Will County Public Works & Transportation Committee met July 5.
Here are the minutes provided by the committee:
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. PLEDGE OF ALLIGIANCE TO THE FLAG
Ms. Bottomley led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
III. ROLL CALL
Chair Joe VanDuyne called the meeting to order at 9:07 AM
| Attendee Name | Title | Status | Arrived |
| Joe VanDuyne | Chair | Present | |
| Sherry Newquist | Vice Chair | Absent | |
| Herbert Brooks Jr. | Member | Present | |
| Mica Freeman | Member | Present | |
| Donald Gould | Member | Absent | |
| Jim Moustis | Member | Present | |
| Frankie Pretzel | Member | Present | |
| Tom Weigel | Member | Present | |
| Denise E. Winfrey | Member | Absent |
Present from the State's Attorney's Office: C. Wise.
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. WC Public Works & Transportation Committee - Regular Meeting - Jun 7, 2022 9:00 AM
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Jim Moustis, Member SECONDER: Herbert Brooks Jr., Member AYES: VanDuyne, Brooks Jr., Freeman, Moustis, Pretzel, Weigel ABSENT: Newquist, Gould, Winfrey |
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Tom Weigel, Member SECONDER: Mica Freeman, Member AYES: VanDuyne, Brooks Jr., Freeman, Moustis, Pretzel, Weigel ABSENT: Newquist, Gould, Winfrey |
1. Status of Caton Farm - Bruce Road Study and Supplemental Engineering Agreements
(Jeff Ronaldson)
Mr. Ronaldson reviewed the memorandum packet that was attached to the agenda.
Mr. Van Duyne stated since we don’t have sponsorship from any of the municipalities, I don’t see that being the direction that we want to go to finish Phase I. My opinion would be to take your advice and go with a power out.
Mr. Moustis added I don’t think we have any viable alternative then to go to the PEL. One of the reasons that we establish corridors is because we want to try and restrict development in those corridors. Is there any commitment from the three municipalities to restrict some development in that corridor?
Mr. Ronaldson stated the issue we had was a previous alignment. The one you see here is not the one that was previously approved in 2009. A new alignment was sought by them and the other three Homer Township and thru Homer Glenn. That is how we ended up after a study with this current corridor; they back the current corridor. Just because the corridor is approved, it is totally up to the jurisdictions within where that corridor falls, to maintain the right of way for that, and we don’t control that. As of today, they are in support of the current alignment.
Mr. Brooks asked what the PEL was, is that a grant that we must pay back.
Mr. Ronaldson stated it is a PEL Study, it is planning environmental linkages, linking environmental work to a later study, the cost was $225,000.
Mr. Weigel stated I would like to see it get done sooner rather than later; due to the cost I think we should go with the PEL Study.
Mr. Moustis made a motion, seconded by Ms. Freeman to take the PEL Study option and put the project on pause.
Motion Passes 6-0.
Mr. Ronaldson said you will see two resolutions for that, one for each engineering firm moving forward for that.
Mr. Moustis said we should pursue funding and work with those municipalities and see if we can help develop additional funding for them for their portion. I am hoping we can communicate with them and talk about how we are going to get it funded. You never know where the money could come from, maybe the State will come up with additional funding. As Mr. Weigel stated it is a project worth getting done; hopefully we will continue to pursue the completion of that bridge someday.
Mr. Palmer stated to Mr. Moustis’ point; with a PEL verses Phase I; can you still pursue grant opportunities, because a Phase I is usually the only way you can pursue additional dollars from the feds.
Mr. Ronaldson confirmed you cannot pursue federal dollars with the PEL Study.
Mr. Palmer said then in effect this stops the project until you pick it back up. This has been 50 years in the making.
Mr. Moustis replied I believe the PEL is still worth doing, but I do think we need to pursue doing Phase I. It is an astronomical amount of money for a small municipality, it is almost unreasonable as far as I am concerned. We say they are committed to funding, and funding it are two different things; what if you don’t have the funding to commit?
