CHAPTER FIVE TRANSPORTATION

INTRODUCTION

Transportation planning is commonly equated with the construction of new roadways, the expansion of existing roadways, or other projects which are designed to reduce traffic congestion and to accommodate future increases in automobile demand. Such transportation needs are directly related to the type and intensity of the land uses that develop along roadways, and other developments that are served by the road network.

Those roadways located within the Study Area for the Corridor Plan were further examined in terms of access to adjoining properties, future road extensions, future frontage and backage roads, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities. The conclusions presented at the end of this Chapter provide the basis for recommended conditions for development approval and continuing implementation strategies that are contained within Chapter Two – the Recommended Plan.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION, LOCATION AND PURPOSE

The Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) is constructing a four-lane, divided highway from a point south of the City of Carthage in Hancock County, Illinois, to the west side of the City of Macomb in McDonough County, Illinois (See Figure 5A). The proposed highway will be designated as Federal Aid Primary Route 315 (FAP 315) and marked as Illinois Route 336 (IL 336). It will generally parallel and replace the existing two-lane U.S. Route 136 (U.S. 136). Having a functional classification of principal arterial highway with partial access control, the proposed highway will be constructed with interchanges at Illinois Route 94 (IL 94) east of Carthage, Illinois Route 61 (IL 61) west of Tennessee, and at U.S. Route 136 west of Macomb. At-grade intersections will be provided at other intersecting roadways that will remain open after construction of IL 336. The project will also include the improvement of U.S. Route 136 west of Macomb as a four-lane divided roadway through the interchange area to County Highway (CH) 18. Between CH 18 and Deere Road, the existing two-lane roadway would be reconstructed as a five-lane roadway providing a continuous left-turn lane.

The purpose of FAP 315 is to provide a safer, more efficient highway facility than presently exists in the western Illinois Counties of Hancock and McDonough. Once the Macomb bypass is complete, the highway will serve as the final link in a four-lane highway connecting Macomb, Quincy and Galesburg, and FAP 315 will be a key improvement to the area’s transportation system by providing east-west access between population centers, favorably influencing the economic development of western Illinois. (IDOT Ecological Resources Technical Report, 1996)

5-1 Figure 5A Project Location Map (Source: IDOT Ecological Resources Report, 1996)

5-2 ROADWAY CONDITIONS

Construction Status of Illinois 336

The current section of IL 336 that is under construction extends approximately 3.0 miles south of Carthage to 2.0 miles east of Carthage. It is a new four lane expressway with an interchange by Wabash Street east of Carthage and new intersections at C.R. 1400N and C.R. 2100E. The construction project was awarded to W.L. Miller of Hamilton, IL on June 30, 2004 for a cost of $19,961,851. Construction started in September 2004 and the total project is scheduled to be completed by November 1, 2006.

The next segment of IL 336 to be completed is between Carthage, IL and Macomb, IL. This new 25 mile segment is scheduled to be completed in 2008 which is three years earlier than currently scheduled according to an article in the Quincy Herald Whig Newspaper (June 26, 2005 edition). The project is estimated to cost approximately $115 million and it is anticipated that the completed highway will bolster economic development opportunities and make it easier for Western Illinois residents to travel to other parts of the state and nation. According to Secretary of Transportation Tim Martin, the project will be split into three major contracts and the work will be done simultaneously, rather than sequentially, in an effort to speed up construction. (See Figure 5B)

Existing Road Conditions and Planned Improvements

There are two state highways in the Study Area: Buchanan Street (U.S. 136) & Douglas Street (Hwy 94). Both of these roads are surfaced with asphalt, there are no curbs and there are open drainage ditches. U.S. 136 has aggregate shoulders on each side that are wide enough to pull off on but the aggregate shoulders on Hwy 94 are only a few feet wide. The only curbs in the Study Area are located at the intersection of U.S. 136 and Hwy 94 on the south side only.

