Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08.06.12 CITY OF EVANSTON, ILLINOIS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, August 6, 2012 6 p.m. Council Chambers Lorraine H. Morton Civic Center 2100 Ridge Avenue Evanston, IL ORDER OF BUSINESS I. Roll Call – Begin with Alderman Burrus II. Citizen Comment (30 minutes) III. Pedestrian Safety (A) Pedestrian Safety Evaluation Committee Report Staff recommends that City Council accept the Pedestrian Safety Report and the recommendations developed by the Pedestrian Safety Evaluation Committee. For Action (B) Approval of Participation in a Joint Contract for Pavement Marking Staff recommends City Council approval to participate in a contract through the Suburban Purchasing Cooperative (SPC) for Pavement marking services. Participation in this contract will allow the City of Evanston to apply Thermoplastic marking materials at various locations throughout the City in support of the pedestrian safety program. Participation in this contract would not exceed $75,000. For Action 1 of 43 (C) Approval of Single Source Purchase of 10 LED Solar Powered School Crossing Warning Signs Systems Staff recommends City Council approval for the purchase of 10 LED solar powered School Crossing Warning Sign Systems from the TAPCO Traffic & Parking Control Company, Inc. (5100 W. Brown Deer Road, Brown Deer, WI 53223) in the amount of $56,950. For Action IV. Adjournment Order and agenda items are subject to change. Information is available about Evanston City Council meetings at: www.cityofevanston.org/citycouncil. Questions can be directed to the City Manager’s Office at 847-866-2936. The City is committed to ensuring accessibility for all citizens. If an accommodation is needed to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Manager’s Office 48 hours in advance so that arrangements can be made for the accommodation if possible. 2 of 43 For Special City Council meeting of August 6, 2012 Item III (A) Business of the City by Motion: Pedestrian Safety For Action To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council From: Suzette E. Robinson, Director of Public Works Sat Nagar, P.E., Senior Engineer Rajeev Dahal, Senior Traffic Engineer Subject: Pedestrian Safety Evaluation Committee Report Date: August 2, 2012 Recommended Action: Staff recommends that City Council accept the Pedestrian Safety Report (Attachment A) and the recommendations developed by the Pedestrian Safety Evaluation Committee summarized in Attachment B. Funding Funding will be provided by the Capitol Improvement Fund which has $200,000 budgeted for signage and stripping for pedestrian safety. Background Safety is one of the top eleven goals adopted by the City Council for 2012. This year, the City Council asked staff to focus specifically on pedestrian safety. To meet that end, a Pedestrian Safety Evaluation Committee was formed to take a closer look at the City’s current approaches, review practices of other communities, and make recommendations for improvement. The Pedestrian Safety Evaluation Committee was comprised of staff from the Public Works Department (Suzette E. Robinson, Director; Sat Nagar, Senior Engineer; Rajeev Dahal, Senior Traffic Engineer; Tom Twigg, Traffic Operations Manager), the Evanston Police Department (Richard Eddington, Chief of Police; Patrick Moran, Traffic Sergeant) Mark de la Vergne, Sam Schwartz Engineering, PLLC.; and Paul Lippens, Active Transportation Alliance. Northwestern University’s Traffic Institute was not available to participate on the committee. Attachments A. Pedestrian Safety Report B. Pedestrian Safety Recommendations Summary and Schedule Memorandum 3 of 43 Attachment A 1 Pedestrian Safety Report of the Evaluation Committee Findings, August 6, 2012 INTRODUCTION Evanston is recognized as one of the most walk-able and pedestrian friendly areas in the Chicago metropolitan region. This is due to a number of factors such as the wealth of transit options, the excellent sidewalk network, land uses that support pedestrian activity, and safe crossings at intersections. Continuing to invest in the pedestrian environment will have numerous benefits to a community’s physical, social, and economic health. By taking a proactive approach to these issues, Evanston will continue to become a more livable community that attracts high quality residents and businesses. This report serves as a review of the existing programs and policies that the City has in place and recommends potential future changes, as well as including action items for implementation. 4 of 43 Attachment A 2 On Street Pedestrian Accident History from 2009 through 2011: A review of Evanston’s on-street accident history indicates that both motor vehicle and pedestrian accidents are declining. In 1990, there were 3,242 accidents of which 104 involved pedestrians. In 2011, there were 1,963 accidents of which 52 involved pedestrians. A breakdown by age shows that over 50% of the pedestrian accidents that occurred between 2009 and 2011 involved adults between the ages of 19 and 53. The charts below show the pedestrian accident history and the breakdown. The accidents history excludes private property and alleys. On-street Pedestrian Accident History 1. Pedestrian Crossing Designation and Priorities (at locations without traffic signals or stop signs) A brief summary of how new crossings requests are evaluated. Pedestrian Accidents and Breakdown by Age Pedestrian Accidents 104 66 67 55 52 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 1990 2000 2009 2010 2011 5 of 43 Attachment A 3 Three-Year Pedestrian Accident History by Age Group *Information Unavailable 0-12 13-18 19-53 54 & Up N/A* Total 2009 5 1 33 19 9 67 2010 2 5 33 13 2 55 2011 2 3 26 10 11 52 6 of 43 Attachment A 4 7 of 43 Attachment A 5 Reason for Accident Reductions: There are various reasons why accidents have decreased. However, together, they have created a change in culture showing that the efforts are working. The reasons are as follows: • Traffic Measures (signs, markings, speed humps etc.) • Enforcement activities by the Evanston Police Department • Traffic Signals Upgrade & Coordination (36 in the last 5 years, 16 in process – state & federally-funded) • Major Roadway Resurfacing (better friction and drainage) • Maintenance (earlier de-icing, better plowing and pot-hole repairs) • Right-of-Way Permits (stricter traffic control and pavement restoration) • Cell phone ban Evaluation Committee The following four areas were reviewed by the Evaluation Committee: 1. Pedestrian Crossing Designation and Priorities (at locations without traffic signals or stop signs) 2. School Route Safety and Education 3. Speed Reduction Strategies 4. High Volume Pedestrian Crossings (at intersections with traffic signals) 8 of 43 Attachment A 6 1. Pedestrian Crossing Designations and Priorities (At locations