The URL can be used to link to this page

O-41-19 Ordinance Granting Preliminary PUD plan approval for Phase II of Forge w exhibits6 Exhibit A Legal Description of Subject Property THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 16 EXHIBIT A1: PROPERTY TITLE SEARCH LTAP Property THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 17 EXHIBIT A1: PROPERTY TITLE SEARCH THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 18 EXHIBIT A1: PROPERTY TITLE SEARCH THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 19 EXHIBIT A1: PROPERTY TITLE SEARCH THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 20 EXHIBIT A1: PROPERTY TITLE SEARCH Lemont Township THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 21 EXHIBIT A1: PROPERTY TITLE SEARCH THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 22 EXHIBIT A1: PROPERTY TITLE SEARCH THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 40 EXISTING TOWNSHIP LICENSE AGREEMENT THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 41 EXISTING TOWNSHIP LICENSE AGREEMENT THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 42 EXISTING TOWNSHIP LICENSE AGREEMENT THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 10 LTAP Property (Private - yellow highlighted): Main Street Parcels: (14411-14597 Main Street, Lemont, IL)-- PIN's: 22-21-200-031-0000 (14501); 22-21-200-077-0000 (14597); 22-21-200-020-0000 (14453); 22-21-200-030-0000 (14453); 22-21-200-021-0000 (14437); 22-21-200-015-0000 (14429); 22-21-200-026-0000 (14423); 22-21-200-009-0000 (14411); 12 acres North of Tracks: (14505 Illinois & Michigan Canal, Lemont, IL); PIN: 22-21-200-080-0000 Lemont Township Parcels (light green highlighted): PIN's: 22-21-200-081-0000 (14507 Main St.), 22-21-200-078-0000 (14501 Main St.), 22-21-100-039-0000 (15185 Main St.) Village of Lemont/I&M Canal Reserve Strip) (light blue highlighted): PIN's: a portion of 22-21-200-044-0000 (11270 Boyer St.) and a portion of 22-21-100-030-0000 (14701 Main St.)-- to be re- zoned by the Village of Lemont 22+ acres 12 acres 6.5 acres PARCEL ADDRESSES & PINS 7 Exhibit B Preliminary PUD Plans Phase II with Summary Letter dated 3/29/2019 PHASE II: PRELIMINARY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT THE FORGE LEMONT QUARRIES March 29, 2019 Jason Berry Economic & Community Development Director Community Development Department 418 Main Street Lemont, IL 60439 RE: Phase II Preliminary Planned Unit Development Application: The Forge Lemont Quarries Dear Mr. Berry: On behalf of LTAP Acquisitions, I would like to formally submit the Phase II Preliminary Planned Unit Development Application and Supplemental Information Packet for The Forge: Lemont Quarries (The Forge). As you are aware from previous conversations with the Deve lopment Team, The Forge is an extremely unique and complicated planned recreational facility located within and adjacent to the Lemont Quarries Heritage Recreation Area. Due to the projects unique proposed use as an active adventure park, many of the project requirements identified in the Unified Development Ordinance may not be applicable. As a result, we are requesting variances within the following areas of the Unified Development Ordinance:  17.07 Building/Structure Height (table 17.07.02) – building heights will exceed the 35 foot height standard due to use of several of the buildings for climbing/bouldering and multi- level activities;  17.10 Off-Street Parking and Loading – recreational parking is subject to special use/PUD approval; and 17.10.070.D. Surfacing – access drives and parking will consist of gravel surfaces;  17.11.04 Prohibited Signs – the Forge Logo/sign will be painted on the cargo containers on-site;  17.11.090 Standards for Specific Types of Signs – Wall signs (see above)  17.11.150 Signs for Shopping Centers and PUDs – (see above)  17.21.040 Commercial Design Standards – Prohibited Materials (the Forge buildings exterior will consist of corrugated steel to provide historical re-enactment of the former quarry industrial operation  17.26.020 Parking Lot Layout – there will be no curb and gutter design for the proposed on-site parking areas  17.26.100.A Driveways – the project access driveway(s) will be graveled surfaces. As we work through the review process with the Village, please let us kno w if you and your team have any questions or comments. Sincerely, TABLE OF CONTENTS EXHIBIT A: APPLICATION FORM 4 EXHIBIT B: PROJECT SUMMARY 11 EXHIBIT C: DECLARATION OF EASEMENTS 14 EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY 15 EXHIBIT E: MARKET RESEARCH STUDY 96 EXHIBIT F: ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY 97 EXHIBIT G: PLAT OF SURVEY 98 EXHIBIT H: TITLE SEARCH 100 EXHIBIT I: SITE PLAN 107 EXHIBIT J: ENGINEERING PLANS 108 EXHIBIT L: LANDSCAPE PLANS 122 EXHIBIT M: TREE SURVEY 135 EXHIBIT N: BUILDING ELEVATIONS 151 EXHIBIT O: SIGN PLAN 155 EXHIBIT P: WETLAND DELINEATION 156 THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 4 EXHIBIT A: APPLICATION FORM Village of Lemont PUD Prelminary Plan/Plat Application Form Community Development Department 418 Main Street Lemont, Illinois 60439 phone (630) 257-1595 fax (630) 257-1598 APPLICANT INFORMATION Applicant Name Company/Organization Applicant Address Telephone & Fax E-mail CHECK ONE OF THE FOLLOWING: _____ Applicant is the owner of the subject property and is the signer of this application. _____ Applicant is the contract purchaser of the subject property. _____ Applicant is acting on behalf of the beneficiary of a trust. PROPERTY INFORMATON Address of Subject Property/Properties Parcel Identification Number of Subject Property/Properties Size of Subject Property/Properties REQUIRED DOCUMENTS FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Application received on: _________________________ By: _________________________________ Application deemed complete on: _________________ By: _________________________________ Current Zoning: ________________________________ Fee Amount Enclosed: ___________________________ Escrow Amount Enclosed: _______________ _____ Applicant is acting on behalf of the owner. See Form 507-A, PUD Preliminary Plan/Plat Application Checklist of Required Materials, for items that must accompany this application. Community Development Department PUD Preliminary Plan/Plat Packet PUD Preliminary Plan/Plat Application Form (Form 507), updated 01-03-2019 Page 1 of 2 LTAP Acquisition, LLC The Forge Adventure Park 340 River Street, Lemont, IL 60439 (630) 326-3475 jeanette@theforgeparks.com X Refer to Map included under Project Summary incorporated as Exhibit B THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 5 EXHIBIT A: APPLICATION FORM PUD Preliminary Plan/Plat Application Form Village of Lemont APPLICATION FEE & ESCROW AND Required Escrow = $2,000 AFFIRMATION Signature of Applicant Date State County I, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the aforesaid County and State, do hereby certify that ______________________________________ is personally known to me to be the same person whose name is subscribed to the foregoing instrument, and that said person signed, sealed and delivered the above petition as a free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes set forth. Notary Signature Given under my hand and notary seal this _______ day of ____________________ A.D. 20 ________. My commission expires this _______ day of ____________________ A.D. 20 ________. I hereby affirm that I have full legal capacity to authorize the filing of this application and that all information and exhibits herewith submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. I permit Village representatives to make all reasonable inspections and investigations of the subject property during the period of processing of this application. I understand that as part of this application I am required to establish an escrow account to pay for direct costs associated with the approval of this application, such as the fulfillment of public notice requirements, removal of the public notice sign, taking of minutes at the public hearing and fees for consultants hired by the Village to evaluate this application. I understand that the submitted fee is non-refundable and that any escrow amount leftover upon project completion will be refunded upon request. Fee is non-refundable. At the time of application, the applicant shall submit a check for the establishment of an escrow account. The escrow money shall be used to defray costs of public notice, consultants, or other direct costs incurred by the Village in association with the PUD preliminary plan/plat application. After completion of the review process, any unused portion of the escrow account will be refunded upon request. Application Fee: < 3 acres = $300, plus $50 per existing and/or proposed dwelling unit 3 to <5 acres = $600, plus $50 per existing and/or proposed dwelling unit 5 to <10 acres = $1000, plus $50 per existing and/or proposed dwelling unit 10 acres or more = $1200, plus $50 per existing and/or proposed dwelling unit If the PUD includes a preliminary plat of subdivsion, the following fee applies (based on size of property and number of proposed and/or existing dwelling units): $500 for properties less than 10 acres, $750 for properties 10 acres or larger Community Development Department PUD Preliminary Plan/Plat Packet PUD Preliminary Plan/Plat Application Form (Form 507), updated 01-03-2019 Page 2 of 2 Included with Phase I Fees THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 6 EXHIBIT A: APPLICATION FORM Community Development Department PUD Preliminary Plan/Plat Packet PUD Preliminary Plan/Plat Application Checklist (Form 507-A), updated 01-03-2019 Page 1 of 2 PUD Preliminary Plan/Plat Application Checklist of Required Materials PUD Preliminary Plan/Plat Materials Required at Submittal of Application A complete application for preliminary plan/plat must include all of the following items. Any application that does not include all of the following items will not be considered complete. The Community Development Department will not schedule a preliminary plan/plat request for Planning & Zoning Commission review until a complete application has been submitted. _______ Application Form. One original copy of the attached PUD Preliminary Plan/Plat Application Form, signed by the applicant and notarized. _______ Application Fee. A non-refundable fee in the appropriate amount. _______ Escrow Account. Any unused portion may be refunded upon request after completion of the final plan/plat review process. _______ Proof of Ownership & Applicant Authorization. One copy of a deed that documents the current ownership of the subject property/properties. If the applicant is the owner, this is the only documentation necessary. If the applicant is not the owner, the following are required in addition to a copy of the deed: x If the applicant is the contract purchaser of the property, a copy of the contract must be attached. x If the applicant is acting on behalf of the beneficiary of a trust, a notarized letter from an authorized trust officer identifying the applicant as an authorized individual acting in behalf of the beneficiaries must be attached. The letter must also provide the name, address and percentage of interest of each beneficiary. x If the applicant is acting on behalf of the owner, a notarized letter of consent from the owner must be attached. x If the property owner is a company, a disclosure of the principals of the company must be included in the application materials. For example, an LLC may submit a copy of the LLC Management Agreement. X included w/ Phase I Fees X THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 7 EXHIBIT A: APPLICATION FORM Community Development Department PUD Preliminary Plan/Plat Packet PUD Preliminary Plan/Plat Application Checklist (Form 507-A), updated 01-03-2019 Page 2 of 2 _______ Title Search. Current Title Search, Title Commitment, or Title Policy for all subject properties shall be submitted. _______ Legal Description. A legal description of the subject property. _______ Submittal Packet at time of Application. 6 complete and collated submittal packets must be provided for staff and Planning and Zoning Commission review. One digital copy of the submittal packet must also be provided. See Form 507-B, Preliminary Plan/Plat Packet Requirements for required packet contents. These packets shall contain full-size copies of all plans. Plans and drawings shall be at a minimum scale of 1 inch = 60 feet, unless otherwise indicated on Form 507-B. PUD Preliminary Plan/Plat Materials Required prior to Ordinance Approval _______ Ordinance Approval Submittal Packet. After review by the Planning and Zoning Commission and COW, the preliminary plan/plat is formally presented to the Village Board of Trustees for approval. 3 complete, collated, and full-size submittal packets must be provided. The full-size sets of plans shall be drawn at a scale of 1 inch = 60 feet or greater. One digital copy of the submittal packet must also be provided. The ordinance approval submittal packets shall include the following: x Preliminary Plan/Plat x Plat of Annexation (if applicable) x Site Plan (if applicable) x Engineering Plans x Landscape Plans, to include tree preservation measures x Building Elevations (if applicable) x Samples of Exterior Building Materials and Colors x Other documents as required by the Community Development Director X X X X THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 8 EXHIBIT A: APPLICATION FORM Community Development Department PUD Preliminary Plan/Plat Packet PUD Preliminary Plan/Plat Application Checklist (Form 507-B), updated 01-03-2019 Page 1 of 3 Form 507-B – PUD Preliminary Plan/Plat Packet Requirements All packets shall: x Be collated and bound; x Contain a table of contents; x Contain all documents listed on the checklist below, with all large maps/plans folded; and x Be tabbed and labeled with exhibit numbers. See below for the desired sequence of exhibits. All maps and plans shall contain the following information: x North arrow or other indication of true north or map north; x Date of map/plan preparation; x Name of person preparing map/plan; and x Scale. Scale may be expressed verbally (e.g. 1 inch equals 60 ft.). Other forms of scale, while not required, are desirable (e.g. bar scale or ratio such as 1:24,000). PUD PRELIMINARY PLAN/PLAT REQUIRED PACKET MATERIALS EXHIBIT DESCRIPTION OFFICE USE ONLY A APPLICATION FORM Copy of the completed and signed application. B PROJECT SUMMARY Provide a written overview of the proposed project. This statement should include how the proposal responds to comments received at the Technical Review Committee meeting, if applicable. Additionally, provide a quantitative summary that includes the following: x Acreage and/or square footage of subject site x Square footage of commercial space x Proposed residential density (dwelling units / gross site area) x Total square footage covered by structures x Total square footage covered by roads and other impervious surfaces x Total square footage of commonly owned and maintained open space x Number of off-street parking spaces C RESTRICTIONS & COVENANTS (if applicable) Draft of any proposed protective restrictions and covenants or existing restrictions and covenants. D DECALARTION OF EASEMENTS A statement of any easements that will be required for public improvements (ie: water service), and whether easements have been obtained. E TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 9 EXHIBIT A: APPLICATION FORM Community Development Department PUD Preliminary Plan/Plat Packet PUD Preliminary Plan/Plat Application Checklist (Form 507-B), updated 01-03-2019 Page 2 of 3 A traffic impact study prepared by a qualified traffic analyst. The traffic study shall indicate the volume of traffic to be generated by the PUD or a phase of it and also indicate any special engineering or design features and/or traffic regulation devices needed to ensure the proper safety of traffic circulation to, through, and around the PUD. The requirement for a traffic impact study may be waived by the Community Development Director when he/she determines that the nature and scope of the development will be unlikely to have significant traffic impacts on the surrounding area. This waiver shall be obtained in writing, prior to submission of the submittal packet, and the written waiver approval shall be included as an exhibit in lieu of the traffic study. Note that this waiver does not preclude Village staff, the Planning & Zoning Commission, or the Village Board from requesting a study once the PUD review is underway. F MARKET RESEARCH STUDY If a shopping center development is planned, adequate evidence to establish the need for and feasibility