The terrain in the corridor is relatively flat, however, there are numerous locations where horizontal and vertical curves require no passing zones and speed restrictions. The combination of no passing zones and speed restrictions amounts to a total deficient area of 34% to 37% of the existing roadway length. U.S. 136 and IL 94 provide unrestricted access to residences, fields, and commercial sites and they are also intersected by side roads at frequent intervals. Travel speed and safety are affected by the traffic entering and exiting the highway. Travel time is further affected by farm equipment using the highway (IDOT Ecological Resources Technical Report, 1996). U.S. 136 will dead end just east of C.R. 2050E as part of the new highway construction.

The majority of existing roads in the Study Area have an oil and chip surface, no curbs, and open drainage ditches. These include C.R. 1400N, C.R. 2100E, C.R. 1980E. Wabash Street is also oil and chip from Douglas Street east to the last

5-3

INSERT FIGURE 5B HERE – 11X17

5-4 home on the north side where it turns to a gravel road. IDOT has a new paved cul de sac planned at this road before the interchange and they will oil and chip the existing gravel portion when they repair the construction traffic damage to the road. C.R. 1550N and C.R. 2050E are gravel roads with open drainage. A portion of C.R. 2050E is being removed between Buchanan Street and C.R. 1450N for the new interchange and it now dead ends just south of the communication tower (See Figure 5C). C.R. 1400N is being constructed east of Hwy 94 to provide access to the existing residence and to the Carthage sewer plant (See Figure 5D).

The local oil and chip roads all need to be improved to handle truck traffic. Improvements would include a more substantial aggregate base, asphalt or concrete surface, and larger turning radiuses to accommodate large trucks that would be used to service future commercial or industrial development in the Study Area.

There are no high-accident locations in the project corridor; however, two categories of Figure 5C accidents exceed statewide C.R. 2050E Closed at the Interchange averages. These are accidents (Construction Date 7/18/05) involving animals, and accidents involving fixed objects. In the period between 1991 and 1993, accidents involving animals constituted 37 percent of accidents in the corridor, compared with 4.2 percent statewide. This is attributable to the rural nature of the area. Accidents involving fixed objects also exceed statewide averages. This may, in part, be due to the narrow shoulders and foreslopes on the highway. Roadway geometrics, especially in hilly areas with curves, may also Figure 5D account for some fixed-object C.R. 1400N Extended East of Hwy 94 accidents. Examination of the (Construction Date 7/18/05) accident data also revealed two potential wet-pavement cluster sites. Both sites are in the U.S. 136 section from the Hancock/McDonough County Line to Deere Road. These two sites produced three accidents and two accidents, respectively. (A location must have a minimum of two

5-5 wet-pavement accidents per site to be identified as a wet-pavement cluster site.) The third most common accident type in the corridor was rear-end collisions. These were almost entirely limited to the eastern end of the corridor, in the more urban area, where traffic volumes are higher, turning movements are more common, and there is more traffic entering and leaving driveways and side streets. Access restrictions and a five- lane urban highway section in this area could reduce the conflicts. Between 1991 and 1993, there were six accidents classified as sideswipes in the opposite direction, two of these resulting in injuries. One of these accidents occurred in the section of highway between Carthage and the McDonough County line. The remainder occurred in McDonough County between the county line and the eastern project limits. There was one fatal accident in the corridor between 1991 & 1993, resulting from a head-on collision in snowy conditions at the eastern edge of Colchester in McDonough County. Both the head-on and the sideswipes are accidents that might have been avoided on a four-lane divided highway with a grass median (IDOT Ecological Resources Technical Report, 1996). The following county wide crash data was obtained from IDOT’s Division of Traffic Safety Bureau of Safety Data & Data Services. It illustrates that generally the number of crashes and persons killed on roadways in Hancock County have been continually increasing.

