Final Report

Final Report

Campus Area Transportation Study (CATS) University of Illinois Campus Area Transportation Study (CATS) Final Report June 1999 Prepared for Champaign-Urbana Urbanized Area Transportation Study by Bucher, Willis & Ratliff Corporation

Campus Area Transportation Study (CATS) Acknowledgements POLICY ADVISORY COMMITTEE Chancellor Michael Aiken, Chancellor, University of Illinois Dr. Charles Colbert, Vice Chancellor for Administration and Human Resources, University of Illinois Laura Huth, Representative of the City Council, City of Urbana Rick Kallmayer, Captain, University of Illinois Police Department, University of Illinois Michael LaDue, Representative of the City Council, City of Champaign Mayor Tod Satterthwaite, Mayor, City of Urbana Mayor Jerry Schweighart, Mayor, City of Champaign Larry Wingate, MTD Board Chairman, Champaign-Urbana Mass Transit District TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE Bruce Knight, Director of Planning, City of Champaign Richard Marley, Assistant City Engineer, City of Champaign William Gray, Public Works Director, City of Urbana Jim Trail, Traffic Engineer, University of Illinois Al Edmonson, Assistant Vice President for Capital Programs, University of Illinois Richard Gross, Planning and Traffic Studies Supervisor, Illinois Department of Transportation Steve Baker, Metropolitan Planning Program Manager, Illinois Department of Transportation Robb Patton, Assistant Director, Champaign-Urbana Mass Transit District William Volk, Managing Director, Champaign –Urbana Mass Transit District David Dressel, Associate Vice Chancellor for Administration, University of Illinois Kevin Duff, Assistant Director for Project Planning and Facility Management, University of Illinois Pam Voitik, Director of Campus Parking/Transportation, University of Illinois Jill Guth, President/CEO, CampusTown 2000, Inc.

Jane Wiles, Manager of Operations and Users Services, ACES Library, University of Illinois Mylinda Granger, Senior Transportation Planner, Champaign County Regional Planning Commission EXECUTIVE POLICY ADVISORY COMMITTEE Steven Carter, City Manager, City of Champaign Dr. Charles Colbert, Vice Chancellor for Administrative and Human Resources, University of Illinois John Dimit, Executive Director, Champaign County Regional Planning Commission Jill Guth, President/CEO, CampusTown 2000, Inc. Bruce Knight, Planning Director, City of Champaign William Volk, Managing Director, Champaign-Urbana Mass Transit District Bruce Walden, City Manager, City of Urbana Bucher, Willis & Ratliff Corporation – Page i

Campus Area Transportation Study (CATS) CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE Gul Agha, Urbana Paul Armstrong, Champaign Thomas Berns, Berns, Clancy and Associates Jessie Clements, Champaign Fred Coleman, University of Illinois Amy Daniel, University of Illinois Elizabeth Dennison, Urbana Bill Dielman, University of Illinois George Friedman, Urbana Jill Guth, Chamber of Commerce Susan Hartter, University of Illinois Betsy Hendrick, Urbana Ed Jiminez, Champaign Jeffery Johnson, Urbana Sue Johnson Smith, Urbana John Kamradt, Champaign William Kubitz, Urbana Scott Kunkel, Champaign Dennis Mc Conaha, Urbana Eric Meyer, Champaign Dyanna & Matt Mortenson, Champaign Dometri Mouratis, Urbana Bryan Orland, Champaign Mike Pollock, Urbana Diane Reinhart, Champaign Chuck Sedlack, Champaign George Shapland, Champaign Patty Smith, Champaign Pat Tumball, Urbana Claudia Washburn, University of Illinois Jane Wiles, University of Illinois Kathryn Zimmerman, Urbana Bucher, Willis & Ratliff Corporation – Page ii

Campus Area Transportation Study (CATS) Table of Contents CHAPTER 1. STUDY BACKGROUND . . 1 A. INTRODUCTION . . 4 A.1 Study Area . 4 A.2 Previous Studies . 4 B. EXISTING CONDITIONS . . 6 B.1 Vehicular Traffic . 6 Traffic Volumes . . 6 Traffic Utilization Levels . 10 Functional Classification System . 12 Functional Classification Review . 14 Number of Lanes . 15 Intersection Accident Analysis . 15 Level of Service Analysis . 15 B.2 Pedestrian Circulation . 18 Pedestrian Flow Rates . 18 Pedestrian Capacity Issues . 18 High Pedestrian Locations . 18 Pedestrian Utilization Levels . 19 Pedestrian Origins-Destinations .

21 Pedestrian Pathway Characteristics . 22 Regulatory and Enforcement Issues . 23 Insufficient Screening, Buffering, and Calming . 23 B.3 Bicycle System . 23 Bicycle Flow Rates . 23 Bicycle Capacity Issues . 24 High Bicycle Activity Locations . 24 Total Bicycle Activity . 25 Bicycle Utilization Levels . 25 Bikeway Characteristics . 28 Continuity of the Bikeway System . 28 Bicycle System Guidelines . 28 Widths of Bike Paths . 28 Two-Way Bike Paths Adjacent to, or Within, the Roadway . 30 Point Obstructions . 30 Narrow Lane Widths on Bike Routes/Paths . 31 Mode Confusion at Intersections . 31 Routing Deficiencies .

31 Program Related Needs . 31 B.4 Transit Operations . 32 The MTD System . 32 Fare Structure . 34 Ridership . 34 Bus Utilization Levels . 35 B.5 Parking Demand . 37 Parking Issues . 37 Areas of Surplus/Deficit . 37 Future Demand . 38 B.6 Freight Deliveries . 41 Bucher, Willis & Ratliff Corporation – Page iii

Campus Area Transportation Study (CATS) B.7 Fire Substation Impact . 41 C. IDENTIFICATION OF MODAL CONFLICTS . . 42 C.1 Methodology . 42 D. CONCLUSIONS AND FINDINGS . . 46 CHAPTER 2. PLAN DEVELOPMENT . . 47 A. MISSION STATEMENT . . 47 B. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES . . 47 C. THE TRANSPORTATION ZONE CONCEPT . . 49 Defining the Zones . 49 Zone One Strategies Overview . 50 Zone Two Strategies Overview . 50 Zone Three Strategies Overview . 50 D. POTENTIAL TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIES . . 52 E. VEHICULAR TRAFFIC . . 52 E.1 Traffic Calming . 52 Speed Tables . 52 Changes in Roadway Surfaces . 53 Semi-diverters (Chokers .