without traffic signal or all-way stop signs) Currently the City has fifty three (53) locations that have pedestrian and school children crossing signs and markings are prioritized as follows: • School crossings • Senior Crossings • Park Crossings • Special Crossings • Other Crossings The Evaluation Committee reviewed the types of crossings and considered other pedestrian crossings near transit, arterials, and downtown. The Committee recommends assigning the locations as follows: • School crossings • Senior Crossings • Park Crossings • General Crossings The Evaluation Committee reviewed the walk routes to school plan, existing treatments and other potential treatments at the crossings. A review of potential treatments included: different pavement markings, floating curb extensions, refuge islands, speed tables, raised crosswalks, public art, sidewalk curb extensions, temporary treatment at potential curb extensions (day-lighting), LED Blinker signs, rapid flash beacons and pedestrian hybrid beacon (HAWK). Pros and cons of the items were reviewed and specific recommendations made for the types of crossings (please see sections to follow). However, one recommendation that applies to all crossings is to increase the visibility of pedestrians and signs and prohibiting parking within 50 feet of the crossing at locations where sidewalk curb extensions are not available. 9 of 43 Attachment A 7 10 of 43 Attachment A 8 Designated School Crossings: School crossings are those that are signed in the walk route to school per coordination between the City and School District 65. School District 65 includes the elementary and the middle schools. The existing treatments listed and depicted at these crossings include the following: • Advance school crossing sign • At intersection crossing sign/down arrow • State Law Stop for Pedestrian sign on the side of the street • State Law Stop for Pedestrian sign in the centerline of the street • High visibility thermoplastic pavement markings • Sidewalk curb extensions Recommendations: • Complete the installation of signs at all of the school crossings. • Complete sidewalk curb extensions where roadway conditions permit. Curb extensions reduce the crossing distance and provide improved visibility of both pedestrians and vehicles. Advance School Crossing At Intersection Side of Street - State Law In Street - State Law Curb ExtensionHigh-Visibility Markings 11 of 43 Attachment A 9 • Install temporary treatments similar to the one pictured on the following page at locations until the sidewalk curb extensions are constructed. Bollards or deflectors used as temporary treatments will create the outline of a curb extension. • Install solar-powered, pushbutton-activated LED Blinker signs at elementary and middle safe route to school crossings. The blinker signs alert drivers to the presence of pedestrians in the crosswalk. The blinker must be activated by pedestrians pushing the button. 12 of 43 Attachment A 10 Senior Crossings Senior crossings are those locations where more time is needed to facilitate safe crossing. The existing treatments at these crossings are listed and depicted below: • Advance pedestrian crossing sign • At intersection senior citizen crossing sign/down arrow • State Law Stop for Pedestrian sign on the side of the street • State Law Stop for Pedestrian sign in the centerline of the street • High visibility thermoplastic pavement markings • Sidewalk curb extensions Recommendation: • Complete the installation signs at all of the senior crossings. • Complete curb extensions where roadway conditions permit. In Street - State LawHigh-visibility Markings Side of Street - State LawAt Intersection Crossing Curb Extension Advance Pedestrian Crossing 13 of 43 Attachment A 11 Park Crossings Park crossings are those that are adjacent to major parks located on primary routes. The existing treatments at these crossings include the following: • Advance pedestrian crossing sign • At intersection pedestrian crossing sign/down arrow • State Law Stop for Pedestrian sign on the side of the street • Crossing Flags • High visibility thermoplastic pavement markings • Sidewalk curb extensions Recommendation: • Complete the installation of signs at all of the park crossings. • Place crossing flags at all of the park crossings to alert the drivers when pedestrians are crossing the street. • Complete sidewalk curb extensions where roadway conditions permit and in conjunction with future resurfacing projects. High-Visibility Markings Side of Street - State Law Crossing Flags Curb Extension Advance Pedestrian Crossing At Intersection Crossing 14 of 43 Attachment A 12 General Crossings General crossings are pedestrian crossings that do not fall in the other three categories. The criteria to establish new crossings are as follows: • Proximity of pedestrian generators and type of facilities • Proximity of existing crossings (Traffic Signals, All-Way Stops, Uncontrolled signed crossing) • Street classification • Visibility • Availability of sidewalks and compliance with ADA requirements • Number of crossings during the peak crossing hours • Pedestrian classification (i.e. School children, Adults, Seniors) • Prevailing speed • Volume and gaps in traffic flow • Accident history The existing treatments at these crossings are listed and depicted below: • Advance pedestrian crossing sign • At intersection pedestrian crossing sign/down arrow • State Law Stop for Pedestrian sign on the side of the street • High visibility thermoplastic pavement markings High-visibility Markings Side of Street - State LawAdvance Pedestrian Crossing At Intersection Crossing 15 of 43 Attachment A 13 Recommendation: • Complete the installation of State Law Stop signs on the side of the street. • Approval of criteria to establish crossings. In addition to a review of existing crossing categories, the Evaluation Committee reviewed the following crossings suggested by the public. • Oakton at Barton: Existing general crossing adjacent to Oakton School. Due to concerns raised by parents and an increase in student crossings, the recommendation is to designate this as a school crossing. As a result, a crossing guard and curb extension is needed. • Central at Broadway: Existing general crossing near transit and retail area. This is a challenging intersection for pedestrian, bicycles, and vehicles due to a number of factors. Signs were installed in 2011 to improve pedestrian crossing. However, this intersection requires a major redesign and IDOT approval. In the near term, staff plans to hold neighborhood meetings to engage those impacted on potential traffic pattern changes. • Church at Wesley: Existing school crossing with incomplete signage. Recommendation is to complete the installation of State Law Stop for Pedestrian signs. • Main at Custer: Existing general crossing by transit and retail