County Motor Vehicle Traffic Crash Statistics For All Roadways 1997 - 2003 HANCOCK COUNTY Persons Persons Year Crashes Killed Injured 1997 235 3 84 1998 266 6 83 1999 263 1 63 2000 513 3 154 2001 513 4 121 2002 536 1 152 2003 548 9 130

MCDONOUGH COUNTY Persons Persons Year Crashes Killed Injured 1997 358 5 122 1998 358 3 116 1999 381 3 105 2000 969 7 225 2001 935 3 231 2002 952 2 251 2003 897 8 194

5-6 EXISTING TRANSIT SERVICE

There is no mass transit service available in Carthage currently and there is none planned in the near future.

EXISTING PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE CIRCULATION

There are no sidewalks or bicycle paths along the roadways in the Study Area and there are none planned with the new highway construction. The Carthage Subdivision Regulations require sidewalks to be installed on each side of a street when a subdivision averages 3.5 lots or more per gross acre. The sidewalks are specified to be concrete, at least 4” thick and a minimum of 4 ft. wide. In the Carthage Community Survey, conducted by the University of Illinois Extension Service in February 2003, the condition of the existing sidewalks was an important issue to the citizens with 61.9% stating they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied.

ACCESS MANAGEMENT

Access management is a process for providing access to land development, while preserving traffic flow on surrounding roadways in terms of safety, capacity, and speed. This is achieved by managing the location, design and operation of driveways, median openings, and street connections to a roadway. It also involves use of auxiliary lanes, such as turn lanes or bypass lanes, to remove turning vehicles from through-traffic movement.

Roadways are classified for access control based upon their importance to local and regional mobility. The greatest access control is applied to roadways intended to serve more through traffic, beginning with interstate freeways or expressways, followed by arterials and collectors. The least access control is applied to local streets – including minor collectors, residential access streets, frontage roads, and alleys. (CUTR, 1996)

Benefits of Access Management

Public purposes behind access control include improved safety of vehicular and pedestrian travel, preservation of roadway level of service, and enhanced community character. By preserving roadway level of service, access management helps protect the substantial public investment in transportation and reduces the need for expensive improvements. Studies conducted in Florida and Colorado suggest that poor spacing, design, and location of driveways reduce average travel speed, whereas improvements in access management increase roadway capacity substantially.

5-7 Research has consistently shown that access management helps reduce the rate and severity of traffic accidents. Good definition and spacing of driveways also improves pedestrian and bicycle safety, by reducing the potential for conflicts with turning vehicles. Safety hazards on transportation corridors translate into significant social and economic costs.

From a land development perspective, access management requirements further the orderly layout and use of land and help discourage poor subdivision and site design (See Figure 5E). The quality of site access is also important to the success of a development project. The Urban Land Institute’s Shopping Center Development Handbook warns that “poorly designed entrances and exits not only present a traffic hazard, but also cause congestion that can create a negative image of the center.”

Reducing the number and frequency of driveways and median openings also improves the appearance of major corridors. More area is available for landscaping, the appearance of pavement is reduced, and scenic or environmental features can be protected. For this reason, access management is a part of many plans aimed at improving the image of streetscapes and gateways and attracting economic Figure 5E development. (CUTR, 1996) Promote Shared Access (Source: CUTR, 1996)

5-8

Access Management Techniques

Access management requires careful coordination of land use and transportation objectives. Local regulations must address the interdependence of land division and access and integrate access management principles throughout the planning and regulatory program. Below are some specific steps local governments can take to improve and manage access:

• Regulate driveway spacing, corner clearance, and sight distance.

• Increase minimum lot frontage and setback requirements along thoroughfares and regulate lot width-to-depth.

• Restrict the number of driveways per existing parcel or lot and consolidate access wherever feasible. (See Figure 5F)

• Establish driveway design elements and warrants for use of those design features.

• Promote internal connections between adjacent land uses and encourage unified circulation and parking plans. (See Figure 5F)

• Treat properties under the same ownership and those consolidated for development as one property for the purposes of access control.

• Discourage the location of driveways along acceleration or deceleration lanes and tapers at street intersections or interchanges.