53 Neck-downs (Chokers . 53 Protected Parking . 53 Chicanes . 53 Traffic Circles . 53 Two-lane Angled Slow Point . 54 Speed Table with Median Refuge . 54 Speed Table with Slow Points . 55 Slow Points . 55 E.2 Intersection Improvements . 58 E.3 Encourage Travel on Peripheral Routes . 58 E.4 Increase Street Capacity on Peripheral Routes . 58 E.5 Create Loading Zones and Designated Times for Freight Delivery . 58 E.6 Reassign One-way Streets . 58 E.7 Close Streets . 59 E.8 Destination Routing of Traffic . 59 F. TRANSIT SERVICE . . 59 F.1 Improve Transit Service . 59 F.2 Increase Transit Travel Speeds .

60 F.3 Improve Transit Boarding Areas . 60 G. PEDESTRIAN/BICYCLE TRAVEL . . 60 G.1 Channel Pedestrian Movements . 60 G.2 Improve Bike Paths . 60 G.3 Implement Bicycle Safety Programs . 60 G.4 Eliminate Vehicle/Pedestrian Conflicts at High Volume Intersections . 60 H. PARKING . . 60 H.1 Refine Parking System . 60 H.2 Increase Peripheral Parking . 61 Bucher, Willis & Ratliff Corporation – Page iv

Campus Area Transportation Study (CATS) H.3 Increase Core Parking . 61 H.4 Provide Appropriate Type of Parking . 61 I. SCENARIO EVALUATION . . 61 I.1 Zone One Concepts . 62 I.2 Zone Two Concepts . 63 I.3 Zone Three Concepts . 64 I.4 Green Street/Springfield Corridor . 64 CHAPTER 3. RECOMMENDED PLAN . . 65 A. DESCRIPTION OF PLAN . . 65 A.1 Wright Street . 69 A.2 Green Street . 70 A.3 Sixth Street . 73 A.4 Gregory Drive . 73 A.5 Mathews Avenue . 73 A.6 Goodwin Avenue . 73 A.7 Springfield Avenue . 74 A.8 John Street . 74 A.9 Daniel Street . 75 A.10 Lincoln Avenue . 75 A.11 Fourth Street . 75 B.

SUPPORTIVE RECOMMENDATIONS . . 76 B.1 University District Policies . 76 University District Strategies . 76 Parking Policies . 76 Education . 78 Enforcement . 78 CHAPTER 4. IMPLEMENTATION . . 79 A. PROJECT PHASING AND COST ESTIMATES . . 79 A.1 Short-term Implementation Phase . 80 A.2 Mid-term Implementation Phase . 84 A.3 Long-term Implementation Phase . 87 B. DESIGN PHASE . . 89 B.1 Design Issues . 89 Green Street . 89 Sixth Street . 90 Springfield Avenue . 90 Bucher, Willis & Ratliff Corporation – Page v

Campus Area Transportation Study (CATS) List of Figures Figure 1-1. Study Area Map . . 5 Figure 1-2. Average Daily Traffic Volumes . . 8 Figure 1-3. Traffic Utilization Levels . . 11 Figure 1-4. Functional Classification System . . 13 Figure 1-5. Green Street . . 14 Figure 1-6. Springfield Avenue . . 14 Figure 1-7. Number of Lanes on Major Streets . . 17 Figure 1-8. Example of Very High Pedestrian Utilization . . 19 Figure 1-9. Pedestrian Utilization . . 20 Figure 1-10. Intersection of Goodwin Avenue and Illinois Street . . 23 Figure 1-11. Bicycle System Utilization . . 27 Figure 1-12. Campus Area Bicycle System .

29 Figure 1-13. Example of Two-way Bike Path . . 30 Figure 1-14. Example of Point Obstructions . . 30 Figure 1-15. Example of Narrow Bicycle Path Crossing Sidewalk . . 31 Figure 1-16. Transit Coverage within Study Area . . 33 Figure 1-17. Bus Utilization Levels . . 36 Figure 1-18. Parking Demand within Study Area . . 39 Figure 1-19. Potential UI Parking Locations . . 40 Figure 1-20. Wright Street (looking south . . 41 Figure 1-21. Areas of Conflict . . 45 Figure 2-1. The Transportation Zone Concept . . 51 Figure 2-2. Two-lane Angled Slow Point with Median (not to scale . . 54 Figure 2-3.

Speed Table with Median Refuge (not to scale . . 55 Figure 2-4. Speed Table with Slow Points (not to scale . . 55 Figure 2-5. Slow Points (not to scale . . 56 Figure 2-6. One-way Entry Treatment (not to scale . . 56 Figure 2-7. One-way Entry Treatment (not to scale . . 56 Figure 2-8. Intersection Hump (not to scale . . 57 Figure 2-9. Intersection Neckdowns (not to scale . . 58 Figure 3-1. CATS Recommended Elements . . 68 Figure 3-2. Desired Functional Classification . . 69 Figure 3-3. Wright Street Conceptual Cross Sections . . 72 Figure 4-1. Short-term Improvements . . 83 Figure 4-2. Mid-term Improvements .