area. Viaduct to the east and metered parking create visibility issues. Recommendation is to remove two parking meter spaces on the southwest corner to improve pedestrian and motorist visibility. • Crawford at Thayer: There is no existing pedestrian crossing or sidewalks. To establish a general crossing, sidewalks need to be constructed on Crawford and Thayer. • Oakton at Hartrey: Request is for pedestrians to cross Oakton to access James Park for sports activities. This is a location with two eastbound lanes merging and could cause drivers distractions, and the speed increases in the westbound direction as the street widens. The recommendation is to increase the length of the existing no parking drop-off area on the south side so that parents can drop off the children safely without them having to cross the street. It is also recommended that parking capacity be increased inside James Park. • Oakton at Florence: The request for the crossing is so that pedestrians can access the Chute School playground. The intersection was observed in late 2010, 2011, and 2012. A maximum of eleven (11) crossings have been observed during 4:30 P.M. to 5:30 P.M. Designating a crosswalk at this location may draw and encourage students to this location from the designated school crossing at Wesley which is controlled by a crossing guard. 16 of 43 Attachment A 14 The recommendation is to provide a no parking drop-off area on the south side by the school grounds to facilitate drop-off for extracurricular activities. The school parking lot is also available as a safe-drop off area. • Dodge between Main and Oakton: The request is for a designated general crossing in this stretch since the traffic signals are spaced about ½ mile apart. The recommendation is to install a general crossing near Monroe Street. The installation will occur in 2012. • Emerson at Oak: A request was previously made and a temporary Stop for Pedestrians sign when needed was posted. • Hartrey – 1200 Block: A request was previously made and a temporary Stop for Pedestrians sign when needed was posted. • Asbury at Grove: The request is for Dewey School and Roycemore School children to cross the street at this location. Grove dead- ends half a block to the west. The designated school crossing for Dewey school is one block to the south at Asbury/Lake which is controlled by a crossing guard. There is also a signalized crossing at Asbury/Davis to the north. Marking a crosswalk at this location would also encourage student crossings at the uncontrolled intersection of Ridge and Grove. Therefore, designating this location as a crossing is not recommended. • Grove at Elmwood: The request is for a crossing for the new development on the north side of the street. Visibility of the location is restricted by the viaduct to the east. It will be difficult to place crossing signs and visibility of the signs will be obstructed. Pedestrian may get the false sense of security that drivers will stop, therefore it is not recommended. The intersection to the west is an all-way controlled intersection and to the east is signalized intersection; these are better crossing locations. • Main near Pitner: A request was made by the daycare facility to cross the street. This location is in a commercial and industrial corridor with limited pedestrian activity. As a result, the recommendation is not to designate this intersection as a crossing. • Ridge at Colfax: The request is for a crossing at Ridge. Site observations of the locations do not indicate frequent crossings. The intersection one block to the north at Ridge/Lincoln and one block to the south at Ridge/Noyes both have traffic signals. Therefore, designating a crossing at this intersection is not recommended. • Grant at Cartwright Park: The request is for crossing Grant to access Cartwright Park. Currently, there is no sidewalk on the south side, but one is planned to be built by Presbyterian Homes with their ongoing improvements. Less than three crossings have been observed during the morning and evening peak hours. During the observation, there were plenty of adequate gaps in traffic flow for pedestrians to cross the street. The recommendation is to re- 17 of 43 Attachment A 15 observe the location after the Presbyterian Homes improvements are completed and sidewalk installed. • Chicago between Greenleaf and Lee: The request is for crossing Chicago between the Autobarn properties. The sidewalk on the west side needs to be widened to accommodate ADA requirement to designate a crossing. A signalized location is located one block north and south, therefore a crossing is not designated. • Lincoln School: City staff and District 65 are recommending that a Do-Not-Enter restriction be placed on Forest Avenue at Main Street during the school drop-off and pick-up hours similar to the signs done at other schools. The intersection is controlled by a crossing guard. Judson at Lee, adjacent to Lincoln school already has similar restriction and the crossing guard opens and closes the sign. As part of this effort, converting the Michigan and Lee intersection to a 4-Way stop is also recommended. School children cross at this intersection and the diverted traffic from Forest Avenue mostly likely use Michigan. The ward alderman supports the changes and ordinances for introduction and action, which will be presented at the August 13 Council Meeting. 18 of 43 Attachment A 16 2. School Route Safety and Education School Routes In 2010 the City partnered with School District 65 to complete the Safe Routes to School Plan. As part of the effort, walk routes to schools were reviewed with the School District, School Administration and PTA members. The plan was approved by the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT). The City and School District have been approved to receive approximately $250,000 for infrastructure improvements (curb-extensions and sidewalk replacement) and $100,000 for education and encouragement programs. The City is working on the infrastructure improvements in coordination with IDOT. The School District will work on some of the education and encouragement programs once the funds are released by IDOT. See Appendix B for the School District 65 Walk Routes map. Recommendation: • School District 65 should form a Safe Routes to School Committee • Conduct a periodic walk route to school review with the School District and School Safe Routes to School Committee Crossing Guard Program The City administers and funds the School Crossing Guard Program for the elementary, middle, and some private schools. There are forty-nine (49) crossing guards assigned to forty-five (45) locations. The City of Evanston funds crossing guard placement through its Parking Fund. Similar to Evanston, the Villages of Skokie and Wilmette both pay school crossing guard salaries. However, funding school crossing guards through