• Restrict flag lots and regulate private roads and access easements.

• Minimize commercial strip zoning and promote mixed use and flexible zoning.

• Require subdivisions along arterials and collectors to be designed with internalized access (reverse frontage).

• Minimize subdivision exemptions and review lot splits to prevent access and right-of-way problems.

• Optimize driveway location and overall access in subdivision and site plan review. (CUTR, 1996)

Some of these access management techniques are explained in more detail below.

5-9

Figure 5F Restricting the Number of Driveways And Linking Adjacent Land Uses (Source: CUTR, 1996)

Driveway Location and Design

Driveway location and design affects the ability of a driver to safely and easily enter and exit a site. If not properly placed, exiting vehicles may be unable to see oncoming vehicles and motorists on the roadway may not have adequate time to stop. If driveways are too narrow or have an inadequate turning radius, then vehicles will be unable to maneuver quickly and comfortably off the roadway. If the turning radius and width are excessive, then rapid maneuvers onto the site pose safety hazards for pedestrians, bicycles, or vehicles. The storage length of a driveway also needs to be adequate so vehicles need not wait in through lanes to enter the site. (CUTR, 1996)

Driveway Spacing Standards

Driveway spacing standards establish a minimum distance that should be maintained between driveways. Reasonable spacing between driveways is important to the safety and capacity of roadways, as well as the appearance of a corridor. Managing driveway spacing is essential on roads intended for higher speeds. At higher speeds travelers have less time and space to react to the unexpected. Therefore, the minimum distance

5-10 needed between driveways is greater as speed limits increase. This is why driveway spacing standards are more stringent for highways and arterials.

Driveway or connection spacing standards are derived from traffic engineering principles, driver behavior, and vehicle dynamics. Considerations in establishing spacing standards include highway function, access classification and speed, location of streets and driveways, volume of trucks, driver expectancy, and separation and reduction of conflicts. Some communities vary spacing standards depending upon the development intensity or traffic volume to be served on a site and that of adjacent sites. Single family homes are typically exempt. Driveway spacing standards for state roads are set by the Illinois Department of Transportation. (CUTR, 1996)

Corner Clearance

Corner clearance is the distance from an intersection of a public or private road to the nearest access connection. Corner clearance standards preserve good traffic operations at intersections, as well as the safety and convenience of access to corner properties. Assuring an adequate lot size with appropriate corner clearance will protect the development potential and market value of corner properties. It will also help assure that these properties do not experience access problems as traffic volumes grow on the adjacent thoroughfare. (CUTR, 1996)

Joint and Cross Access

Joint and cross access requirements connect adjacent land uses and consolidate driveways serving more than one property. This allows vehicles to circulate between adjacent businesses without having to re-enter the arterial. Joint access requirements are used to connect major developments and to improve driveway spacing where highway frontage has been subdivided into small lot frontages. This technique allows intensive development of a corridor, while maintaining traffic operations and safe and convenient access to businesses (See Figure 5G).

Joint and cross access can be applied to selected corridors as follows. Property owners unable to meet driveway spacing standards are required to provide for joint and cross access easements wherever feasible. Abutting properties under different ownership are encouraged to comply, but generally not required until they redevelop or expand. In the meantime, the applicant is allowed a temporary driveway. The easement is recorded with the property records, along with a joint maintenance agreement and agreement to close the temporary driveway when the joint access system is complete.