of such development shall be provided. The evidence shall be in the form of a market research report. The requirement for a market research study may be waived by the Community Development Director when he/she determines that the nature and scope of the development will be unlikely to have significant impacts on the surrounding area or Village. This waiver shall be obtained in writing, prior to submission of the submittal packet, and the written waiver approval shall be included as an exhibit in lieu of the traffic study. Note that this waiver does not preclude Village staff, the Planning & Zoning Commission, or the Village Board from requesting a study once the PUD review is underway. G ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY A tax impact study detailing the impact which the PUD will have upon taxing bodies and the expected number of students that will be generated by any residential portion of the development. The requirement for an economic impact study may be waived by the Community Development Director when he/she determines that the nature and scope of the development will be unlikely to have significant economic impacts on the surrounding area or Village. This waiver shall be obtained in writing, prior to submission of the submittal packet, and the written waiver approval shall be included as an exhibit in lieu of the traffic study. Note that this waiver does not preclude Village staff, the Planning & Zoning Commission, or the Village Board from requesting a study once the PUD review is underway. H PLAT OF SURVEY/ EXISTING CONDITIONS MAP(S) A map or series of maps, as appropriate, drawn at a scale of 1 inch equals 100 ft. or greater, that indicates the location of the subject site and the territory within 200 ft. of the subject property and includes the following: x Corporate and County boundaries x Current roads or public rights of way x Addresses and/or PINs of immediately adjacent properties and names, as they appear on most current tax records of the county, of the property owners x Existing buildings on site and within 200 ft. of the site THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 10 EXHIBIT A: APPLICATION FORM Community Development Department PUD Preliminary Plan/Plat Packet PUD Preliminary Plan/Plat Application Checklist (Form 507-B), updated 01-03-2019 Page 3 of 3 x Existing topography of site shown at intervals no greater than two feet x Wetland areas x Portions of the site in any floodway and/or floodplain fringe area x Streams, drainage ditches, culverts, and standing water x Soil problem areas based upon a soil survey I SITE PLAN A site plan indicating the arrangement and location of proposed: x Structures x Setbacks of all structures x Right-of-way alignments, widths and names of streets x Off-street parking and service areas x Areas to be dedicated for recreation, schools, or open space x Pedestrian circulation system, including sidewalks and trails x Lot subdivision x Easements x Topographic features J ENGINEERING PLANS The preliminary engineering plans for all public or private support facilities including roads, sidewalks, drainage ditches, culverts and water retention areas, sanitary sewers, storm sewers, water supply lines, and illumination. K PHOTOMETRIC PLAN The proposed photometrics (level of illumination) of the site as well as the specific design details of all exterior light sources including: x light color x height of light fixtures x illustration of fixtures x screening of illumination L LANDSCAPE PLANS A landscape plan prepared in the same scale as the site plan. See Chapter 17.20 of the Unified Development Ordinance for landscape plan requirements. M TREE PRESERVATION PLAN The tree preservation plan shall consist of a tree survey that graphically shows the location of trees on site, identifies those trees to be preserved, and details efforts to protect those trees during construction. See Unified Development Ordinance Section 17.20.130 for more information on tree preservation plans. N BUILDING ELEVATIONS Architectural renderings of all elevations of all proposed buildings, including trash enclosures, or perspective drawings of the same. All exterior materials and colors should be indicated. O SIGN PLAN (if applicable) Elevations of the sign face(s) shall be prepared, to scale, and shall indicate sign design, dimensions, materials, colors, and method of illumination. P Additional information as required by the Community Development Director THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 11 EXHIBIT B: PROJECT SUMMARY SCOPE AND NATURE OF THE FORGE ADVENTURE PARK LTAP Acquisition is working in conjunction with the Village of Lemont and Lemont Township in the creation of a new adventure park, The Forge Lemont Quarries (The Forge). In total, The Forge Adventure Park will encompass nearly 300 acres of mostly vacant land and natural areas adjacent to the Illinois & Michigan (I&M) Canal and comprising several abandoned quarry sites. The Forge will include land licensed from both the Village and Township. The property that will be subject re-zoning under this application includes that outlined in the attached map. When complete, the park will be operated year-round, 7 days/week (except certain holidays), between 8AM – 11pm. This location is expected to support the following activities: Phase I Outdoor Adventure Course A custom designed aerial adventure course will be constructed on a 10–acre site between the Icebox Quarry and Quarry 1 on the south side of the I&M Canal. The aerial adventure courses will include activities such as zip-lines, climbing towers, rappelling, and other interconnecting ropes course activi- ties. Kid Zone A custom designed kid zone will also be constructed to create an at-ground version of the aerial ad- venture course that is safe for children ages 5 through 12. The kid zone will also include a beginners mountain bike course and pump track. Mountain Bike Course Mountain bike courses of varying skill levels will be installed as part of the project. The primary course will be installed throughout the 10-acre adventure course area. Over time, additional mountain bike trails will be constructed north of the I&M Canal to expand and enhance the mountain biking experi- ence. A shop with mountain bike rentals and repair station will also be included. Water and Land Sports Other outdoor activities will include water sports, such as kayaking, stand up paddle (SUP) boarding, canoing, and fishing. Kayaks and SUP boards will be available for rental on-site. Other land-based activities include paintball and laser tag are possible future additions. In addition, the existing trail system will be expanded to allow better access and functionality for all users throughout The Forge. Separated multi-use, pedestrian, and mountain bike trails will allow all users to safely use The Forge concurrently. Concessions Concessions will be available on-site, which will include a restaurant and bar within a retrofitted cargo container located on LTAP property east of The Forge Quarry. Refueling carts will be located through- out and will sell grab–and–go style food and beverages to patrons. Performance Live music and performances will also be an amenity of The Forge, facilitated by the installation of a stage and outdoor seating area immediately east of The Forge Quarry. Phase I is subject to the submittal of a Final PUD application incorporated herein. THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 12 Phase II During Phase II, it is planned that LTAP will acquire a public crossing at the IC/CN railroad tracks in order to construct a primary access drive at Walker Road. These improvements will also require the installation of water and sanitary sewer infrastructure improvements simultaneously. At this location, which is anticipated to be the future primary access into The Forge, permanent buildings are planned for the LTAP property east of The Forge Quarry. These buildings are proposed to host park check-in, climbing, ropes courses, and bouldering. A restaurant and kitchen, as well as an indoor special events center, will also be included in Phase II. Phase II is subject to the submittal of a separate Preliminary PUD application. After the completion of Phase I through the completion of Phase II, special events will be held which may include athletic competitions (i.e., running races, triathlons, challenge course competitions, etc.), as well as holiday themed events throughout the year. EXHIBIT B: PROJECT SUMMARY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 2019.03.25 13 6/14/2018 Google Maps https://www.google.com/maps/@41.6819517,-87.9776387,584m/data=!3m1!1e3 1/1 Imagery ©2018 Google, Map data ©2018 Google 200 ft The Forge Project/Phase I LTAP Property (Private - yellow highlighted): Main Street Parcels: (14411-14597 Main Street)-- PIN's: 22-21-200-031-0000 (14501); 22-21-200-077-0000 (14597); 22-21-200-020-0000 (14453); 22-21-200-030-0000 (14453); 22-21-200- 021-0000 (14437); 22-21-200-015-0000 (14429); 22-21-200-026-0000 (14423); 22-21-200-009-0000 (14411); 12 acres North of Tracks: (14505 Illinois & Michigan Canal); PIN: 22-21-200-080- 0000 Lemont Township Parcels (light green highlighted):PIN's: 22-21-200-081-0000 (14507 Main St.) Village of Lemont/I&M Canal Reserve Strip) (light blue highlighted): PIN's: a portion of 22-21-200-044-0000 (11270 Boyer St.) The Forge Adventure Park Project Phase II Parcels Map 12 acres 6.5 acres 2.7 acres 8+ acres PARCEL ADDRESSES & PINS THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 14 EXHIBIT C: DECLARATION OF EASEMENTS LTAP anticipates that there will need to be access easement agreements for the following utility providers: • Electrical (Comed) • Telecommunication (Comcast) • Gas (Nicor) • Water • Sewer Note: Extended Walker Road ROW will need to be dedicated as Village Street and RR Crossing acquired across IC/CN Railroad THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 15 EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY The Forge: Lemont Quarries Adventure Park Traffic Impact Study Walker Road at Main Street Lemont, Illinois, 60439 Final Report Prepared By: November 14, 2018 THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 16 EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY Table of Contents SECTION I – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................... 1 SECTION II – INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND OF SITE ................................................... 2 SECTION III – STUDY AREA ............................................................................................................ 2 SECTION IV – EXISTING ROADWAY TRAFFIC CONDITIONS ......................................... 3 Level of Service and Delay .............................................................................................................. 3 SECTION V – COMPUTATION OF BACKGROUND TRAFFIC ........................................... 5 SECTION VI – SITE LAYOUT ............................................................................................................ 7 SECTION VII – TRIP GENERATION ............................................................................................ 10 SECTION VIII – TRIP ASSIGNMENTS ........................................................................................ 15 SECTION IX – OPENING DAY ANALYSIS ................................................................................ 16 SECTION X – FUTURE BUILD CONDITION ............................................................................ 18 SECTION XI – TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS ....................................................................... 20 Evaluation of Applicable Warrants .............................................................................................. 22 SECTION XI – TRAFFIC MITIGATION RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................... 27 SECTION XIII – SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS................................................................ 28 THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 17 List of Figures Figure 1 - Study Area Map ................................................................................................ 2 Figure 2 - 2018 Existing AM (PM) Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ............................................ 3 Figure 3 - 2026 Future No-Build Traffic Volumes AM (PM) ................................................. 6 Figure 4 - Proposed The Forge: Lemont Quarries Site Plan ............................................... 8 Figure 5 - Walker Road Extension Plan and Potential Overflow Parking .............................. 9 Figure 6 - Summer Season Visitor Flow Estimates ........................................................... 11 Figure 7 - Shoulder Season Visitor Flow Estimates .......................................................... 12 Figure 8 – Winter Season Visitor Flow Estimates ............................................................. 13 Figure 9 - Forge Weekday Peak Hour Trip Assignments AM (PM) .................................... 15 Figure 10 - Forge Weekend Peak Hour Trip Assignments AM (PM) .................................. 16 Figure 11 - Opening Day Weekday ................................................................................. 17 Figure 12 - Opening Day Weekend ................................................................................. 17 Figure 13 - Future Build Weekday Estimated Traffic Volumes AM (PM) ............................. 18 Figure 14 - Future Build Weekend Estimated Traffic Volumes AM (PM) ............................ 19 Figure 15 - Warrant 2, Volume Graph from the MUTCD ................................................... 2 7 EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 18 Traffic Impact Study – Final Report November 14, 2018 The Forge: Lemont Quarries Adventure Park Page 1 The Forge: Lemont Quarries Adventure Park Traffic Study SECTION I – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This study was undertaken to determine the impact of the proposed The Forge: Lemont Quarries Adventure Park on the surrounding street network in Lemont, IL. The facility proposes to create an outdoor activity park with cycling, rock climbing, hiking and other similar activities on the site of an old quarry. The site will be located on the north side of Main Street near the intersection with Walker Road. The activity park will be located north of the railroad tracks between the tracks and the I&M Canal. The park will generate activity year-round, with peak visitors expected in the summer season and a greater number of visitors on weekend days than on typical weekdays. Existing trip data was collected on August 9th, 2018 from 6:00 AM to 8:00 PM at the intersection of Main St. and Walker Rd. to observe the typical traffic peak hours. The hours in which the intersection experienced the greatest vehicular volume during the morning and the evening, known as the peak hours, were determined from the collected data. These peak weekday volumes were modeled to determine the existing operating conditions. Additionally, traffic growth at a rate of 0.5% per year was assumed and traffic growth calculated to evaluate a future 2026 “No-Build” scenario without the site which was also modeled. Both models show acceptable traffic flows with the existing intersection configuration. Traffic projections for the site were provided by the developer based on similar sites in operation where data is available. These projections estimated weekday and weekend traffic for three different operating seasons for the site. These forecasted trips were added to the existing traffic to get new proposed volumes. Some geometric changes were assumed for the intersection, including a left turn lane for each direction of traffic and a new north leg of the intersection to provide access to the site. The future horizon was then evaluated for the site based on 2026 traffic with the site in operation. The results shown in the traffic models for a two-way stop condition show very poor levels of service with significant delays for northbound and southbound traffic. Of specific concern was the PM weekday traffic flows and much of the weekend afternoon traffic flows during the peak summer season. One mitigation option which was considered was to evaluate the need for a traffic signal to manage the traffic to and from the site and through the intersection. Traffic signal warrants were evaluated and would not be met for typical weekday traffic. However, Warrant 1 and 2 were both met when weekend traffic flows to the site were considered in conjunction with the existing weekday traffic flows. The