86 Figure 4-3. Long-term Improvements . . 88 Bucher, Willis & Ratliff Corporation – Page vi

Campus Area Transportation Study (CATS) List of Tables Table 1-1. Average Daily Traffic Volumes for Select Locations . . 8 Table 1-2. Traffic Utilization Levels (Vehicles during Peak Hour . . 10 Table 1-3. Entering Traffic Volumes at Select Intersections . . 16 Table 1-4. Level of Service Analysis at Select Intersections . . 16 Table 1-5. Highest Pedestrian Activity Locations . . 19 Table 1-6. Pedestrian Utilization Levels (Number of Pedestrians during Peak Thirty Minutes . . 19 Table 1-7. Highest Bicycle Activity Locations (Peak Thirty Minutes . . 25 Table 1-8. Bicycle Utilization Levels (Peak Thirty Minutes .

26 Table 1-9. Ridership by Campus Transit Route . . 34 Table 1-10. Bus Utilization Levels (Peak Hour . . 35 Table 1-11. Transit Activity for Select Locations (peak period . . 35 Table 1-12. Potential UI Parking Locations . . 38 Table 1-13. Traffic Utilization Levels (Vehicles during Peak Hour . . 43 Table 1-14. Pedestrian Utilization Levels (Peak Thirty Minutes . . 43 Table 1-15. Bicycle Utilization Levels (Peak Thirty Minutes . . 43 Table 1-16. Bus Utilization Levels (Peak Hour . . 43 Table 1-17. Ranking of Modal Conflicts . . 44 Table 2-1. CATS Goals and Objectives . . 48 Table 2-2. The Transportation Zone Concept .

48 Table 2-3. Summary of Potential Transportation Strategies . . 51 Table 3-1. Recommended Elements by Specific Locations/Corridors . . 66 Table 3-2. Recommended Elements by Specific Locations/Corridors (continued from Table 3-1 . . 67 Table 4-1. Short-term Improvements . . 81 Table 4-2. Mid-term Improvements . . 84 Table 4-3. Long-term Improvements . . 87 Bucher, Willis & Ratliff Corporation – Page vii

Campus Area Transportation Study (CATS) Chapter 1 Study Background Over the past several years much effort has been spent identifying transportation/circulation deficiencies that exist within the study area. Out of this process have come reports such as the Campus Safety Task Force Report and the Campus 2000 Report which detail these deficiencies. While these studies have set forth concerns about specific problems, there was not previously a study which looked comprehensively at transportation issues in the area and recommended integrated solutions for all transportation modes.

In a collective effort with the Champaign-Urbana Urbanized Area Transportation Study (CUUATS), the City of Champaign, the City of Urbana, the University of Illinois, Illinois Department of Transportation, and the Mass Transit District initiated the Campus Area Transportation Study(CATS).

It is the intent of the CATS to identify a comprehensive approach to address transportation issues within the study area. This is the first transportation study undertaken collectively by these jurisdictions for the campus area. The consulting firm of Bucher, Willis & Ratliff Corporation was contracted to conduct this study. It addressed the following issues: · Pedestrian safety · Community traffic flow needs · University-oriented traffic · Interaction among travel modes · The level of emphasis given to non-auto travel modes including pedestrian, bus, bike and travel by persons with disabilities · Truck traffic and freight deliveries · Traffic calming · Interaction between parking supply and traffic circulation · Aesthetic impact of proposed improvements · Identifying projects, priorities, and cost estimates The focus of this study was to identify problem locations for transportation circulation and develop solutions, or strategies, to address these problems.

The study consisted of three principal phases. Phase One identified transportation related problems and issues pertinent to the study area. These issues were identified through public meetings, joint meetings of citizen, policy, and technical advisory committees, and business and university surveys. Phase Two involved the development and evaluation of potential strategies. Phase Three included the preparation of a recommended plan and implementation strategy that identifies priorities for the construction of future projects. Bucher, Willis & Ratliff Corporation – Page 1

Campus Area Transportation Study (CATS) The CATS project reflects four major themes incorporated into the project approach and work products. The completion of a successful project required the integration of these four elements: Foster Intergovernmental Coordination This project is complex due to the need to actively involve the agencies providing transportation services within the study area. These agencies include the Champaign Urbana Urbanized Area Transportation Study (CUUATS), the University of Illinois, the City of Champaign, the City of Urbana, the Mass Transit District (MTD), and the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT).

Developing consensus required the input and assistance of all agencies. Conduct a Multi-modal Study This study addressed the many transportation modes used by students, employees, visitors and others within the study area. The interaction of these transportation modes and related issues included: · Vehicular traffic · Transit operations · Pedestrian movements · Bicycle operations · Parking issues · Freight deliveries · Use of right-of-ways Utilize Advisory Committees Four advisory committees were formed to provide a representative cross-section of interests and to assist and guide the direction of this study.

The advisory committees included: · Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) – was formed and consisted of the Mayors of Urbana and Champaign and the Vice Chancellor of the University of Illinois. · Executive Policy Advisory Committee (EPAC) – was formed and consisted of top administrative officials of all four agencies.

Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) – was formed consisting of community and civic leaders in Champaign and Urbana to provide input to the consulting team on transportation issues and solutions throughout the study process. · Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) – comprised of staff and technical representatives from the Cities of Champaign and Urbana, the University of Illinois, the Illinois Department of Transportation, the Mass Transit District, and from CUUATS to assist the consulting team in the completion of the study.

Meetings with the advisory committees were held at key points throughout this study to obtain feedback and recommendations on work completed to date as well as upcoming tasks.

The committees also assisted in the identification of potential strategies to address transportation related problems within the study area and reviewed and commented on the preferred plan. Provide Meaningful and Frequent Public Participation Public participation was a key element in the development of the CATS. Public involvement is critical throughout any planning process and therefore community input was sought to identify issues Bucher, Willis & Ratliff Corporation – Page 2

Campus Area Transportation Study (CATS) and needs, alternatives to address those needs, and finally identify preferred strategies. Since public participation is such a vital element, a number of opportunities were made available to participate. These included: · Town Meetings – were held at key points throughout the study to solicit broad-based community input. · Surveys – were sent to students, faculty and staff of the University of Illinois and to area businesses to receive their input on transportation issues and problems.

Workshops and Focus Groups – were conducted during each study phase to receive indepth, detailed input from various constituencies at critical junctures in the study process.