Flexibility is needed on an administrative label to work with the unique circumstances of each development site. Communities could relax driveway spacing standards for properties that agree to consolidate access, and provide for variances where compliance proves impractical. Some ordinances provide incentives, such as density

5-11 bonuses, for combining access points, or relax parking and dimensional requirements where necessary to achieve shared access. (CUTR, 1996)

Figure 5G Joint and Cross Access

Reverse Frontage

When land is subdivided for residential use, lots abutting the thoroughfare should not be allowed to obtain driveway connections on the thoroughfare. Instead, the subdivision should be designed so these lots obtain access from an interior street or frontage street. Landscaping, berms, or other barriers may be provided at the rear of these properties to buffer them from the noise, debris, and traffic on the thoroughfares. This also reduces the potential for dangerous conflicts between high-speed traffic and residents entering and exiting their driveway. (CUTR, 1996)

Frontage Roads

Frontage roads can be useful for eliminating driveway connections along high-speed arterials (See Figure 5H). However, if not carefully managed, frontage roads can create operational problems at intersections – especially when combined with high traffic volumes associated with commercial and higher density residential areas. If frontage roads connect close to major intersections, the result may be severe

5-12 congestion, long delays, and high accident rates. These potential impacts are even greater with two-way frontage roads, and those planned to accommodate higher intensity development.

Figure 5H Frontage Road along State Highway 13 Carbondale, Illinois

Problems associated with frontage roads can be overcome through careful attention to design and placement. Below are some considerations related to frontage roads:

• “Backage” roads with development along both sides, are preferable to frontage roads, as they allow for a greater distance between the connection and the intersection.

• One-way frontage roads generate fewer conflicts than two-way frontage roads. For retrofit situations, one-way frontage roads that enter and leave the main road without crossing intersections are preferred.

• Restricting left turns into and out of a frontage road helps to reduce conflicts. This could be accomplished with restrictive medians.

• Maintain adequate separation between the frontage road and the future right-of-way line for pedestrian refuge and landscaping. (CUTR, 1996)

5-13 Medians

Raised or grassy medians in the center of a road separate opposing lanes of traffic and restrict turning and crossing movements. Studies from Florida and around the nation show that thoroughfares with raised medians are safer than those with undivided thoroughfares or center two-way left turn lanes. Medians also provide a refuge for pedestrians as they cross thoroughfares and can be landscaped as part of a corridor beautification program.

Median landscape plans need to be developed with careful attention to maintaining adequate sight distance and visibility for turning and crossing vehicles. As with driveways, the spacing and design of median openings is important to the safe and efficient operation of the roadway. Safety benefits are reduced where median openings have inadequate storage or are too close together. (CUTR, 1996)

Because IDOT has total authority over medians on state roads, medians are an effective way for IDOT to reduce traffic conflicts and encourage driveway consolidation. Medians are especially useful for retrofitting problem areas, as they can control left turns and reduce traffic conflicts in already developed areas.

Interchange Access Management and Land Use

Land use changes can be rapid and intensive near interchange areas. If local governments provide for development in interchange areas without the necessary plans or regulations to manage access outcomes, the result is a proliferation of driveways near interchange ramps. In addition, major street intersections are often located too close to the ramp termini. A variety of transportation problems occur when driveways and intersections are too close to interchange ramps. Signalized intersections too close to ramp termini can cause heavy volumes of weaving traffic, complex traffic signal operations, accidents, congestions, and traffic backing up the ramps on the main line. Curb cuts and median openings near the ramp termini further compound these problems. (CUTR, 2000)

Planning for interchange areas is similar to corridor development planning – it targets a specialized area and takes a comprehensive approach. Like a corridor plan, an interchange area plan is linked to the roadways and should concentrate on the interrelationship of land use and access. Because an interchange area shapes the perception of a community, an interchange area access management plan gives clear direction for development, provides organizational structure, and is the basis for achieving a positive, welcome perception of the community. A good plan will also prevent situations from occurring that will limit economic benefits to the community.