Mr. Ronaldson said that is the issue, they are committed to the corridor, they have already voted on that. But committing to be a sponsor to take their segments forward and bring it to the next level to be designed after this, which is some measure of their own funding verses some other federal dollars that they have applied for, not to say that they will get it. There is also the sponsorship of the bridge crossing itself, which no one has expressed any interest in, not even IDOT. We met with the staff level of IDOT, and they also did not express interest in taking over an additional bridge.
Mr. Moustis said if they are committed to this, and they don’t have the funding for Phase II it would stop; but at least Phase I would be completed. All they must do is commit to being a sponsor, it doesn’t mean they have to commit any dollars. Maybe we should pause and meet with them one more time.
Mr. Ronaldson stated that is not necessarily accurate, being a sponsor then you didn’t have to show to bring your segments into the TIP (Transportation Improvement Program). You would have to put your project into the TIP, then you are committing dollars too. If you don’t do that you couldn’t get it to Phase I.
Mr. Van Duyne asked if they could commit to being a sponsor then we can take it off the PEL and continue, correct.
Mr. Ronaldson replied correct.
Mr. Van Duyne stated then we can wait for them to commit to be a sponsor. We are only at $13 million out of $217 million.
Mr. Ronaldson said in doing so we’ve spent how many years already working on this and our data keeps on getting older and we are having to do it repeatedly, that is why the cost keeps going up and I must come back for supplementals because the data is older and IDOT keeps asking for more information. They wanted $1 million for the last supplemental and now it has gone down to $500,000.
Mr. Weigel asked if we could work through our Legislators to get a bill passed that requires IDOT to take sponsorship of the bridge. They abandoned the Division St. bridge several years ago and that was the only other crossing in that area. They have some experience in being responsible for a bridge. Also, on this PEL Study do the other municipalities have to agree to that?
Mr. Ronaldson said no.
Mr. Palmer said if we want to do Phase I it is about $700,000 to complete so that is a cost to the county. If we do the PEL it is less money, and it just pauses it. But if you complete to Phase I then you can pursue federal dollars for segments. It is not going to all be built at once, it is going to be like I-355 where it is going to be built in 2 years, this will be built in segments. If we have Phase I complete the County or our partners can pursue federal money. That is the only way you can do that, if you don’t have a Phase I done then you are not competing for those dollars. I have been involved with this for the last 20 years and have gone through the twists and turns; there has been change in leadership in a lot of these municipalities and townships which has resulted in the reconsideration of the route. I think the leadership in some of these municipalities, in particular Lockport has been more supportive of this option and some other ones that are a lot longer term. I think having a conversation with them before we make a final decision, maybe we can have them come to Executive Committee before this board meeting if we are going to act on this.
Mr. Moustis stated I think that it is profitable to finish Phase I.
Mr. Ronaldson said the Executive’s Office has talked to the municipalities and they have not come up with any level of sponsorship. Our department has done what they can, it is beyond what we can do at this point.
Mr. Van Duyne asked Mr. Wise, since we have already taken a vote on using the PEL Study option; do we need to rescind that if the committee wishes; or can we let Mr. Ronaldson take his time with the process. What would you like to see?
Mr. Wise answered we voted to pause; I guess we can vote to lift the pause at any meeting that we desire.
Mr. Moustis answered it must go to the full Board, we can pause it at the Executive Committee. It will give you the option to talk about it one more time.
Mr. Van Duyne asked at Executive Committee can I ask for a motion table.
Mr. Wise answered I believe you can.
Mr. Moustis asked in the meantime Mr. Ronaldson, will you contact the municipalities that are involved. Are they aware of the options, and were they supportive of pausing the project?
Mr. Ronaldson noted this is where we get into a gray area, they want the project, but they didn’t want to, nor do they have the ability to spend the money. That is the only answer that they will provide to us.
Mr. Moustis said I think you should tell them that we are going to pause it unless there is some movement on sponsorship. As you said this data just gets old and you are going to wind up redoing it again.