Web Page – was established to provide updates regarding the study progress. · E-mail Address – was established to allow for public feedback. · Newsletters/Project Bulletins – were distributed periodically to provide information on the study. Bucher, Willis & Ratliff Corporation – Page 3

Campus Area Transportation Study (CATS) A. Introduction This section includes a discussion of the study area, previous reports used as background data, and the study themes identified for CATS. A.1 Study Area Geographically, the study area includes the area bound by University Avenue to the north, St. Mary’s Road to the south, Neil Street to the west, and Lincoln Avenue to the east (see Figure 1-1). The primary purpose of this study is to undertake an interactive planning process and develop a consensus on goals and strategies that address transportation issues within the study area. The study area is located within the City of Champaign and the City of Urbana.

The main campus of the University of Illinois Champaign-Urbana is located within this area. The Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) maintains State and U.S. Highways serving the area including US 45/150 and Illinois Route 10.

The study area is comprised of separate neighborhoods or sub-districts. These neighborhoods include the Athletic Complex, Champaign Campustown District, Champaign Downtown – East, East Campus Residential, Northeast Campus Residential, Northwest Campus Residential, Core Campus, Southwest Campus Residential, Urbana Campustown District, and the Campus Service. A.2 Previous Studies Previous studies have been completed in the studyarea regarding transportation issues, parking, safety, and other related items. This study utilized this previous work in the identification of problems and potential solutions.

The intent of the Campus Area Transportation Study (CATS) is to build upon previous work and take the next step to address problem locations by applying appropriate transportation planning and traffic engineering strategies. Previous work that was reviewed included: · Campus Safety Task Force Report.

Campustown 2000 Task Force, January 1997. · Campustown 2000 Task Force, Transportation, Traffic and Parking Subcommittee. · Campustown Revitalization Plan, Drainage, Public Improvements and Appearance Subcommittee. · North Campus Master Plan. · Central Campus Master Plan. · South Campus Master Plan. · UI Parking Master Plan. · A Long Range Transportation and Mobility Plan for the Champaign-Urbana-SavoyUniversity of Illinois Area. Additional data and reports regarding other campus transportation related topics were also provided for review. This included material covering transit, pedestrian crossings, lighting and signage, class schedules, traffic studies, accident statistics (Local Accident Reference System), and other relevant items.

These reports and data were reviewed and considered during the development of the improvement strategies.

Bucher, Willis & Ratliff Corporation – Page 4

Campus Area Transportation Study (CATS) Figure 1-1. Study Area Map Neil St. 1st St. 2nd St. 3rd St. 4th St. 5th St. 6th St. Wright St. Mathews Ave. Goodwin Ave. Harvey St. Gregory St. Lincoln Ave. University Ave. Clark St. Main St. Stoughton St. Springfield Ave. Healey St. Green St. John St. Daniel St. Chalmers St. Armory Ave. Gregory Dr. Stadium Dr. Kirby Ave. Peabody Dr. St. Mary’s Rd. Oak St. Pennsylvania Ave. Loredo Taft Dr. Maryland Dr. Nevada St. Oregon St. California St. Illinois St. Virginia Dr. Dorner Dr.

Bucher, Willis & Ratliff Corporation – Page 5

Campus Area Transportation Study (CATS) B. Existing Conditions The first step in evaluating the transportation system is to develop an understanding of current transportation conditions. There is a substantial amount of traffic related data available that documents vehicle traffic levels, transit vehicle movements, and accident data. That information was used in this study. Less specific information was known about pedestrian and bicycle travel. Specific new information was obtained by the consultant and is described in greater detail in this report. This information is helpful not only to identify current problem locations, but also provides a valuable baseline for comparison to assess the impacts of potential solutions.

The following sections describe the existing transportation conditions by mode within the study area. Before proceeding, two major points need to be made. · First, the multimodal travel characteristics in the study area are different when compared with typical urban or suburban development across the nation. Through the analysis, it was found that the traditional traffic engineering tools did not adequately represent impacts that the high level of bicyclists or pedestrians have on the operation of the transportation system. · Secondly, the methods to compare multimodal conflicts are not well defined in the current practice.

To address these deficiencies in the technical processes, the Consultant developed a process to uniformly evaluate each travel mode using a general planning level of service approach. Current practices defined in the general planning level of service approach contained in the HighwayCapacity Manual, Special Report 209, Transportation Research Board were expanded. From this, a process was developed to compare the conflicts between modes to obtain a score of the conflicts between modes at individual locations. The total scores were then compared to indicate those intersections and midblock locations that had the highest conflicts.

B.1 Vehicular Traffic Vehicular traffic includes a discussion on twenty-four hour traffic volumes, traffic utilization levels, functional classification, accident data, and level of service analysis. Traffic Volumes An assessment of vehicle movements was conducted using twenty-four hour traffic counts and peakhour intersection turning movements. These counts were obtained from Champaign-Urbana Urbanized Area Transportation Study (CUUATS) for the years 1997 - 1998. Daily traffic counts provide a general comparison of the level of traffic activity with the number of lanes provided on a given street.

In general, a four-lane street with turning lanes can provide a capacity of 28,000 vehicles per day. A four-lane street without turning lanes can provide capacity for 24,000 vehicles. While these capacity estimates are not absolute, they do provide a general indication of the level of traffic congestion and the amount of available capacity.

The highest traffic volumes in the campus area are found on UniversityAvenue, Lincoln Avenue, and Neil Street. University Avenue carries on average of 21,000 to just over 23,000 vehicles per day. Bucher, Willis & Ratliff Corporation – Page 6

Campus Area Transportation Study (CATS) Traffic volumes on Lincoln Avenue average between 14,000 and 16,000 vehicles. The highest volume on Lincoln Avenue was recorded just north of Illinois Street at 19,200 vehicles per day. Neil Street, which provides the major north-south movement on the western edge of campus, carries 20,000 to 25,000 vehicles per day with the highest volume located just south of Springfield Avenue.

