Transportation Advisory Board - Regular Meeting

We will try to pause and ask for questions, but feel free to interrupt us as well. But we're excited to be here this evening. As Andy mentioned, we're going to walk through the methodology and findings for the year 2050 traffic projections. We'll highlight anticipated operational conditions for intersections and roadway segments throughout the city. And then, we'll present the preliminary list of improvements for your review and discussion and then kind of talk through next steps.

There we go. So really quickly, a brief overview for a reminder for those that weren't here in May and just a refresh for the rest of us. The purpose of the road improvement plan is to evaluate intersection and roadway segments under the city's jurisdiction. We presented in May a review of existing traffic conditions. Again, today we're going to talk through future conditions, year 2050.

And then the ultimate output or purpose of the RIP we'll refer to it as the RIP throughout the presentation, so bear with me. But the RIP will identify capacity driven improvements. And we'll talk through other components that are considered when we define those improvements, but this is a capacity driven plan. The improvements that are defined in the road improvement plan will ultimately inform the city's capital improvement plan that is reviewed annually to define implementation priorities for the improvements included in the RIP. And then, want to highlight and we'll come back to this at the end of the presentation, but as you all know, as we discussed in May and we'll revisit here briefly, this has been an iterative planning process.

We solicited feedback from the community to inform the road improvement plan. And as these projects move forward through the city's capital improvement plan, there will be future opportunities for public improvement as these projects move forward for design and the construction. So I just want to make sure that that stays top of mind. So really quick, a quick revisit of existing conditions. This is a very data driven process.

The analysis included 162 intersections, most of which are signalized. We did also take a look at un signalized intersections, and then over 175 roadway segments were evaluated. The data used for the analysis, the baseline data for existing conditions is largely based on data from the city and IDOT. In certain situations where that data was not readily available, we did use replica. I want to emphasize no data from year 2020, 2021 was none of that was referenced for analysis.

We realized COVID heavily influenced traffic patterns, and therefore, that data was not referenced. And then, we did obtain signal timing data from the three agencies that have signals under in the study network. As I mentioned, public input is a large component of this planning process. We previously held a public open house to solicit input on the existing conditions to identify opportunities for potential improvements that we may not realize through just review of an analysis file and then we did I think we all we shared at the last meeting we did have an online tool to solicit public input that generated almost 500 comments. I won't go through this again, but happy to answer any questions tonight regarding the public input.

So since we met last time, I want to note I'll figure this out eventually I apologize I want to note since we last discussed this project IDOT has released new existing data previously we were referencing year 2022 and year 2023 existing data. IDA released 2024 data since we last chatted. So, we have subsequently updated the existing conditions analysis to reflect available year 2024 data, which which again kind of gets us further removed from any COVID influence. So, the data set is largely year 2023 or 2024, some 2022 from the city. So, on the revised IDOT data that is specific to segments, I should have said, segment data from IDOT was the analysis was updated.

So, the segment analysis has been updated to reflect the newly released year 2024 data. This did not impact the intersection analysis in any way. The intersection analysis was previously referencing most recent available data not from IDOT. The intersection analysis is largely based on data from the city and other private traffic studies in the area. So we did update the capacity analysis for the roadway segments throughout the city.

Largely did not materially change the conclusions, but again, wanted to make sure that we were operating from the most current baseline data. The other thing I wanted to highlight, and I believe this was touched upon in our last meeting, is as a part of our review of operational conditions at the intersections and roadway segments, we did review the crash data. IDOT publishes crash data for the most recent available five year period at the time of this analysis. That period is 2019 through 2023. High level, based on a review of that crash data, the most common crash types at the study intersections are listed on the screen front to rear, cross movement, and sideswipe.

And so, we did as we evaluated the capacity improvements at all of the intersections and segments, we took a look at the benefits that those capacity driven improvements would have on safety. And key benefits, we will get to it in a minute, but we're introducing a number of turn lanes at key intersections. In many cases, those turn lanes are identified based on queuing conditions where the queue is spilling back into the through lane which can create some crash conditions so that reduction and queue spill back should alleviate some of that exposure to crashes. It'll also reduce delay, which can cause a front to rear crash. Signal modifications were identified at a number of intersections.

In many cases, we're including protected left turn phasing, which alleviates cross movement crashes. It provides dedicated green time for someone to turn left on a green arrow, as opposed to trying to find a gap in through traffic to complete their left turn. So, that was carried through as we evaluated potential improvements at each intersection. So, now, a quick pivot to future conditions and how the methodology you used to develop your 2050 traffic projections. The Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning has a region wide travel demand model.

That model was referenced to derive segment traffic projections for all roadway segments, over 175 segments included in the analysis. 2,050 traffic projections were obtained from CMAP. And then, based on the traffic projections, what we did was we took a look at the city based on a quadrant and evaluated average growth in the city using the CMAP data to determine an average growth rate in the four quadrants of the city, using Washington Street and 75th Street as kind of the boundaries of those quadrants. The derived growth rates are on the screen. Those growth rates were then used to project intersection turning movement counts.

So, we took the segment data from CMAP, year 2050. That's in the regional model. That is the methodology that's used in our traffic impact study. That's used in a phase one design process. That was used for the segment analysis here.

In order to get at the intersection level turning movement volumes, we took these average rates and then did a growth projection to year 2050. So, if we had a 2022 turning movement count at Washington and Aurora, we would grow that count by 0.61% per year through 2050 to develop a year 2050 traffic projection for that intersection, which we could then use to evaluate that intersection's operational conditions. I will note the region wide travel demand model is the assumptions are vetted by the city in partnership with CMAP. They take into consideration the future land use map, development opportunities. So, it is, again, kind of the accepted standard for traffic growth in the region, including the City Of Naperville.

So, from that, we created this map, which is high level summary of projected traffic volumes on the roadway segments in the city, and that was then used for the segment capacity analysis. And then we also did the intersection capacity analysis. In order to evaluate future traffic conditions, we also needed to consider what improvements are already programmed or underway on the road network. And there are a number of improvements that are planned by the city or DuPage County or IDOT on roadway segments and intersections included in the analysis. Based on information that's available from these different agencies, the improvements on the screen and I'll just kind of touch on the intersections briefly were assumed to be completed by year 2050.

So, 2 And 48th Avenue, city's roadway widening project, that's currently underway. That was assumed to be included in the model for year 2050. We assumed that roadway would have four lanes in the future. 75th Street, based on information from DuPage County, that is expected to be completed. That widening project is expected to be completed by year 2050.

So that was included in the model. Similarly, IDOT has identified a couple of projects in the city Ogden and Naperville Wheaton Road, and then Ogden and Rickert. And then there are a couple of under the other column that are related to private development, where there is an improvement planned associated with an improved traffic study for Ogden and Iroquois that's a permit that's been submitted to IDOT currently under IDOT review will be installed once that permit is approved and then neighbor Boulevard Naperville we can road is a some modifications to that existing intersection and then we touched on this for existing conditions but just a re refresh So, all of this went into a model. We used synchro capacity analysis software for intersections and FHWA calculation methodology for segments. And then the output is delay measured in seconds per vehicle, level of service, which is kind of like a grade in school.

A means you're moving pretty well, not a lot of cars around you, don't experience much delay. F is I feel like I'm sitting in a lot of congestion. I have a lot of delay. This is not acceptable. In the city of Naperville, level of service E is acceptable in a downtown environment. You expect a higher delay in a downtown environment. Typically, in Northeastern Illinois, we're looking to achieve a level of service D. I will note that is not always realistic. There are some conditions where a D is just not feasible. That's typically at a stop controlled intersection with a heavily traveled arterial.

The arterial is free flow. You have to wait for a gap in traffic. That gap in traffic typically takes longer than what is that? Less than fifty five seconds, but thirty five to fifty five seconds, I believe, is the level of service D. So, it just that's a function of being a minor leg stop controlled intersection at an arterial signalized intersection.

When you have a left turn movement, you only have a certain and it's protected. You get a green arrow. You only have certain number of seconds on your green arrow. You're going to automatically default to a level of service E or F, because you have to wait for the green time that all the other movements are receiving until you receive your green arrow again. And that's typically kicking you automatically into an E or F.

So, the level of service is a great measure, but you also have to kind of dig into the details. And we looked at queuing, and we looked at how the queues were operating we looked at the cycle length we looked at the signal timing settings to evaluate where the improvements were appropriate so with all that said I'm going to pivot to Adam's going to kind of quickly walk through by quadrant, similar to what we did under existing conditions, walk through key findings from level of service, and then we'll get to the fun part, which is the improvements.