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Jim Moustis, Member SECONDER: Mica Freeman, Member AYES: VanDuyne, Brooks Jr., Freeman, Moustis, Pretzel, Weigel ABSENT: Newquist, Gould, Winfrey |
VII. NEW BUSINESS
1. Confirming Award of Contract to Gallagher Asphalt Corporation ($161,106.00), Let on June 15, 2022, Countywide Pavement Patching, All County Board Districts (Jeff Ronaldson)
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS] Next: 7/20/2022 9:30 AM
TO: Will County Planning and Zoning Commission MOVER: Jim Moustis, Member SECONDER: Mica Freeman, Member AYES: VanDuyne, Brooks Jr., Freeman, Moustis, Pretzel, Weigel ABSENT: Newquist, Gould, Winfrey |
(Jeff Ronaldson)
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS] Next: 7/20/2022 9:30 AM
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Tom Weigel, Member SECONDER: Mica Freeman, Member AYES: VanDuyne, Brooks Jr., Freeman, Moustis, Pretzel, Weigel ABSENT: Newquist, Gould, Winfrey |
(Jeff Ronaldson)
Mrs. Ogalla stated the County Line is a rapid highway with all the semis going from Wilmington over to Indiana; and the residents complain how fast they are driving. The more improvements that get done with this road the more the semis take it. Is there a way we can add more signage to this road for speed limits or anything that can help slow down the traffic on this road?
Mr. Ronaldson replied I would have to check the spacing of the current speed limit signs that are out there, it is a 55-mph road. If they are ignoring those signs, I don’t know that it would make a difference. But of course, we can look at the spacing of those signs.
Mrs. Ogalla asked have you already done a traffic study so we can see how many cars and trucks are using that road?
Mr. Ronaldson replied we have done Wilmington/Peotone Rd. I don’t know when the last time we did a study on County Line Rd.
Mrs. Ogalla stated it would be good to see a new study to see the changes at least for information purposes. Perhaps there may be locations where some stop signs could be installed.
Mr. Ronaldson clarified they don’t have any between Rt. 1 and County Line; I would believe that none of the cross streets would warrant a four-way-stop. If you go on to IDOTs, gettingaroundillinois.com their ADT have the historical values on there so you can see if they are growing or not. The last one that they did was 2019, you can also see some of the years before that. We can still take on for current data.
Mr. Moustis asked does that study include how fast they are going.
Mr. Ronaldson advised our counters do record the speed as well, which we did on Willington/Peotone, and we have a huge violation rate on that corridor.
Mr. Van Duyne added that study doesn’t take very long, I believe it is a 24-hour study.
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS] Next: 7/20/2022 9:30 AM
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Jim Moustis, Member SECONDER: Frankie Pretzel, Member AYES: VanDuyne, Brooks Jr., Freeman, Moustis, Pretzel, Weigel ABSENT: Newquist, Gould, Winfrey |
(Jeff Ronaldson)
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS] Next: 7/20/2022 9:30 AM
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Tom Weigel, Member SECONDER: Frankie Pretzel, Member AYES: VanDuyne, Brooks Jr., Freeman, Moustis, Pretzel, Weigel ABSENT: Newquist, Gould, Winfrey |
(Jeff Ronaldson)
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS] Next: 7/20/2022 9:30 AM
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Mica Freeman, Member SECONDER: Herbert Brooks Jr., Member AYES: VanDuyne, Brooks Jr., Freeman, Moustis, Pretzel, Weigel ABSENT: Newquist, Gould, Winfrey |
(Jeff Ronaldson)
Mr. Ronaldson noted this is concluding the Truck Routing Feasibility Study that we undertook a year or so now, with the recommendation that Crete/Monee Rd. is now the corridor based on that study. That was a PEL study, so we were able to take that information and move it forward into Phase I.
Mrs. Ogalla commented just so I am clear, once we get to the Village of Monee we don’t know where we are going to go. We are going to look at whether we are going to go north or south, or north and south.
Mr. Ronaldson stated in Phase I we will look at various alternatives through Monee.