intersection control was modified from the two-way stop control to actuated traffic signal control with an assumed 90 second cycle length. The model results show this appears to operate very effectively for the intersection. The current data does not warrant a signal but once the site is complete and open in the future it should meet warrants. It was suggested that at that future date, a traffic control signal be considered for the Walker Road and Main Street intersection in conjunction with the construction and opening and operation of the site. EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 19 Traffic Impact Study – Final Report November 14, 2018 The Forge: Lemont Quarries Adventure Park Page 2 SECTION II – INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND OF SITE TERRA Engineering has been asked to evaluate the traffic impacts of the proposed new recreational facility called The Forge: Lemont Quarries Adventure Park (The Forge) which is proposed to be constructed in Lemont, Illinois. This parcel was formerly part of an old quarry site located along both the railroad and the I&M Canal. The site will host a new outdoor adventure park which is expected to contain a mountain bike park, climbing walls, zip lines, hiking trails, kayaking and similar activities. The site proposes to construct access from the north side of the intersection of Main Street and Walker Road and will form the 4th leg of the existing T-intersection. The main portion of the site will be located to the north of the existing rail line which runs through the property with an unimproved overflow parking area for peak days which will be located to the south of the railroad along the north side of Main Street. Main Street is a two-lane road with traffic flow in both directions and a proposed new westbound left turn lane is proposed to be constructed by IDOT at the intersection with Walker Road. Walker Road is also a two-lane two-way roadway which runs north-south and terminates currently at the intersection with Main Street. SECTION III – STUDY AREA The proposed site lies at the northwest corner of the intersection of Main Street and Walker Road in the City of Lemont, Illinois. The proposed site location and adjacent street network and study intersections are provided in Figure 1. Figure 1 - Study Area Map SPROJECT SITE WALKER RD POTENTIAL OVERFLOW PARKING EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 20 Traffic Impact Study – Final Report November 14, 2018 The Forge: Lemont Quarries Adventure Park Page 3 Traffic data was collected around the proposed site at the following intersection:  Walker Road at Main Street (unsignalized) Main Street is 2-lane road which runs in the east-west direction with a speed limit of 45 mph near the project location. On the south side of Main St, near the site there is a Franciscan Village assisted living facility. There road appears to have approximately 12-foot wide lanes in each direction with little or no shoulder provided. The road has aerial utility lines along the south side of the pavement and is designed to rural standards with open drainage. No pedestrian facilities are provided along either side of the roadway. Walker Road is a two-lane roadway (one lane in each direction) running in the north-south direction. The roadway lanes appear to be approximately 12 feet wide with 2-foot shoulders near the intersection with Main Street. There no street parking allowed on either side of the street. The posted speed limit on Walker Road is 40 mph. The roadway is also designed to rural standards with no curbs and open drainage along both sides of the road. No pedestrian facilities are provided along either side of the roadway. SECTION IV – EXISTING ROADWAY TRAFFIC CONDITIONS Existing traffic data was collected on August 9th, 2018, while school was not in session for the summer. This may result in lower numbers as summer traffic is traditionally lower than what is collected during the school year. Turning movement counts as well as pedestrian and bicycle counts were collected from 6:00 AM to 8:00 PM to ascertain the times the intersection experienced the peak volume of vehicular traffic. The AM peak hour occurred between 6:15 AM and 7:15 AM, while the PM peak hour was observed between 4:30 PM and 5:30 PM. Not surprisingly as there are no pedestrian facilities provided near the site, only one pedestrian was observed throughout the entire day. TERRA used the highest overall hourly total volumes collected at the intersection to provide an evaluation for the existing traffic near the proposed site. The AM and PM peak hour volumes used for analysis of the intersection are provided in Figure 2. Level of Service and Delay Delay is one of the main components of measuring the service of an interrupted flow roadway. The principal measure of this delay is control delay which is defined by the Highway Capacity Manual as “a quantitative stratification of a performance measure or measures representing quality of service”. The The Forge - Existing Traffic Data - AM (PM) Lemont, IL ↑ 244 (487)N 23 (68) Main St ↰↱ (473)269 1358(30)8 ↴(13)(40)Walker Rd Figure 2 - 2018 Existing AM (PM) Peak Hour Traffic Volumes EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 21 Traffic Impact Study – Final Report November 14, 2018 The Forge: Lemont Quarries Adventure Park Page 4 LOS is measured on an A-F scale, where “LOS A represents the best operating conditions from the traveler’s perspective and LOS F the worst. For cost, environmental impact, and other reasons, roadways are typically designed not to provide LOS A conditions during peak periods but instead to provide some lower LOS that balances individual travelers’ desires against society’s desires and financial resources”. The LOS designation was created as a tool to help laypersons and decision makers determine the difference in operating conditions for a particular location. There are six representative levels of service defined for each type of facility which can be analyzed, and they are designated using letters A through F. These letters are an attempt to translate “complex numerical performance results into a simple A-F system representative of travelers’ perceptions of the quality of service”. LOS calculations are provided for different modes of travel such as motorized vehicle, pedestrian, bicycle and transit modes. Safety of the intersection is not included in the analysis of LOS. Level of Service is defined separately for signalized and unsignalized intersections as shown in the Table 1. Table 1 – Level of Service Thresholds for Control Delay (seconds/vehicle) Level of Service Control Delay per Vehicle (sec/veh) Signalized Unsignalized A 0-10 sec 0-10 sec B > 10-20 sec > 10-15 sec C > 20-35 sec > 15-25 sec D > 35-55 sec > 25-35 sec E > 55-80 sec > 35-50 sec F > 80 sec > 50 sec LOS is a measure of the acceptability of the amount of delay, therefore it is considered slightly subjective as what is acceptable in a major metropolitan area may not be acceptable in a smaller city or rural area. These delays are computed as the average control delay per vehicle arriving at the intersection. For signalized intersections, delays are evaluated for the overall intersection, while on streets which are unsignalized; delay is analyzed for each movement separately and only includes side street traffic and left turns from the major street. Another factor evaluated when determining traffic operations at an intersection is the volume to capacity (v/c) ratio of the critical lane group. This ratio compares the rate of flow to the available capacity of the intersection and is considered a measure of the degree of saturation. Sustainable values of a v/c ratio range from 0.0 to 1.0. Values in excess of 1.0 indicate a possible excess of demand and are considered to be LOS F. In a dense urban area, it is generally acceptable to provide LOS D in all areas but consider LOS E in certain situations where traffic demand is very high on major arterial routes. Occasionally side streets will be allowed to operate at LOS F when volume and demand on the side street is considered very low and servicing these vehicles would cause a greater negative impact on the progression of through traffic on the main route. EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 22 Traffic Impact Study – Final Report November 14, 2018 The Forge: Lemont Quarries Adventure Park Page 5 The existing traffic data collected was modeled in Synchro 10 traffic modeling software for analysis of the intersection. The analysis was performed for the existing traffic during the peak period in the morning and again in the afternoon. For the existing analysis, it was assumed that the intersection would remain stop-controlled on the side street, Walker Road, and allow free-flow traffic on Main Street. The existing traffic analysis performance data from the model is provided in Table 2 for the AM and PM periods and the Synchro output from the existing analysis is provided in Appendix B. Table 2 – Existing Traffic Analysis Weekday AM Peak Weekday PM Peak LOS Delay v/c LOS Delay v/c Walker Road and Main Street Unsignalized Intersection – Westbound Northbound A B 7.9 11.2 0.02 0.12 A C 8.8 16.7 0.07 0.16 Overall the intersection functions well with the westbound left turn experiencing very little delay of under 10 seconds and a LOS A in both the AM and PM peak. The eastbound and westbound traffic is currently free flow on Main Street, so the delays caused are only for vehicles to identify a break in eastbound traffic to make the left turn. The westbound delay experienced affects both the through traffic and the left turning traffic as there is currently no dedicated turn lane westbound onto Walker Road. Through traffic may sometimes be blocked for a short time while waiting for left turning cars to complete their movements but can freely move forward upon reaching the front of the traffic queue. Northbound traffic on Walker Road also appears to operate relatively well in the current condition with LOS B in the AM and LOS C in the PM Peak and delays of under 20 seconds in either case. Again, the northbound traffic is only one shared lane for both the left and right turning movement, so the delay is experienced for all traffic at the stop sign. The existing traffic volumes and corresponding traffic evaluations from Table 2 will be used as the base scenario for the existing conditions for the study. SECTION V – COMPUTATION OF BACKGROUND TRAFFIC Often when projecting traffic for a new development with a future opening date, it is necessary to project an increase in the existing traffic due to background growth in the area from other sources including new developments and overall growth of the area. Over the last several years in many areas traffic volumes have remained flat without a lot of growth. To see what traffic volumes are around the proposed site, TERRA utilized the “Getting Around Illinois” website to obtain recent traffic volumes. The most recent ADT’s available through the webpage show a ADT of 7,800 along Main Street in 2014 with a 2010 ADT of 7,700. On Walker Road an ADT of 1,650 was recorded in 2014 with an ADT of 1,550 recorded in 2010. Using these values of traffic for 2014 and 2010 and adding them together to show potential traffic through the Main and Walker intersection resulted in 9,450 cars in 2014 and 9,250 cars in 2010. It appears that approximately 200 more vehicles were recorded in the area at EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 23 Traffic Impact Study – Final Report November 14, 2018 The Forge: Lemont Quarries Adventure Park Page 6 the end of the four-year period. This overall growth is estimated to be about 2% total growth, or about 0.5% growth per year. As this development would be planned for a 2021 opening at the earliest, it will be necessary to increase the opening day background traffic for a period of three years to a 2021 date for analysis. Therefore a 5-year design horizon after opening would be estimated for a six-year horizon for future analysis in 2026. The existing traffic provided earlier in Figure 2 was adjusted by the growth factor to provide estimated 2026 traffic volumes. The calculations to adjust these traffic volumes is provided in Appendix C and the resulting volumes for the 2026 traffic is shown in Figure 3. The next step was to create a model for the 2026 traffic showing a no-build condition for establishing the future background traffic without the addition of the Forge development in the area. The “Future No-Build” traffic for the study area was developed and provides a frame of reference for the future analysis to help show what is attributable to the Forge development and what is background traffic. The results of the updated analysis for the 2026 no-build condition are provided in Table 3 with the synchro results provided in Appendix D. These new volumes are considered a no-build condition and are representative of what the expected traffic levels would be in 6 years if no changes were made to the existing area. Table 3 – Future No-Build Traffic Analysis Weekday AM Peak Weekday PM Peak LOS Delay v/c LOS Delay v/c Walker Road and Main Street Unsignalized Intersection – Westbound Northbound A B 8.0 11.4 0.02 0.13 A C 8.9 17.7 0.08 0.18 The additional traffic and delay caused by a 0.5% growth over eight years does not significantly affect the LOS. The largest predicted delay is the on the northbound lane of Walker Rd, which would have an increased delay of 1.0 seconds. Drivers are not likely to notice an increase in delay in the future no-build condition. Figure 3 - 2026 Future No-Build Traffic Volumes AM (PM) EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 24 Traffic Impact Study – Final Report November 14, 2018 The Forge: Lemont Quarries Adventure Park Page 7 SECTION VI – SITE LAYOUT The proposed The Forge: Lemont Quarries site is to be located on the north side of the railroad tracks which run in the east-west direction about 500 feet to the north side of Main Street. The main portion of the site will be located between the existing railroad tracks and the I&M Canal which runs roughly parallel to the railroad and about 625 feet to the north of the tracks. Currently there is no roadway access to this location, so a new roadway access is proposed as the north leg of the Walker Road intersection. This roadway would provide access across the railroad tracks and into the main parking area for the site. Figure 4 shows the proposed site plan in its current configuration. The plans include constructing a new outdoor recreation park which will include a mountain bike park, climbing walls, zip lines, hiking trails, kayaking and similar activities. This use is a unique use for the area which will be expected to generate new trips to the site. As this is a recreational use, it is expected that weekend traffic and visits will be higher than weekday visits to the site. The proposed main parking lot will contain about 412 spaces per the current site plan. It is expected that during peak periods of visits in the summer months and on other busy weekends that the proposed parking area may not be adequate to store the expected vehicle traffic. To accommodate these additional vehicles an overflow parking area is proposed along the extend Walker Road to the north, between the existing train tracks and the north side of Main Street. It appears that there will be an entrance to this lot from the extended Walker Road, and that there may also be a proposed access point at the east end of the lot directly onto Main Street. This overflow lot and the proposed extension of Walker Road into the site is shown in Figure 5. EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 25 Traffic Impact Study – Final Report November 14, 2018 The Forge: Lemont Quarries Adventure Park Page 8 Figure 4 - Proposed The Forge: Lemont Quarries Site Plan EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 26 Traffic Impact Study – Final Report November 14, 2018 The Forge: Lemont Quarries Adventure Park Page 9 Figure 5 - Walker Road Extension Plan and Potential Overflow Parking EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 27 Traffic Impact Study – Final Report November 14, 2018 The Forge: Lemont Quarries Adventure Park Page 10 SECTION VII – TRIP GENERATION When evaluating proposed traffic at a new development, it is necessary to estimate the number of new vehicle trips which will be created by the new uses at the site. This estimation of trips is typically generated using data obtained from traffic counts at other similar locations or by using the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual. The ITE Manual collects data at existing sites for all types of uses such as hotels, shopping centers, apartment