Good evening. Adam Kucharski. My focus is on roadway design and geometrics. So like Rory was saying, we're focused on those segments and intersections that operate at that E or F level of service and what we can do to improve those. So focusing on those quadrants, we're starting in the Northwest quadrant as we walk through where we're seeing deficiencies and then what we can do to improve those.

So looking at the map here between the red and black segments and dots, that is going to identify where the specific locations are for improvement. So right here, we have three segments in this Northwest quadrant listed operating at a poor level of service. Similarly, the intersections are highlighted here. Nothing different on the map. We're just highlighting the intersections in the bullet points there.

We wanted to focus on the locations that had all city jurisdiction on all four legs, as that requires the least amount of coordination upfront as opposed to coordination with other agencies such as the county for future improvements. So when we look at those four intersections, we'll see on a few slides here what we would recommend. And boiling down those segments and intersections that were at a poor level of service, we now show on the map here how we can address those. So we looked at what can we do without any infrastructure improvements, so just signal timing. So those are identified in the red boxes here on the map.

There were four locations in that Northwest quadrant. I guess I jumped ahead here. So between infrastructure improvements, those are in the blue box, and then signal timings are in red box. So we have three locations with actual added turn lanes, and then we have six locations here with signal timing improvements. So as we walk through each location, there's going be a lot of information here.

So I'll take a pause every so often for any questions. But this first location here, we are looking at Aurora and West. The capacity improvements would be westbound and eastbound sorry, westbound left turn and eastbound right. And again, like Rory had mentioned, there's significant spill back into the through lanes. So by adding turn lanes, that not only improves the capacity, but also theoretically a reduction in crashes as well.

And by this improvement, we're achieving that level of service D that is considered acceptable. Each improvement was then evaluated and a cost was given. So we took a look to see what are the least amount of impacts we could make while incorporating turn lanes. We strive to not impact any property where possible, staying within the existing right of way, considering in certain locations paced bus stops, access for pedestrians, driveway access, and those sorts items. Moving on here to book and record.

You can see the scope that we have outlined for this location. Capacity also improves to a level of service D by introducing a longer westbound left turn and a northbound dedicated right turn. Moving on to Weston and Rickert. We're providing an additional southbound left turn lane here. And similar to the other locations, reducing that spill back and providing additional space for vehicles to queue.

Something else to note, you know, what you'll see here is, you know, the existing right of way lines, in certain cases appear to be at or near what would be the proposed sidewalk. Those right of way lines would have to be verified as the information we're pulling is directly from the county GIS website, which for the most part is a good estimate and starting place. But in future phases of the project, as this turns into phase one and phase two, right of verification would be needed. So that was the Northwest quadrant. Now we're moving on to the Northeast.

Similar setup here, looking at the red and black segments and intersections. We've got four segments operating at a poor level of service. And similarly, we have four intersections under city jurisdiction operating at a port level of service. There's 10 others that would require further coordination with different agencies. But again, purposes of what we're focused on now, we're looking at those city jurisdictions.

And so the improvements resulted in what you'll see these seven intersections in the blue squares here. And we'll continue to walk through those based on any improvements. I can stop there and take any questions now if there's anything. We do have several others to get through. So I'll just take a quick pause if anybody has any questions.

Can I ask a question? Sure. Two locations, Rickard and West and Book, I think, and Rickard And Book. Those traffic jams occur usually the backup from 75th Street, heading second left turn lane over there. Did you look at the backup?

Usually that traffic, it backs up all the way back towards where especially if you're going to west towards Rickard, it backs up. The Rickard backs up significantly. And I don't know if it is like, signal timing over there is pretty decent. It empties the storage area, but the traffic on record is backed up because of the traffic on 75th Street.

Yeah, I can answer. So as a part of this analysis, DuPage County intends to widen 75th Street to six lanes. With that widening, signal retiming would be required, and that would influence the Rickert Drive timing as well. So in twenty five years, I think it's a fair estimate to assume all signals will likely require some level of retiming, but particularly 75th Street and then the signals within that influence area would also be subject to retiming. Your observation is correct. I would expect in the future that that would be different.

Second question when are you planning to implement these?

Yes, so the projects would be implemented over the next twenty years.

There's no short term timing?

This is not what is on the screen is not for construction. This is intended for planning purposes So there would be a whole and we'll talk about it at the end. But there will be a whole future construction drawing phase with public input. This was intended to essentially Adam and his team put together the concept geometry to inform the budget numbers, which can then inform the capital improvement plan, which will then inform the city's ability to proceed with implementation over the next twenty years.

I have a question. I apologize if you answered this already. What does split phasing mean? In this case,

it shows north south split phasing. That is just how the signal is operating. So northbound north south, sorry, split phasing in the sense that we would have left turns operating independently from the through movements so that those would be provided separately.

Yeah, we're tag teaming this because I helped with the capacity analysis and then kicked it to Adam for the design. So the split phasing, in this case, there's so little traffic on the north leg of the intersection that it doesn't that leg does not need a lot of green time. The opposite is true on the south leg. You have a high volume of traffic, and that leg needs more green time. So we can split phasing is kind of like what you see over by DuPage Children's Museum. That signal, I think, still runs split phasing, where the east and west legs are not getting concurrent green. In this case, it's north and south.

I just had a question about the cost estimates. So I was just kind of curious what's included in those costs. If you have to take additional right away, was that calculated in their utility relocation? And then also, is this $20 $25 that you're showing here?

Yes. So we have a summary of costs towards the end. We can dive into some details. But at a high level, we looked at pavement, curb, sidewalk, drainage, signal, any kind of hard costs like that. We did not include any engineering costs or right of way costs.

We did identify where right of way would be needed, but didn't attribute a cost to that. And then these are all in today's dollars that have not been escalated. There is a 15% contingency on these numbers currently. And generally, did include costs for utility relocations as well. At a high level, it was what we could tell without any survey at this point. So any visible utilities we could see was what was included.

Thank you. I'll take that really quick. So the escalation would be considered as these are prioritized through the CIP. You would escalate accordingly once you determine at what year over the twenty year timeline these would move forward.

Okay, so to the second quadrant we're going to review now, the Northeast quadrant. We are focused on what those improvements would be in this quadrant and looking first here at Washington and Deal. It's the dual westbound left turn lanes, which requires widening on either side and modifying the traffic signal, addressing the Q spill back as well here. And then just to note, this particular location would still require some DuPage County coordination. Similarly here, Washington And Bauer, North South, additional left turn lanes.

Similar updates here, just showing these for reference. And you can see in this particular case what is in the upper left quadrant here on the plan view. We've got, like I mentioned right away, you can see like the existing sidewalk is technically outside of the existing right of way. This is typically rare. So just taking those proposed potential property takes with a grain of salt at this point.

Washington and Ogden, we've got an additional southbound right turn lane. There's a couple of driveways at this location here as well that we would be working through and staying off of the property there in that corner. And also to note, this requires some IDOT coordination as well because of Ogden Avenue. This particular location I know has been looked at in the past. It would require significant property take for that residence.

But in turn, by fully kind of realigning this intersection and providing different pedestrian accommodations, we can see here on the I guess that is the East West. I guess it's plan north, plan south. The roadway here is already wide enough to accommodate left turn lanes, as they're pretty wide and have parking here. So another consideration in the future is in certain cases such as this where parking may or may not be allowed, it's possible that some changes in those, I guess, rules may need to be adjusted. Ogden and Iroquois.

I know with all the development going on in this area, currently a very congested area as well. So looking to add that additional left turn lane there to get onto Ogden. And this would improve that level of service again to D like we had referred to earlier.

Can I ask a quick question about that one?

Sure.

Was this done before or after 7Brew went in? Like is the data including all of the traffic generated by 7Brew?

I don't believe so. I think what we see in a lot of those cases is, especially with a newer development like that, there's a peak in the volumes in the first x amount of months. And then in the long term, things tend to settle out. But I'll let you answer that.

Yeah, that's a fair question. I don't know off the top of my head the data date at this intersection. We can certainly follow-up with that prior to the next meeting. My assumption would be it does not include that, but there was a traffic study done not for that development, but for Costco. We can take a look at it.

We'll do some comparison between a couple of data points to try to define. Regardless, what this is showing is level of service D indicates there's excess capacity in the future with this improvement. The extent of the turn lanes may be something that would need further consideration in the future as a part of a future design phase, and that would capture kind of your traffic condition with all users. But I can take a look at the data set here. Don't know off the tip of my head, but that's a fair question.

Thank you.

