because they do work. However, if the Commission were to recommend one of these two measures, they would also recommend that they be made as bicycle friendly as possible.
The Village's Fire, Police, and Public Works Departments reviewed each proposed measure and ranked it as to the level of impact that it would have on its operations. The Commission and the Departments discussed the ranking during the development of the tabular listing.
It should be noted that Village Staff does not concur with four of the Commission's recommendations regarding the use of speed humps, speed tables, raised crosswalks, and raised intersections. The Fire Department provided a memorandum to the Transportation Commission, included as Exhibit E, providing reasons for its not recommending these four measures. The primary reasons given include an increased response time due to having to slow down while going over these devises and causing a "rough ride" for all drivers and possible pain for passengers with certain skeletal disabilities. The Police Department informed the Commission at its May 10th meeting that a few speed humps wouldn't affect its operations but that if they were to proliferate then it would start to cause problems. The Public Works Department informed the Commission at its May 10th meeting that these four devices could be worked around but would still have a negative impact on providing services.
It was discovered during the preparation of this agenda item commentary that a Transportation Commission voice vote of 4 to 2 to not include full and partial street closures in the traffic calming measures table was not included in the Commission's draft May 10, 2017 meeting minutes which were subsequently approved by the Commission at its June 12, 2017 meeting. Therefore, the May 10th meeting minutes will need to be amended and reapproved by the Transportation Commission at one of its future meetings.
Finally, the table includes a Staff recommendation as to who should pay for the various traffic calming measures. The recommendations call for the Village to provide one-hundred percent funding for some measures and for the petitioners to pay for some measures by means of a Special Service Area (SSA) tax.
Exhibit F provides a graphical description of each of the proposed traffic calming measures. The descriptions used by the Commission during its development and included in this exhibit were taken from the NTMP documents as published by Placer County, California and the City of Albuquerque, New Mexico. Graphical descriptions specifically geared for and relevant to the Village of Oak Park's NTMP document would be created by the consultant hired to assist in creating the Village's NTMP document.
Alternatives
The alternative to this recommendation could be to delay action to gain additional information.
Previous Board Action
N/A.
Citizen Advisory Commission Action
The Transportation Commission recommended the following:
1. Review and approve the draft traffic calming toolbox documents as submitted.
2. The Village Board and the Commission should discuss a funding mechanism for expensive traffic calming measures.
3. The Village should continue on to the next phase of developing a Neighborhood Traffic Management Program.
Anticipated Future Actions/Commitments
Staff will be recommending under a future separate agenda item that the Village Board authorize the use of a consultant familiar with the development of such documents to work with Staff and the Transportation Commission in order to develop and publish a complete NTMP document.
One Transportation Commission recommendation is for the Village Board and the Commission to discuss funding mechanisms for the expensive traffic calming measures. This discussion would provide insight to the Commission as to how the Village Board would like to fund the expensive traffic calming measures. This insight could be used by the Commission during is evaluation of traffic calming petitions.
Intergovernmental Cooperation Opportunities
None at this time.
Performance Management (MAP) Alignment
N/A.