Mrs. Ogalla commented thank you I just wanted to clarify that.
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS] Next: 7/20/2022 9:30 AM
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Jim Moustis, Member SECONDER: Mica Freeman, Member AYES: VanDuyne, Brooks Jr., Freeman, Moustis, Pretzel, Weigel ABSENT: Newquist, Gould, Winfrey |
(Jeff Ronaldson)
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS] Next: 7/20/2022 9:30 AM
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Jim Moustis, Member SECONDER: Mica Freeman, Member AYES: VanDuyne, Brooks Jr., Freeman, Moustis, Pretzel, Weigel ABSENT: Newquist, Gould, Winfrey |
(Jeff Ronaldson)
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS] Next: 7/20/2022 9:30 AM
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Mica Freeman, Member SECONDER: Tom Weigel, Member AYES: VanDuyne, Brooks Jr., Freeman, Moustis, Pretzel, Weigel ABSENT: Newquist, Gould, Winfrey |
(Jeff Ronaldson)
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS] Next: 7/20/2022 9:30 AM
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Mica Freeman, Member SECONDER: Herbert Brooks Jr., Member AYES: VanDuyne, Brooks Jr., Freeman, Moustis, Pretzel, Weigel ABSENT: Newquist, Gould, Winfrey |
(Jeff Ronaldson)
| RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS] Next: 7/20/2022 9:30 AM
TO: Will County Board MOVER: Mica Freeman, Member SECONDER: Frankie Pretzel, Member AYES: VanDuyne, Brooks Jr., Freeman, Moustis, Pretzel, Weigel ABSENT: Newquist, Gould, Winfrey |
IX. DIRECTOR OF TRANSPORTATION DISCUSSION
Mr. Ronaldson stated I have three updates; one is to remind everyone that 167th St. will be closed for approximately three weeks to accommodate the Veterans Memorial Bike way Trail on I-355, that detour should be up any day. Then I have a follow up on a question from Mr. Fricilone about Safe Streets for All; it is a grant looking at safety action plans. We are going to pursue that grant. We looked at variations of how we can do that; at the present we are looking at a countywide application; meaning that we will look at the entirety of the county. Or we could just do our county highway system itself. If we do countywide, we need some buy in from some other municipalities. I am not sure how quickly that can happen, we may just move forward with the countywide and if we don’t, we will back off. At present we are going to move forward with the grant writing, the Executive’s Office is helping coordinate that as well, so we will apply for that grant for an action plan. Once we have the action plan in place, an additional grant process we can move forward and apply for implementation grants; that would be step one to get to step two. Then lastly an update; some of you are aware of the operators strike against the quarries that hasn’t impacted some jobs, but it has impacted others. We were able to complete some jobs regardless of the strike. However, the Plainfield-Naperville Rd. overlay was scheduled to start, that will be on pause until the strike gets resolved, they do not have material to proceed with that. On Wilmington/Peotone Rd. resurfacing, which was recently approved last month, that still will go forward, because they are coming out of a quarry that is not affected by the strike. Weber Rd. is not affected by the strike, Cedar at Laraway we did about 6,000 tons of asphalt last week; that pretty much dried out P.T. Ferro so they are shutting down their plant is my understanding. We will be able to do some earth work related items, but we may have to put that one on pause until the strike is resolved. We are hopeful we can get into the next phase so we can keep that project going. Some other projects that are being let, but they don’t start until the fall anyway. Hopefully, that will not affect them. Cedar over Spring is a bridge project, that one was already affected by material shortages, the deck beams. We are scheduled to start shortly but we are concerned that we won’t get the bridge done this year; we are investigating whether we do half a bridge or just wait until next year. It may have an impact there as well if we can’t get Store to build the abutments that the deck beams go on. There are some relevant impacts for our projects, and we will have to wait and see.
Mr. Van Duyne stated as a side note the, the Forest Preserve trails are also affected as well because of the strike. I am not sure if anyone has received any calls, I know I have. I see that they are working on an agreement.
Mr. Moustis asked how many quarries are there.