Touching in on Ogden and Naper, just to note here, this is another location that would require other agency coordination and for the installation of these left turn lanes as well. More simple straightforward modification here with the eastbound right turn at Plank And Napier. Again, within the existing right of way.

Can you go back to that one real quick? Are you aware that there is a proposed development that's going in the Northeast corner of that? Is that going to take that into account?

It will, I believe. Yeah.

This is a case where the travel demand model does recognize that property, big picture, not that specific development petition that's on the table, or that was recently approved, I think. But it does consider that that's a vacant parcel, that the Southwest corner is a vacant parcel, and that would be reflected future traffic generated by redevelopment or development activity is included in the traffic demand model.

Okay. Does it go further west on this for the Tuthill Intersection as well? I know there's a lot of talk about the traffic with this whole area right here. So I'm almost thinking that

Yeah, typically, the travel demand model doesn't look at the minutiae of development, traffic, routing, and impacts. That would be something that would be evaluated in a traffic impact study that would be submitted with the development petition. This improvement on the screen does not extend to Tuttle.

Okay, thank you.

So that was the Northeast Quadrant and moving on to the Southwest. Again, three segments here that operate at a poor level of service, 59 Book Road and 111th. Similarly, three intersections that you see with the, there's seven intersections total between E and F, but only three within city jurisdiction. Those are listed here on the screen. And based on those poor level of service, we've come up with these recommended improvements, the four that are listed there in addition to the signal timing at book and hazard.

And again, I know the map's a little bit hard to see. It's trying to cover a large area. But the red squares representing for the signal timing adjustment versus the blue is for infrastructure improvements. Here's 248th At 95th Street. North is pointing up, as you would typically see.

We are modifying the signal for the dual left turns and reducing the delay to that level of service D. The addition of a right turn lane here for the northbound direction. And similarly, the same thing at Route 59 And 95th. You can see the realignment of the sidewalk here as well that would potentially require some right of way. Book and 90 5th, have based on the analysis, we would widen to provide two lanes in each direction.

At this point, they would need further analysis to determine how far to carry those through lanes widening. For right now, the way everything is analyzed and summarized, this would still operate at a level of service D with the improvements shown on the screen. And then finally here, the Southeast quadrant. We're getting to the end. We've got two segments that are operating at poor level service along with one intersection, which results in one intersection improvement.

Shown here we have dual westbound lefts and a northbound right adjacent to the park. And this reduces the delay that we're seeing in that westbound direction. So getting to costs here, this is a summary of everything that was on each of the individual slides. That's over a twenty year period in today's dollars is a planning level cost estimate. Obviously, future survey, right of way considerations, understanding the full extent of utility relocations would need to be considered.

But from the information that we know now, this is what those costs are looking like at just under 5,000,000.

So Adam kind of walked through intersection level improvements. In addition to the intersection analysis, we did complete analysis of the segments. Adam highlighted some of the segments per quadrant. The next two this slide and the next slide kind of are a summary of that. So it's a repeat of the data that you saw by quadrant, just to put together this summary.

So this is segments projected to operate at levels of service E. A key component was a review of jurisdiction. In this case, there are a segments couple under two dot and IDOT jurisdiction, a section at Brook Road under township jurisdiction. The other key consideration when we look at segment performance is adjacent land use and right of way. In some cases, there is not a realistic opportunity for roadway widening.

It's a function of a development pattern. An example of that would be you'll see on the next screen Washington as a clear example. That is projected segments are projected to operate at level service F in the future. We are not going to go through and create a six lane highway on Washington through Downtown Naperville. That's not a realistic assumption.

The congestion there is a function of a thriving economy. And so there is a land use component to this and a right of way component. The segment highlighted in green is where we did identify the improvement that Adam highlighted at Book and ninety fifth. There would be widening of book associated with that improvement. As Adam said, the extent of that would be further reviewed as a part of a future design phase, but it would be widened to provide two lanes in each direction for a total of four lanes, whereas right now, it's a single lane in each direction.

And then, again, this is Level Service F. In this case, several of these segments are not under city jurisdiction, and therefore, not part of the scope of the road improvement plan. We do have an improvement on 111th Street for widening, which is highlighted here. So the roadway widening projects that are in front of you tonight are 111th Street, west of Route 59 to 248. That would be widened to a four lane cross section with turn lanes at key intersections.

Again, right now, that's two lanes with some turn lanes. And then we would recommend a westbound right turn lane at 248. And then the other roadway widening would be 119th Street, east of Route 59 to DuPage River. And then this is in the city's current capital improvement plan, roadway extension to extend Brook Road it currently terminates the aerial on the screen shows the current termination of Brook Road at 111th Street so we would propose to continue to include the roadway extension and the road improvement plan to provide an additional North South route in this quadrant of the city. So with those three roadway widening and extension projects, obviously, that's additional construction costs that Adam's team put together.

So the projects included in the draft road improvement plan before you this evening are just over $28,000,000 Again, implementation over a twenty year period prioritization of these projects would be identified as part of the future capital improvement plan process. And then, in addition, what we did was, at the segment level, we also took a look at where are there opportunities where we maybe have too much pavement today and could potentially explore what's called a road diet, or how do you maybe reimagine some of that existing pavement that is we don't expect would be necessary from a capacity standpoint. So again, this is a capacity driven plan. So we felt like this was an appropriate use of the road improvement plan to not only talk about where we have constraints, but maybe where we have opportunities as well. So Whirley Road, South Of Muirhead, based on projected traffic volumes, is a segment that has we would characterize it as excess capacity, and potentially a candidate for a road diet.

A road diet, again, is reimagination or reuse of existing pavement that can take many forms. It can be a bike, on street bike lane. It can be parking. It can be just a shoulder, striped shoulder. How this pavement is used is something that the city would incorporate in the future bicycle and pedestrian plans.

So the road improvement plan is not going to say, use this for a bike lane, because that would be operating in a silo that's not looking at a comprehensive picture of the city's bicycle network and how a bike lane on Whirley Road may or may not interconnect with the network but the road improvement plan will identify an opportunity that there's excess capacity here and through the city's bicycle and pedestrian plan and future design processes this space could be reused without any challenges from a capacity standpoint A similar condition was noted on 87th Street from Route 59 to Book Road. Yes?

Earlier, the map showed 87th Street Route 59 to Book Road. A big portion of that from Skylane to Book was not color coded. Is that jurisdiction of Naperville, 87th from Sky Lane to Book Road?

Yes, it is. That

may have just been an oversight.

Let's see. You've got eagle eyes. Oh, that is yeah, that we can connect. The IDOT data is truncated in weird segments, so we can that's a good catch. We can extend that blue line. Thank you. Eagle eyes, good catch. Live right there. That's why I know it. Yeah, I appreciate it.

So I'll just say these images were developed just for demonstration purposes only. The top image shows the existing geometry of Orly Road with two travel lanes in each direction. And the bottom image is just a concept which would convert that pavement to a single lane in each direction with a center turn lane. And that creates space potentially for bike lanes or other striped shoulder, parking, whatever may be appropriate based on future study. So we've mentioned this a couple of times, but just to reiterate, the graphics that were on the screen are not for construction.

Those were conceptual for planning purposes. These would be subject to a future design phase, subject to future construction drawings. That would be a public planning process with public hearings and public meetings where appropriate, depending on funding. And I think it's important to note, as a part of that design process, there is an alternatives analysis. We're here in 2025 developing this.

Things may change in ten to fifteen years. So, as these intersections and projects move forward, alternatives are reviewed to make sure what's included in the RIP is the most appropriate option moving forward. Where appropriate, there may be grant funding for a number of these, especially those that maybe have a safety component. So that's identified as part of future implementation stages. We talked about the phase one, phase two, and the public input.

And then, it's important to note that, although the RIP is a capacity driven plan, as this advances to future design phases, every project will have pedestrian accommodations, and where appropriate relative to the city's bicycle network, bicycle accommodations. So that's just inherent to the city's approach to design of intersections and roadway segments. Accessibility is considered for any improvement moving forward. Lighting, there will be site distance review. That's part of the design process, as Adam mentioned, drainage, utility conflicts, right of way impacts.

All of that will be further reviewed in more detail as these move forward. The intent of the concepts on the screen today was really, are these feasible? Are these reasonably feasible relative to existing right of way adjacent development? In some cases, for example, Ogden and Washington is a great example. We've recommended a southbound right turn lane.

Realistically, from a capacity standpoint, additional turn lanes are needed at that intersection. However, based on right of way and adjacent development, that's not feasible. And so the southbound right turn lane is feasible based on our review of right of way and development the other turn lanes were not included in the road improvement plan because they're not feasible so I think that's important to note and we can certainly walk through any questions you have on the intersections in more detail In terms of next steps, the ask tonight is for initial feedback on what we've presented. And we'll come back, hopefully, in September to ask for a recommendation. And then ultimately, this will move forward to City Council for review and approval.