Green Street provides a major east-west movement through the study area, carrying between 15,500 and 17,000 vehicles per day. The traffic counts on Green Street between Wright Street and Mathews Avenue showed a traffic volume of 17,000 vehicles per day. Green Street just west of Wright Street carries 15,500 vehicles on a daily basis. On Springfield Avenue, another major east-west street, a count taken just east of Wright Street showed a traffic volume of 13,500 vehicles per day. Gregory Drive, while not providing a direct east-west connection through the campus, does carry a significant amount of daily traffic ranging from 4,600 to 8,500 vehicles per day.

For major north-south travel movements within the campus area, First Street and Fourth Street are the only two streets which provide a direct connection between the north and south ends of campus. First Street currently carries 9,100 vehicles just south of Gregory Drive. Another count along First Street, just south of Green Street, shows a traffic volume of 7,400 vehicles. Fourth Street also carries a significant amount of daily traffic with volumes approaching 10,000 vehicles per day. The highest volumes on Fourth Street are between John Street and Daniel Street where the daily traffic ranges from 9,100 to 9,600 vehicles.

Closer to the center of campus, Sixth Street, Wright Street and Mathews Avenue function as one-way streets providing north-south movements. Sixth Street carries an average of 6,000 southbound vehicles each day, Wright Street carries an average of 4,300 northbound vehicles per day while Mathews Avenue carries 3,500 southbound vehicles per day. Another heavily travel north-south roadway is Goodwin Avenue. Near the intersection of Goodwin Avenue and Illinois Street, the daily traffic volume is over 10,000 vehicles per day. Figure 1-2 shows the average daily traffic volumes for the campus area while Table 1-1 displays the high traffic volume locations, the approximate design capacity and the reserve capacity.

The reserve capacity is equal to the design capacity less average daily traffic.

Bucher, Willis & Ratliff Corporation – Page 7

Campus Area Transportation Study (CATS) Table 1-1. Average Daily Traffic Volumes for Select Locations Rank Location Average Daily Traffic Existing Design Capacity Existing Reserve Capacity 1 Neil Street (south of Springfield Avenue) 25,000 28,000 3,000 2 University Avenue (between Fourth and Fifth Streets) 23,300 28,000 4,700 3 Neil Street (south of Green Street) 22,900 28,800 5,100 4 Lincoln Avenue (south of Green Street) 19,200 24,000 4,800 5 Green Street (between Fourth and Fifth Streets) 17,100 24,000 6,900 6 Lincoln Avenue (south of Springfield Avenue) 16,900 24,000 7,100 7 Kirby Avenue (east of Neil Street) 16,500 24,000 7,500 8 Springfield Avenue (east of Sixth Street) 13,500 15,000 1,500 9 Goodwin Avenue (south of Green Street) 10,400 15,000 4,600 10 Sixth Street (south of Green Street) 6,000 15,000 9,000 11 Wright Street (south of Green Street) 4,300 10,000 5,700 SOURCE: CUUATS and Bucher, Willis & Ratliff Corporation.

Bucher, Willis & Ratliff Corporation – Page 8

Campus Area Transportation Study (CATS) Bucher, Willis & Ratliff Corporation – Page 9

Campus Area Transportation Study (CATS) Traffic Utilization Levels Current traffic engineering practices provide strong methodology for the analysis of individual modal operation. The examination of multimodal conflicts is far less developed. In order to identify modal conflicts, it was necessary to establish a uniform evaluation method for each mode of transportation and then to indicate how various levels of use of one mode impact other modes. This was done by establishing utilization levels (low to very high) for vehicular traffic, pedestrian movements, bicycle usage, and transit activity.

Traffic utilization is based on entering traffic volumes at an intersection and at a mid-block or nontraffic controlled location during the peak hour. In the case where peak hour traffic volumes were not available, the peak hour volume has been estimated by taking ten percent of the ADT volume. In general, eight to 12 percent of daily traffic occurs during the peak hour. This was confirmed in the campus area by peak hour intersection turning movement counts that were conducted within the study area.

In general, the capacity or utilization levels of a roadway segment are dictated by the intersection capacity.

A traffic controlled intersection will generally provide a higher capacity or utilization level as compared to a non-traffic controlled intersection or a mid-block location. The thresholds used for a non-traffic control or mid-block location were derived byapplying between a 33% to 50% reduction to the traffic controlled intersection values. This is based upon the assumption that a mid-block or nontraffic controlled intersection will have less capacity compared to a controlled intersection. The 33% to 50% is simply an estimate made by the consultant since there is no documented evidence comparing traffic controlled intersections to non-traffic controlled locations.

As shown in Table 1-2, a traffic controlled intersection has a threshold of 1,500 entering vehicles during the peak hour before it is classified as having a very high utilization level. By comparison, a mid-block location or a location with no traffic control device has a threshold of 1,000 vehicles before it is classified as having a very high utilization level. The respective ranges for the high, medium, and low classifications are also displayed in the following table. Figure 1-3 displays the utilization levels for select locations within the campus area.

The criterion set fourth in Table 1-2 is based upon the detailed level of service analysis described in the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM).

Synchro, a program used to perform capacity analysis based upon the HCM, categorizes traffic levels into four categories ranging from super heavy to light traffic. The utilization levels set forth in Table 1-2 are based upon the values used in Synchro. The super heavy traffic level in Synchro has a threshold of 1,500 vehicles, which corresponds to the very high category used for this study. The high , medium , and low categories shown below are also related to the Synchro values.

Table 1-2. Traffic Utilization Levels (Vehicles during Peak Hour) Utilization Level Traffic Controlled Intersection Mid-Block or No Traffic Control VERY HIGH 1,500 + 1,000 + HIGH 901 - 1,500 701 - 1,000 MEDIUM 601 - 900 301 - 700 LOW 0 - 600 0 - 300 SOURCE: Bucher, Willis & Ratliff Corporation, Highway Capacity Manual, Synchro Manual Bucher, Willis & Ratliff Corporation – Page 10

Campus Area Transportation Study (CATS) Bucher, Willis & Ratliff Corporation – Page 11

Campus Area Transportation Study (CATS) Functional Classification System One issue with this study is to determine which streets should carry through traffic, which streets should be major access streets to the campus area destinations, and which streets should be pedestrian and bicycle oriented.