a municipal police department is a more common practice in Illinois and nationally. Elmhurst, Carpentersville, Des Plaines, Forest Park, Berwyn, Midlothian, Homewood, and Steger are all examples of towns in Chicago area with crossing guard programs funded through the police departments. Crossing guards are not always funded by municipalities and police departments. The Mount Prospect and New Lenox school district pays for their own crossing guards. Blue Island has a cost sharing system between the police department and school districts. Forest Park is considering moving to a cost sharing system due to fiscal constraints. Other school districts, nationally, were found to utilize the services of volunteer custodial staff and/or parents. Crossing guards provide a valuable community service. One strategy for increasing or maintaining current crossing guard locations is to establish a volunteer crossing guard program. Locations with a low student crossing count could be transitioned into a volunteer program. The Evaluation Committee is recommending the following criteria to evaluate current and future crossing guard locations: 19 of 43 Attachment A 17 Placement at new location • At controlled intersection (with traffic signal or stop signs) There has to be at least 20 student crossings at the designated walk route crossing location during the school drop-off hour or during the pick-up hour. • At uncontrolled intersection (without traffic signal or stop signs) There has to be at least 15 student crossings at the designated walk route crossing location during the school drop-off hour or during the pick-up hour. Re-assignment of or elimination at a existing location • Crossing guards can be reassigned to other locations or eliminated if there are: 1. less than 10 student crossings during the school drop- off and pick-up hours at uncontrolled intersections. 2. less than 15 student crossings during the drop-off and pick-up hours at controlled intersections. City Council Approval • City Council approval is required to place a crossing guard at a new location, reassign the crossing guard to a different location or eliminate a crossing guard position. Evaluation of student crossings will be based on the average crossings at intersections during two school years. Crossing counts will be taken during the good weather months. Recommendation: • Establish the school crossing guard criteria presented above. • School District 65 look into establishing parent volunteer and/or school maintenance staff crossing guard program • School District 65 consider a cost sharing system with the City Crossing Guard Location and Crossing Counts during Drop-off and Pick-Up Hours: Number School Crossing Guard Location 2010 & 2009 Average 1 Chute Oakton & Asbury 90 2 Chute Oakton & Wesley 114 3 Dawes Kirk & Dodge 120 4 Dawes Oakton & Dodge 74 5 Dewey Lake & Wesley 105 6 Dewey Lake & Asbury 33 7 Dewey Church & Wesley 37 8 Dewey Davis & Wesley 29 9 Dewey Lake & Ridge 27 20 of 43 Attachment A 18 10 Haven/Kingsley Central & Prairie 100 11 Haven/Kingsley Green Bay & McCormick 56 12 Haven/Kingsley Central & Green Bay 15 13 Haven/Kingsley Lincoln & Prairie 310 14 Haven/Kingsley Lincoln & Green Bay 52 15 Haven/Kingsley Grant & McCormick 76 16 Haven/Kingsley Grant & Prairie 54 17 King Lab Greenwood & McDaniel 98 18 Lincoln Main & Chicago 58 19 Lincoln Main & Forest 73 20 Lincoln Main & Judson 47 21 Lincolnwood Colfax & Bennett 40 22 Lincolnwood Grant & Bennett 142 23 Lincolnwood Grant & McDaniel 36 24 Lincolnwood Colfax & McDaniel 120 25 Oakton Austin & Ridge 89 26 Oakton Oakton & Ridge 79 27 Oakton Hull & Ridge 73 28 Orrington Isabella & Ridge 9 29 Orrington Central & Orrington 31 30 Orrington Central & Sherman 54 31 Orrington Lincoln & Ridge 37 32 Park/Nichols Main & Sherman 82 33 St. A's Central & Ashland 10 34 St. A's Lincoln & Green Bay 55 35 St. A's Lincoln & Ashland 108 36 Washington Lee & Florence 98 37 Washington Main & Florence 50 38 Washington Main & Ashland 21 39 Willard Central & Central Park 23 40 Willard Central Park & Park Place 73 41 Willard Hurd & Park Place 63 42 Nichols Ridge & Greenleaf 129 43 Pope John 23rd Ridge & Main 21 44 Pope John 23rd Asbury & Washington 61 45 Pope John 23rd Main and Asbury 62 21 of 43 Attachment A 19 Education and Encouragement The goal is to teach the health, environmental and sustainable transportation benefits of walking and bicycling to and from school. The City and the School District already participate and promote events that encourage walking and bicycling. Events that the have been supported include the following: • The first week of school was named the Evanston Walk Week. This program was sponsored by the City of Evanston’s Health Department in cooperation with Aldermen and the School District. The City provided wrist bands to all walkers. This year’s event was considered a big success. • The City also participated in the Chicagoland Car-Free Day. Many city employees car pooled and residents were encouraged to park their cars in favor of public transportation. There was some impact at the schools where parents generally drove kids to school. • In the past year the theme for the Painting Evanston’s Plows (P.E.P.) project was SAFETY…”Be Alert, Accidents Hurt”. P.E.P. is an annual art contest to select murals to be painted on one of the City’s snow plows. The City invites participating school to submit designs to be judged and selected to appear on the face of snow plows! Recommendation: What Extra Efforts the City Can Do: • Continue to promote and participate in events that encourages walking and bicycling • Paint the safety marker on the pavement at each designated school route crossing. 22 of 43 Attachment A 20 • Sponsor Back to School Awareness Campaign where Fire Department distributes safety stickers on the first day of school. • Add additional education and awareness materials to the City’s website on the Stop for Pedestrian law and other pedestrian safety concerns in English and Spanish. What can the School District do: • Encourage walking school buses and bike-trains. Parents will share the responsibility of walking with children along the “Bus Route” to school, picking up children along the way. Similar effort for children who ride bicycles. • Encourage parents to park and walk: Parents can park their cars near the school and walk the short distance remaining. This will eliminate some of the congestion caused by parents dropping and picking up kids in front of the schools. • The Schools and School District should strongly consider relocating Walk route to school maps in a prominent place on their websites. • Establish a walking and bicycling mileage clubs and contests. Walkers and bikers will record mileage per student and the school who amasses the most miles will receive an award or gift from the District and/or City. • Teach pedestrian and bicycling