And then through the capital improvement program, these projects will be implemented. So happy to answer any questions.

I have one question. First of all, you very much. Your guys' presentations are great. These are really fun meetings to attend. And I mean that genuinely and truly. I was wondering, were any environmental impact, and I understand that'll be considered in further stages of the design, but for this, were any environmental impacts considered or like flagged? For instance the extension of a book road between 111th and 119th you know it's right next to the DuPage River so just curious about that

Yes, environmental wise, it comes to that particular example, we'll make note of what needs to be investigated. And it's difficult to attribute necessarily cost to that. But that's really what that phase one engineering process is for to work through those. In particular, what we'll find most times is your current or past gas stations on a quarter of several of these intersections will have some sort of remediation that's needed. And then there's a process for that. But we did not try to attribute a cost to that at this point.

Yeah, not from a cost standpoint, but from a standpoint of, it's more of like, I think the community might have more concerns. Yeah. You know, as opposed to like the river area as opposed to, you know, some underground storage tanks, you know, at an old gas station or something.

Yeah, that will that is not part of this scope. That will be part of the phase one, and that's a public process. So the community would have an opportunity to voice any concerns based on the alignment alternatives for that future roadway connection. As Adam said, there would be an environmental study completed at that time. But in terms of this process, that is not part of the scope of this project.

Yeah.

Yeah, again, I echo that's a great analysis. Thank you. And I know you can't include everything in your presentation. But I'm curious if there's additional quantitative data you can provide or have provided the city for cost of benefit analysis for the recommendations, whereby one project may be $100,000 estimated one, maybe 300,000, terms of what percentage of going from an F to an E or an E to a D. Is there a gradation there or also based on volume because some intersections are much bigger than the others, help prioritize how we spend our money.

Yeah, we've talked about including some prioritization considerations. So that will be included. Think in some cases, we have created a very specific prioritization of projects. I don't know that that is necessarily how we'll proceed pending your input. I think a lot of times, there may be funding opportunities that change that prioritization or bundling of projects.

So say, the water utility needs to install a new water main, and you're going to advance one of your projects, roadway projects, so that you're only disrupting an area once. So sometimes, it can be challenging to try to set forward very strict prioritization of projects when there can be a lot of disruption. But we will include prioritization considerations. Not necessarily like a cost benefit analysis, but some of what you're saying, like for $150,000 this has a significant improvement to this intersection, or this queue is significantly contributing to crash conditions, and an additional turn lane would have a meaningful impact here, a meaningful benefit here. So there will be some prioritization considerations, but strict prioritization of projects I think would be limiting.

I just want to make sure if there's any public comments. Do I go through the motion process? Can just do that. I'll just do it. So I'm going to entertain a motion to have further discussion on this item. Do we have a motion and a second to discuss the presentation and provide input on the proposed update to the city's road improvement plan?

So moved.

A motion from Ms. Nair. Do we have a second?

Second.

Second from Ms. Rose. Do we have anyone from the public signed up to speak on this item? Yeah,

thank you. An excellent work. And Alison, thank you for the questions about the area around north in the Northeast Quadrant, Naperville Boulevard and Plank Road and Ogden and so on near Ogden and 7 Brew. I have a question. It seems like a lot of the solutions are dual left turn lanes.

Can you state your name, please?

Kevin Madden, Larson Lane, thirty three year resident. In that situation where you go to a dual left turn lane, what is the experience with flow? Do more or less cars get through typically during that left or for that left turn lane traffic? Because I assume when you make a dual, then cars are prohibited from turning left outside of having a left arrow. Is it that in heavy traffic conditions, more cars can make the flow is greater, and then less traffic conditions, the flow is lighter? Could you speak to that, please?

Yes. The purpose of dual left turn lanes is to increase capacity. So it provides the ability for more vehicles to complete the left turn lane. The signal timing, the statement is correct. It operates under a protected left turn, so just the green arrow as opposed to maybe a green arrow and then a green ball. So the timing can be less. It's not always the case. But the dual left turn lanes do provide additional capacity, meaning more cars can complete a left turn lane.

Thank you. For example, so going north on Naperville Boulevard at Ogden, if more cars can make that left turn, then maybe less cars will turn left on plank and go up Tut Hill and use that shortcut to get to Costco.

Right? Yeah. Are

you traffic engineer?

No, but I have a strong interest in the topic.

Yeah. Yes. Thank you for that statement. A large part of the and I think we covered this in May, so I apologize. A large portion of the purpose of the road improvement plan is to do exactly as Mr. Madden stated, to provide additional capacity on the arterial collector network so that it relieves cut through traffic on local roads through neighborhoods. So the example provided, yes, if we can improve the condition, the operating condition at Naper and Ogden, motorists are less inclined to take an alternate route which may not be as direct.

Thank you so much.

And just one more item. And I really appreciate this opportunity. Naper feels awesome this way. I think on the Plank and Naperville Boulevard, the right turn, southbound right turn, should it be noted that that's currently Township Of Lyell jurisdiction? Or

is

the assumption that the only way to do it would be by that property becoming incorporated into Naperville, and jurisdiction would transfer to Naperville anyway as part of the process?

So with that particular intersection, you're talking about Plank West Of Napier?

Yes, to go south on Napier.

So the way that that works is when a property incorporates, so in this case, the property to the North of Plank annexed to the city. So when that happens by state law, the city then takes jurisdiction of that full right of way to the south right of way line. So since that property has annexed, now the city does have jurisdiction of just that section between the Naper and Tuthill, yes. But then west of there, it would revert back to the township. So it all comes in piecemeal. It's all about how the property's annexed. That's how the roadway jurisdiction works.

Thank you very much. Thank you.

Do we have any other anyone else signed up for public comments?

We have no other speakers signed up for public forum.

Do we have anyone else in the board with comments? Okay, so hearing nothing, I'm going to close this item. And we're going to move on. Next, we have 2060, Approval Recommendation to Establish Overnight Parking Exemptions for Carrollwood neighborhood. I think we have a presentation from the staff on that

I do not have a presentation okay but I will give you some details about it So the Carol Wood Homeowners Association has requested to be included in the overnight parking program. Staff reviewed Carol Wood's application and approved their need for overnight parking and deemed the neighborhood eligible for the program. The neighborhood was constructed prior to 2015 and is not in compliance with the current off street parking requirements per the municipal code. Staff proposes issuing 17 overnight parking permits to be distributed by the property manager and locating the overnight parking exemptions on the south and west sides of Arcadia Circle, the North side of Carrollwood Road between Fort Hill Drive and Bordeaux Lane, and the South side of Carrollwood Road between Arcadia Circle and the terminus. Staff is asking TAB to approve a recommendation to establish overnight parking exemptions for the Carrollwood neighborhood.

Okay, I'll entertain a motion to have a discussion on this item. Do we have a motion and a second to discuss and approve?

So moved.

We have a motion from Mr. Webb. Second. We have a second from Mr. Korczewinski.

Do we have anyone signed up from the public to speak on this item?

We have no speakers signed up from the public.

Does the board have any questions or comments for the staff?

Yeah, just kind of a general question about the overnight parking program. Has there been sort of any evaluation now that it's been you've had it for a year or two, I guess, maybe more. Just how's it going? Have you done any follow-up? Have you received any feedback? And also from the police perspective, enforcement, has that worked out well with the hang tags?

Yes. So we get annual updates from the homeowners associations with list of participants and any changes in who they've been distributed to. So we have had consistent contact with the participating residents. Police department has not discussed any concerns with overnight parking as far as I'm aware. None

of the appeals that I've seen come through from overnight parking citations being issued have been because they had a hang tag that was provided to them and were ticketed anyways. So the officers that are out there ticketing for it are doing a good job of seeing the exemptions that are being given and ticketing the cars that don't have

As far as just like overnight parking in general, right, I mean, the last year we have definitely seen more of an uptick in requests to be involved in the program. And then on the other side, we're still seeing, I think on the PD side, more, I'll call them complaints of vehicles parking overnight than we are on complaints of getting ticketed for overnight parking, if that makes sense.

Yeah, thank you.

Do we have any more comments? Yep.

Just kind of following up on that, has there been any issues as far as running out of tags?

We have not had issues with that so far. Most of the existing participants are not using their tags to the fullest capacity. So most have access. So not yet.