Functional classification is the process by which streets and highways are grouped into classes, or systems, according to the service they are intended to provide. Basic to this process is the recognition that an individual road does not serve travel independently, but rather trip making involves movement through a network of roads. Developing a complete functional classification system is important to the logical and efficient movement of traffic. Roadway classifications are based upon guidelines prepared by the U.S. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and are described below. A functional classification of all the streets in the ChampaignUrbana area was completed by CUUATS.

Other classifications were conducted as part of the Campus Safety Task Force. The product of this study will be to recommend changes to the functional classification if appropriate. The functional classification for the study area is shown in Figure 1-4. · Principal Arterials – typically serve the major centers of activity of the metropolitan area, have the highest traffic volumes, and serve the longest trips. These routes are not designed to provide direct access to adjacent properties but are designed to accommodate longer trip mobility. Within the campus area, University Avenue, Springfield Avenue and KirbyAvenue are classified as principal arterials providing major east-west movements in the area.

Neil Street and Lincoln Avenue function as principal arterials providing for north-south movements.

Minor Arterials – form a network that interconnects with the principal arterials to provide service for moderate length trips at a somewhat lower level of travel mobility than principal arterials. The minor arterial classification places slightly more emphasis on land access than the higher systems. Such facilities are appropriate to carry local bus routes and provide intracommunity continuity, but ideally they should not penetrate identifiable neighborhoods. Green Street, First Street and a part of Springfield Avenue are classified as a minor arterials. These routes have similar conflicts as do the principal arterials.

Collectors – generally serve intra-county or intracity travel rather than regional or statewide travel. Travel distances on these roads tend to be shorter than on arterial routes. Collector routes should provide service to other traffic generators not served by the arterial street system. The collector street system provides land access and traffic circulation within residential neighborhoods, commercial and industrial areas. Collector systems maypenetrate neighborhoods, distributing trips from the arterials through the area to the ultimate destination. Conversely, collector streets collect traffic from local streets in residential neighborhoods and channel it into the arterial street system.

A second issue is the use of routes such as Goodwin Avenue, Gregory Drive, and Pennsylvania Avenue. These streets are classified as collectors. However, they also accommodate major travel movements, large pedestrian movement and bicycle travel.

Local Streets – comprise all facilities that are not categorized in a higher street classification. The purpose of a local street is to provide direct access to abutting land and to higher level street systems. It offers the lowest level of mobility and usually contains no bus routes. Service to through traffic movement is deliberately discouraged. This is typicallynot the case on Wright Street and Sixth Street. These streets function more like collector streets and accommodate relatively large volumes of vehicle travel.

Bucher, Willis & Ratliff Corporation – Page 12

Campus Area Transportation Study (CATS) Bucher, Willis & Ratliff Corporation – Page 13

Campus Area Transportation Study (CATS) Functional Classification Review Policies related to the functional classification system contribute to traffic circulation problems within the campus setting. The high levels of pedestrian, bicycle and transit travel raise questions about the design preference to vehicle travel on certain routes designated as arterials. It is important that the intended function of a roadway is actually the same as its design characteristics. In comparing Figures 1-5 and 1-6, both Green Street and Springfield Avenue are classified as minor arterials. However, these two streets have different design characteristics and functions.

Figure 1-5, shows Green Street as a four-lane roadway with a center median and turn lanes at the intersections. This type of facility encourages high travel speeds and raises the potential for conflicts with other modes. By comparison, Figure 1-6 displays Springfield Avenue as a two-lane roadway which uses some simple traffic calming techniques. The brick paving along the sidewalk, the bus pull out area, and well-defined pedestrian crossings portray a very different setting to motorists and pedestrians as compared to Green Street.

Figure 1-5. Green Street Figure 1-6. Springfield Avenue To a lesser extent, the function of routes currently designated as collector routes should be examined. In other cases, streets such as Sixth Street and Wright Street are classified as local routes but operate as collectors. Local routes should provide preferential treatment to the movement of pedestrians and bicyclists similar to residential neighborhoods. The functional classification system should also be adhered to when locating new facilities. Major parking facilities should be located on arterial and collector routes, and generally not local routes.

Likewise, generators attracting a large number of vehicle trips should not be located on local streets. These considerations will be taken into account as alternative strategies are developed. Bucher, Willis & Ratliff Corporation – Page 14

Campus Area Transportation Study (CATS) Number of Lanes The majority of roadways within the study area are two-lane roadways. Currently, onlyone three-lane segment exists - along Springfield Avenue. Four-lane roadways are concentrated primarily on the perimeter of the campus area. One exception is Green Street which cuts through the center of the campus and serves the Champaign Campustown area. A five-lane segment exists along portions of University Avenue. Figure 1-7 displays the number of lanes for principal arterials, minor arterials and collector streets.

Intersection Accident Analysis CUUATS provided intersection accident data for select intersections within the campus area between 1988 and 1992.

In the report, published in May 1995, the number of vehicular related accidents is reported for the five year period and additional information regarding the number of pedestrian and bicycle related accidents is also provided. Detailed safety information can be obtained through the review of that report. From the data, it was observed that a significant number of accidents are concentrated west of the core campus in the Champaign area in an area bordered by Green Street, Armory, Fourth Street and Sixth Street. There are several reasons that could explain this occurrence. 1. The level of pedestrian, bicycle, transit, and vehicular activity is very high.

2. A significant portion of the student population is concentrated in the surrounding residential neighborhood. This population coupled with the probability of commuters searching for parking in the surrounding neighborhoods could cause circulation problems and raise the potential for accidents.

