Dupage County Comprehensive Road Improvement Plan
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
2010 DuPage County Comprehensive Road Improvement Plan DuPage County DOT 11/5/2010 i | Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS County Board Chairman: Robert Schillerstrom County Board Transportation Committee: Donald Puchalski, Chairman James Healy, Vice Chairman John Curran JR McBride Brien Sheahan James Zay Impact Fee Advisory Committee: Donald Puchalski, Chairman DuPage County Board Brent Coulter, P.E., Consultant Coulter Transportation Consulting, LLC and DuPage Mayors and Managers Conference Representative Steven Davidson, Local 150 Operating Engineers David Faganel, Faganel Builders Paul Hoss, Zoning Division Manager DuPage County Zoning Department Mike McCarthy, McCarthy Builders Jeff Merrinette, Director of Government Affairs MAINSTREET Organization of Realtors ‐Suburban Chicago Marcie Schatz, TED Group Leader City of Naperville Charles Tokarski, County Engineer DuPage County Division of Transportation Daniel Wennerholm, Manager Village of Bloomingdale ii | Page Contents FIGURES .................................................................................................................................................. IV COMPREHENSIVE ROAD IMPROVEMENT PLAN FRAMEWORK ............................................................................ 1 SECTION 1: LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY ........................................................................................................... 3 SECTION 2: IMPACT FEE AND PLAN METHODOLOGY....................................................................................... 6 SECTION 3: LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS ...................................................................................................... 11 SECTION 4: STATE OF THE HIGHWAY SYSTEM ........................................................................................... 21 SECTION 5: HIGHWAY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE ......................................................................................... 35 SECTION 6: 2020 TRAFFIC FORECASTS AND ROAD SYSTEM DEFICIENCIES ....................................................... 54 SECTION 7: HIGHWAY SYSTEM COSTS AND TRENDS ..................................................................................... 64 SECTION 8: PROPOSED FY11‐20 ROAD IMPROVEMENT PLAN ........................................................................ 69 SECTION 9: FUNDING AND NEEDS ANALYSIS ................................................................................................ 77 SECTION 10: PUBLIC HEARING RECORD AND PUBLIC COMMENTS ................................................................... 79 APPENDIX A ............................................................................................................................................ 81 APPENDIX B ............................................................................................................................................ 82 APPENDIX C ............................................................................................................................................ 83 APPENDIX D ............................................................................................................................................ 84 APPENDIX E ............................................................................................................................................ 85 iii | Page Figures FIGURE 1 ‐ DUPAGE COUNTY IMPACT FEE DISTRICT MAP ................................................................................ 10 FIGURE 2 ‐ EXISTING RESIDENTIAL LAND USE .................................................................................................. 13 FIGURE 3 ‐ EXISTING COMMERCIAL LAND USE .................................................................................................. 13 FIGURE 4 ‐ ALLOCATION OF BUILDING STRUCTURES TO TRAFFIC ZONES ....................................................... 17 FIGURE 5 ‐ DUPAGE COUNTY MODEL AREA TRAFFIC ZONE STRUCTURE ........................................................ 18 FIGURE 6 ‐ HIGHWAY FUNCTIONAL CLASS IN THE DUPAGE MODEL ............................................................... 24 FIGURE 7 ‐ 2010 ROADWAY JURISDICTION ........................................................................................................ 26 FIGURE 8 ‐ TYPICAL DUPAGE COUNTY ROADWAY SECTION ............................................................................ 27 FIGURE 9 ‐ 2010 ROADWAY DESIGN IN DUPAGE COUNTY ................................................................................ 29 FIGURE 10 ‐ IMPACT FEE DISTRICTS ................................................................................................................... 