I'll just say for the other newer members of the board, since this is relatively new in the last few years, we've discussed quite a bit these individual opportunities that came up. The city and the department does a great deal of diligence to make sure that when they apply for this that they actually fit for it. In the past, I'd ask all sorts of questions, they always have the right answer. And so I don't feel that there's need to

STEINER:

ask again for a different subdivision when I know that they're doing the proper due diligence.

Anyone else? Okay. Hearing no more discussion, staff can we please call roll. All those in favor say aye. Those opposed, nay.

Mr. Hurley. Aye. Mr. Krzywinski. Aye. Mr. Laird. Aye. Ms. Snier. Mr. Neibel. Aye. Mr. Olger. Aye. Ms. Rose.

Aye.

Mr. Webb. Aye.

Okay, so motion passes and we approve a recommendation to establish overnight parking exemptions for the Carolwood neighborhood. Next, we have 20 five-ten-twenty seven approve a recommendation to establish no parking restriction for mailboxes. Staff?

Hi, good evening. My name is Jasmine Vega, and I'm a project manager with TED. Today we're bringing forward a recommendation to establish a no parking restriction in front of mailboxes. This came from a concern from a homeowner who claims that they are not receiving their mail at times due to parking in front of their mailbox. Just some context, this is a corner lot home where the driveway and the mailbox are separated.

This addition would put us in line with other local municipalities who have begun to establish similar ordinances to restrict parking within certain distances of a mailbox or within mail delivery hours. In terms of signage, we don't intend to sign every mailbox, but rather review concerns on a case by case basis. So in the case of this homeowner, we would sign that particular mailbox after staff was able to complete some observations and site visits. Enforcing the ordinance would likely follow the same protocol that we have with other no parking restrictions. So for example, if someone is parked in front of your driveway, you have the option of contacting PD we would assume that that would follow the same process

okay so I'm going to entertain a motion to have a discussion on this item do we have a motion a second to discuss and approve a recommendation to establish no parking restriction for mailboxes

so moved

we have a motion from mr. Hurley second we have a second from mr. Naibel So do we have anyone in the public signed up to speak on this item?

We have no speakers from the public signed up to speak.

And does the board have questions or comments for the staff? Go ahead.

I guess I'm surprised that Naperville that this hasn't been in the ordinance. And then I do have a concern to sign people's mailboxes. I just don't think that's really necessary. And I think then, like, if someone can just call and observe that, I feel like it might be someone that's parking there that if the police has called on them once or they're ticketed or someone lets them know that they'll just not park there anymore, I just feel like that's kind of odd that we're signing people's mailboxes. And for what distance would that be?

Yeah, as it's written, it's pretty broad. So the language that we have is in front of mailboxes. There isn't an existing ordinance because mailbox are typically found next to driveways, which is covered under the current code. That is about 10 feet, I believe. So that essentially protects your mailbox. I mentioned the corner lot home because the driveway is on one leg, the mailbox is on another. That's not typical, which is what made this case atypical. Do you want to address that?

Yeah, so as Jasmine had mentioned, we would not be signing every mailbox location. This particular resident who has this concern lives adjacent to a school. So similar to other restrictions that we have around a school, we will have like no parking here to corner signs. And those will be 10 feet from the driveway closest to that corner, right, to just extend that restriction. So in this case, with them being on a corner lot, they have a driveway on one leg of the intersection, but then no driveway on that other leg.

So what people are doing as they're queuing for pickup and drop off, they are parking in front of this resident's mailbox, which would not be covered under our 30 foot feet rule from an intersection. So this restriction would allow us to restrict an extra ten, fifteen feet to cover the in front of a mailbox. Drive, you know, it's one of those things where you don't see it until now that you know that we have mailboxes that aren't adjacent to driveways. You kind of see them often as you're driving through neighborhoods. And not only for those specific houses on corner lots this would also impact in a lot of our multifamily neighborhoods we have mailboxes that are combined with about like 10 to 20 other units and that comes up every once in a while with our overnight parking restriction as well where we technically don't have an ordinance to block those mailboxes and the US Postal Office doesn't have an ordinance their rule is just they won't deliver mail if it's blocked So this ordinance will obviously help with that fact.

Could people move the location of their mailbox to get more street essentially their own in front of their house, if they could move their mailbox and they get an additional footage where no one else could park but them. It seems like might maybe I'll say like a visual representation of this condition I think would be helpful, especially in this case for discussion purposes. And also, was there any follow-up with the resident in the school? Can anything be done on a smaller scale to try to help alleviate this issue?

Sure. So I like to think that no resident would go through all that trouble to have that be done. But here, we'll show you the examples. So this is next to Fry Elementary School. I'm in the Tallgrass neighborhood. And here we have a the intersection of Brooks Edge and Brightweiser. Okay? So it's this house in question. We have no mailbox adjacent to the driveway. The mailbox is located in between these two trees here.

So the restriction would be from about where my mouse is, and then obviously through the intersection. And what's happening at this school, and what's happening in a lot of schools, parents tend to not utilize the pickup and drop off plan that's provided. And for district, I will say, for district two zero four schools, which Tallgrass is included in, we have plenty of internal driveway space for parents to utilize those driveways within the school compared to the district two zero three schools. But either way, parents are queuing here on the North Side Of Brooks Edge and picking up their kids as they cross using this path. And what's happening, that queue kind of comes through here.

And we have quite a few compliance issues people are parking within you know very close to this driveway or through all three of these driveways along with the crosswalk So with this sign, if this gets approved, right, we would, you know, include this sign, and then whenever we add a parking restriction to a school, we typically rely pretty heavily on PD to enforce it in the first week or two of the school starting. So here in September, and you know, it's mostly frequent flyers, so that should stop it. But we rely on signs for enforcement. So, you know, a sign here would do a lot of our legwork for us.

So sort of building on what you're saying, I think any of us that have had kids know that passions can run high at school drop off. It's not always the best representation of manners that we've ever seen. So my concern is so people that live in school zones have cars in front of them. And it's annoying, I'm sure, at times. In the morning, I don't know what time mail starts getting delivered, it doesn't seem like it would be appropriate for the morning.

Someone could use this as a tool to try to keep people from parking in front of their house when it's not actually an issue prior to mail delivery. And then secondly, I'd be concerned that if there's less spots for people to park, then it may lead to worse and less safe behavior for where they actually can pick up and drop off their kids if there's now less spots that are available to do so? JOSHUA

Fair questions. I'll state that so this in particular, every single request that we would have come in gets gets reviewed on an individual basis. So like for instance, this one here, we went out there a few times during afternoon pickup and the congestion here was pretty intense. So it goes through the intersection of Brightwiser and Brooks Edge where we have no parking here at a corner signage. And cars are queuing through the intersection, creating somewhat of a safety hazard.

That's why we have no parking around intersections. But we have no signs to reiterate that restriction. Most people here, residents of Naperville, even on this border, or even in staff level, aren't aware of all of those restrictions. 30 feet from an intersection, 20 feet from a crosswalk, 10 feet from a driveway, Hopefully, people know the fire hydrant 15 foot rule. So we don't and we don't sign all of those.

But around schools and around the downtown, you'll see those signed. And it's because we have times of the day where we have congestion. And we want to clear that up to just have a free flow of traffic and better sight lines, especially for the pedestrians that are using the crosswalks at that intersection. So in this case, after those observations, it was deemed that this restriction would be very helpful in clearing up that intersection. And then at the same time, my mail gets delivered in Naperville in between the hours of about three and five. Fry Elementary gets out at 03:30, I believe. So it's right in that time where the resident had mentioned that her mail had been skipped a few times.

But it would be highly unusual for mail to be delivered prior to nine a. M. So for the morning time, it would be a unnecessary restriction.

No, no, no. Of course. But on the other end of it, in the morning, we're still having those queue issues where we still want to clear out the intersection. So we're talking, you know, typically we have 30 feet from the intersection for a restriction where no parking, including on the non, this is a three way intersection. So even on the far side of the intersection where we have no street, there is a no parking restriction there.

It's not signed. But all day, every day, no one can park between those two driveways on the South Side of Brightwiser. So it's not this isn't necessarily in this case here, it's more of a congestion restriction. And we have the mailbox there as it's I won't say a plus, but it's just another variable as part of our evaluation. I'm talking too much and I could hear in my voice that I'm maybe not as clear. But does that answer your question? No. Can you repeat your question?

So I'm guessing the intent of this was for people, for spots where parking would otherwise be allowed for school pickup or drop off in those areas that are not from the intersection, where people are parking too close to their driveway or sorry, to the mailbox where they're interfering with mail delivery. And so what we're trying to make sure is unimpeded mail delivery in areas where people would otherwise have been allowed to park.