complexes, subdivisions, offices, etc. and compiles it into book form as a reference for designers. The data in the 10th edition is based on more than 5,000 trip generation studies which have been collected over several decades by transportation professionals. As stated, the standard of practice is to estimate the number of trips a new development will generate based on the Trip Generation Manual, whenever possible. However, for a unique facility such as this, there is no land use in the manual that is reasonably analogous to The Forge. Land uses such as “Rock Climbing Gym,” Multipurpose Recreational Facility,” or “Amusement Park,” are based on less than five studies, and don’t incorporate all of the activities or the size of this proposed site. Accurately estimating new vehicle trips caused by The Forge using the ITE manual would be difficult and have a high degree of uncertainty. The Forge has provided Visitor Flow Estimates which includes daily car counts for each hour from 7:00 AM to 9:00 PM, both for weekday and weekend traffic. The estimates are broken down into the Summer Season, Shoulder Season and Winter Season, with varying overall estimates for each time period. Figures 6-8 show the estimated daily visitors and corresponding car counts The Forge will generate during each season during a typical weekend and weekday. It is estimated based on the values provided that the summer season is 4 months in duration, the winter season is 5 months in duration and the shoulder season consists of 3 months total, likely split with one and a half months between the winter and summer in both fall and spring. It was also determined that the visitor and car counts provided are likely only an ingress number as the visitor numbers and car counts seem to coincide in magnitude, therefore the numbers don’t appear to indicate volumes of traffic leaving the site. Several assumptions will need to be made about the times and volumes of traffic exiting the site. TERRA divided the hourly car counts provided for each hour by four to average the total per hour into 15-minute intervals. These 15-minute intervals match the existing traffic count periods TERRA obtained at the Main Street and Walker Road intersection. The next step was to add each of the 15-minute visitor car estimates to each of the existing traffic volumes per 15-minute period. Once these added values were calculated, TERRA reviewed the data at the intersection to determine the hours in which the intersection would experience the highest vehicular volume during the day and during the evening. The peak hours when considering the daily car counts estimated by The Forge coincide with the peak hours of the existing traffic, which are 6:15 AM to 7:15 AM, and 4:30 PM to 5:30 PM. EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 28 Traffic Impact Study – Final Report November 14, 2018 The Forge: Lemont Quarries Adventure Park Page 11 Figure 6 - Summer Season Visitor Flow Estimates EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 29 Traffic Impact Study – Final Report November 14, 2018 The Forge: Lemont Quarries Adventure Park Page 12 Figure 7 - Shoulder Season Visitor Flow Estimates EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 30 Traffic Impact Study – Final Report November 14, 2018 The Forge: Lemont Quarries Adventure Park Page 13 Figure 8 – Winter Season Visitor Flow Estimates EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 31 Traffic Impact Study – Final Report November 14, 2018 The Forge: Lemont Quarries Adventure Park Page 14 For the weekday peaks of traffic during the peak summer season, during the hour of 7:00 AM, The Forge estimates 10 vehicles will enter the site, which is an average of 2.5 vehicles every 15-minutes. Because the AM peak hour is from 6:15 AM to 7:15 AM, TERRA assumed 3 vehicles will enter the site during the AM peak hour. The trips generated during the PM peak hour were calculated slightly differently. During the hour of 4:00 PM, The Forge estimates the daily car count will be 31 cars which is an average of 7.75 cars every 15 minutes. During the hour of 5:00 PM, The Forge estimates the daily car count will be 41 cars, which averages to 10.25 cars every 15 minutes. Since the PM peak hour is from 4:30 PM to 5:30PM, TERRA determined that during this time, 15.5 vehicles are trips caused by The Forge between 4:30 PM to 5:00 PM, and 20.5 vehicles are trips caused by The Forge between 5:00 PM and 5:30 PM, for a total of 36 cars during this hour. The evaluation assumes that all of the provided vehicle counts are for vehicles arriving at the site and do not take into account when vehicles exit the site. With the AM peak of adjacent street traffic from 6:15-7:15 AM and the arrivals starting at 7 AM, it is assumed that either no vehicles or a negligible amount would depart the site during the AM peak. It is assumed that many people would spend several hours at the site participating in activities throughout the day. This would seem to keep the AM exiting trips lower and would shift many exiting trips to the PM peak. TERRA estimated trips departing based partially on the estimated arrival times, as well as the time of day as a percentage of the daily traffic. The total arrivals and departures for the site, along with the overall % per hour and the net cars within the parking areas are provided in Table 4. Table 4 – Breakdown of Traffic Flows – Summer Season Time Weekday Weekend Entering % of Total Exiting % of Total Net in parking area Entering % of Total Exiting % of Total Net in parking area 7:00 AM 10 1.9% 0 0.0% 10 44 2.0% 0 0.0% 44 8:00 AM 10 1.9% 0 0.0% 20 44 2.0% 0 0.0% 88 9:00 AM 21 4.1% 0 0.0% 41 87 4.0% 0 0.0% 175 10:00 AM 39 7.5% 10 2.0% 70 164 7.5% 44 2.0% 295 11:00 AM 39 7.5% 16 3.0% 93 218 10.0% 65 3.0% 448 12:00 PM 57 11.0% 26 5.0% 124 240 11.0% 109 5.0% 579 1:00 PM 62 12.0% 26 5.0% 160 262 12.0% 109 5.0% 732 2:00 PM 52 10.0% 36 7.0% 176 218 10.0% 153 7.0% 797 3:00 PM 47 9.1% 41 8.0% 182 164 7.5% 175 8.0% 786 4:00 PM 31 6.0% 52 10.0% 161 109 5.0% 218 10.0% 677 5:00 PM 41 7.9% 67 13.0% 135 175 8.0% 284 13.0% 568 6:00 PM 47 9.1% 78 15.0% 104 196 9.0% 327 15.0% 437 7:00 PM 41 7.9% 78 15.0% 67 175 8.0% 327 15.0% 285 8:00 PM 16 3.1% 62 12.0% 21 65 3.0% 262 12.0% 88 9:00 PM 5 1.0% 26 5.0% 0 22 1.0% 110 5.0% 0 Total 518 100.0% 518 100.0% 0 2183 100.0% 2183 100.0% 0 EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 32 Traffic Impact Study – Final Report November 14, 2018 The Forge: Lemont Quarries Adventure Park Page 15 The estimation by TERRA assume that on a weekday, the 4:00 PM hour will have 52 exiting vehicles and that the 5:00 PM hour will have 67 vehicles. Again, taking half of each total and adding them together to get the total between 4:30 and 5:30 PM we estimate that there will be about 60 vehicles leaving the site during the afternoon peak hour. For the weekend, the peak hours appear to be from 1:00 PM to 2:00 PM, and from 6:00 PM to 7:00 PM, in which it is estimated 109 and 327 vehicles respectively that will be discharged from the site. SECTION VIII – TRIP ASSIGNMENTS The calculated trips for the new development need to then be assigned to the network to evaluate the future traffic created by The Forge. TERRA used the percentage of vehicles traveling on each leg of the intersection on the existing traffic model to determine which leg of the intersection vehicles entering the site are coming from, or which direction they are likely to travel when exiting the site. The existing direction of travel in theory would approximate how drivers would behave when turning in and out of the site. When the existing traffic was recorded, it was observed during the PM peak hour, 43% of vehicles are entering the intersection from westbound Main St, 45% are entering from eastbound Main St, and 12% are entering from Walker Rd. If the 36 vehicles entering the site are distributed proportionally, it would follow that during the PM peak hour, 18 vehicles are entering the site from westbound Main St, 16 vehicles are entering the site from eastbound Main St, and 2 vehicles are entering from Walker Rd. The same process was also followed when calculating the AM entering traffic for the light volumes expected to arrive during the AM Peak. The turning movements of vehicles exiting the site were calculated similarly, using the assumption that vehicles leaving the site will travel in the same proportions to the overall directional flow of what was observed in the existing traffic model. These trips were then assigned to the Walker Road and Main Street intersection. The proposed main parking lot was not expected to exceed capacity on a weekday, even during the peak traffic season, so it was assumed that all weekday exiting traffic would use the north leg of the Walker intersection. The trip assignments for weekday traffic are shown in Figure 9. The Forge - Trip Generation Data On A Weekday - AM (PM) Lemont, IL The Forge (27)(5)(28)1 (18)↑000N ↲↳ Main St (16)1 ↰↱ 1↴(2)Walker Rd Figure 9 - Forge Weekday Peak Hour Trip Assignments AM (PM) EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 33 Traffic Impact Study – Final Report November 14, 2018 The Forge: Lemont Quarries Adventure Park Page 16 It was noted during the review of the expected visitor totals that the weekend traffic for the facility is significantly higher than the weekday visits. The volumes of vehicles on the weekend to the site are so significant that they will likely have a much greater impact on the traffic along Walker and Main Street than the weekday visits. TERRA Did not collect weekend base traffic data at the intersection of Walker Road with Main Street. Traditionally weekend commuter traffic is much lower than on the weekday volumes during the same hours of the day. Peak traffic flows are more often in the hours around noon, and the expected visitor totals seem to reflect a similar expectation. The overall directional flows assume that during the AM peak hour, 45% of the traffic entered the intersection traveling from eastbound Main St, and 45% entered the intersection traveling westbound on Main St. Additionally, based on the existing traffic, 42% exited the intersection traveling westbound on Main St and 53% exited traveling eastbound on Main St. During the PM peak hour, based on the existing traffic, 45% of traffic entering the intersection traveled from eastbound Main St, and 50% entered from westbound Main St. Additionally, 45% of traffic exits the intersection traveling westbound Main St and 46% exit traveling eastbound Main St. These percentages were used to assign the weekend traffic flows in and out of the site. It was determined that the peak traffic flows entering the site would be at approximately 1 PM on the weekend and that the exiting traffic would peak between 6-7 PM in the evening. The estimated values for these peaks were used and the weekend trip assignments were generated. These values are shown in Figure 10. SECTION IX – OPENING DAY ANALYSIS Assuming the development is built in 2021, the volumes for the existing traffic were multiplied by a growth multiplier to account for growth rate of 0.5% to account for one year of growth in the existing traffic. The proposed trips generated by the site were then added to the 2021 adjusted traffic, which creates the Opening Day model on a weekday. The Opening Day model is the traffic the intersection is predicted to experience once the development is built in 2021. The resulting volumes for the weekday traffic flows are provided in Figure 11, the weekend volumes are shown in Figure 12. It was assumed for the initial analysis that the intersection would remain a two-way stop, in which Walker Rd and the exit from The Forge would be controlled by stop signs, and Main St would be allowed to free flow. It was assumed however that adjustments would be made to the geometry on the roadway with left turn The Forge - Trip Generation Data On A Weekend - AM (PM) Lemont, IL The Forge ↑(147)(29)(151)118 (98)N 46558 ↲↳ Main St (89)118 ↰↱ 26↴(9)Walker Rd Figure 10 - Forge Weekend Peak Hour Trip Assignments AM (PM) EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 34 Traffic Impact Study – Final Report November 14, 2018 The Forge: Lemont Quarries Adventure Park Page 17 lanes added for both east and west bound traffic, as well as adding a northbound left turn lane and a 3-lane roadway section to extend the new Walker Road to the north (SB thru/right, SB left and NB). The results of the Synchro Analysis are summarized in Table 9 with the full calculations provided in Appendix F. Table 9 – Opening Day Traffic Analysis Weekday AM Peak Weekday PM Peak LOS Delay v/c LOS Delay v/c Walker Road & Main Street Unsignalized Intersection – Northbound Left Northbound Thru/Right Southbound Left Southbound Thru/Right Eastbound Left Westbound Left B B A A A A 14.6 10.4 0.0 0.0 7.8 7.9 0.04 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.02 E B E C A A 39.3 13.3 46.3 15.4 8.6 8.8 0.13 0.10 0.26 0.09 0.02 0.08 Weekend AM Peak Weekend PM Peak LOS Delay v/c LOS Delay v/c Walker Road & Main Street Unsignalized Intersection – Northbound Left Northbound Thru/Right Southbound Left Southbound Thru/Right Eastbound Left Westbound Left D C E B A A 25.6 16.1 39.4 11.8 8.5 7.9 0.08 0.23 0.38 0.10 0.11 0.02 F C F D A A 137.6 19.8 694.1 34.5 9.3 8.8 0.37 0.18 2.25 0.63 0.10 0.08 Figure 12 - Opening Day Weekend Estimated Traffic Volumes AM (PM) Figure 11 - Opening Day Weekday Estimated Traffic Volumes AM (PM) EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 35 Traffic Impact Study – Final Report November 14, 2018 The Forge: Lemont Quarries Adventure Park Page 18 Comparing the traffic analysis for Opening Day during the weekday and the Existing Traffic analysis, the LOS remains unchanged. However, in the evening, there is a significant difference in the northbound movement. The LOS drops from a C to an E, and the delay is increased from 16.7 seconds to 39.3 seconds. The new southbound left movement exiting the proposed development also suffers a significant delay of 46.3 seconds and the v/c ratio is at 0.26. The two-way stop condition does not appear to properly handle the traffic flow at the intersection during the peak evening hours of operation based on the projected flows from the developer. On the weekend during the peak summer months, the traffic is expected to be much heavier due to the attraction provided by the Forge. The southbound left movement during the earlier portion of the day around 1 PM has a LOS E and suffers a delay of 39.4 seconds. In the later afternoon peak, when it is expected that many people may be finishing their visit to the Forge, traffic volumes exiting the development are greatly increased, and if similar traffic to the PM weekday existing traffic are seen on Main St, it becomes very difficult to find gaps for traffic to exit the north leg of the intersection. The northbound left movement also sees a long delay and has a LOS F and a delay of 137.6 seconds, however the southbound left movement, projects vehicles leaving the site to suffer extreme delays of almost 11 minutes. The southbound traffic is likely to get impatient waiting and accept smaller gaps to exit the site resulting in less safe operation. The left turn lane is heavily saturated, and the v/c ratio is double what is considered sustainable. Projected models of the site show queues that back up into the parking area and are not able to clear, creating gridlock on the north leg. SECTION X – FUTURE BUILD CONDITION The study also investigated the future traffic scenario five years after construction was finished which is projected to be in the year 2026. To develop this condition, it will be necessary to use the projected traffic increases for a 2026 Future No-Build condition as the base for the traffic volumes and add in the trip assignments provided previously. A 0.5% growth was assumed and added to the volumes in the existing traffic model, resulting in the 2026 Future No-Build traffic model. The Future Build model then, is the sum of the generated trips estimated by The Forge added to the Future No-Build calculations provided previously. The resulting traffic volumes are provided in Figure 13 for weekday traffic and Figure 14 for weekend traffic. The Future Build volumes were then placed into the Synchro modeling software for analysis and the results of the model are provided in Table 10 with the full Synchro output from the analysis provided in Appendix G. Figure 13 - Future Build Weekday Estimated Traffic Volumes AM (PM) EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 36 Traffic Impact Study – Final Report November 14, 2018 The Forge: Lemont Quarries Adventure Park Page 19 Table 10 – Future Build Traffic Analysis Weekday AM Peak Weekday PM Peak LOS Delay v/c