safety skills. For example, before crossing a street, children should look left - look right - and look left again. Teach children to walk on the designated walk routes and crossings and not in the street. • Teach traffic safety rules in and around schools. Teach children to use the street curbside adjacent to the school for child pick- ups and drop-offs. Never enter or leave a vehicle on the street side. Encourage parents to observe all traffic laws including the school traffic circulation plan. 23 of 43 Attachment A 21 3. Speed Reduction Strategies The Citywide speed limit is 25 miles per hour unless otherwise posted. Currently, the City ordinance grants exceptions on portions of 17 streets, 15 of which have speed limits of 30 mph. Only two streets, McCormick Boulevard and Elgin Road/Simpson Street (Golf Road) have Speed limits of 35 mph. Street adjacent to schools have school speed limit 20 miles per hour on school days when children are present. In accordance with subsection 10-1-7(B) of the City Code the maximum speed limit on the major streets is as shown in the table below. 24 of 43 Attachment A 22 Name Of Street Maximum Speed Limit Asbury Avenue — city limits to Green Bay Road 30 mph Burnham Place — Forest Avenue to Sheridan Road 30 mph Central Street — Crawford Avenue to McDaniel Avenue 30 mph Chicago Avenue — Howard Street to Dempster Street 30 mph Church Street — city limits to Ridge Avenue 30 mph Crawford Avenue — city limits south to city limits north 30 mph Dempster Street — city limits to Elmwood Avenue 30 mph Dodge Avenue — city limits to Simpson Street 30 mph Elgin Road/Simpson Street (Golf Road) — city limits to McCormick Boulevard 35 mph Emerson Street — city limits to Green Bay Road 30 mph Green Bay Road — city limits to Emerson 30 mph Howard Street — city limits west to city limits east 30 mph Main Street — city limits to Ridge Avenue 30 mph McCormick Boulevard — Emerson Street to Green Bay Road 35 mph Oakton Street — city limits to Callan Avenue 30 mph Ridge Avenue — city limits south to city limits north 30 mph Sheridan Road — city limits south to city limits north 30 mph 25 of 43 Attachment A 23 Speed Limit Reduction: As mentioned earlier, the citywide speed limit is already 25 mph unless posted otherwise. Corridors with high pedestrian activity and retail shops are for the most part covered under the 25 mph limit. However, speed limit 25 mph extension should be considered for two high pedestrian activity retail corridors. Other cities have experienced issues with blanket speed reductions on residential streets. Peoria, Illinois considered a reduction but was told by Federal Highway Administration that uniform speed reductions were not enforceable. Instead the city encouraged residents to notify them if they wanted speeds reduced in their neighborhood. Peoria hoped to reduce all of their streets to 25 mph at one time, because it would be an easier policy decision. Columbia, Missouri conducted a pilot speed reduction in two neighborhoods and tested driving speeds before and after sign installation and education campaigns. The data showed that just installing the signs reduced the average speeds by 1.0 to 6.2 miles (on different streets). The addition of education campaign reduced the speeds slightly more (0.67 mph on one street and 1.75 on another). Thereafter, the City Council voted to reduce speed limits to 25 mph in all residential areas. Speed Control: It is well proven that vehicle speed is the determining factor of a crash severity. The slower a vehicle is going, the more likely a pedestrian is going to survive and suffer less serious injuries. Speed limits can be effective but they are not the only way to control vehicle speeds, this requires a partnership between the Public Works Department and Police Enforcement. The speeding issue should be addressed with a combination of measures, such as: extend the 25 mph limit to cover other high pedestrian activity retail areas; place speed display radar units permanently at some locations and temporarily at other locations; placement of permanent and temporary placement of speed radar display, and enforcement. Automated Photo Enforcement: Similar to red-light cameras, speed cameras are a type of automated enforcement that enforce a law that is difficult for the police department to monitor everywhere all of the time. 26 of 43 Attachment A 24 According to the Illinois Vehicle Code, only municipalities with a population over one million (1,000,000) can utilize speed cameras to enforce speeding around schools and parks. Note: Change in State Legislation will be required to consider this mechanism. Recommendation: • Extend the 25 mph regulations on Chicago Avenue from Dempster Street to South Blvd; and Central Street from McDaniel Avenue to Central Park Avenue. • Review the effect of the reduction in one year with respect to compliance and enforcement efforts. 27 of 43 400 600 200 900 1700 1900 1000 2200 2800 2400 2700 2500 1400 1600 500 2600 1200 100 2100 1100 1300 1500 2300 1800 700 2000 300 800 2600 1300 2300 1100 2100 2900 600 2800 1900 1000 2700 400 800 1700 1400 200 2000 700 1500 2200 1200 300 900 2400 1800 100 500 2500 160070030080031001200140018001500360034001600300032003300220023001300100290050024001100200280010002600200060040025002700350017001900900210038003700 50010020002500300700240020014008002200160012001500190010001300600110017002600180090023002100400NOR T H S H O R E C H A N N E L NORTH SHORE CHANNELL A K E M I C H I G A NSHERI DAN RD PARK PL ASHLAND AVEDODGE AVEHURD AVEGIRARD AVELEE STOAK AVESHERIDAN PL RIDGE CTGREEN BAY RD THAYER ST PRATT CTGRANT JENKS ST HAVEN ST PAYNE ST LEON PLPOPLAR AVEGREY AVEHARRISON ST P RA I R I E AV E REBA PL COLFAX ST LEMAR AVEMARCY AVEDAVIS ST MAPLE AVEHARTZELL ST LIBRARY PL SIMPSON ST CLYDE AVEBROWN AVEGREELEYPITNER ALYLAUREL AVEHINMAN AVEDEWEY AVEEWING AVECOWPER AVEKIRK STHOVLAND CTJUDSON AVEGARRETT PL ARBOR LN FOREST AVEINGLESIDE PK GREY AVEST. MARK'S CTEMERSON ST SHERMAN AVEWILDER ST GARRISON AVETHELIN CT FOREST PLASBURY AVEMICHIGAN AVEWESLEY AVELELAND AVECENTRAL ST CALLAN AVERIDGE TER HULL TER ISABELLA ST GROSS POINT RDCUSTER AVELYONS ST FOWLER AVECLA RK ST DARROW AVEPIONEER RDHASTINGS AVEHARTREY AVEBRUMMEL STPRINCETON AVEPROSPECT AVEHAMLIN ST PAYNE ELM AVECASE PLRIDGEWAY AVEMULFORD ST MICHIGAN AVELAWNDALE AVECHU R C H ST CRAIN ST DEMPSTER STJACKSON AVEKEDZIE ST CLINTON PL McDANIEL AVEELMWOOD AVESEWARD ST ROSLYN PL FLORENCE AVEBENSON AVESHERMAN PLCULVER FORESTVIEW RDMARTHA LNHAWTHORNE LN WADE CT BROWN AVECROFT LNBROWNGREYB R IDG E S T CALVIN CIR BROWN AVENORMANDY PL WOODLAND RD ELINOR PL KEENEY ST SOUTH BLVD HAMILTON ST GREENWOOD ST UNIVERSITY PLREESE AVEBRUMMEL PL GAFFIELD PLLINCOLNWOOD DRCRAWFORD AVELEONARD PLCENTRAL PARK AVEBENNETT AVEMADISON PL BRADLEY PL GREENLEAF STWALNUT AVEROSALIE ST BURNHAM PL WARREN STLIVING ST O N WASHINGTON ST NATHANIEL PL