3. Geometric deficiencies at select locations adds to the number of accidents. 4. There is a concentration of bars and restaurants located in this area. The CUUATS report does in some instances offer recommendations regarding possible intersection improvements to remedy the problem. These recommendations along with the overall accident analysis will be considered in the evaluation of alternative strategies. Level of Service Analysis During the Fall 1997, CUUATS collected intersection turning movement counts at select locations within the campus area. Table 1-3 displays entering traffic volumes for select one-hour time periods.

Data was collected over five separate one-hour time periods corresponding to peak campus related pedestrian activity. Upon review of the data, it was observed that the highest traffic volumes were, for the most part, observed during the one-hour period between 12:00 p.m. and 1:00 p.m. The only exceptions were Green Street and Wright Street; Green Street and Lincoln Avenue; and Sixth Street and John Street, which showed the peak period recorded between 3:00 p.m. and 4:00 p.m. Signal timing and phasing plans, and lane geometry were obtained from both the Cities of Champaign and Urbana. This information was entered into Synchro, an intersection and corridor analysis software, and the level of service was calculated.

Level of service (LOS) uses qualitative measures that characterize operational conditions within a traffic stream and their perception by motorists and passengers. Level of service ranges from LOS A to LOS F. Level of service A represents the best operating conditions while LOS F represents the worst operating conditions. Typically LOS D is regarded as the minimum accepted level of service. This methodology, Bucher, Willis & Ratliff Corporation – Page 15

Campus Area Transportation Study (CATS) while a standard traffic engineering analysis procedure, does not fullyaccount for the high numbers of pedestrians, bicyclists or transit users that characterize the study area.

Thus, the results may overstate the actual level of service that are occurring. Table 1-3. Entering Traffic Volumes at Select Intersections Location 7:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. 11:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. 12:00 p.m. to 1:00 p.m. 2:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. 3:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. 1 Green Street and Fourth Street 1,464 1,919 1,986 1,508 1,630 2 Green Street and Sixth Street 1,303 1,343 1,350 1,342 1,268 3 Green Street and Wright Street 1,298 1,436 1,448 1,579 1,650 4 Green Street and Mathews Avenue 1,083 1,191 1,330 1,226 1,153 5 Green Street and Goodwin Avenue 1,233 1,456 1,643 1,439 1,503 6 Green Street and Lincoln Avenue 1,594 1,681 1,973 1,672 2,060 7 Fourth Street and John Street 718 793 890 767 868 8 Fourth Street and Gregory Drive 888 1,065 1,129 1,004 983 9 Sixth Street and John Street 627 642 735 645 762 10 Sixth Street and Gregory Drive 614 785 815 721 779 SOURCE: CUUATS (Fall 1997) NOTE: The turning movement counts are provided in the appendix.

Bold text indicates highest intersection entering volume observed.

The level of service results along Green Street are provided in Table 1-4. The majority of intersections were found to operate at LOS B during both the a.m. and p.m. peak periods. The one exception is the intersection of Green Street and Fourth Street which was found to operate at LOS F during the hour of the highest level of afternoon traffic. This is a result of the northbound and southbound approaches which have a significant amount of left and through movements handled bya shared left-through lane.

Table 1-4. Level of Service Analysis at Select Intersections Location Signal Type Level of Service (A.M.

P.M.) Green Street and Fourth Street Pre-timed B / F Green Street and Sixth Street Pre-timed B / B Green Street and Wright Street Pre-timed B / C Green Street and Goodwin Avenue Actuated B / B Green Street and Lincoln Avenue Actuated B / B SOURCE: Bucher, Willis & Ratliff Corporation and CUUATS. Bucher, Willis & Ratliff Corporation – Page 16

Campus Area Transportation Study (CATS) Bucher, Willis & Ratliff Corporation – Page 17

Campus Area Transportation Study (CATS) B.2 Pedestrian Circulation Because of the high level of pedestrian activity in the Campus Area and the identified weakness in analyzing traffic conditions using traditional methods, a detailed inventory of pedestrian activity was completed. This section includes a discussion of pedestrian flow rates, capacityissues, high pedestrian locations, pedestrian utilization levels, and primary origins and destinations. Because information on pedestrian counts was not available prior to this study, pedestrian counts were collected by the consultant.

This information was used to understand the level of pedestrian movement and used as an input into a multi-modal analysis process developed by the consultant designed to better evaluate the potential pedestrian conflicts with other travel modes than the traditional level-of-service analysis. Pedestrian Flow Rates The present student population is approximately 35,000 and the faculty/staff population is approximately 24,000. A large proportion of this population walks during the course of everyday activities in and around the campus area. The dominance of this mode is reflected in the observations and analysis described in the following.

Pedestrian Capacity Issues For the study, it was decided to look at locations of recognized high pedestrian activity. Counts were taken at eighteen high activity locations identified by the TAC. The locations of the pedestrian counts were along Sixth Street, Wright Street, Springfield Avenue, Green Street, Gregory Drive, and Mathews Avenue, which carry much of the daily pedestrian traffic in the study area. Also counted were the intersections of Pennsylvania Avenue and Dorner Drive, and Fourth Street and Gregory Drive. All count locations were at vehicular intersections or major path intersections.

Seven locations were studied on more than one occasion in order to gain a further understanding of intensitylevels. A total of twenty-six pulse-periods were studied.

Most of the locations were studied on the following dates in 1997: October 1; October 8, 9, and 10; and October 14, 15, 16, and 17. Four additional locations were studied on November 5. The temperature during this period ranged from the 70's to 80's during October. The November observations occurred when temperatures were cooler, though still moderate ranging from the high 40's to the 60's. These temperatures are considered to be within the range for optimum pedestrian travel. Weather conditions ranged from overcast to sunny. No precipitation occurred during the observation periods.

High Pedestrian Locations Of the eighteen locations studied, the ten most active are listed in Table 1-5.

The number represents the highest count of pedestrians recorded, and the 30 minute pulse period during which the count was conducted. At Gregory Drive and the Survey Library, the number of pedestrians declined 48% from the 9:45- 10:15 a.m. pulse to the 1:45-2:15 p.m. period. At another multiple count location (Green Street and Illini Union), there was a decline of more than 40% from the 11:45-12:15 p.m. pulse to the late afternoon period, 4:45-5:15 p.m.