LO S Delay v/c Walker Road & Main Street Unsignalized Intersection – Northbound Left Northbound Thru/Right Southbound Left Southbound Thru/Right Eastbound Left Westbound Left B B A A A A 14.8 10.5 0.0 0.0 7.8 7.9 0.04 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.02 E B E C A A 41.4 13.5 49.3 15.7 8.7 8.9 0.13 0.10 0.27 0.09 0.02 0.08 Weekend AM Peak Weekend PM Peak LOS Delay v/c LO S Delay v/c Walker Road & Main Street Unsignalized Intersection – Northbound Left Northbound Thru/Right Southbound Left Southbound Thru/Right Eastbound Left Westbound Left D C E B A A 26.1 16.3 40.0 11.9 8.5 8.0 0.08 0.23 0.39 0.10 0.11 0.02 F C F E A A 152.6 20.3 757.4 36.4 9.3 8.9 0.40 0.19 2.38 0.64 0.10 0.08 Comparing the 2026 Future Build to the Opening day yields what is intuitively expected. Since the two-way stop configuration does not adequately solve the problem of gridlock in the Opening Day scenario, it is unlikely to solve it in the Future Build condition where the population has grown and there are more vehicles. There is no change on Main St which is free flowing, but there is a significant increase in the southbound left movement. Vehicles Figure 14 - Future Build Weekend Estimated Traffic Volumes AM (PM) EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 37 Traffic Impact Study – Final Report November 14, 2018 The Forge: Lemont Quarries Adventure Park Page 20 turning left are expected to be delayed 63.6 seconds more in the Future Build condition than in the Opening Day condition. This increase may be caused by the increased number of vehicles traveling on Main St, which reduces the frequency of vehicular gaps needed for cars leaving The Forge to safely turn left into Main St. Based on the weekend traffic flows it will be necessary to consider mitigation alternatives to keep the traffic from backing up both across the railroad tracks and into the site when the site opens SECTION XI – TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS A possible solution to mitigate the gridlock and high levels of delay once The Forge is built is to install a traffic signal at the intersection of Main St and Walker Rd. The need for a traffic signal is justified when there is a high volume of vehicular or pedestrian traffic on a typical day. The standard of practice for evaluating the need for a traffic signal is to meet the warrants described in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). The MUTCD is a publication which is the federally accepted standard for evaluating traffic control devices and is developed by the U.S. Department of Transportation in conjunction with the Federal Highway Administration. The MUTCD provides warrants for the evaluation of intersections for traffic signal control. If any warrant is met, a traffic signal may be justified. There are nine (9) warrants which are evaluated to determine the need for a signal, and these warrants will be evaluated to see if they still apply at either of these intersections. As discussed, the MUTCD provides nine warrant evaluations to determine the need for installation of a traffic signal at a given location. The nine warrant evaluations are as follows: Warrant 1, Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume Warrant 2, Four-Hour Vehicular Volume Warrant 3, Peak Hour Warrant 4, Pedestrian Volume Warrant 5, School Crossing Warrant 6, Coordinated Signal System Warrant 7, Crash Experience Warrant 8, Roadway Network Warrant 9, Intersection Near a Grade Crossing Each of the warrants has specific instructions provided in the MUTCD for how they are to be applied and if they are applicable to certain situations. Several of these warrants would not apply to the Main Street and Walker Road intersection and can be removed from consideration for this report. The warrants which do not need to be considered are as follows: Warrant 3 – Peak Hour The Peak Hour signal warrant is intended for use at a location where traffic conditions are such that for a minimum of 1 hour of an average day, the minor-street traffic suffers undue delay when entering or crossing the major street. This signal warrant shall be applied only in unusual cases, such as office complexes, manufacturing plants, industrial complexes, or high-occupancy vehicle facilities that attract or discharge large numbers of vehicles over a EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 38 Traffic Impact Study – Final Report November 14, 2018 The Forge: Lemont Quarries Adventure Park Page 21 short time. This sounds like a possible scenario that applies to our study, however it isn’t really based on a shift change or work pattern and could vary throughout the day. This could be considered an unusual case affected by large site generating uses impacting the intersection, however conditions may meet a different warrant, so this was not specifically evaluated. Warrant 4 – Pedestrian Volume The Pedestrian Volume signal warrant is intended for application where the traffic volume on a major street is so heavy that pedestrians experience excessive delay in crossing the major street. Only 1 pedestrian was observed during the traffic data collection, and this pedestrian crossed the minor street. There is not enough existing or projected pedestrian volume to consider Warrant 4. Warrant 5 – Pedestrian Volume The School Crossing signal warrant is intended for application where the fact that schoolchildren cross the major street is the principal reason to consider installing a traffic control signal. There is not a school nearby the development so Warrant 5 is not applicable for analysis. Warrant 6 – Coordinated Signal System The Coordinated Signal System warrant should be applied to signal systems which are used to maintain flow along a signalized corridor. The MUTCD states, “Progressive movement in a coordinated signal system sometimes necessitates installing traffic control signals at intersections where they would not otherwise be needed in order to maintain proper platooning of vehicles”. There is not a coordinated signal system in the area, so this warrant does not apply. Warrant 8 – Roadway Network The Roadway network warrant states that “Installing a traffic control signal at some intersections might be justified to encourage concentration and organization of traffic flow on a roadway network.” This location is not part of a larger signalized network, so this warrant does not apply. Warrant 9 – Intersection Near a Grade Crossing While there is a railroad line that runs parallel to Main St, it does not cross or interfere with any nearby roads to be applicable. The extension of Walker Road does cross the railroad track and this warrant could maybe considered to help ensure southbound traffic does not back up to the crossing for safety reasons. However as discussed below, the Walker Road and Main Street intersection may meet other warrants so this condition was not specifically evaluated in the report. EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 39 Traffic Impact Study – Final Report November 14, 2018 The Forge: Lemont Quarries Adventure Park Page 22 Evaluation of Applicable Warrants Warrant 1 – Eight Hour Vehicular Volume The Eight Hour Vehicular volume warrant has two possible conditions which either individually or in combination can be used to justify consideration of installation of a traffic signal. The conditions are known as Condition A and Condition B. “The Minimum Vehicular Volume,” Condition A, is intended for application at locations where a large volume of intersecting traffic is the principal reason to consider installing a traffic control signal. “The Interruption of Continuous Traffic,” Condition B, is intended for application at locations where Condition A is not satisfied and where the traffic volume on a major street is so heavy that traffic on a minor intersecting street suffers excessive delay or conflict in entering or crossing the major street. It is intended that Warrant 1 be treated as a single warrant. If Condition A is satisfied, then Warrant 1 is satisfied and analyses of Condition B and the combination of Conditions A and B are not needed. Similarly, if Condition B is satisfied, then Warrant 1 is satisfied and an analysis of the combination of Conditions A and B is not needed. Additionally, for the warrant to be met that either Condition A, Condition B, or a combination thereof must be met for at least 8 continuous or noncontinuous hours on an average day. The warrant evaluates the number of vehicles in both directions on the major (busier) street and the volume in one direction on the minor street. Both the minimum volumes on the major street and the minor street must be met during the same hour to count towards the 8 required hours for the warrant. Additionally, the volume limits depend on the number of traffic lanes approaching the intersection. The volume and approach requirements are as shown in Table 4C-1 from the MUTCD. If neither condition A nor B is met for the 100% traffic volume tests, then the warrant allows for an 80% threshold to be evaluated for the intersection, however for the 80% calculation to qualify for the warrant, it is required that BOTH 80% thresholds in Condition A and B are met at the intersection for any 8 hours on an average day. Main St is considered the major street because it has high vehicular volume than the existing Walker Road. Main St will be conceptualized as a 1-lane street. Paragraph 9 of Section 4C.01 of the MUTCD states that an “approach should be considered two lanes if approximately half of the traffic on the approach turns left and the left-turn lane is of sufficient length to accommodate all left-turn vehicles.” Based on the existing traffic model, it is the case that approximately half of the vehicles exiting The Forge would turn left onto Main St. As a two-way stop, the left turn lane when exiting The Forge is not of sufficient length to accommodate all left-turn vehicles. It appears based on the modeling that if a traffic signal is installed, the left-turn lane will be of sufficient length to accommodate all left- turn vehicles. The road exiting The Forge will therefore be conceptualized as a 2-lane minor street. Table 11 presents the MUTCD evaluation methodology for Conditions A and B for Warrant 1. EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 40 Traffic Impact Study – Final Report November 14, 2018 The Forge: Lemont Quarries Adventure Park Page 23 Table 11 – Table 4C-1 from MUTCD, Warrant 1, Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume Condition A – Minimum Vehicular Volume Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach Vehicles per hour on major street (total of both approaches) Vehicles per hour on higher-volume minor-street approach (one direction only) Major Street Minor Street 100%a 80%b 70%c 56%d 100%a 80%b 70%c 56%d 1 1 500 400 350 280 150 120 105 84 2 or more 1 600 480 420 336 150 120 105 84 2 or more 2 or more 600 480 420 336 200 160 140 112 1 2 or more 500 400 350 280 200 160 140 112 Condition B – Interruption of Continuous Traffic Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach Vehicles per hour on major street (total of both approaches) Vehicles per hour on higher-volume minor-street approach (one direction only) Major Street Minor Street 100%a 80%b 70%c 56%d 100%a 80%b 70%c 56%d 1 1 750 600 525 420 75 60 53 42 2 or more 1 900 720 630 504 75 60 53 42 2 or more 2 or more 900 720 630 504 100 80 70 56 1 2 or more 750 600 525 420 100 80 70 56 a Basic minimum hourly volume b Used for combination of Conditions A and B after adequate trial of other remedial measures c May be used when the major-street speed exceeds 40 mph or in an isolated community with a population of less than 10,000 d May be used for combination of Conditions A and B after adequate trial of other remedial measures when the major-street speed exceeds 40 mph or in an isolated community with a population of less than 10,000 Table 12 summarizes the hourly vehicular volumes TERRA recorded on a typical weekday with the addition of the projected visitor traffic from the site for each hour. 90% of the site traffic was added to the east and west Main Street existing traffic, and 10% was added to the northbound approach on Walker Road. The southbound approach volume is the projected vehicles leaving from Forge throughout the day. As shown in the table, on the major street (Main St) the total volume in both directions is considered, while on the minor street (Walker Rd) each side of the intersection is considered separately. The east-west columns are therefore the sum of the total volume of vehicles predicted to travel east and west. The north and south columns are the predicted number of vehicles going north and south respectively. Under Condition A, Minimum Vehicular Volume, for one lane on the major street and two lanes on the minor street, eight minimum hourly volumes for the major street must be at least 500 vehicles (the 100% column in Condition A of the major street) and at least 200 vehicles on the minor street (the 100% Column in Condition A of the minor street). From Table 12, there are only five hours in which the vehicles on the minor street would exceed 200 vehicles, therefore condition A for the 100% column is not met to justify a traffic signal. EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 41 Traffic Impact Study – Final Report November 14, 2018 The Forge: Lemont Quarries Adventure Park Page 24 Table 12 – Volume Summary for Warrant 1 Analysis Weekday Weekend Time East- West Vehicles North Vehicles South Vehicles Time East- West Vehicles North Vehicles South Vehicles 7:00 AM 533 73 0 7:00 AM 533 73 0 8:00 AM 514 56 0 8:00 AM 545 59 0 9:00 AM 505 52 0 9:00 AM 536 55 0 10:00 AM 413 47 10 10:00 AM 472 54 44 11:00 AM 409 52 16 11:00 AM 522 64 65 12:00 PM 456 45 26 12:00 PM 617 63 109 1:00 PM 505 59 26 1:00 PM 670 77 109 2:00 PM 475 48 36 2:00 PM 655 68 153 3:00 PM 654 59 41 3:00 PM 803 76 175 4:00 PM 935 45 52 4:00 PM 1041 56 218 5:00 PM 1019 45 67 5:00 PM 1089 53 284 6:00 PM 1004 53 78 6:00 PM 1125 67 327 7:00 PM 570 45 78 7:00 PM 704 60 327 8:00 PM 369 39 62 8:00 PM 490 53 262 9:00 PM 14 2 26 9:00 PM 59 7 110 Under Condition B, Interruption of Continuous Traffic, for one lane on the major street and two lanes on the minor street, eight minimum hourly volumes for the major street must be at least 750 vehicles (the 100% column in Condition B of the major street) and at least 100 vehicles on the minor street (the 100% Column in Condition B of the minor street). From Table 12, only the hours between 3:00 PM and 6:00 PM are predicted to more than 750 vehicles on the major street and more than 100 vehicles on the minor street. With these values, there are not enough hours with the vehicle requirement to meet condition B. There is also an 80% threshold which can be considered when remedial measures do not work, but this requires both Conditions A and B to be met at 80%. Under Condition A, for one lane on the major street and two or more lanes on the minor street, the 80% threshold requires that eight hourly volumes be at least 400 vehicles on the major street and 160 vehicles on the minor street. Under Condition B, for one lane on the major street and two or more lanes on the minor street, the 80% threshold requires that eight hourly volumes be at least 600 vehicles on the major street and 80 vehicles on the minor street. There are only six hours in which the hourly volume on the side street exceeds 160 vehicles, and thus Condition A is not met for the 80% threshold. Since condition A is not met for the 80% threshold, an analysis of condition B for the 80% threshold is not necessary. EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 42 Traffic Impact Study – Final Report November 14, 2018 The Forge: Lemont Quarries Adventure Park Page 25 Another lower threshold evaluation using 70% and 56% thresholds can also be used for small communities of less than 10,000 people or routes with speeds over 40 mph. In this case the speed on Main Street is listed at 45 mph, so these thresholds may apply. For the 70% condition, 140 vehicles would need to be observed on the side street to meet the condition. This would be the case for 7 hours on the weekend day, but this still falls one hour short for condition A. For condition B for interruption of continuous traffic, the side street volume requirements drop to 70 vehicles per hour with combined through traffic on the major street of 525 vehicles. This threshold is met for 8 hours on the weekend, so the Condition B for interruption of Continuous Traffic at the 70% threshold is met on the weekend. Warrant 1 would be met based on potential weekend traffic. Warrant 2 – Four-Hour Vehicular Volume The conditions for Warrant 2 are intended to be applied where the volume of intersecting