Village of Bartlett Committee met April 7.
Here is the minutes provided by the committee:
President Wallace called the Committee of the Whole meeting to order at 7:56 p.m.
PRESENT: Chairmen Camerer, Carbonaro, Deyne, Gabrenya, Hopkins, Reinke and President Wallace
ABSENT: None
ALSO PRESENT: Village Administrator Paula Schumacher, Assistant Village Administrator Scott Skrycki, Human Resources Director Janelle Terrance, Economic Development Coordinator Tony Fradin, Sr. Management Analyst Sam Hughes, Management Analyst Joey Dienberg, Finance Director Todd Dowden, Director of Public Works Dan Dinges, Public Works Engineer Bob Allen, Planning & Development Director Roberta Grill, Building Director Brian Goralski, Head Golf Professional Phil Lenz, Deputy Chief Jim Durbin, Village Attorney Bryan Mraz and Village Clerk Lorna Giless.
POLICE & HEALTH, CHAIRMAN CARBONARO
Chairman Carbonaro stated that they have a traffic calming policy on the agenda and asked Deputy Chief Jim Durbin to proceed.
Deputy Chief Jim Durbin stated that on Tuesday, February 4, 2020, the police department presented a proposal to Village Committee Members seeking the enactment of a Neighborhood Traffic Calming Policy. The presentation contained a brief explanation of what traffic calming is, what is contained in the Neighborhood Traffic Calming Policy, and how the policy would provide for the establishment of protocols and a petition process for handling resident requests to install traffic calming devices in their neighborhoods.
Part of the presentation included references to a recent village-wide effort which was undertaken to address a series of neighborhood traffic complaints received from residents of the North Avenue & Western Avenue neighborhood. One of the Village’s responses to the North Avenue & Western Avenue complaints included the installation of stop signs with flashing LEDs at that intersection. It was initially believed that the installation of the LED stop signs would help satisfy the concerns of the residents while providing an economical solution for the Village. However, after the police department convened a special listening session with residents of the North Avenue & Western Avenue neighborhood, two notions became apparent: there were multiple traffic-related concerns throughout the neighborhood—not just stop sign violations, and there was no consensus among neighborhood residents regarding the effectiveness or need for flashing LED stop signs. In fact, many residents vocalized the flashing LED signs were an eyesore and wanted them removed. These sentiments were shared with Committee Members at the February 4, 2020 meeting.
Several Committee members offered feedback regarding the Traffic Calming Policy proposal and also engaged in subsequent discussion regarding the LED stop signs. In summary, Committee members posed two questions requiring follow-up by staff:
- How many other communities with traffic calming policies have received back petitions attaining the 66% in-favor threshold (Bartlett’s proposed percentage) of resident approval for the installation of a traffic calming device in their neighborhood?
- What are the current thoughts or perceptions of residents in the North Avenue & Western Avenue regarding traffic conditions and all the stop signs with flashing LEDs, such as; Are they working? Should they be removed?
In order to obtain answers to the petition in-favor percentage threshold question, the police department contacted 7 local municipalities from which elements of our proposed traffic calming policy were modeled after. Of those municipalities, five of them (Aurora, Mt. Prospect, Oswego, St. Charles, and Wooddale) advised they did not have any record of, nor were they aware of any returned petitions which met their town’s assigned in-favor percentage threshold needed to advance a neighborhood petition. One town, Village of Deer Park, no longer had any knowledge of their own Traffic Calming Procedure as policing functions had been assumed by the Lake County Sheriff’s Office. These six municipalities require in-favor percentage thresholds anywhere between 60% and 80% be attained before their respective petitions will be considered for further action. Only one municipality, Village of Lincolnwood, had any record of returned neighborhood petitions. In 2019, Lincolnwood received 17 requests for traffic calming petitions. Of those 17 petitions, four met Lincolnwood’s 80% resident in-favor threshold and were accepted for further consideration. Only one of those petitions met the final qualifications for a traffic calming device.
Additionally, a survey was created by the police department to address the second question regarding thoughts or perceptions of residents in the North Avenue and Western Avenue neighborhood about current traffic conditions and the flashing LED stop signs. One question in the survey pertains to daily traffic volumes, one question pertains to speeding autos, and two questions seek input on the flashing LED stop signs. This survey was either sent out via email to the residents who attended the August 2019 listening session or was conducted via phone interview with those residents who did not provide an email address but provided a phone number at the listening session. Through those efforts, we received ten completed survey responses.
In summary, of the four questions posed in the survey, the only question which indicated that a clear majority of residents perceived a single neighborhood traffic issue in the same way was that pertaining to speeding autos—80% of the residents polled in the survey responded that overall speeding auto conditions remain the same today as they were in August 2019. Of the three other questions, the next highest majority response to a question was at a level of 60%. The inconsistency in percentages of resident responses to this survey itself serve to demonstrate how perceptions of traffic problems vary from resident to resident within the same neighborhood. The survey responses further demonstrate why a traffic calming policy with a formalized petition process is an essential tool for making future determinations during the processes of addressing resident traffic complaints and how resident requests for the installation of physical traffic calming devices are handled.
The police department continues to advocate for the enactment of the proposed Traffic Calming Policy. This will allow the police department as well as other representatives of the Village of Bartlett to have additional means to address neighborhood traffic-related complaints and provide a consistent set of protocols for addressing requests for traffic calming devices.
Trustee Carbonaro asked if this program was funded in his current budget.
Deputy Chief Durbin stated that it is not. It would be hard to anticipate costs. Unofficially, they have taken measures to do these things. They work with public works to have additional signage such as speed limits or parking. They are incidental costs that would fall within the public works budget itself.
President Wallace thanked him for the information. He stated that he is guilty as anyone, when someone is continually talking about a situation that they feel is dangerous or a problem in their community, we really have to get the entire community to buy in. He thinks this policy will clear up a lot of things in the future.
Trustee Carbonaro stated that this item will come to the next Board meeting for a final vote. Chairman Deyne moved to adjourn and that motion was seconded by Chairman Carbonaro.
ROLL CALL VOTE TO ADJOURN
AYES: Chairmen Camerer, Carbonaro, Deyne, Gabrenya, Hopkins, Reinke
NAYS: None
ABSENT : None
MOTION CARRIED
The meeting was adjourned at 8:08 p.m.
https://www.village.bartlett.il.us/Home/ShowDocument?id=11045
Alerts Sign-up