Sure. To a, I think we're so right now, I'll I'm guessing here, 30 feet is this tree right here where my mouse is. So no one can park between my mouse, the tip of my mouse, and on the other 10 feet away from this driveway, currently. Alright. No restriction. The mailbox is right here. We're adding about, I'd say 10 to 15 feet more of a restriction. So treat the mailbox as you would a driveway. You know, typically, as Jasmine had mentioned, our mailboxes are between one and two feet from a driveway. So we already have that 10 foot restriction for a driveway, so it's never an issue.

It's still an issue. You know, people call and complain about it all the time. But we have that restriction in the code. So this is just giving those people that don't have that mailbox adjacent to their driveway the same rights as people that have the mailbox adjacent to their driveway. But in this particular case, we're adding, I'd say, 10 to 15 feet of restriction.

Yeah, I just have a couple questions. So would this be at all time limited to just during the day, like 6AM to 6PM or anything?

As it's written, it's pretty broad. What we have is in front of a mailbox. If that is a recommendation that members would like to suggest, I think staff could consider the mail delivery hours, which is in line with other local municipalities and the ordinance that they've began putting together.

Okay. Yeah. And I'm just wondering, too, for overnight parking, which we just talked about. The previously approved permits, would those be impacted by this new ordinance? Would you have to go back and reevaluate those and reduce some of the permits already distributed?

I don't believe so. We do take into consideration things like fire hydrants, driveways, mailboxes in multifamily developments that have those kind of ten, fifteen person mailboxes and try to avoid those as much as possible when making our recommendations for exemption locations.

Thank you.

I know this is dragging too long. Apologies for that, for this mailbox issue. But is this during the school pickup drop off time? When we talk about parking, are they parking there and leaving their cars and going? Or just those pick up and drop off times during those times?

Yeah, mean it's both, right? It's a queue during the winter months. But during the summer months, we see that parents will leave their car there and then meet their kids. There's a playground just north of this. And it kind of becomes like a parking for about a half hour to an hour while their kids are playing at the park.

I have a couple concerns here. One is putting a sign or creating this ordinance, is that going to stop the parking over there? Because the reason that they're parking over there is they're desperate. That's the only thing that they found over there. Or they're picking up their kids. They're going to be I don't know if it's going to stop anything. The other issue that I wanted to ask you, the ordinance, like you mentioned, Ms. Vega, you said it's pretty broad. So for a mailbox car come in, drop the mail, and then go out, are we talking about 20 feet between? We're not describing anything.

Just we're saying that so we have five feet in front of the mailbox. Is that what it is? If somebody parks in there, how are we going to I think we should make it clear is what I'm trying to get at if we're to enforce this.

Yes, it is pretty broad. We don't define footage. But again, I think that's a right. So we were advised by our legal department. We did speak with them several times about our concerns of distance from mailboxes. What we were advised to do is use the broad language in front of mailboxes. But I hear you with footage suggestion.

On your first part of the question, I will say, to your point, that people still park there. We have found a lot of success by when we do install we just last year did a kind of a rehab of all of our school parking restrictions. And when we did that, made a few changes at certain schools. And when we do those changes, we rely on PD to get out there in the first week or two of school and ticket warnings, all of that. And it's frequent flyers.

It's the same people that are coming there. And if you get them with those tickets and warnings at the beginning, it usually stops the behavior. And parents start utilizing the school pickup and drop off traffic control plan that's recommended by the city and the school district.

Mr. Webb?

So just kind of echoing what I'm kind of getting from up here. As far as the time restriction, say someone's having people over on Sunday afternoon, the way this ordinance is written, they can't park in front of that mailbox. They could be ticketed. But if this is only a concern when mail's being delivered, when school's in session, that's just kind of my concern as it strikes me as a little bit overly broad.

No, it's fair concern. As Jasmine had mentioned, we were advised by the legal department to have it broad. And to your point, you know, it's the same thing. You can't have people over parking within 10 feet of your mailbox currently if your mailbox is adjacent to your driveway, even off peak mailbox times or peak mail delivery times, sorry.

Councilwoman.

Thank you. Yeah, so I echo a lot of what y'all are saying up here too. So this is a this is gonna be a citywide ordinance because of one complaint. Have we gotten any other complaints about people parking in front of their mailboxes?

This is the single complaint that we're aware of. Okay.

Occasionally, we'll get complaints in multifamily neighborhoods of people parking at the cluster mailboxes.

Yeah, and that would make sense. Would it be easier just to extend the no parking from this intersection, like right where the arrow is, just extend the no parking just there? And then it's kind of no school parking. You just can't park from where that arrow is to the intersection. And that would solve it.

That could be a recommendation from the board.

Rather than a citywide ordinance that would impact mailboxes across the city. I mean, live in Park Edition, so we don't have mailboxes. So we have a walking mailman. So I'm not sure how many this impacts. But given that we've never had a complaint about it before, I'm kind of wary about having a citywide ordinance to tackle one problem. So maybe we try something smaller. And then if it continues or we start getting other complaints, then we go from there.

Yeah, that'd be fine. So we can, if that is how the board wants to go, we can do a, Staff can come back in September with a separate ordinance just kind of attacking this specific location. We would not be able to do an amendment just with how it's written currently for this ordinance.

Thank you.

Ms. Rose?

Can you investigate if their mailbox could be moved?

As far as I know, the postal office would not allow that. Their address is Brooks Edge with their driveway on Brightwiser. So that would be a I mean, I guess we could always go that route. It would be a very complicated route that would involve an address change. That would, it would be quite a bit of staff time and then also resident time as well-to-do that.

Mr. Hardley.

Is there for snow removal back when it used to snow here, any distance from a mailbox that has to be cleared? Like, I don't really know. When I remove the snow from the front of my mailbox, do I have to make it, like, a one foot so someone can get out of their car and get to my mailbox? Or does it have to be 10 feet so they can actually swing their vehicle in. So is there an analogy from snow removal that we can use as a distance in terms of not being obstructing the mailbox when it's away from the driveway?

There's we have no city ordinance and there's nothing in the Illinois vehicle code but I we could check back and see if the postal service has anything based off conversations with them regarding this I suspect that they have nothing.

Do we have any other comments? So I'm not sure where to move right now because I feel like you're going to be coming back in September, correct?

You can table the agenda item and then we'll come back with it written a little bit differently.

So we'll table the item until September?

Move the table.

All right. So do we have a motion to table the no parking restriction for mailboxes.

Move to table.

Got a motion from Mr. Webb.

Second.

Second from Ms. Rose. All right. So next we have 20 five-ten twenty two approve a recommendation to establish a 25 mile an hour speed limit for the Naper Commons subdivision. This is item one of three around Naper Commons. We have something from the staff. I don't know if we have a presentation or just a discussion.

Thank you, Chairman. I just have a discussion. Speed limits and right of way controls are established when new subdivisions reach build out and are turned over to the city for maintenance. The Naper Commons subdivision had their roads finished in June 2025, and staff conducted traffic evaluations in July 2025. Speed limits are established based on prevailing speed or the eighty fifth percentile of free flowing traffic.

Adjustments are made due to road factors, driveways, crashes, pedestrians, and presence of on street parking. Staff collected speed data on Lucent Lane and Snapper Road. On Lucent Lane, the prevailing speed was 24.75 miles per hour, and the adjusted prevailing speed was 19.8 miles per hour. On Snapper Drive, the prevailing speed was 22 miles per hour, and the adjusted prevailing speed was 19.8 miles per hour. The speed limit is set to the nearest allowable five mile per hour increment, which established 25 miles per hour as the lowest possible speed limit in accordance to the city of Naperville neighborhood residential speed limit policy, the IDOT speed limit manual, and the Illinois vehicle code.

Staff is asking TAB to approve a recommendation to establish 25 miles per hour as the neighborhood speed limit for Naper Commons.

Okay, so I'll entertain a motion to have a discussion on this item. Do we have a motion and a second to discuss and approve recommendation to establish 25 mile an hour speed limit for the Naper Commons subdivision?

So moved.

We have a motion from Ms. Nair.

Second.

Second from Mr. Oeger. Do we have anyone from the public assigned to speak on this item?

We have no speakers signed up to speak.

Great. Does the board have any questions or comments for the staff? Hearing no or seeing no discussion, staff, can we please call a roll? All those in favor signify by saying aye. And those opposed, nay.

Mr. Hurley. Aye. Mr. Kruszwinski. Aye. Mr. Laird. Aye. Ms. Nyre.

Aye.