The first step in interchange area access management planning is determining the interchange area boundaries. The recommended boundary is 1/2 mile from the taper

5-14 along cross streets, or to the first major signalized intersection. Elements that need to be evaluated to assure future access management include, but are not limited to:

• Site plans (encourage unified development such as shared signage, driveway and parking); • Signage (control of billboards and advertisements); • Highway and traffic (road function, access to adjacent land, evaluation of traffic generation versus benefits such as employment generation) • Access control (minimizes conflicts) • Street system (internal, frontage, backage, local, and crossroads) • Setbacks (safety, future construction, aesthetics) • Corner clearance • Loading on premises (for pick-up, delivery, services, and emergency vehicles) • Consolidated signage • Pedestrian circulation

It will also be necessary to assess existing conditions, such as:

• Property ownership and land division characteristics • Lot frontage • Access points • Transportation characteristics (CUTR, 2000)

It is important to determine what types of development will be allowed, where development should be located and, perhaps the most important, planning a system of local roads to serve development. When developing a plan, some areas of caution to consider are:

• Incompatible land uses (especially in rural areas) • Strip development • Unattractive and cluttered buildout, including signage (causes confusion) • Insufficient building setbacks (obscures vision and increases cost for road widening) • Excessive number of access points • Land uses that generate excessive traffic • Inadequate off-street parking, loading space and delivery area. (CUTR, 2000)

5-15 Access Management Measures

Access management measures can be regulatory and non-regulatory. For example, separation distances on state roads are regulatory, while using raised medians rather than nonrestrictive medians is part of roadway design. The most effective technique that can be used to preserve the function of interchange areas over the long term involves the provision of alternate access to the interchange area crossroad. This may be achieved by purchasing access rights or building an alternate access road. IDOT can also assist local governments by locating possible access connections, reviewing design of access systems, and providing training in access management and interchange preservation.

Alternate (frontage, backage or reverse frontage, or local) road systems provide additional property access, decrease direct access on arterial roads, and allow traffic from multiple parcels to be channeled through a single access point. A poorly located access road can harm the flow on the arterial road it was intended to protect. It is essential to consider how the alternate road will interface with the arterial road and to assure adequate corner clearance from any nearby intersection.

Alternate access roads can be implemented through public and private contributions in a variety of ways. For example, developers could be required to set aside right-of-way needed for the alternate access road as a condition of development approval, and the local government could construct and maintain the road. In some cases, developers may construct a portion of the road. In other cases, a local government may opt to complete undeveloped segments of the road as an incentive for private participation (Figure 5I). (CUTR, 2000)

One way state transportation agencies can promote the development of alternate access roads is to purchase access rights a certain distance from the interchange ramp. Some state transportation agencies also contribute to local road improvements where this would reduce safety and operational problems on a state highway. For example, the Kansas Department of Transportation has a small budget designated for the purpose of off-system improvements, such as local street extensions, that would advance a corridor access management plan. The Colorado DOT engages in targeted local street improvements during highway reconstruction projects to advance its access management program. (CUTR, 2000)

Redevelopment and nonconforming situations will also need to be addressed. Although most techniques are best when implemented prior to development, some can also be used for retrofit projects and/or redevelopment. Even if an area is not identified as a redevelopment area, a change in land use usually triggers a site plan review, at which time the adopted regulations will have an effect.

5-16

Prior to drafting regulations and policies, it will be necessary to decide how to deal with existing elements on a site that do not conform to the new standards. These situations may never meet minimum interchange management standards, but new regulations should specify opportunities for bringing those elements into conformance. Existing elements are allowed to remain, while measures are being taken to avoid further deterioration. Retrofit strategies include:

• Selectively reconstructing existing substandard driveways. • Negotiating driveway closure, reconstruction, or relocation during roadway resurfacing or improvement. • Requiring improvement of access during redevelopment or expansion of an existing use. • Providing for joint and cross access with abutting properties. • Issuing temporary access until adjoining properties are developed.

It will be necessary to review local policies that relate to the interchange management area to determine if they require any regulatory or policy changes. This may include plan amendments, updating policies and procedures, revising design standards, securing intergovernmental agreements, and so on. Figure 5I Coordinated Road & It is much more difficult to retrofit or change Access Easements an area that is already developed. Therefore, the critical time for instituting access management regulations for interchange areas is prior to building the interchange. Because the time period between programming dollars for purchase of right-of-way and completion of construction is so long, there is adequate opportunity for development of regulations for the interchange area. (CUTR, 2000)

5-17 Agreements and Resolutions

Development Agreements legally record the trade-offs between public benefits and development incentives. Agreements ensure that the terms for development are followed by all parties. Development agreements usually run with the use of the land; however, they can also run with the land, binding each successive owner.