Bucher, Willis & Ratliff Corporation – Page 18

Campus Area Transportation Study (CATS) Table 1-5. Highest Pedestrian Activity Locations Rank Location Number of Pedestrians Time of Day 1 Mathews Avenue and Illinois Street 1,030 10:45 a.m. - 11:15 a.m. 2 Wright Street and Armory Avenue 750 2:45 p.m. - 3:15 p.m. 3 Goodwin Avenue and Illinois Street 620 11:45 a.m. - 12:15 p.m. 4 Mathews Avenue and California Street 590 1:45 p.m. - 2:15 p.m. 5 Mathews Avenue and Nevada Street 570 9:45 a.m. - 10:15 a.m. 6 Sixth Street and Daniel Street 565 1:45 p.m. - 2:15 p.m.

7 Mathews Avenue and Green Street 510 1:45 p.m. - 2:15 p.m. 8 Green Street and Illini Union 500 11:45 a.m. - 12:15 p.m. 9 Gregory Drive and Quadrangle 480 1:45 p.m. - 2:15 p.m. 10 Gregory Drive and Quadrangle 465 12:45 p.m. - 1:15 p.m. SOURCE: Bucher, Willis & Ratliff Corporation. Pedestrian Utilization Levels The following classification system was developed for pedestrian utilization, or flow rates, on public rights-of-way. Pedestrian utilization is based upon the number of pedestrians crossing at a particular location within the campus area during the peak thirty minutes. Similar to the traffic utilization, two thresholds have been established based upon whether the pedestrians are crossing at a signalized intersection or an unsignalized intersection.

In some instances where pedestrian counts were not obtained, the number of pedestrians has been estimated. Table 1-6 shows the criteria used to classify pedestrian utilization at signalized intersections and non-signalized intersections. The pedestrian level criteria are based upon pedestrian density level of service identified in the Highway Capacity Manual (see Figure 13-8 in HCM). Figure 1-8 shows an example of very high pedestrian utilization. Figure 1-9 displays the pedestrian utilization levels within the campus area. Table 1-6. Pedestrian Utilization Levels (Number of Pedestrians during Peak Thirty Minutes) Utilization Level Signalized Unsignalized VERY HIGH 450 + 300 + HIGH 301 - 450 151-300 MEDIUM 151 - 300 51 - 150 LOW 0 - 150 0 - 50 SOURCE: Bucher, Willis & Ratliff Corporation NOTE: Unsignalized includes two-way stops, all-way stops, and mid-block crossings.

Figure 1-8. Example of Very High Pedestrian Utilization Bucher, Willis & Ratliff Corporation – Page 19

Campus Area Transportation Study (CATS) Bucher, Willis & Ratliff Corporation – Page 20

Campus Area Transportation Study (CATS) Pedestrian Origins-Destinations The primary pedestrian origin-destination within the campus area is the Liberal Arts and Sciences (LAS) Core, or the Quadrangle. The Quadrangle is formed by Green Street to the north, Mathews Avenue to the east, Wright Street to the west, and Gregory to the south. The Quadrangle is a vehicle free zone and contains the Union on the northern edge and the student Library along the southern edge. A significant amount of pedestrian activity occurs between zones located both east and west of the Quadrangle.

The east zone and west zone, as referred to in the Central Campus Master Plan, provide for three primary east-west movements along Green Street, Daniel-California Street, and along the Armory Avenue axis. The land use in the east and west zones is comprised of a mix of University related buildings, residential, and some commercial uses.

A primary commercial/retail destination within the study area is the Campustown area located along Green Street. This area is in very close proximity to the Quadrangle and as shown by the pedestrian counts, the area attracts a large number of students, faculty/staff, and visitors who walk to various businesses in Campustown. Other important locations to consider with regard to pedestrian origins-destinations are residential halls. Within the Champaign area, the undergraduate residential halls are concentrated between First Street, Gregory Drive, Fourth Street, and Peabody Drive. This area includes the following residential halls: Barton, Forbes, Garner, Hopkins, Lundgren, Scott, Snyder, Taft, Van Doren, and Weston.

A graduate hall, Sherman Hall, is also located in Champaign near the intersection of Chalmers Street and Fifth Street. Privately certified housing also exists in the area bound by Second Street, John Street, Wright Street, and Armory Avenue.

Within the Urbana area, the undergraduate residential halls are located west of Lincoln Avenue from Green Street to Florida Avenue. Just north of Illinois Street, the residential halls include Townsend and Wardall Halls. Family housing is also located in this same proximity near the intersection of Green Street and Goodwin Avenue. A graduate hall, Daniels Hall, is located along Green Street just west of Gregory Street. Other residential halls are located near the intersection of Goodwin Avenue and Nevada Street (Busey and Evans Halls), at the east end of Gregory Drive (Allen and Lincoln Avenue Halls), along Pennsylvania Avenue (Babcock, Blaisdell, Carr, and Saunders Halls), and along Florida Avenue (Oglesby and Trelease Halls).

The UI North Campus Master Plan identifies two pedestrian zones similar to the Quadrangle. The first would be created between Green Street and Springfield Avenue and is planned to serve as the quadrangle for the undergraduate core of the College of Engineering. The second zone would be located between the Beckman Institute and Main Street. Each of these zones would be a vehicle free environment. In total, the North Campus area serves over 7,000 students based on the master plan. The South Campus consists of a number of athletic/recreational areas which attract a significant amount of pedestrian activity.

Two primarylocations during special events are Memorial Stadium and Assembly Hall. Some student housing is located in the South Campus area and therefore is a primary pedestrian origin-destination.

In looking at the three campus master plans, it is obvious that there is considerable pedestrian interaction between the northern campus, the central campus, and the southern campus. This makes it important Bucher, Willis & Ratliff Corporation – Page 21