HARVARD TER MAPLE AVEDOBSON STDEWEY AVEDARROW AVEDEWEY AVEINGLESIDE PL RIDGE AVEASBURY AVEFOWLER AVEHARTREY AVECASE ST SOUTH BLVD ASHLAND AVESHERMAN AVELYONS ST S T EWA R T AV EMARCY AVEWELLIN GT ON CT CLEVELAND ST MONROE ST LINDEN PL LAKE SHORE BLVDKNO X CIR HILLSIDE LN TRINITY CT SHERIDAN SQEDGEMERE CTGREEN BAY RD GARNETT PL CENTRAL ST RIDGE AVEPAYNE ST WESLEY AVECHURCH ST HARTZELL ST PRAIR IE AVEDODGE AVEOAKTON ST SOUTH BLVD CRAINMcDANIEL AVEPITNER AVELEE ST ASHLAND AVEGROVE ST FOSTER ST ASBURY AVEBARTON AVEGRANT ST BRYANT AVEJUDSON AVESHERMAN AVECOLFAX ST ISABELLA ST DAVIS ST MAIN ST RIDGE AVEASBURY AVETHAYE R C T THAYER ST ISABELLA ST HAYES DARTMOUTH PL COLFAX PL THAYER THAYER ST CRAWFORDLINCOLNWOOD DRMILBURN ST LAKESIDE CT EUCLID PARK PL WESLEYCLARK STLYONS ST DEWEY AVEPAYNE ST MAIN STDODGE AVECENTRAL ST McDANIEL AVEEWING AVESHERIDAN RDBRUMMEL STPITNER AVELINCOLN ST HINMAN AVESEWARD ST WESLEY AVECENTRAL ST KEENEY ST RIDGE AVEOAK AVEJACKSONSHERMAN AVEDOBSON ST LINCOLN ST SEWARD STDARROW AVEGREY AVEPARK PL NOYES ST LAKE ST THAYER ST WASHINGTON ST LAKE STMcDANIEL AVEAUSTIN STASHLAND AVEWESLEY AVENOYES CTHAMPTON PKYOTTO LNBERNARD PLMEADOW-LARK LNRIDGE AVEEL G I N R D ELMWOOD AVECOLFAX ST HINMAN AVESIMPSON ST WESLEY AVEOAKTON ST SHERI DAN RDSHERIDAN RD DEMPSTER ST GREY AVELEE ST SIMPSON ST CHICAGO AVECHICAGO AVEBENNETT AVEMADISON ST KEENEY STRIDGE AVESHERIDAN RDGRANT ST ASBURY AVEGR O V E ST EL G I N R D FLORENCE AVEFOREST AVEFOSTER ST MULFORD ST GREENLEAF ST HILLSIDE RD HARTREY AVEHARTREY AVEGREY AVEARNOLD PLPITNER AVELINCOLN ST McC O R MI C K B L V D FOST E R ST GREENWOOD ST CALLANPARK PL JUDSON AVENOYES ST DARROW AVEASHLAND AVEHARRISON ST NOYESPRINCETONCLIFFORD ST HIGHLAND AVELAWNDALE AVEDARTMOUTH PL TECH DR ORRINGTON AVECAMPUS DRHOWARD ST HOWARD ST A RTS CI RCL E D R McCORMICK BLVDGLENVI E W R D CHANCELLOR LIVINGSTON LIVINGSTON ST CHANCELLOR ST HARRISON COLFAX TEREASTWOOD AVEBROADWAY AVEWOODBINE AVERICHMOND AVEMONTICELLO PL OAKEAST RA I LROA D AVE MILBURN PK BROWN AVEDODGE AVEWASHINGTON STGREY AVECLEVELAND ST EMERSON ST Streets with a speed limit greater than 25 mph and recommended reductions 7/24/2012 SpeedLimits12000.mxd This map is provided "as is" without warranties of any kind. See www.cityofevanston.org/mapdisclaimers.html for more information. 010.5 Mile 1:12,000 1 inch = 1,000 feet Speed Limit > 25 mph 30 mph 35 mph Recommended Reduction to 25 mph Roadways Main Road Local Street Railroad Water City of Evanston Name Of Street Boundaries Of Street Maximum Speed Limit Asbury Avenue —city limits to Green Bay Road 30 mph Burnham Place —Forest Avenue to Sheridan Road 30 mph Central Street —Crawford Avenue to McDaniel Avenue 30 mph Chicago Avenue —Howard Street to Dempster Street 30 mph Church Street —city limits to Ridge Avenue 30 mph Crawford Avenue —city limits south to city limits north 30 mph Dempster Street —city limits to Elmwood Avenue 30 mph Dodge Avenue —city limits to Simpson Street 30 mph Elgin Road/Simpson Street — city limits to McCormick Boulevard 35 mph Emerson Street —city limits to Green Bay Road 30 mph Green Bay Road —city limits to Emerson 30 mph Howard Street —city limits west to city limits east 30 mph Main Street —city limits to Ridge Avenue 30 mph McCormick Blvd —Emerson Street to Green Bay Road 35 mph Oakton Street —city limits to Callan Avenue 30 mph Ridge Avenue —city limits south to city limits north 30 mph Sheridan Road —city limits south to city limits north 30 mph 28 of 43 Attachment A 26 Speed Radar Display Radar speed displays (or speed feedback signs) display the speeds of vehicles as they pass by. These signs are often used around schools or parks, have been proven to reduce vehicle speeds. They can be used alone of in conjunction with other pedestrian safety tools. The City currently has two sets of mobile speed displays that they currently rotate to different locations. Mobile radar units stay at a location for about one month. The city can currently place the units in 24 locations in a year; some of the locations will be repeated. Typically, moving signs can be more effective because people associate it with the need to lower speed; however drivers may speed-up once they are removed. Permanent placement of radar speed displays could be used but they can be less effective when placed permanently because drivers become used to seeing the display especially if police officers are not present for enforcement. The speed radar unit also records speed and volume 24 hours per day. This data can be used for future analysis. Recommendation: • Permanent Radars Consider permanent solar-powered radar speed displays for streets that have: two or more schools and/or at least two school crossings (at an uncontrolled intersection) in a major street corridor. The required spacing between the traffic signals in the corridor is ½ mile with no all way stop intersection in between. Therefore, the Committee is recommending permanent speed radar units along the corridors of Church, Oakton and Main Street. • Temporary Radars Continue the placement of movable radar displays in areas where speeding is a concern. In addition, the Committee recommends purchasing an additional four units. 29 of 43 Attachment A 27 4. High Volume Pedestrian Crossings (at intersections with traffic signals) After the Public Works staff plotted the locations of the pedestrian accidents for the last three years, nine high volume pedestrian crossings were identified as the map below shows. Accidents are primarily occurring along the Chicago Avenue corridor and the downtown area. One of the primary reasons for the accidents is that drivers are not yielding to pedestrians when making left turns. For example, all of the accidents at Ridge and Davis intersection involved left turning vehicles. Traffic signals modernization on Chicago Avenue corridor was completed in 2011. Central and Green Bay intersection is under the jurisdiction of the Illinois Department of Transportation and the location with viaduct structures pose challenge in improving the intersection. 30 of 43 Attachment A 28 The pictures below are examples of signs and marking designed to improve high pedestrian crossings. In addition, the intersection of Ridge and Oakton presents a challenge for crossing pedestrians due to the type of crossing signal. The Public Works Department continues to upgrade and coordinate traffic signals. Thirty-six (36) traffic signals have been modernized since 2007. With the improvement in technology and the safety needs of pedestrians new practices are being implemented when signals are upgraded. The following are pictures of upgrades to traffic signals that enhanced pedestrian crossings. 31 of 43 Attachment A 29 Recommendations: • Install “Turning Traffic Must Stop Yield To Pedestrians” at all of the signalized locations where 3 or more pedestrian accidents have occurred. • Installation of Countdown Signals or microwave detection signals at all high volume pedestrian locations. • Installation of different crosswalk treatments on business districts at signalized locations. 