Mr. Neibel. Aye. Mr. Olger? Aye. Miss. Rose?

Aye.

Mr. Webb? Aye.

All right, motion passes and we approve a recommendation to establish a 25 mile an hour speed limit for the Naboor Common Subdivision. Next we have twenty five one zero two six approve a recommendation to establish a right of way controls for the neighbor common subdivisions is two of three staff

Thank you, Chairman. The streets in Napier Commons are currently operating under temporary stop controls that were put in place to accommodate construction during the traffic during development. A sign plan for Napier Commons was reviewed and approved by the city before building began. This plan included no stop signs in the neighborhood and right of way would follow the Illinois rules of the road. During construction, the developer altered the approved sign plan to install a one way stop at the T intersection of Hibbard Road and Wetherbee Lane, which is the west one, and a two way stop at the four leg intersection of Hibbard Road and Wetherbee Lane, the east one.

Staff conducted traffic evaluations to determine appropriate stop controls at each signed intersection following federal, state, and local procedures. Staff reviewed Hibbard Road and Wetherbee Lane, West 1, the T Intersection, and did not find concerns that would support a one way stop. Staff also reviewed Hibbard Road and Wetherbee Lane East Intersection and determined that a two way stop control should be established to clarify the assignment of right of way due to the existing conditions and the volumes of traffic on the intersecting roads being approximately equal. Staff is asking TAB to recommend approval of establishing a two way stop at Hibbard Road and Wetherbee Lane East Intersection with Hibbard stopping for Wetherbee.

Thank you. I'll entertain a motion to have a discussion on this item. Do we have a motion and a second to discuss and approve recommendation to establish right of way controls for the neighbor common subdivision

so moved

we have a motion from mr. Webb

second

second from mr. Hurley do I have anyone from the public signed up to speak on this item

There are no speakers signed up.

Does the board have any questions or comments for the staff?

I had one question. Is there any few meetings ago, we discussed a stop sign being removed at like a T intersection. And so I was wondering for this development, are there any cut through

potentials at that location? No, at that location it terminates into a court and it then has the force preserved beyond that. So there's no place for traffic to come to or from.

Thank you.

Okay, seeing no more discussion, staff can we please call the roll. All those in favor signify by saying aye and those opposed nay.

Mr. Hurley. Aye. Mr. Krzywinski. Aye. Mr. Laird. Aye. Ms. Nyre.

Aye.

Mr. Nybelle. Aye. Mr. Olger. Aye. Ms. Rose. Aye. Mr. Webb. Aye.

Okay, motion passes and we approve a recommendation to establish right away controls for the Neighbor Common Subdivision. Next we have 25, 1025, approve a recommendation to establish one way streets for neighbor Common Subdivision. Miss Smith, do you have a discussion on this?

Yes, thank you. Prior to development, Neighbor Common's roadway plan was reviewed by the city. This plan included one way streets for Snapper Road and Renton Avenue. Both streets are currently operating and signed as one way streets. Staff is asking TAB to recommend approval for establishing Snapper Road and Renton Ave as one way streets.

Okay, I'll entertain a motion to have a discussion on this item. Do we have a motion and a second to discuss and approve a recommendation to establish one way streets for Naper Commons Subdivision?

Motion to discuss

we have a motion from miss rose

second

second from miss near do we have anyone from the public signed up to speak on this item

We have no speakers signed up.

Does the board have any questions or comments for the staff? Ms. Nair?

Yeah, I'm just not that familiar with this area, so I'm just curious why there would be one way streets in this particular area. It seems unusual.

I'm not sure. It is surrounding a park. Andy, do you know?

Yeah. When this development came forward, the developer wanted to create kind of a unique space around this park. And this is part of that plan is they have this one way couplet.

Okay. Thank you.

Anyone else? Mr. Hurley?

Is the street is it wide enough support two way traffic? And have you observed how it's being used already? Like, is this going to materially impact how people are driving today?

People are currently treating this as a one way road. It is signed as a one way, and it has appropriate pavement markings.

Anyone else? I think it would just be more easier with like a visual because this is like a very large boulevard. It's not just like a normal residential street that's just one way.

The road width is 20 feet.

It is not sufficient for two way traffic.

I'll just add, yeah. I believe the streets are 20 foot wide. That's the minimum that our fire department requires to make

sure

that their largest vehicles can get through on those streets. So that's the reason for the width. It would not meet our standards for two way traffic.

Go ahead.

Sorry. Thank you. I mean, has been one way ever since it was built. I mean, this has been around for a couple of years now. It's always been one way. That's just the flow of it around the park. I was a little bit confused as well because I went over. I'm like, this is already one way. Why is this coming up tonight? But it sounds like you're just basically getting it on the books.

So when a development is under construction, the developer technically has maintenance of the streets. So this is once the city accepts the streets, we're just kind of codifying what's already more or less been approved when it went through the development process.

Yeah, exactly. Thank you.

Okay. Do we have any more discussion on this topic? Okay. Hearing no more discussion, staff can we please call the roll. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Those opposed, nay.

Mr. Hurley. Aye. Mr. Kwiswinski. Aye. Mr. Laird.

Aye.

Ms. Nialler. Aye. Mr. Neibel. Aye. Mr. Olger. Aye. Ms. Rose. Aye. Mr. Webb. Aye.

Alright motion passes. We approve a recommendation to establish one way streets for neighbor common subdivision. Next we have 20 five-ten-twelve receive board and commission member training. Do we have a presentation from the staff?

Yes, do. So as part of the City Of Naperville's Boarding Commission kind of revamp and cleaning some things up, we do now require that the members go through member training. So this will be very exciting. So let's get started. So to start off, we're going talk about the importance of the boards and commissions and kind of what you guys are providing for us and the public, member responsibilities and then meeting rules and participation.

So Naperville has about 150 volunteer positions on almost 20 boards and commissions. These boards and commissions are an part of citizen participation within the City Of Naperville and is an important asset to the city. Volunteers who serve on this board or on these boards and commissions exemplify outstanding community involvement. Appointments are reserved for City Of Naperville residents and are made by the mayor with approval from the city council based on experience and interest. Members that are chosen to serve in part are based on is based on their unique background and perspective and they must commit to active full participation in the role of the group on which they serve.

So the importance of the boards and commissions. You guys are the voices of the community for policy development and decision making, providing unique experiences and in-depth analysis of topics, leveraging unique backgrounds and expertise in the community, a channel between residents and elected officials, and assistant staff and elected officials in providing a different perspective, and lastly increasing consistency in community planning and discussions. So some responsibilities. So members are expected to arrive on time, be prepared for, and actively participate in all meetings. This is new as of last year.

Boarding Commission members must attend at least 75% of all meetings. Less than 75% attendance may result in removal from that Board and Commission. An excused absence is defined as a personal or family illness, death in the family, maternity, paternity leave, or family emergency. Board and Commission attendance is regularly reviewed for all boards. If a board or commission member has an outstanding circumstance, please reach out to your staff liaison.

So term limits. Terms for all boards are three years unless otherwise noted. Members are limited to two consecutive terms on a board and members are eligible to serve on another board after that fact. If a vacancy occurs, the member appointed to fill the vacancy will serve for the unexpired term and then terms expire on May 30 and members can serve up to one hundred and eighty days beyond the end of their term while new appointments are completed. Liquor Commission appointments are not subject to term limits and serve on four year terms aligned with the mayor.

So reappointments. At the end of the first term, the staff liaison will review the members' attendance and participation. If the board member is below that 75% mark for the previous eighteen months, they will not be recommended for reappointment. Board and commission members will be asked if they are interested in serving an additional term and reappointment recommendations are subject to approval by the mayor and city council. So some ethics here.

As a public official, you are subject to various laws, rules, and policies, including those in the Naperville Municipal Code and the State Officials and Employees Ethics Act. This applies to both elected officials and city employees. These laws are intended to ensure that the functions of local government are conducted with fairness, honesty, and integrity. And to act ethically, you must use city resources in the most productive and efficient way possible and only for the work of local government. Members will also avoid placing your personal or financial interests in conflict with those of the city.

So some more ethics. The oath and the municipal code, official misconduct is a class four misdemeanor and felony. So here are some examples of what that would entail. And then political activities are prohibited as well on government property and by government employees. There are gift bans.

This regulates gifts from a prohibited source. A gift has monetary valuable, tangible and intangible. The source is someone that would do business with the city and this includes spouses and household. It's $75 food and refreshment daily, dollars 100 gift per source per year, promptly return or give gift or equal amount to charity, and if there are any questions, you can please contact the city attorney. So some conflict of interest commissioners are prohibited from being financially interested in any contract the commissioner may be called upon to vote commissioners are in a fiduciary position requiring faithful performance of duties and are prohibited from using authority to advance individual interests.

