PEDESTRIAN SAFETY & CONNECTIVITY: KEY ROUTES & INTERSECTIONSfifthavenuedevelopment.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/5-Ped-Exh… · • Difficult to use safely for pedestrians with

PEDESTRIAN SAFETY & CONNECTIVITY: KEY ROUTES & INTERSECTIONS

5TH AVENUE

SPRING AVENUE

N

LEGENDPedestrian / School Walk Route(Existing Sidewalk/Path)Pedestrian / School Walk Route(Existing Sidewalk Gap)Review Pedestrian CrossingHigh-Activity Pedestrian Zone

Boecker Lot

East Burlington Lot

Lower Burlington Lot

Parkview Lot

Washington Jr. High School

Water Tower West

Kroehler Lot

Upper Burlington Loto

NORTH AVENUE

DuPage Children’sMuseum

WA

SHIN

GTO

N S

TREE

T

CEN

TER

STR

EET

ELLS

WO

RTH

STR

EET

BR

AIN

AR

D S

TREE

T

LOO

MIS

STR

EET

WR

IGH

T ST

REE

T

5TH AVENUE

4TH AVENUE

SLEI

GH

T ST

REE

T

SCHOOL STREET

BurlingtonSquare Park

Kendall Park

NOT TO SC ALE

SIDEWALK

SCENARIO BSCENARIO A

CROSS TRAFFIC

DOES NOT STOP

Intersection Crossing: Stop Sign ControlA

APPLICATION

CONSIDERATIONS• At two-way stop, stop sign should be placed on

the lower-volume street

• Stop signs should not be used as speed control or

traffic calming

• May be supplemented with “Stop Ahead” signage

• Crash history

• Observed conflicts

• Limited visibility on one or more approaches

PEDESTRIAN SAFETY & CONNECTIVITY: CROSSING TREATMENTS

NAPERVILLE - 5TH AVENUE REDEVELOPMENT

Midblock Crossing: Standard TreatmentB

APPLICATION

CONSIDERATIONS• Difficult to use safely for pedestrians with visual

impairments (unable to determine gap in traffic

or stopped traffic) compared to a stop condition

• Multi-lane crossings should provide a median or

refuge island

• Review pedestrian visibility (e.g., onstreet

parking, lighting)

• Provide advance crosswalk warning signs for

vehicle traffic

• Facilitate crossings where there is consistent

pedestrian demand

• Create a direct route to key destinations

• Locate away from nearest side street or driveway

so that drivers turning onto the primary street

notice pedestrians

SIDEWALK

NOT TO SC ALE



C

APPLICATION

CONSIDERATIONS

Mid-Block Crossing: Increased Signage

SIDEWALK

• Difficult to use safely for pedestrians with visual



• Multi-lane crossings should provide a median or

refuge island

• Review pedestrian visibility (e.g., onstreet

parking, lighting)


pedestrian demand

• Create a direct route to key destinations

• Locate away from nearest side street or driveway

so that drivers turning onto the primary street

notice pedestrians

• Encourage motorist compliance

NOT TO SC ALE



D

APPLICATION

CONSIDERATIONS

Mid-Block Crossing: Curb Extensions

SIDEWALK

NOT TO SC ALE




• Must be designed to accommodate drainage

• May require fire hydrant relocation

• Enhance visibility of pedestrians

• Reduce crossing distance


pedestrian demand

• Create gateway to lower speed area

• Reduce speed of turning vehicles



E

APPLICATION

CONSIDERATIONS

Mid-Block Crossing: Speed Table

NOT TO SC ALE

MA X. 50’

SIDEWALK




• Use of distinctive materials may require additional

maintenance but highlight and define the speed

table

• Typically preferred by emergency response over

speed humps

• Existing City of Naperville policy prohibits speed

tables and speed humps

• Enhance visibility of pedestrians

• Traffic calming device

• Create gateway to lower speed area



F

APPLICATION

CONSIDERATIONS

Mid-Block Crossing: Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon

NOT TO SC ALE

SIDEWALK

• Requires FHWA permission for use

• Regular use of RRFBs could decrease effectiveness;

should be used at key uncontrolled intersections

only

• To minimize glare during nighttime conditions, an

automatic signal dimming device should be used

• Increase driver yielding rates to pedestrians

• Lower cost alternative to traffic signal



G

APPLICATION

CONSIDERATIONS

Mid-Block Crossing: In-Pavement Lighting

SIDEWALK




• Actuated by pedestrian, lights may be

misinterpreted as control device

• Encourage motorist compliance

• Enhance visibility of crosswalk

NOT TO SC ALE


Photo Credit: Lightguard Systems


CONSIDERATIONS

Railroad Crossing: Re-Open Cow TunnelA

• Potential for significant utility conflicts and

unknown risks

• ADA access (e.g., elevator or ramp)