Joint Development Agreements specify how public and private developers will each contribute to the development of strategic projects, and hinge on the public and private sectors each performing on schedule. These agreements are particularly important with regard to redevelopment efforts. Joint efforts are a good way for government agencies to demonstrate their commitment to access management and their willingness to assist in retrofitting for the benefit of the community.

Intergovernmental Agreements are binding contracts creating legal rights and obligations between parties. They convey the consent and mutual obligation to unite in a common purpose. This is the preferred method for intergovernmental coordination, as it is both legally binding and specific in its terms of the desired course of action. Intergovernmental agreements work best when responsibilities, financial obligations, and procedures for review and management are detailed.

Memoranda of Understanding (MOU) are an effective way to clearly document the role of each agency in helping to implement a plan. An MOU sets forth goals, objectives, actions, deadlines and funding responsibility.

A Resolution is the formal expression of an opinion or the will of an official body. A resolution publicly declares the unilateral position of a governing body on a given policy matter at a point in time. Resolutions are not legally binding and are subject to change, particularly if the members of the elected body change. (CUTR, 2000)

Coordination

State agencies lack authority over the land development process, and local governments lack authority over access permitting decisions on state highways. Together, these factors make coordination difficult, but essential. State transportation agencies and local governments must coordinate closely and consider the effects of their decisions on the entire interchange area, if it is to work efficiently. Too often, state and local agencies act independently, leading to problems that actually undermine the functional integrity of the interchange. Because each agency has authority over a different part of the process, state and local governments can achieve far more through mutual cooperation than either agency could achieve alone.

5-18 Coordination is accomplished when parties responsible for interchange management decisions act in harmony. The goal is to make decisions that are consistent with each agency’s standards. Ideally, coordination leads to compatible standards and procedures within and across government agencies. This makes it beneficial not only to the agencies involved, but also to the public and the developer or property owner whose financial investment is at stake.

Coordination between government agencies requires each agency to verify their level of commitment and agree upon their respective roles and responsibilities. This can be formally accomplished through Resolutions, Memoranda of Understanding, or Intergovernmental Agreements (explained above).

One way IDOT can encourage coordination is by working with local agencies to adopt procedures for advance notification of development activities within interchange areas. With this notification, the state could assist the local government in assessing and mitigating interchange impacts. In many cases, mitigation may take the form of access control. Each district office of IDOT could arrange with local units of government to be notified on all matters that affect interchange areas within those jurisdictions. Early state review of subdivision proposals helps ensure conformance with access management requirements and provides state agencies an opportunity to suggest changes prior to local plat approval, which may occur well in advance of a request for a driveway permit. Then IDOT could then provide a formal response, as well as technical assistance.

Local governments can assist IDOT by attaching conditions to development approvals to require actions from the developer that support interchange management. This may include conditions that require unified access and circulation systems, alternative access roads, or joint and cross access.

Interchange management plans are another way to facilitate intergovernmental coordination and consistent decision-making within interchange areas. These plans are developed and implemented through a cooperative effort between the state and local governments. As individual developments occur, permits can be issued that conform to the plan, or permits outlining conditions can be issued so that the development will ultimately be in conformance. District IDOT representatives can encourage this process by providing technical assistance and support.

Another effective action is the development of a coordinated review process. This would help minimize inconsistencies between state and local permitting decisions. This could be achieved by structuring a tiered review. For larger projects, the first stage could consist of an informal meeting or telephone conference in which state transportation officials and local regulatory staff can discuss the proposed development concept. A preapplication meeting could then be scheduled where representatives of both agencies could be in attendance to advise the developer or property owner what is required to receive development approval. For smaller projects, early state and local communication might be sufficient.