32 of 43 Attachment A 30 Appendix A Comments Received During the Public Information Meeting and via 311 after the meeting. • A very exciting idea is to transform Davis St. in the area around Fountain Square to a “woonerf” (Living Street, or shared space) wherein signs and lights and pavement markings are removed, and trees and benches invade the street. It is very safe because cars must drive at 15 mph or slower. • Please consider an education effort regarding crosswalks where cars are required to stop. Too many don’t stop when they should and others stop when they shouldn’t. • Please consider making the intersection of Main and Dodge a no right turn on red intersection • I would love to see crosswalks or 4-way stops at either Oakton and Elmwood or Oakton and Sherman. People (and children) are already crossing here but it’s an accident waiting to happen. Traffic is going too fast down Oakton! My balcony looks out over this street, so I see it all the time. Ridge and Chicago are unpleasant for pedestrians, and dangerous (or impossible) for bicyclists. How about a road diet? Narrow the road bed; add bike lanes, etc. • Different Crosswalk Treatment Great Idea. Cost Effective and works (see Cambridge or Somerville). • Much Prefer “soft” methods (Speed display, conditions) to “hard” greater- enforcement (eg. Lower limits, more control cameras) • Stop and go much more dangerous than predictable flow • Open up secondary arteries clogged with (ignored) stop signs • No “speeder” cameras please • Being a pedestrian means being smart. Better make crosswalks, then teach people to use them, not make ever intersection 4-way • Prohibit EW Left Turns at Greenbay /Lincoln during rush hour 33 of 43 Attachment A 31 • Roundabout at Central/Crawford/Grosspoint • Please no more “State Law! Stop here” screaming neon confusion signs. Ideally get rid of all those and half of all other neon green noise. • Start replacing – on pilot basis at least- existing decorative – but inefficient, glare-in-drivers- eyes streetlights with functional down lights that use less overall light to put more where it’s needed. • I’d like to see bells on bikes promoted for safety concerns when riding bikes on sidewalks. This could be achieved by licensing bikes and requiring bells as part of registration • I walk a lot. I've seen a number of people almost get hit. Sometimes it seems the driver is just oblivious, usually because they are on the phone. That did get better after it was banned, but I am starting to see the number of people on their phone rise again. In the crosswalks, it does seem to be a different matter. I had a friend who showed up really freaked out. She was almost hit at a crosswalk with her twin 5 year old girls. The driver had seen them and had intentionally sped up. I've had similar things happen, when I have tried to cross a crosswalk with my girls. I think maybe there needs to be some kind of campaign to change people's attitude. For the driver, crosswalks encourage pedestrians to cross at a specific location (Now that you can sometimes cross at the crosswalk, near Jewel, on Chicago, I've seen a lot less pedestrians randomly crossing.) The pedestrians are also at least one less car, and ultimately, pedestrians are people. On a more personal note, my daughters and I cross Asbury on the way to school. We walked almost every day. Other than the crosswalk, there is no place to cross between Main and Oakton. It is much nicer if we don't have to walk along Main. The noise is bad, and in winter, the exhaust is really bad. There are a number of us in this position. There seems to be a crossing guard at the crosswalk for Pope John, but the crossing guard 34 of 43 Attachment A 32 leaves before 9:00. It would be really great if the guard could stay until after the Evanston Schools start. We also meet people going the opposite way to the train, or out for a walk. If one could actually cross at this crosswalk, I think you would find a lot more people walking to the train, beach, etcetera, and the other way to Robert Crown, etcetera. From a motorist point of view, I would like this too. If there are 2 cars backed up turning left on Main onto Asbury, no one can get through the stop light. If the pedestrians are crossing, which means no one gets through the light. On a positive note, I think what has been done at Chicago and Main, works well. It's much easier to cross the intersection now. • Overarching Preventive Consideration: As the City moves forward with actions to improve public safety, foremost in the planning the following “Mama” advise should be kept in mind—“a stitch in time saves nine”. This was brought home starkly in the Tuesday Chicago Tribune report of that City’s’ pending payment of $3M in a hit-run incident because the parents of the child killed won their suit which alleged that “stop signs and other traffic control markings at the site were improperly placed and or deteriorated because of neglect”. • Current Traffic Control Conditions in Evanston: At this time traffic control markings throughout Evanston remain in a seriously deteriorated condition. This situation not only creates potential safety hazards, but it impacts the ambiance of our city as we try to attract potential economic development projects. Paint! Paint! Paint! And what a way to create summer-fall youth employment (supervised of course). Lastly, when painting, use uniform wide striped crosswalks that can be easily seen by drivers and pedestrians alike. • Getting the Message: Note that research studies have found that most people do not pick up on an advertising/PR message until they have heard it or read it at least fifteen times. Create clever visual, reminders not to jay walk (may need to educate the new generations as to what jaywalking is) and place them in areas identified as hot spots for crosswalk avoidance. 