You may recuse yourself to avoid the appearance of improper I dy? I've not said that word before, I apologize. Written discussion disclosure should be filled with the city liaison before the meeting. And then you would leave the meeting and not vote on that agenda item. And if you have any questions regarding conflict of interest, you can contact myself or the city attorney.

So here is where that is listed in our city municipal code in two dash one dash 13. So transparency. Good governance requires a high degree of transparency and accountability in all public operations and processes. The city strives to promote transparency in all operations by providing as much data through our website. All board and commission members are to adhere to the Open Meetings Act, adhere to the state of Illinois' Freedom of Information Act, ensure concise and accurate minutes, and disclose potential conflicts on matters under consideration.

Involving meeting transparency and engagement, meeting locations are here at City Hall, Meeting Rooms A, B, C are council chambers. Designated seating for board members, staff, and public. Nameplates for board members and staff consistent public forum rules and processes consistent agendas and improved content for agenda items and annual reports highlighting accomplishments and challenges. Audio and video recording for all boards and commissions has started, I believe, starting in September for we don't fall into that, but some of the smaller boards and commissions are now all audio or video. So FOIA, ensure public access to government records, paper and electronic.

This includes sex, email, DM, etcetera. Subject to FOIA, if it is related to city business, personal varsity email account is irrelevant, personal varsity devices is irrelevant, and this includes communications during meetings. So please remember that if you are using your cell phone during tab meetings. Exceptions include privacy, security drafts, propriety, trade information, and legal advice. All right, so meetings, rules, and participation.

So the Open Meetings Act, any gap so this is very important as we get going on our BIC and PAD plan update. There will be public meetings involved in that. So any gathering of majority of a quorum discussing public business, there is a public meeting required. So the topic would have to be within the scope of the board or commission, and this would account for even a purely social gathering. You cannot discuss city business with a majority of a quorum.

This includes email, text, social media. As far as this is on the staff level public view. Before the meeting, have forty eight hour publication notice of the agenda at the meeting, public access and forum after the meeting, approval and posting of the minutes. So quorum, the majority of a public body is required to do the business. For our case, that would be five members. If a quorum is not available, the meeting will be canceled. So here is that. This is for all boards and commissions. We have nine members, so our quorum is five. The majority of the quorum would be three.

So remote participation. This is only permitted in cases of personal illness or disability, employment purposes or other public business, a family or other emergency, an unexpected child care obligation. A motion and majority vote of those members physically present is required to allow remote participation. Although allowed by the Municipal Code, remote participation is not encouraged and should be viewed as an exception. For public participation, Naperville encourages active citizen participation in city council and board and commission meetings.

The input provided by the citizens of Naperville creates a well rounded discussion that benefits everyone. Agendas of all meet for all meetings are posted and maintained on the city's website. Each meeting allows residents to address the Boarding Commission with issues or concerns. So some rules. Writing comments can be submitted in advance of the meeting.

We have the sign up sheet at the meeting. The public should sign up for a specific agenda item or public forum for items not on the agenda. As you guys know, the speaker's time is limited to three minutes unless additional time is granted by the chairperson or majority vote of the Boarding Commission. Board members may ask speakers questions at the conclusion of their comments. Speakers shall refrain from harassing comments and members of the audience shall maintain the quorum.

Procedures, motions, and voting. The chairperson recognizes board members by name before speaking. A city staff member with knowledge of the subject matter may be asked for an opinion or to provide further information. Member makes a motion, a motion is seconded. Debate can occur prior to a motion being made or after a motion is seconded.

Floor is open for debate by members and then a chairperson typically calls for a vote. So the chairperson's role, one year term appointed by the mayor, leads and manages the meeting, sets the tone, ensures proper procedure, access the staff contact, welcome and include student representatives. Regarding the student representatives, we should be seeing those some probably at the November meeting for our first meeting. And then it also ensures compliance. So now governing rules, Sorry. So lastly, rules, as you guys know,

as

we mentioned, our city code and state law, Robert's rules are the rules of order. And then we have special rules or procedures adopted by the Boarding Commission as authorized by the city, and then counsel by ordinance or resolution. Are there any questions?

So I'm going to entertain a motion to have a discussion on the item. Do we have a motion and a second to discuss the board and commissioner member training?

So moved.

Motion from Mr. Hurley.

Second.

Second from Ms. Near. So do we have anyone from the public signed up to speak on the item?

We have no speakers signed up to speak.

Does the board have any questions or comments about the training? I have two comments I just want to make. One, there was a mention on cell phones. The previous chair, recommended no cell phones because we don't want FOIA or anything like that. You don't want to get your cell phone checked. So all cell phones should be off, in my opinion, during the meetings. And then the Open Meetings Act. So we have a nine member board, five for quorum, three for a majority of quorums. So when three of us are talking together, that's a majority of quorum. And then that meets the Open Meetings Act.

So two or less people talking together about the topics outside of this meeting.

Yes, that is correct. So I just want to reiterate that, you know, that's one of that is very important. That is one piece that is very important as we get going on the public process of the Bike and Ped meeting. So if we do end up having as part of that any sort of public meeting downstairs with boards and whatnot, and we typically invite TAB to those public meetings, We would have to do some sort of sign up sheets where two people are allowed from five to 05:30 and so on. But that is a very important rule.

Anyone have any other comments? Mr. Hartley.

So per the cell phone rule and the nature of this board being very geographically specific for any topic, you usually do a pretty good job with it. But any time you talk about something, the ability to see the map on there, especially if it deviates from exactly what may have been in the agenda, it's very helpful to us so we can actually get the context of where you're you're talking with talking about. I've always thought it strange that, for example, mister Olga joined, he had to vote on meetings from what he did not participate in and may not have even seen it. Is that, I don't know, Robert, rules of order well enough, but can we abstain if we don't actually have any knowledge of whether or not you approve of something you had no participation in?

We've had that happen before, and it's up to the member if they feel comfortable voting on it. In a lot of cases, new members to boards and commissions have reviewed the previous meeting to kind of get a lay of the land. So if they feel comfortable voting on the minutes, they are allowed to. But they can abstain.

But is it an expectation, let's say, someone misses a meeting because they couldn't help it? Is it an expectation that they view the recorded meeting so they can speak to it? Or is it up to them?

I mean it's entirely up to them. It is stated on the presentation that it is expected that members are aware of, know, have that subject matter expertise, I guess, on what we're talking about on the agenda. So I would think that would fall under that line as well, that they would review videos of a meeting that they had missed.

All right, and then one last question, because I know it's after nine But are we even technologically set up for remote participation? If someone asks for it and gets approval, do we have the ability to even do that here?

We do in this chamber. Mean, occasionally, city council members do remote in. I can't say we've ever done it with TAB, but that is a possibility. We'd probably need to look into a little further about how to set that up.

Thank you.

It's a good question now that we have the 75% rule. I'd imagine that may come up a little bit more often.

Any other comments? Okay, hearing no more discussion, I'll close that item. And the next item is old business. I believe we have a staff update on the bike and pedestrian plan.

Yes, we are currently finalizing selection of the firm that will aid in the bicycle and pedestrian plan update. And we anticipate the project starting in September.

Thank you. Does anyone have any questions? I just have one comment. Just based on the presentation that was given earlier, which was awesome, and then the bike and pedestrian plan, I think it's going to be super important that we're tying these two things together. I was thinking about how 75th is a separator of the city.

We want to make sure we're not separating our city, that we have a bike and pedestrian plan in place to cross 75th, and how Book Road is becoming a north south arterial, I guess, now. And that's a super big bike and pedestrian area. So it's just good that we're doing all of this together. That was my only comment. Do we have anything else for old business?

Hearing nothing else, we'll close old business. Next up is new business. Do we have anything for new business? Hearing nothing, we'll close new business. I'll now entertain a motion and a second for adjournment. Do we have a motion and a second to adjourn the meeting?

So moved.

Motion from Mr. Webb. Second. Second from Mr. Elder.

Staff, can we please call the roll? All those in favor signify by saying aye. Those opposed, nay.

Mr. Hurley? Aye. Mr. Krudzinski? Aye. Mr. Laird? Aye. Ms. Snire?

Aye.

Mr. Neibel? Aye. Mr. Olger? Aye. Ms. Rose? Aye. Mr. Webb? Aye.

Okay, so we have unanimous agreement on the adjournment, And this concludes the 08/07/2025 Transportation Advisory Board meeting. It was a good one.