31 FIGURE 11 ‐ AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES ON DUPAGE COUNTY ROADS ............................................. 33 FIGURE 12 ‐ SURFACE ARTERIAL 24 HOUR TRAFFIC PROFILE ........................................................................... 34 FIGURE 13 ‐ ARTERIAL LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARD FOR DUPAGE COUNTY* .............................................. 35 FIGURE 14 ‐ INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARD FOR DUPAGE COUNTY* .................................... 36 FIGURE 15 ‐ PM PEAK HOUR ARTERIAL SYSTEM PERFORMANCE ..................................................................... 38 FIGURE 16 ‐ SYNCHRO TRAFFIC MODEL ............................................................................................................ 40 FIGURE 17 ‐ DUPAGE COUNTY INTERSECTION DEFICIENCIES ........................................................................... 47 FIGURE 18 ‐ USING HHTS TO GENERATE PEAK HOUR MODELS – HOME BASED WORK EXAMPLE ................. 49 FIGURE 19 ‐ DUPAGE COUNTY VALIDATION SCREENLINES .............................................................................. 51 FIGURE 20 ‐ TRAFFIC MODEL CALIBRATION: MODEL DEVIATION .................................................................... 52 FIGURE 21 ‐ TRAFFIC MODEL CALIBRATION: MODELED VS OBSERVED COUNTYS .......................................... 53 FIGURE 22 ‐ 2010 TO 2020 MODELED PROJECTS ............................................................................................... 57 FIGURE 23 ‐ INTERSECTION DEFICIENCIES IN DUPAGE COUNTY ‐ 2020A SCENARIO ....................................... 61 FIGURE 24 INTERSECTION DEFICIENCIES UNDER 2020AP2 SCENARIO ............................................................ 62 FIGURE 25 ‐ PROJECTED DUPAGE HIGHWAY COSTS PER LANE‐MILE OF PAVEMENT ..................................... 65 FIGURE 26 ‐ PROJECT COSTING METHODS FOR 2015‐2020 RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS ...................... 68 FIGURE 27 ‐ IMPACT FEE ELIGIBLE PROJECTS BY FEE DISTRICT ........................................................................ 75 FIGURE 28 ‐ FY 2011 TO 2020 COMPREHENSIVE ROAD IMPROVEMENT PLAN MAP ......................................... 76 iv | Page Preface Impact fee programs are widely used by municipalities and local agencies throughout the United States to offset the high cost of providing fire, police, water, sanitary, school, road and other services to new residents and businesses locating within their jurisdiction. These programs are used particularly in fast growing suburban communities, locations with high tourism or high retirement development and areas of extreme environmental sensitivity. By and large, the fees collected do not cover all of the costs an implementor accrues in providing a service. But they do allow the implementing agency the opportunity to use its primary funding sources such as property taxes, motor fuel taxes and state and federal assistance for the purpose of better maintaining the existing infrastructure. General Goals The Road Improvement Impact Fee Law created by the State of Illinois in 1989 cites two general goals for those agencies implementing impact fee programs in Illinois: 1. “…the imposition of such road improvement impact fees is designed to supplement other funding sources so that the burden of paying for road improvements can be allocated in a fair and equitable manner.” 2. “…to promote orderly economic growth throughout the State by assuring that new development bears its fair share of the cost of meeting the demand for road improvements through the imposition of road improvement impact fees.” DuPage County supports these goals through the publication of this Comprehensive Road Improvement Plan for Impact Fees. Objectives of the Plan The Ten Year Comprehensive Road Improvement Plan is a document required of each unit of authority wishing to implement the Road Improvement Impact Fee Law (605 ILCS 5/5‐901 to 5/5‐919). The Plan’s primary function is to support the Law’s goals by establishing where demand for new facilities will be created by new development, and by establishing a rational program for distribution of road improvement impact fees in DuPage County according to that need. The second objective of the Plan is to demonstrate the methods and procedures used to establish the impacts of new development. It is a specific requirement of the Road Improvement Impact Fee Law that the implementing agency design and follow a reasonable set of procedures in implementing an impact fee program. Because the Comprehensive Road Improvement Plan is designed to pertain only to DuPage County highways, recommendations for short and long‐range improvements on roads maintained by other jurisdictions will not be included in the recommended project list in Section 8. Planned improvements shown in other agencies’ long range programs are included, however, in Appendix