traffic is the principal reason to consider installing a traffic control signal. Figure 4C-1 in the MUTCD shows a graph with several curves which delineate when a traffic signal should be considered based on volumes. If there are four continuous or noncontinuous hours that if plotted for vehicles per hour on the major street (total of both approaches) and vehicles per hour on the minor street (highest one direction only); are above the applicable curve, then Warrant 2 is satisfied. For the same reasons mentioned in Warrant 1, Main St is considered the major street and is conceptualized as a one-lane street, and the entrance to the Forge is the considered the minor street and is conceptualized as a two-lane street. Table 13 is the same table as Table 12. It summarizes the hourly vehicular volumes TERRA recorded on a weekday added to the projected summer site traffic for each hour. As in the analysis for Warrant 1, for the East and West movements, 90% of the site traffic was assigned to use Main Street to and from the site, while 10% was added to the northbound approach on Walker Road. Figure 15 shows four points plotted on the Warrant 2 Four-Hour Vehicular Volume graph that would fall above the “2 OR MORE LANES & 1 LANE” curve. Since there are at least four points for hourly volumes which fall above the curve in the graph, Warrant 2 is also met for weekend traffic. EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 43 Traffic Impact Study – Final Report November 14, 2018 The Forge: Lemont Quarries Adventure Park Page 26 Table 13 – Volume Summary for Warrant 2 Analysis Weekday Weekend Time East- West Vehicles North Vehicles South Vehicles Time East- West Vehicles North Vehicles South Vehicles 7:00 AM 533 73 0 7:00 AM 533 73 0 8:00 AM 514 56 0 8:00 AM 545 59 0 9:00 AM 505 52 0 9:00 AM 536 55 0 10:00 AM 413 47 10 10:00 AM 472 54 44 11:00 AM 409 52 16 11:00 AM 522 64 65 12:00 PM 456 45 26 12:00 PM 617 63 109 1:00 PM 505 59 26 1:00 PM 670 77 109 2:00 PM 475 48 36 2:00 PM 655 68 153 3:00 PM 654 59 41 3:00 PM 803 76 175 4:00 PM 935 45 52 4:00 PM 1041 56 218 5:00 PM 1019 45 67 5:00 PM 1089 53 284 6:00 PM 1004 53 78 6:00 PM 1125 67 327 7:00 PM 570 45 78 7:00 PM 704 60 327 8:00 PM 369 39 62 8:00 PM 490 53 262 9:00 PM 14 2 26 9:00 PM 59 7 110 EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 44 Traffic Impact Study – Final Report November 14, 2018 The Forge: Lemont Quarries Adventure Park Page 27 Figure 15 - Warrant 2, Volume Graph from the MUTCD SECTION XI – TRAFFIC MITIGATION RECOMMENDATIONS As the traffic signal warrants were met for weekend traffic, the intersection was modeled as a signalized intersection to determine if this would improve the overall traffic. The intersection geometry was left the same as in the two-way stop-controlled version of the analysis with the same volumes to see how the intersection would function with the traffic signal. The analysis was completed for both the Opening Day scenario and Future Build scenarios for the weekday and weekend traffic. The signal was modeled as an actuated signal with detection which would adapt to the observed traffic to attempt to function as efficiently as possible and a 90 second cycle length was assumed for all scenarios. The results of the analysis are provided in Tables 14 and 15, with the full results of the modeling provided in Appendix H. Table 14 – Opening Day Traffic Analysis (Signalized) Weekday AM Peak Weekday PM Peak LOS Delay v/c LOS Delay v/c Walker Road & Main Street Signalized Intersection A 8.6 0.44 A 7.7 0.44 Weekend AM Peak Weekend PM Peak LOS Delay v/c LOS Delay v/c Walker Road & Main Street Signalized Intersection B 10.1 0.59 B 15.7 0.75 EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 45 Traffic Impact Study – Final Report November 14, 2018 The Forge: Lemont Quarries Adventure Park Page 28 Table 15 – Future Build Traffic Analysis (Signalized) Weekday AM Peak Weekday PM Peak LOS Delay v/c LOS Delay v/c Walker Road & Main Street Signalized Intersection A 8.6 0.45 B 10.1 0.65 Weekend AM Peak Weekend PM Peak LOS Delay v/c LOS Delay v/c Walker Road & Main Street Signalized Intersection B 10.1 0.59 B 16.2 0.76 As shown in the results, the LOS for the overall intersection improve to LOS A of B in all conditions, which implies that the signalized intersection will operate efficiently to move traffic through the network. It appears that the signalized intersection will be a good solution to allow traffic to enter and exit the site while also minimizing the impact to residents in the area and the existing traffic flows through the Main Street and Walker intersection. It is expected that when traffic is light at the Forge site, the signal will remain mostly green to allow Main Street traffic to flow through the intersection but will allow more balanced flows on the weekend. SECTION XIII – SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS This study was undertaken to determine the impact of the proposed The Forge: Lemont Quarries Adventure Park on the surrounding street network in Lemont, IL. The facility proposes to create an outdoor activity park with cycling, rock climbing, hiking and other similar activities on the site of an old quarry. The site will be located on the north side of Main Street near the intersection with Walker Road. The activity park will be located north of the railroad tracks between the tracks and the I&M Canal. The park will generate activity year-round, with peak visitors expected in the summer season and a greater number of visitors on weekend days than on typical weekdays. Traffic and pedestrian data was collected at the intersection of Main Street with Walker Road on August 9, 2018 to get a better understanding of the existing vehicles on a typical weekday. The data was collected during summer, which typically results in lower counts as any traffic generated by schools is not included. In this case, because the peak traffic generation for the site is during the summer, and the expected visitors are lower during the months when school is in session it may better represent the peak expected condition. The existing data was then modeled using Synchro 10 traffic modeling analysis software to establish a base condition. This established the baseline for existing traffic, the results of which showed an acceptable Level of Service (LOS) in the existing condition with a side street stop-controlled intersection on Walker Road. Additionally, traffic was increased by 0.5% per year to evaluate a 2026 future scenario where the site was not built to evaluate traffic. This evaluation also assumed a stop for Walker Road and showed that with future growth and no changes the intersection appears to operate at acceptable levels. The vehicle trips for the site expansion were then estimated from the expected visitor and vehicle projections provided to TERRA by the developer. These new trips were then EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 46 Traffic Impact Study – Final Report November 14, 2018 The Forge: Lemont Quarries Adventure Park Page 29 assigned to the traffic network based on several factors including the existing traffic patterns and the easiest paths to I-55 and I-355. This model is considered the Opening Day scenario. Traffic was also modeled with an increase to a future horizon of 2026 for a Future Build condition, creating two (2) additional analysis scenarios. In both of these scenarios the geometry was changed to add a left turn lane for EB, WB and NB traffic and to create a new SB (north) leg of the intersection with a left turn lane and through/right shared lane. The models for the weekday conditions had some longer delays for northbound and southbound left turns in the afternoon peak that were estimated at LOS E. The summer weekend analysis shows the intersection is severely over capacity on the north leg with the two-way stop-controlled intersection in place for both the Opening Day and Future Build scenarios. The traffic queue extends the entire length of the north leg and spills into the parking area. The LOS estimated is F and the delays are in the range of 10 minutes per vehicle. This is clearly not an acceptable scenario for operation on these summer weekend days, so TERRA looked at potential options for mitigation. Based on the weekday traffic volumes, it does not appear that this intersection would meet traffic signal warrants for the installation of a signal. The projected weekend data however does appear to meet the requirements for a traffic signal. Typically, these warrants are applied to “typical” data, which would not be weekend only traffic, but with the high levels of traffic expected at the site, it seems like a good alternative to be considered. It would be suggested that any signal installed be fully actuated to adjust to traffic demands as they vary throughout the week and weekend. Additionally, it may be advisable to see how traffic develops once the site is built before installing the signal. Overall it is expected that the increase of traffic created by the site modifications will have a significant impact on the traffic flow in this area around the proposed site after the site is built, especially on weekends. It appears that geometric changes will be necessary to provide turn lanes at the intersection prior to the site opening. Once the site is in operation, it will likely be necessary for the potential installation of a traffic control signal will allow for appropriate access to the site. Typically traffic signals are not installed until a point in time where they become warranted, per the procedures described in the MUTCD. Therefore, it would be expected that as this signal would not be warranted until the site opens, potentially in 2021, that the signal would be installed at that time. EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 47 Appendix A Existing Traffic Volumes EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 48 Terra Engineering1804 Borman Circle Drive Saint Louis, Missouri, United States 63146314-395-9899 song@terraengineering.com Count Name: Main St & Walker RdSite Code:Start Date: 08/09/2018Page No: 1 Turning Movement Data Start Time Main St Walker Rd Main St Westbound Northbound Eastbound Left Thru U-Turn Peds App. Total Left Right U-Turn Peds App. Total Thru Right U-Turn Peds App. Total Int. Total 6:00 AM 2 42 0 0 44 2 16 0 0 18 69 1 0 0 70 132 6:15 AM 3 66 0 0 69 3 11 0 0 14 70 1 0 0 71 154 6:30 AM 3 63 0 0 66 5 16 0 0 21 63 1 0 0 64 151 6:45 AM 6 69 0 0 75 2 18 0 0 20 73 1 0 0 74 169 Hourly Total 14 240 0 0 254 12 61 0 0 73 275 4 0 0 279 606 7:00 AM 11 46 0 0 57 3 13 0 0 16 63 5 0 0 68 141 7:15 AM 4 66 0 0 70 1 13 0 0 14 47 4 0 0 51 135 7:30 AM 3 59 0 0 62 4 5 0 0 9 74 6 0 0 80 151 7:45 AM 5 59 0 0 64 1 15 0 0 16 51 2 0 0 53 133 Hourly Total 23 230 0 0 253 9 46 0 0 55 235 17 0 0 252 560 8:00 AM 8 53 0 0 61 2 6 0 0 8 73 5 0 0 78 147 8:15 AM 6 64 0 0 70 4 12 0 0 16 53 4 0 0 57 143 8:30 AM 5 36 0 0 41 2 11 0 0 13 70 4 0 0 74 128 8:45 AM 9 49 0 0 58 2 12 0 0 14 53 4 0 0 57 129 Hourly Total 28 202 0 0 230 10 41 0 0 51 249 17 0 0 266 547 9:00 AM 7 60 0 0 67 0 14 0 0 14 50 9 0 0 59 140 9:15 AM 3 47 0 0 50 5 10 0 0 15 40 3 0 0 43 108 9:30 AM 7 35 0 0 42 1 8 0 0 9 42 1 0 0 43 94 9:45 AM 6 27 0 0 33 3 4 0 0 7 48 9 0 0 57 97 Hourly Total 23 169 0 0 192 9 36 0 0 45 180 22 0 0 202 439 10:00 AM 4 43 0 0 47 5 10 0 0 15 41 10 0 0 51 113 10:15 AM 7 43 0 0 50 5 7 0 0 12 36 3 0 0 39 101 10:30 AM 3 43 0 0 46 7 6 0 0 13 36 5 0 0 41 100 10:45 AM 9 44 0 0 53 3 5 0 0 8 40 7 0 0 47 108 Hourly Total 23 173 0 0 196 20 28 0 0 48 153 25 0 0 178 422 11:00 AM 4 40 0 0 44 2 7 0 0 9 33 4 0 0 37 90 11:15 AM 9 50 0 0 59 4 6 0 0 10 48 11 0 0 59 128 11:30 AM 13 53 0 0 66 6 4 0 0 10 50 6 0 0 56 132 11:45 AM 2 43 0 0 45 6 6 0 0 12 42 13 0 0 55 112 Hourly Total 28 186 0 0 214 18 23 0 0 41 173 34 0 0 207 462 12:00 PM 6 42 0 0 48 5 8 0 0 13 50 12 0 0 62 123 12:15 PM 13 49 0 0 62 3 7 0 0 10 60 2 0 0 62 134 12:30 PM 10 61 0 0 71 4 10 0 0 14 46 4 0 0 50 135 12:45 PM 10 46 0 0 56 6 10 0 0 16 36 7 0 0 43 115 Hourly Total 39 198 0 0 237 18 35 0 0 53 192 25 0 0 217 507 1:00 PM 5 49 0 0 54 6 7 0 0 13 32 7 0 0 39 106 1:15 PM 7 52 0 0 59 3 11 0 0 14 38 4 0 0 42 115 1:30 PM 6 39 0 0 45 1 7 0 0 8 49 7 0 0 56 109 EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 49 1:45 PM 13 51 0 0 64 3 4 0 0 7 53 7 0 0 60 131 Hourly Total 31 191 0 0 222 13 29 0 0 42 172 25 0 0 197 461 2:00 PM 11 53 0 0 64 6 15 0 0 21 57 4 0 0 61 146 2:15 PM 11 79 0 0 90 5 9 0 0 14 57 9 0 0 66 170 2:30 PM 10 67 0 0 77 4 4 0 1 8 68 4 0 0 72 157 2:45 PM 17 77 0 0 94 3 8 0 0 11 79 4 0 0 83 188 Hourly Total 49 276 0 0 325 18 36 0 1 54 261 21 0 0 282 661 3:00 PM 13 74 0 0 87 5 7 0 0 12 122 6 0 0 128 227 3:15 PM 15 88 0 0 103 2 9 0 0 11 83 6 0 0 89 203 3:30 PM 15 115 0 0 130 1 8 0 0 9 107 8 0 0 115 254 3:45 PM 14 109 0 0 123 5 3 0 0 8 115 3 0 0 118 249 Hourly Total 57 386 0 0 443 13 27 0 0 40 427 23 0 0 450 933 4:00 PM 19 90 0 0 109 5 4 0 0 9 107 9 0 0 116 234 4:15 PM 20 123 0 0 143 1 6 0 0 7 111 7 0 0 118 268 4:30 PM 18 112 0 0 130 4 8 0 0 12 106 8 0 0 114 256 4:45 PM 12 109 0 0 121 2 12 0 0 14 131 9 0 0 140 275 Hourly Total 69 434 0 0 503 12 30 0 0 42 455 33 0 0 488 1033 5:00 PM 17 123 0 0 140 1 14 0 0 15 114 4 0 0 118 273 5:15 PM 21 143 0 0 164 6 6 0 0 12 122 9 0 0 131 307 5:30 PM 16 126 0 0 142 2 8 0 0 10 75 5 0 0 80 232 5:45 PM 14 86 0 0 100 4 8 0 0 12 80 12 0 0 92 204 Hourly Total 68 478 0 0 546 13 36 0 0 49 391 30 0 0 421 1016 6:00 PM 19 78 0 0 97 9 7 0 0 16 71 11 0 0 82 195 6:15 PM 11 67 0 0 78 4 7 0 0 11 53 3 0 0 56 145 6:30 PM 8 51 0 0 59 0 4 0 0 4 44 3 0 0 47 110 6:45 PM 20 55 0 0 75 2 7 0 0 9 30 4 0 0 34 118 Hourly Total 58 251 0 0 309 15 25 0 0 40 198 21 0 0 219 568 7:00 PM 7 41 0 0 48 1 9 0 0 10 38 5 0 0 43 101 7:15 PM 13 41 0 0 54 0 12 0 0 12 29 3 0 0 32 98 7:30 PM 5 31 0 0 36 2 7 0 0 9 29 1 0 0 30 75 7:45 PM 9 43 0 0 52 2 2 0 0 4 29 8 0 0 37 93 Hourly Total 34 156 0 0 190 5 30 0 0 35 125 17 0 0 142 367 Grand Total 544 3570 0 0 4114 185 483 0 1 668 3486 314 0 0 3800 8582 Approach %13.2 86.8 0.0 --27.7 72.3 0.0 --91.7 8.3 0.0 --- Total %6.3 41.6 0.0 -47.9 2.2 5.6 0.0 -7.8 40.6 3.7 0.0 -44.3 - Lights 534 3196 0 -3730 173 474 0 -647 3125 296 0 -3421 7798 % Lights 98.2 89.5 --90.7 93.5 98.1 --96.9 89.6 94.3 --90.0 90.9 Mediums 10 121 0 -131 11 9 0 -20 120 14 0 -134 285 % Mediums 1.8 3.4 --3.2 5.9 1.9 --3.0 3.4 4.5 --3.5 3.3 Articulated Trucks 0 253 0 -253 1 0 0 -1 241 4 0 -245 499 % Articulated Trucks 0.0 7.1 --6.1 0.5 0.0 --0.1 6.9 1.3 --6.4 5.8 Bicycles on Road 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 -0 0 % Bicycles on Road 0.0 0.0 --0.0 0.0 0.0 --0.0 0.0 0.0 --0.0 0.0 Bicycles on Crosswalk ---0 ----0 ----0 -- % Bicycles on Crosswalk --------0.0 ------- Pedestrians ---0 ----1 ----0 -- % Pedestrians --------100.0 ------- EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 50 Terra Engineering1804 Borman Circle Drive Saint Louis, Missouri, United States 63146314-395-9899 song@terraengineering.com Count Name: Main St & Walker RdSite Code:Start Date: 08/09/2018Page No: 3 08/09/2018 6:00 AMEnding At08/09/2018 8:00 PM LightsMediumsArticulated TrucksBicycles on RoadOther 3969002411293599Out4114002531313730In8083004942607329TotalMain St [E]T3570002531213196L54400010534U000000P000000830 647 1477 24 20 44 4 1 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 858 668 1526 Out In Total Walker Rd [S] U L R P 0 173 474 0 0 11 9 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 185 483 1Main St [W]Total6790266499007555In3421134245003800Out3369132254003755000000U3125120241003486T29614400314R000000PTurning Movement Data Plot EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 51 Terra Engineering1804 Borman Circle Drive Saint Louis, Missouri, United States 63146314-395-9899 song@terraengineering.com Count Name: Main St & Walker RdSite Code:Start Date: 08/09/2018Page No: 4 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (6:15 AM) Start Time Main St Walker Rd Main St Westbound Northbound Eastbound Left Thru U-Turn Peds App. Total Left Right U-Turn Peds App. Total Thru Right U-Turn Peds App. Total Int. Total 6:15 AM 3 66 0 0 69 3 11 0 0 14 70 1 0 0 71 154 6:30 AM 3 63 0 0 66 5 16 0 0 21 63 1 0 0 64 151 6:45 AM 6 69 0 0 75 2 18 0 0 20 73 1 0 0 74 169 7:00 AM 11 46 0 0 57 3 13 0 0 16 63 5 0 0 68 141 Total 23 244 0 0 267 13 58 0 0 71 269 8 0 0 277 615 Approach %8.6 91.4 0.0 --18.3 81.7 0.0 --97.1 2.9 0.0 --- Total %3.7 39.7 0.0 -43.4 2.1 9.4 0.0 -11.5 43.7 1.3 0.0 -45.0 - PHF 0.523 0.884 0.000 -0.890 0.650 0.806 0.000 -0.845 0.921 0.400 0.000 -0.936 0.910 Lights 21 227 0 -248 13 56 0 -69 232 8 0 -240 557 % Lights 91.3 93.0 --92.9 100.0 96.6 --97.2 86.2 100.0 --86.6 90.6 Mediums 2 6 0 -8 0 2 0 -2 18 0 0 -18 28 % Mediums 8.7 2.5 --3.0 0.0 3.4 --2.8 6.7 0.0 --6.5 4.6 Articulated Trucks 0 11 0 -11 0 0 0 -0 19 0 0 -19 30 % Articulated