Mr. Ronaldson stated three quarry firms, but the actual locations are over thirty.
X. STATE'S ATTORNEY DISCUSSION
XI. MONTHLY WORK REPORTS
1. Construction Status Report
(Jeff Ronaldson)
2. Maintenance Status Report
(Jeff Ronaldson)
3. Phase II Summary Report
(Jeff Ronaldson)
XII. REPORTS BY COMMITTEE MEMBERS
XIII. PUBLIC COMMENT
XIV. ANNOUNCEMENTS/REPORTS BY CHAIR
Mr. Van Duyne read an email into the record from Brian Loomis:
This correspondence is regarding the truck traffic and speed limits on Tryon, Ford, and Knapp St. north of Rt. 6, within the village of Channahon Illinois. The roadway is being way overused my semi-trucks, tractor trailers, gravel, and large dump trucks. This road
does not have businesses that would require repeated use of this road. I see this mainly as a safety issue. This is a residential area and has access to both the I&M Canal and the DuPage River. Both of which attract families and children for many recreational activities. These vehicles do not adhere to the posted speed limits and damage the roads and bridges they continue to drive on. I am requesting the county restrict and enforce the restrictions of the trucks and reduce the speed limits on these roads. I live in the Indian Trails subdivision which has entrances by the S curve of this road. I have witnessed the trucks and speeding plus numerous accidents in front of my subdivision. Your attention to this matter is greatly appreciated. Thanks Brian Loomis.
Mr. Van Duyne said I brought this to Mr. Ronaldson’s attention, and he did some research on the weight of some trucks, garbage trucks, and some busses, if you wouldn’t mind, would you let us know what you found.
Mr. Ronaldson stated in 2017 a similar thing was brought to the County Board; Board Member Gould brought up to post the road at that time, and the County Board agreed to put a 14-ton weight limit on that road, at least our portion of the County Highway. At that time Grundy County also said that they would proceed with the 14-ton weight limit. For whatever reason they have never posted that; I did reach out to their County Engineer, and they did in fact establish a 14-ton weight limit, he does not know why they didn’t post it so that could be part of the problem that people coming from the east don’t know that there is this 14-tom weight limit when you get off Ridge Road. He was going to bring that to their committee last month, I don’t know the results of that just to remind them that they did that before he starts putting up signs. Hopefully they will stand behind that and they can put their 14-ton weigh limit signs up so that might help to some degree. 14-ton was a suggestion however the recent studies that the County has done, CMAP did for us with the Truck Routing Study, staff has recommended an 18-ton weight limit to accommodate buses, buses generally can go up to 18-tons, technically that is a problem for those busses. They further recommend 27-tons to accommodate garbage trucks, which everyone needs garbage trucks. So really their recommendation when establishing a weight limit is 27-tons. I would not recommend going lower than what we are at 14-tons, enforcement is really the issue. We have the signs out there that they are in violation of, so enforcement is not something that the County can do because it runs through the two municipalities out there Channahon, and Minooka, they patrol those routes except the small section where the curve is, it heads from east west to north south. There is a meeting with the Mayor from Channahon has asked that I join, I don’t know the date of the meeting yet. My recommendation at the meeting will be enforcement, but I am not recommending a weight limit unless the County Board wants to do something different.
Mr. Van Duyne asked if it has ever been considered to allow the garbage trucks, and school busses and give them an exception and lower the speed limit, has that ever happen before or is that even an option.
Mr. Ronaldson stated the State Law doesn’t allow us to exempt certain things like a garbage truck, they would have to get a permit, and neither do the busses.
XV. EXECUTIVE SESSION
XVI. ADJOURNMENT
1. Motion to Adjourn @ 9:53 AM
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Jim Moustis, Member SECONDER: Herbert Brooks Jr., Member AYES: VanDuyne, Brooks Jr., Freeman, Moustis, Pretzel, Weigel ABSENT: Newquist, Gould, Winfrey |
https://willcountyil.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=12&ID=4329&Inline=True
Alerts Sign-up