35 of 43 Attachment A 33 A few examples from my walking and driving around town: along Sheridan fronting Northwestern; Elgin Road east of the marked crosswalks between Sherman and Orrington (suggestions: plant dense groundcover on divider strip of land and add signs to “Keep Off New Plantings”; Sherman between Clark and Church (some onto Davis); Central Street –almost the whole length; and Main Street between Custer and Sherman. • Tighten laws and increase enforcement: Raise fines for jaywalking, particularly on the commercial streets that attract jaywalking; enforce and advertise the enforcement. Include “cross at crosswalks” reminders and other public safety messages during 311 wait times. • Educate: Enlist the School Districts, Northwestern, the local media and the civic and religious institutions and organizations in a united, uniform educational program about improving public safety. Build in frequent repetition of the message. (See 4) • Change the Conversation: Help change the Public Safety message to a Fitness Activity by reminding pedestrians to add steps to their fitness routine by walking to the corners or other marked crosswalks when needing to cross a street. (This is a variation on the oft used encouraging message to get off the bus or train at one or two stops before your normal stop and walk the rest of the way.) 36 of 43 37 of 43 Attachment B Pedestrian Safety Recommendations Summary and Schedule  Projects       Target Completion Date  School Crossings:  • Complete installation of signs    08/31/12  • Complete sidewalk curb extensions    2013   • Install solar powered, push button      08/31/12  activated LED pedestrian warning signs  • Refresh pavement markings    08/31/12    Senior Crossings:  • Complete installation of signs    08/31/12  • Complete sidewalk curb extensions    2013  • Refresh pavement markings    08/31/12    Park Crossings:  • Complete installation of signs    08/31/12  • Installation of flag system at crossings    12/31/12  • Complete sidewalk curb extensions with    Ongoing   future resurfacing projects  • Refresh pavement markings    08/31/12    General Crossings:  • Complete installation of signs    08/31/12  • Refresh pavement markings    08/31/12  • Approve crossing criteria    N/A    Crossing Guard Program:  • Approve crossing guard criteria    N/A  • Reassign crossing guard from Central and Ashland  08/31/12  or Isabella and Ridge to Barton and Oakton    Education:  • Print safety marker art work for stickers    08/31/12  • Install safety markers on pavement    08/31/12    Speed Reduction:  • Acquire two additional set of temporary    12/31/12  speed displays to be placed where needed  • Lower the speed limit to 25 miles per hour  10/01/12  along retail districts:  Chicago‐ Dempster to South Blvd.  Central‐ McDaniel to Central Park  38 of 43 Attachment B   • Install permanent speed display along the  12/31/12  following corridors:  Oakton‐ Grey to Ridge  Church‐ McDaniel to Wesley  Main‐ Dodge to Asbury    Signalized Locations:  • Upgrade pedestrian signals to countdown    12/31/12  signals or microwave detection systems  • Install turning yield signs    12/31/12  • Install different crosswalk treatments in    2014   Business District                       39 of 43 For Special City Council meeting of August 6, 2012 Item III (B) Business of the City by Motion: Contract for Pavement Markings For Action To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council From: Suzette Robinson, Director of Public Works Jim Maiworm, Superintendent of Streets and Sanitation Subject: Approval of Participation in a Joint Contract for Pavement Marking Date: August 6, 2012 Recommended Action: Staff recommends City Council approval to participate in a contract through the Suburban Purchasing Cooperative (SPC) for Pavement marking services. Participation in this contract will allow the City of Evanston to apply Thermoplastic marking materials at various locations throughout the City in support of the pedestrian safety program. Participation in this contract would not exceed $75,000. Funding Source: Funding for this purchase will be from the Capital Improvement Fund (416394) of which has $200,000 budgeted for signage and pavement striping for pedestrian safety. Summary: In April 2012, staff from the SPC solicited bids for thermoplastic pavement marking services. The proposed contract was for a one-year period with the right to extend the contract for up to three, one-year periods. Five different vendors submitted bids with Superior Road Striping being the successful bidder based on the pricing structure below exhibited below. Item Description UOM Unit Cost 4” Thermoplastic marking line LF $0.50 6” Thermoplastic marking line LF $0.75 12” Thermoplastic marking line LF $1.50 24” Thermoplastic marking line LF $3.75 Thermoplastic marking letters & symbols SF $3.75 Thermoplastic marking removal SF $0.70 Memorandum 40 of 43 Page 2 of 2 The Suburban Purchasing cooperative is a group of 135 municipalities in the six county areas of northern Illinois. Every municipality and government agency in the State of Illinois is eligible to participate in this program. Staff recommends approval to participate in the Suburban Purchasing Cooperative thermoplastic markings contract for one year for the 2012 pavement marking season. 41 of 43 For Special City Council meeting of August 6, 2012 Item III (C) Business of the City by Motion: Purchase of Solar Powered School Crossing Signs For Action To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council From: Suzette Robinson, Director of Public Works Sat Nagar, P.E., Senior Engineer Rajeev Dahal, Senior Traffic Engineer Subject: Single Source Purchase of 10 LED Solar Powered School Crossing Warning Signs Systems Date: August 1, 2012 Recommended Action: Staff recommends City Council approval for the purchase of 10 LED solar powered School Crossing Warning Sign Systems from the TAPCO Traffic & Parking Control Company, Inc. (5100 W. Brown Deer Road, Brown Deer, WI 53223) in the amount of $56,950. Funding Source: Funding for this work will be from the Capital Improvement Fund (416394) in the amount of $56,950, which has $200,000 budgeted for Fiscal Year 2012. Summary: As part of the 2012 Pedestrian Safety goals outlined in the Pedestrian Safety report, the City will purchase 10 LED solar powered school crossing warning sign systems with pushbutton activation. Each system contains two 30” yellow school crossing signs with five yellow LED BlinkerBeam™ lights on the perimeter of each sign. Each system is activated by a wireless radio via pushbutton and powered by a solar battery system. These will be installed at designated school crossing locations without traffic signals or all-way stop controls. TAPCO is the sole manufacturer in the market that complies with the standards of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devises (MUTCD) and has the patented BlinkerSign™ and Blinkerbeam™ technology. Attachments: Single Source Manufacture Letter Memorandum 42 of 43 5100 W Brown Deer Rd., Brown Deer, WI 53223 Phone 800-236-0112 / 262-814-7000 ⋅ Fax 262-814-7017 www.tapconet.com August 1, 2012 Attn: To Whom It May Concern: This Letter is to certify that TAPCO is the sole manufacturer of the patented LED BlinkerSign™ with Blinkerbeam™ wireless controls. No other product on the market complies with the MUTCD. Both Product lines are being manufactured at TAPCO in Brown Deer, WI. If there are any questions on either of the above please feel free to contact me direct at 806-888-8883. Thank you for your continued support of TAPCO’s proprietary products. Sincerely, Jason Kugel Solar Products Division Manager TAPCO 262-754-4340 jason@tapconet.com 43 of 43