5-19

After a preliminary site plan is drafted, it would be reviewed by both the state and local government to determine if additional changes or conditions are needed. When the plan meets with both state and local approval, the applicant would submit a final site plan for permit approvals.

There are many ways to achieve successful coordination. Although these coordination strategies are relatively straightforward, they can be difficult to achieve. Establishing a coordination procedure or protocol requires time, effort, and may raise philosophical differences – both within and across government agencies. Although it may take time to work out the details for each situation, improved coordination will accomplish rewarding results. (CUTR, 2000)

IDOT Access Guidelines

IDOT has guidelines for limited access points along their state roads and the guidelines are listed in the Bureau of Design and Environment (BDE) Manual. IDOT has a permit process for access drives on state highways which allows them to regulate the number of new driveways, the sizes and the location. The criterion used for new access points will depend on the type and size of the development, the speed limit, medians, the type of road classification and whether it is in an urban or rural setting. For example, if a developer has a large scale development in the Study Area then IDOT will require the developer to do a traffic study that will address items such as existing and projected traffic counts, the demand for a signalized intersection, a de-acceleration lane for right turns or constructing a left turn lane. As Figure 5J illustrates, when a public road intersects with a state highway with partial access control, a non-commercial entrance shall be a minimum of 100 ft. from the state highway and a commercial entrance shall be a minimum of 200 ft. from the state highway (IDOT, 1974). IDOT also has regulations for the construction of frontage roads next to their interchanges and highways. For example, a frontage road or public service drive intersection should be 100 ft or 300 ft. from the edge of the expressway depending on the conditions. The IDOT guidelines are amended annually so these requirements may be revised by the time new development occurs in the Study Area.

5-20

Figure 5J Location of Driveways Along Public Roads Intersecting A Freeway with Partial Access Control (Source: IDOT Policy on Permits for Access Driveways to State Highways, 1974)

CHAPTER FIVE – TRANSPORTATION CONCLUSIONS

The existing and planned transportation system within the Corridor Study Area was examined earlier in this Chapter. The following conclusions are based upon the analysis of each of the previous sections discussed in Chapter Five. Where appropriate, further recommendations related to access management, interchange development, pedestrian and bicycle circulation etc. have been identified. The recommended conditions for development approval related to transportation issues are located in Chapter Two.

5-21 Access Management

As discussed above, there is a great need for development of a future transportation network in the Study Area so future right-of-way can be preserved. While no one can predict what exact land uses will be developed in the future, there are some roadway connections that make sense for any kind of development. To get citizens, developers, property owners and government officials thinking along these lines, a proposed transportation network map is attached (See Figure 5K) to illustrate various future road design concepts. This drawing is conceptual only for future public streets and it is intended to show the benefits of right-of-way planning and acquisition. The conceptual design includes frontage roads, extending the existing roads where applicable and tying into the dead end portion of Buchanan Street. Internal roads and access points are not included because their layouts are more subjective due to the size and type of future development. Existing gravel roads such as C.R. 2050E, C.R. 1550N and C.R. 1450N would need to be widened and resurfaced when new development occurs also. Some of the existing oil and chip roads will also need to be improved to handle truck traffic.

Pedestrian and Bicycle Circulation

The only sidewalk requirement for new development in Carthage is for subdivision plats. In reviewing the comments from the Carthage Community Survey, it appears that it is an important issue to the citizens for existing sidewalks downtown. The current subdivision sidewalk requirements are only four feet wide which is narrow for two people to pass by each other or walk side by side. The minimum size for new sidewalks within the Study Area shall be 5 feet but 6 feet would be preferable where space allows. The combination of a bicycle friendly roadway network and sidewalk system will allow residents to work or bike to shopping, recreational and work sites with the Corridor Plan Study Area safely.

5-22 INSERT FIGURE 5K TRANSPORTATION NETWORK COLOR ACAD MAP

5-23