• Stormwater drainage

• Amtrak, BNSF, and Metra coordination required

for shutdowns during construction

• Amtrak/BNSF/Metra service disruptions during

construction (could require 48- to 72-hour

shutdown)

• Security concerns associated with a tunnel (e.g.,

limited visibility)

• High-level review suggests the structural

integrity of the cow tunnel may require repairs

• Cost to modernize and repurpose to current code

could exceed cost of a new underpass

• Available right-of-way limitations

Photo Credit: Naperville Cow Tunnel, Chicago Tribune

PEDESTRIAN SAFETY & CONNECTIVITY: RAIL CROSSING TREATMENTS


B Railroad Crossing: Construct New Underpass

CONSIDERATIONS• Security concerns associated with a tunnel (e.g.,

limited visibility)


• Stormwater drainage

• Amtrak, BNSF, and Metra coordination required

for shutdowns during construction

• Amtrak/BNSF/Metra service disruptions during

construction (could require 48- to 72-hour

shutdown)

Photo: Deerfield Road Pedestrian Underpass, Deerfield, IL


COST ESTIMATE: $3-5 million• Structure is not temperature controlled except at

elevators (if provided in lieu of ramps)

• Considers precast box culverts

• Assumes 10 foot clear dimension inside of the

tunnel.

• Excludes site civil and utilities


C Railroad Crossing: Construct New Pedestrian Overpass / Skyway

• Create sense of security and desired level of service

• Opportunity to integrate with development or parking deck

• Site impacts and coordination with BNSF, Metra, and Amtrak for closures

during construction


• Aesthetics and height

• Maintain conductor line of sight to signal stations


CONSIDERATIONS

COST ESTIMATE: $2.5-4 million• Structure is not temperature controlled except at elevators

• Assumes a pre-engineered steel truss; minimal architectural features

• 70-foot span and 12-foot wide truss

• Includes hydraulic elevator at each headhouse

• Reflects headhouse elevation to allowed for the required clear height

between top of rail and bottom of bridge structure

• Excludes site civil and utilities

Photos: Anoka CRTV Pedestrian Bridge, Anoka, MN


RAIL CROSSINGS: CASE STUDIES

Photo Credit: Rendering of pedestrian tunnel at Lombard Metra Station, Village of Lombard

LOMBARD METRA STATION - UNDERPASS (COMPLETED)• Construction initiated in Spring 2014, completed in Summer 2015

• Included new ADA ramps and stairs to the platform and tunnel and construction of roof

canopies over the platform

• Removed at-grade crossing

• Construction cost (estimate): $8.1 million + $1.6 million platform rehabilitation

• Coordination with Metra and Union Pacific Railroad

WHEATON COLLEGE - UNDERPASS (COMPLETED)• Included new ADA ramps and stairs to the tunnel

• Removed existing Chase Street at-grade crossing

• Cost estimate roughly $3 million


Photo: Aerial view of pedestrian underpass adjacent to the Wheaton College stadium(former Chase Street right-of-way)


RAIL CROSSINGS: CASE STUDIES

Photo Credit: Rendering of pedestrian overpass at Glen Ellyn Metra Station, Village of Glen Ellyn

GLEN ELLYN METRA STATION - OVERPASS (CONCEPT)• Village completed feasibility study to evaluate overpass and underpass alternatives

• ADA access to be provided by elevator or ramp

• Preliminary construction cost estimate roughly $3 million


Photo Credit: Rendering of pedestrian overpass concept at Mundelein Metra Station, Village of Mundelein

MUNDELEIN METRA STATION - OVERPASS (CONCEPT)• 24-feet tall with a tower on each side of the tracks

• Includes stairs, ramps, elevators, and canopies covering walkways

• Preliminary construction cost estimate roughly $5 million

• Construction anticipated early 2019

• Coordination with Metra and Canadian National


PEDESTRIAN SAFETY & CONNECTIVITY: KEY ROUTES & INTERSECTIONSfifthavenuedevelopment.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/5-Ped-Exh… · • Difficult to use safely for pedestrians with

Documents