Trucks 0.0 4.5 --4.1 0.0 0.0 --0.0 7.1 0.0 --6.9 4.9 Bicycles on Road 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 -0 0 % Bicycles on Road 0.0 0.0 --0.0 0.0 0.0 --0.0 0.0 0.0 --0.0 0.0 Bicycles on Crosswalk ---0 ----0 ----0 -- % Bicycles on Crosswalk ---------------- Pedestrians ---0 ----0 ----0 -- % Pedestrians ---------------- EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 52 Terra Engineering1804 Borman Circle Drive Saint Louis, Missouri, United States 63146314-395-9899 song@terraengineering.com Count Name: Main St & Walker RdSite Code:Start Date: 08/09/2018Page No: 5 Peak Hour Data 08/09/2018 6:15 AMEnding At08/09/2018 7:15 AM LightsMediumsArticulated TrucksBicycles on RoadOther 327001920288Out26700118248In594003028536TotalMain St [E]T24400116227L23000221U000000P00000029 69 98 2 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 31 71 102 Out In Total Walker Rd [S] U L R P 0 13 56 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 58 0Main St [W]Total480243000534In240181900277Out24061100257000000U232181900269T800008R000000PTurning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (6:15 AM) EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 53 Terra Engineering1804 Borman Circle Drive Saint Louis, Missouri, United States 63146314-395-9899 song@terraengineering.com Count Name: Main St & Walker RdSite Code:Start Date: 08/09/2018Page No: 6 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (4:30 PM) Start Time Main St Walker Rd Main St Westbound Northbound Eastbound Left Thru U-Turn Peds App. Total Left Right U-Turn Peds App. Total Thru Right U-Turn Peds App. Total Int. Total 4:30 PM 18 112 0 0 130 4 8 0 0 12 106 8 0 0 114 256 4:45 PM 12 109 0 0 121 2 12 0 0 14 131 9 0 0 140 275 5:00 PM 17 123 0 0 140 1 14 0 0 15 114 4 0 0 118 273 5:15 PM 21 143 0 0 164 6 6 0 0 12 122 9 0 0 131 307 Total 68 487 0 0 555 13 40 0 0 53 473 30 0 0 503 1111 Approach %12.3 87.7 0.0 --24.5 75.5 0.0 --94.0 6.0 0.0 --- Total %6.1 43.8 0.0 -50.0 1.2 3.6 0.0 -4.8 42.6 2.7 0.0 -45.3 - PHF 0.810 0.851 0.000 -0.846 0.542 0.714 0.000 -0.883 0.903 0.833 0.000 -0.898 0.905 Lights 68 459 0 -527 13 39 0 -52 444 29 0 -473 1052 % Lights 100.0 94.3 --95.0 100.0 97.5 --98.1 93.9 96.7 --94.0 94.7 Mediums 0 12 0 -12 0 1 0 -1 5 1 0 -6 19 % Mediums 0.0 2.5 --2.2 0.0 2.5 --1.9 1.1 3.3 --1.2 1.7 Articulated Trucks 0 16 0 -16 0 0 0 -0 24 0 0 -24 40 % Articulated Trucks 0.0 3.3 --2.9 0.0 0.0 --0.0 5.1 0.0 --4.8 3.6 Bicycles on Road 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 -0 0 % Bicycles on Road 0.0 0.0 --0.0 0.0 0.0 --0.0 0.0 0.0 --0.0 0.0 Bicycles on Crosswalk ---0 ----0 ----0 -- % Bicycles on Crosswalk ---------------- Pedestrians ---0 ----0 ----0 -- % Pedestrians ---------------- EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 54 Terra Engineering1804 Borman Circle Drive Saint Louis, Missouri, United States 63146314-395-9899 song@terraengineering.com Count Name: Main St & Walker RdSite Code:Start Date: 08/09/2018Page No: 7 Peak Hour Data 08/09/2018 4:30 PMEnding At08/09/2018 5:30 PM LightsMediumsArticulated TrucksBicycles on RoadOther 51300246483Out555001612527In10680040181010TotalMain St [E]T487001612459L68000068U000000P00000097 52 149 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 98 53 151 Out In Total Walker Rd [S] U L R P 0 13 39 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 40 0Main St [W]Total9451840001003In47362400503Out472121600500000000U44452400473T29100030R000000PTurning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (4:30 PM) EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 55 Appendix B Existing Synchro Output EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 56 HCM 6th TWSC Forge Existing AM traffic.syn 3: Walker Rd & Main St 10/09/2018 Forge Existing traffic 6:15 am 10/09/2018 AM Existing Synchro 10 Report TERRA Engineering, Ltd.Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.6 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 269 8 23 244 13 58 Future Vol, veh/h 269 8 23 244 13 58 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, %0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 292 9 25 265 14 63 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 301 0 612 297 Stage 1 - - - - 297 - Stage 2 - - - - 315 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1260 - 456 742 Stage 1 - - - - 754 - Stage 2 - - - - 740 - Platoon blocked, % - -- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1260 - 446 742 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 446 - Stage 1 - - - - 737 - Stage 2 - - - - 740 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.7 11.2 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h)662 - - 1260 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.117 - - 0.02 - HCM Control Delay (s) 11.2 - - 7.9 0 HCM Lane LOS B - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.4 - - 0.1 - EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 57 HCM 6th TWSC Forge Existing PM traffic.syn 3: Walker Rd & Main St 10/09/2018 Forge Existing traffic 4:30 pm 10/09/2018 PM Existing Synchro 10 Report TERRA Engineering, Ltd.Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.3 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 473 30 68 487 13 40 Future Vol, veh/h 473 30 68 487 13 40 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, %0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 514 33 74 529 14 43 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 547 0 1208 531 Stage 1 - - - - 531 - Stage 2 - - - - 677 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1022 - 202 548 Stage 1 - - - - 590 - Stage 2 - - - - 505 - Platoon blocked, % - -- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1022 - 181 548 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 181 - Stage 1 - - - - 529 - Stage 2 - - - - 505 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 1.1 16.7 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h)366 - - 1022 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.157 - - 0.072 - HCM Control Delay (s) 16.7 - - 8.8 0 HCM Lane LOS C - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.6 - - 0.2 - EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 58 Appendix C Traffic Growth Calculations EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 59 The Forge - 2021 Growth Calculation - AM (PM) Lemont, IL Growth Multiplier = (1+r)n, where r = assumed growth rate, n = number of years. r = 0.5%, n =3 Each existing volume is multiplied by Growth Multiplier. ↑ 248 (495)N 24 (70) Main St ↰↱ (481)274 14 59 (31)9 ↴(14)(41)Walker Rd EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 60 The Forge - 2026 Growth Calculation - AM (PM) Lemont, IL Growth Multiplier = (1+r)n, where r = assumed growth rate, n = number of years. r = 0.5%, n = 8 Each existing volume is multiplied by Growth Multiplier. ↑ 254 (507)N 24 (71) Main St ↰↱ (493)280 14 61 (32)9 ↴14 (42)Walker Rd EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 61 Appendix D 2026 Future No-Build Synchro Output EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 62 HCM 6th TWSC Forge Future No-build AM.syn 3: Walker Rd & Main St 11/13/2018 Forge Future No-Build traffic 6:15 am 10/09/2018 Synchro 10 Report TERRA Engineering, Ltd.Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.6 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 280 9 24 254 14 61 Future Vol, veh/h 280 9 24 254 14 61 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, %0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 304 10 26 276 15 66 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 314 0 637 309 Stage 1 - - - - 309 - Stage 2 - - - - 328 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1246 - 441 731 Stage 1 - - - - 745 - Stage 2 - - - - 730 - Platoon blocked, % - -- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1246 - 430 731 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 430 - Stage 1 - - - - 726 - Stage 2 - - - - 730 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.7 11.4 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h)647 - - 1246 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.126 - - 0.021 - HCM Control Delay (s) 11.4 - - 8 0 HCM Lane LOS B - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.4 - - 0.1 - EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 63 HCM 6th TWSC Forge Future No-build PM.syn 3: Walker Rd & Main St 11/13/2018 Forge Future No-Buid traffic 4:30 pm 10/09/2018 Synchro 10 Report TERRA Engineering, Ltd.Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.4 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 493 32 71 507 14 42 Future Vol, veh/h 493 32 71 507 14 42 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, %0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 536 35 77 551 15 46 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 571 0 1259 554 Stage 1 - - - - 554 - Stage 2 - - - - 705 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1002 - 188 532 Stage 1 - - - - 575 - Stage 2 - - - - 490 - Platoon blocked, % - -- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1002 - 167 532 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 167 - Stage 1 - - - - 511 - Stage 2 - - - - 490 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 1.1 17.7 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h)344 - - 1002 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.177 - - 0.077 - HCM Control Delay (s) 17.7 - - 8.9 0 HCM Lane LOS C - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.6 - - 0.2 - EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 64 Appendix E Trip Generation Calculations EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 65 The Forge: Lemont Quarries Adventure Park Visitor Flow Estimates Days/Season 80%BASE 120%80% BASE 120% 80% BASE 120% Gross Visitors*465,630 582,038 698,445 Summer Season 232,815 291,019 349,223 Weekend 32 139,689 174,611 209,534 4,365 5,457 6,548 1,746 2,183 2,619 7:00 AM 2,794 3,492 4,191 87 109 131 35 44 52 8:00 AM 2,794 3,492 4,191 87 109 131 35 44 52 9:00 AM 5,588 6,984 8,381 175 218 262 70 87 105 10:00 AM 10,477 13,096 15,715 327 409 491 131 164 196 11:00 AM 13,969 17,461 20,953 437 546 655 175 218 262 12:00 PM 15,366 19,207 23,049 480 600 720 192 240 288 1:00 PM 16,763 20,953 25,144 524 655 786 210 262 314 2:00 PM 13,969 17,461 20,953 437 546 655 175 218 262 3:00 PM 10,477 13,096 15,715 327 409 491 131 164 196 4:00 PM 6,984 8,731 10,477 218 273 327 87 109 131 5:00 PM 11,175 13,969 16,763 349 437 524 140 175 210 6:00 PM 12,572 15,715 18,858 393 491 589 157 196 236 7:00 PM 11,175 13,969 16,763 349 437 524 140 175 210 8:00 PM 4,191 5,238 6,286 131 164 196 52 65 79 9:00 PM 1,397 1,746 2,095 44 55 65 17 22 26 Weekday 90 93,126 116,408 139,689 1,035 1,293 1,552 414 517 621 7:00 AM 1,863 2,328 2,794 21 26 31 8 10 12 8:00 AM 1,863 2,328 2,794 21 26 31 8 10 12 9:00 AM 3,725 4,656 5,588 41 52 62 17 21 25 10:00 AM 6,984 8,731 10,477 78 97 116 31 39 47 11:00 AM 6,984 8,731 10,477 78 97 116 31 39 47 12:00 PM 10,244 12,805 15,366 114 142 171 46 57 68 1:00 PM 11,175 13,969 16,763 124 155 186 50 62 75 2:00 PM 9,313 11,641 13,969 103 129 155 41 52 62 3:00 PM 8,381 10,477 12,572 93 116 140 37 47 56 4:00 PM 5,588 6,984 8,381 62 78 93 25 31 37 5:00 PM 7,450 9,313 11,175 83 103 124 33 41 50 6:00 PM 8,381 10,477 12,572 93 116 140 37 47 56 7:00 PM 7,450 9,313 11,175 83 103 124 33 41 50 8:00 PM 2,794 3,492 4,191 31 39 47 12 16 19 9:00 PM 931 1,164 1,397 10 13 16 4 5 6 ANNUAL VISITORS DAILY VISITORS DAILY CAR COUNTS 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 7:00 AM 8:00 AM 9:00 AM 10:00 AM 11:00 AM 12:00 PM 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 6:00 PM 7:00 PM 8:00 PM 9:00 PM 80%BASE 120% 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 7:00 AM 8:00 AM 9:00 AM 10:00 AM 11:00 AM 12:00 PM 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 6:00 PM 7:00 PM 8:00 PM 9:00 PM 80%BASE 120% EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 66 The Forge: Lemont Quarries Adventure Park Visitor Flow Estimates Days/Season 80%BASE 120%80% BASE 120% 80% BASE 120% Shoulder Seasons 162,971 203,713 244,456 Weekend 24 97,782 122,228 146,674 4,074 5,093 6,111 1,630 2,037 2,445 7:00 AM 1,956 2,445 2,933 81 102 122 33 41 49 8:00 AM 1,956 2,445 2,933 81 102 122 33 41 49 9:00 AM 3,911 4,889 5,867 163 204 244 65 81 98 10:00 AM 7,334 9,167 11,001 306 382 458 122 153 183 11:00 AM 9,778 12,223 14,667 407 509 611 163 204 244 12:00 PM 10,756 13,445 16,134 448 560 672 179 224 269 1:00 PM 11,734 14,667 17,601 489 611 733 196 244 293 2:00 PM 9,778 12,223 14,667 407 509 611 163 204 244 3:00 PM 7,334 9,167 11,001 306 382 458 122 153 183 4:00 PM 4,889 6,111 7,334 204 255 306 81 102 122 5:00 PM 7,823 9,778 11,734 326 407 489 130 163 196 6:00 PM 8,800 11,001 13,201 367 458 550 147 183 220 7:00 PM 7,823 9,778 11,734 326 407 489 130 163 196 8:00 PM 2,933 3,667 4,400 122 153 183 49 61 73 9:00 PM 978 1,222 1,467 41 51 61 16 20 24 Weekday 68 65,188 81,485 97,782 959 1,198 1,438 383 479 575 7:00 AM 1,304 1,630 1,956 19 24 29 8 10 12 8:00 AM 1,304 1,630 1,956 19 24 29 8 10 12 9:00 AM 2,608 3,259 3,911 38 48 58 15 19 23 10:00 AM 4,889 6,111 7,334 72 90 108 29 36 43 11:00 AM 4,889 6,111 7,334 72 90 108 29 36 43 12:00 PM 7,171 8,963 10,756 105 132 158 42 53 63 1:00 PM 7,823 9,778 11,734 115 144 173 46 58 69 2:00 PM 6,519 8,149 9,778 96 120 144 38 48 58 3:00 PM 5,867 7,334 8,800 86 108 129 35 43 52 4:00 PM 3,911 4,889 5,867 58 72 86 23 29 35 5:00 PM 5,215 6,519 7,823 77 96 115 31 38 46 6:00 PM 5,867 7,334 8,800 86 108 129 35 43 52 7:00 PM 5,215 6,519 7,823 77 96 115 31 38 46 8:00 PM 1,956 2,445 2,933 29 36 43 12 14 17 9:00 PM 652 815 978 10 12 14 4 5 6 ANNUAL VISITORS DAILY VISITORS DAILY CAR COUNTS 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 7:00 AM 8:00 AM 9:00 AM 10:00 AM 11:00 AM 12:00 PM 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 6:00 PM 7:00 PM 8:00 PM 9:00 PM 80%BASE 120% 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 7:00 AM 8:00 AM 9:00 AM 10:00 AM 11:00 AM 12:00 PM 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 6:00 PM 7:00 PM 8:00 PM 9:00 PM 80%BASE 120% EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 67 The Forge: Lemont Quarries Adventure Park Visitor Flow Estimates Days/Season 80%BASE 120%80% BASE 120% 80% BASE 120% Winter Season 69,845 87,306 104,767 Weekend 40 41,907 52,383 62,860 1,048 1,310 1,572 419 524 629 7:00 AM 838 1,048 1,257 21 26 31 8 10 13 8:00 AM 838 1,048 1,257 21 26 31 8 10 13 9:00 AM 1,676 2,095 2,514 42 52 63 17 21 25 10:00 AM 3,143 3,929 4,715 79 98 118 31 39 47 11:00 AM 4,191 5,238 6,286 105 131 157 42 52 63 12:00 PM 4,610 5,762 6,915 115 144 173 46 58 69 1:00 PM 5,029 6,286 7,543 126 157 189 50 63 75 2:00 PM 4,191 5,238 6,286 105 131 157 42 52 63 3:00 PM 3,143 3,929 4,715 79 98 118 31 39 47 4:00 PM 2,095 2,619 3,143 52 65 79 21 26 31 5:00 PM 3,353 4,191 5,029 84 105 126 34 42 50 6:00 PM 3,772 4,715 5,657 94 118 141 38 47 57 7:00 PM 3,353 4,191 5,029 84 105 126 34 42 50 8:00 PM 1,257 1,572 1,886 31 39 47 13 16 19 9:00 PM 419 524 629 10 13 16 4 5 6 Weekday 111 27,938 34,922 41,907 252 315 378 101 126 151 7:00 AM 559 698 838 5 6 8 2 3 3 8:00 AM 559 698 838 5 6 8 2 3 3 9:00 AM 1,118 1,397 1,676 10 13 15 4 5 6 10:00 AM 2,095 2,619 3,143 19 24 28 8 9 11 11:00 AM 2,095 2,619 3,143 19 24 28 8 9 11 12:00 PM 3,073 3,841 4,610 28 35 42 11 14 17 1:00 PM 3,353 4,191 5,029 30 38 45 12 15 18 2:00 PM 2,794 3,492 4,191 25 31 38 10 13 15 3:00 PM 2,514 3,143 3,772 23 28 34 9 11 14 4:00 PM 1,676 2,095 2,514 15 19 23 6 8 9 5:00 PM 2,235 2,794 3,353 20 25 30 8 10 12 6:00 PM 2,514 3,143 3,772 23 28 34 9 11 14 7:00 PM 2,235 2,794 3,353 20 25 30 8 10 12 8:00 PM 838 1,048 1,257 8 9 11 3 4 5 9:00 PM 279 349 419 3 3 4 1 1 2 - - - *Estiamtes bases on the average expected visitors in years two through five ANNUAL VISITORS DAILY VISITORS DAILY CAR COUNTS 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 7:00 AM 8:00 AM 9:00 AM 10:00 AM 11:00 AM 12:00 PM 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 6:00 PM 7:00 PM 8:00 PM 9:00 PM 80%BASE 120% 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 7:00 AM 8:00 AM 9:00 AM 10:00 AM 11:00 AM 12:00 PM 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 6:00 PM 7:00 PM 8:00 PM 9:00 PM 80%BASE 120% EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 68 Appendix F Opening Day Synchro Output EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 69 HCM 6th TWSC Forge Opening Day AM - Weekday.syn 3: Walker Rd & Main St 11/13/2018 Forge Opening Day traffic 6:15 am 10/09/2018 Synchro 10 Report TERRA Engineering, Ltd.Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.6 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 1 274 9 24 248 1 14 1 59 0 0 0 Future Vol, veh/h 1 274 9 24 248 1 14 1 59 0 0 0 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length 200 - - 200 - - 115 - - 115 - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, %- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 1 298 10 26 270 1 15 1 64 0 0 0 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 271 0 0 308 0 0 628 628 303 661 633 271 Stage 1 - - - - - - 305 305 - 323 323 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 323 323 - 338 310 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.218 - - 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1292 - - 1253 - - 395 400 737 376 397 768 Stage 1 - - - - - - 705 662 - 689 650 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 689 650 - 676 659 - Platoon blocked, %- -- - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1292 - - 1253 - - 389 391 737 337 388 768 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 389 391 - 337 388 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 704 661 - 688 636 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 675 636 - 616 658 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.7 11.2 0 HCM LOS BA Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1NBLn2 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1 SBLn2 Capacity (veh/h)389 726 1292 - - 1253 - - - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.039 0.09 0.001 - - 0.021 - - - - HCM Control Delay (s) 14.6 10.4 7.8 - - 7.9 - - 0 0 HCM Lane LOS B B A - - A - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 0.3 0 - - 0.1 - - - - EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 70 HCM 6th TWSC Forge Opening Day PM - Weekday.syn 3: Walker Rd & Main St 11/13/2018 Forge Opening Day traffic 4:30 pm 10/09/2018 Synchro 10 Report TERRA Engineering, Ltd.Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 16 481 31 70 495 18 14 2 41 28 5 27 Future Vol, veh/h 16 481 31 70 495 18 14 2 41 28 5 27 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length 200 - - 200 - - 115 - - 115 - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, %- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 17 523 34 76 538 20 15 2 45 30 5 29 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 558 0 0 557 0 0 1291 1284 540 1298 1291 548 Stage 1 - - - - - - 574 574 - 700 700 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 717 710 - 598 591 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.218 - - 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1013 - - 1014 - - 140 165 542 139 163 536 Stage 1 - - - - - - 504 503 - 430 441 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 421 437 - 489 494 - Platoon blocked, %- -- - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1013 - - 1014 - - 120 150 542 117 148 536 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 120 150 - 117 148 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 495 494 - 423 408 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 363 404 - 439 486 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.3 1.1 19.7 29.8 HCM LOS CD Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1NBLn2 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1 SBLn2 Capacity (veh/h)120 483 1013 - - 1014 - - 117 380 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.127 0.097 0.017 - - 0.075 - - 0.26 0.092 HCM Control Delay (s) 39.3 13.3 8.6 - - 8.8 - - 46.3 15.4 HCM Lane LOS E B A - - A - - E C HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.4 0.3 0.1 - - 0.2 - - 1 0.3 EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 71 HCM 6th TWSC Forge Opening Day AM - Weekend.syn 3: Walker Rd & Main St 11/13/2018 Forge Opening Day traffic 6:15 am 10/09/2018 Synchro 10 Report TERRA Engineering, Ltd.Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 5.8 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 118 274 9 24 248 118 14 26 59 58 5 46 Future Vol, veh/h 118 274 9 24 248 118 14 26 59 58 5 46 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length 200 - - 200 - - 115 - - 115 - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, %- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 128 298 10 26 270 128 15 28 64 63 5 50 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 398 0 0 308 0 0 973 1009 303 991 950 334 Stage 1 - - - - - - 559 559 - 386 386 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 414 450 - 605 564 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.218 - - 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1161 - - 1253 - - 231 240 737 225 260 708 Stage 1 - - - - - - 513 511 - 637 610 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 616 572 - 485 508 - Platoon blocked, %- -- - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1161 - - 1253 - - 190 209 737 166 226 708 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 190 209 - 166 226 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 457 455 - 567 597 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 556 560 - 370 452 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 2.5 0.5 17.4 26.5 HCM LOS CD Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1NBLn2 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1 SBLn2 Capacity (veh/h)190 416 1161 - - 1253 - - 166 586 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.08 0.222 0.11 - - 0.021 - - 0.38 0.095 HCM Control Delay (s) 25.6 16.1 8.5 - - 7.9 - - 39.4 11.8 HCM Lane LOS D C A - - A - - E B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 0.8 0.4 - - 0.1 - - 1.6 0.3 EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 72 HCM 6th TWSC Forge Opening Day PM - Weekend.syn 3: Walker Rd & Main St 11/13/2018 Forge Opening Day traffic 6:15 am 10/09/2018 Synchro 10 Report TERRA Engineering, Ltd.Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 69.6 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 89 481 31 70 495 98 14 9 41 151 29 147 Future Vol, veh/h 89 481 31 70 495 98 14 9 41 151 29 147 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length 200 - - 200 - - 115 - - 115 - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, %- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 97 523 34 76 538 107 15 10 45 164 32 160 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 645 0 0 557 0 0 1574 1531 540 1506 1495 592 Stage 1 - - - - - - 734 734 - 744 744 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 840 797 - 762 751 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.218 - - 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 940 - - 1014 - - 89 117 542 ~ 99 123 506 Stage 1 - - - - - - 412 426 - 407 421 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 360 399 - 397 418 - Platoon blocked, %- -- - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 940 - - 1014 - - 41 97 542 ~ 73 102 506 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 41 97 - ~ 73 102 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 370 382 - 365 389 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 209 369 - 318 375 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 1.4 0.9 45.6 $ 339.1 HCM LOS EF Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1NBLn2 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1 SBLn2 Capacity (veh/h)41 297 940 - - 1014 - - 73 306 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.371 0.183 0.103 - - 0.075 - - 2.248 0.625 HCM Control Delay (s) 137.6 19.8 9.3 - - 8.8 - -$ 694.1 34.5 HCM Lane LOS F C A - - A - - F D HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 1.3 0.7 0.3 - - 0.2 - - 15.4 3.9 Notes ~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 73 Appendix G 2026 Future Build Synchro Output EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 74 HCM 6th TWSC Forge Future Build AM - Weekday.syn 3: Walker Rd & Main St 11/14/2018 Forge Future Build Weekday 6:15 am 10/09/2018 Synchro 10 Report TERRA Engineering, Ltd.Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.6 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 1 280 9 24 254 1 14 1 61 0 0 0 Future Vol, veh/h 1 280 9 24 254 1 14 1 61 0 0 0 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length 200 - - 200 - - 115 - - 115 - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, %- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 1 304 10 26 276 1 15 1 66 0 0 0 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 277 0 0 314 0 0 640 640 309 674 645 277 Stage 1 - - - - - - 311 311 - 329 329 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 329 329 - 345 316 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.218 - - 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1286 - - 1246 - - 388 393 731 368 391 762 Stage 1 - - - - - - 699 658 - 684 646 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 684 646 - 671 655 - Platoon blocked, %- -- - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1286 - - 1246 - - 381 384 731 328 382 762 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 381 384 - 328 382 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 698 657 - 683 632 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 670 632 - 609 654 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.7 11.3 0 HCM LOS BA Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1NBLn2 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1 SBLn2 Capacity (veh/h)381 720 1286 - - 1246 - - - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.04 0.094 0.001 - - 0.021 - - - - HCM Control Delay (s) 14.8 10.5 7.8 - - 8 - - 0 0 HCM Lane LOS B B A - - A - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 0.3 0 - - 0.1 - - - - EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 75 HCM 6th TWSC Forge Future Build PM - Weekday.syn 3: Walker Rd & Main St 11/13/2018 Forge Opening Day PM Weekday 4:30 pm 10/09/2018 Synchro 10 Report TERRA Engineering, Ltd.Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 3.1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 16 493 32 71 507 18 14 2 42 28 5 27 Future Vol, veh/h 16 493 32 71 507 18 14 2 42 28 5 27 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length 200 - - 200 - - 115 - - 115 - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, %- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 17 536 35 77 551 20 15 2 46 30 5 29 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 571 0 0 571 0 0 1320 1313 554 1327 1320 561 Stage 1 - - - - - - 588 588 - 715 715 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 732 725 - 612 605 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.218 - - 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1002 - - 1002 - - 134 158 532 132 157 527 Stage 1 - - - - - - 495 496 - 422 434 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 413 430 - 480 487 - Platoon blocked, %- -- - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1002 - - 1002 - - 114 143 532 111 142 527 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 114 143 - 111 142 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 487 488 - 415 401 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 355 397 - 429 479 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.3 1.1 20.2 31.4 HCM LOS CD Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1NBLn2 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1 SBLn2 Capacity (veh/h)114 473 1002 - - 1002 - - 111 370 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.133 0.101 0.017 - - 0.077 - - 0.274 0.094 HCM Control Delay (s) 41.4 13.5 8.7 - - 8.9 - - 49.3 15.7 HCM Lane LOS E B A - - A - - E C HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.4 0.3 0.1 - - 0.2 - - 1 0.3 EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 76 HCM 6th TWSC Forge Future Build AM - Weekend.syn 3: Walker Rd & Main St 11/14/2018 Forge Future Build Weekend 1:00 pm 10/09/2018 Synchro 10 Report TERRA Engineering, Ltd.Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 5.9 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 118 280 9 24 254 118 14 26 61 58 5 46 Future Vol, veh/h 118 280 9 24 254 118 14 26 61 58 5 46 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length 200 - - 200 - - 115 - - 115 - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, %- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 128 304 10 26 276 128 15 28 66 63 5 50 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 404 0 0 314 0 0 985 1021 309 1004 962 340 Stage 1 - - - - - - 565 565 - 392 392 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 420 456 - 612 570 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.218 - - 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1155 - - 1246 - - 227 236 731 220 256 702 Stage 1 - - - - - - 510 508 - 633 606 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 611 568 - 480 505 - Platoon blocked, %- -- - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1155 - - 1246 - - 186 205 731 161 223 702 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 186 205 - 161 223 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 453 452 - 563 593 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 551 556 - 364 449 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 2.5 0.5 17.7 27.4 HCM LOS CD Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1NBLn2 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1 SBLn2 Capacity (veh/h)186 414 1155 - - 1246 - - 161 580 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.082 0.228 0.111 - - 0.021 - - 0.392 0.096 HCM Control Delay (s) 26.1 16.3 8.5 - - 8 - - 41.1 11.9 HCM Lane LOS D C A - - A - - E B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 0.9 0.4 - - 0.1 - - 1.7 0.3 EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 77 HCM 6th TWSC Forge Future Build PM - Weekend.syn 3: Walker Rd & Main St 11/13/2018 Forge Future Build PM Weekend 4:30 pm 10/09/2018 Synchro 10 Report TERRA Engineering, Ltd.Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 74.6 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 89 493 32 71 507 98 14 9 42 151 29 147 Future Vol, veh/h 89 493 32 71 507 98 14 9 42 151 29 147 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length 200 - - 200 - - 115 - - 115 - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, %- 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 97 536 35 77 551 107 15 10 46 164 32 160 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 658 0 0 571 0 0 1603 1560 554 1535 1524 605 Stage 1 - - - - - - 748 748 - 759 759 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 855 812 - 776 765 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.218 - - 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 930 - - 1002 - - 85 112 532 ~ 95 118 498 Stage 1 - - - - - - 404 420 - 399 415 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 353 392 - 390 412 - Platoon blocked, %- -- - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 930 - - 1002 - - 38 93 532 ~ 69 98 498 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 38 93 - ~ 69 98 - Stage 1 - - - - - - 362 376 - 358 383 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 203 362 - 311 369 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 1.4 0.9 48.8 $ 369.3 HCM LOS EF Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1NBLn2 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1 SBLn2 Capacity (veh/h)38 290 930 - - 1002 - - 69 298 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.4 0.191 0.104 - - 0.077 - - 2.379 0.642 HCM Control Delay (s) 152.6 20.3 9.3 - - 8.9 - -$ 757.4 36.4 HCM Lane LOS F C A - - A - - F E HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 1.4 0.7 0.3 - - 0.2 - - 15.8 4.1 Notes ~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 78 Appendix H Signalized Option Synchro Output EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 79 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Forge Opening Day AM Signalized - Weekday.syn 3: Walker Rd & Main St 11/13/2018 Forge Opening Day traffic 6:15 am 10/09/2018 Synchro 10 Report TERRA Engineering, Ltd.Page 1 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)1 274 9 24 248 1 14 1 59 0 0 0 Future Volume (vph)1 274 9 24 248 1 14 1 59 0 0 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft)200 0 200 0 115 0 115 0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft)100 100 132 108 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.995 0.999 0.852 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot)1770 1853 0 1770 1861 0 1770 1587 0 1863 1863 0 Flt Permitted 0.593 0.573 0.757 Satd. Flow (perm)1105 1853 0 1067 1861 0 1410 1587 0 1863 1863 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR)3 64 Link Speed (mph)30 30 30 30 Link Distance (ft)1450 987 675 372 Travel Time (s)33.0 22.4 15.3 8.5 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph)1 298 10 26 270 1 15 1 64 0 0 0 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 1 308 0 26 271 0 15 65 0 0 0 0 Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Perm NA Perm Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6 Detector Phase 7 4 3 8 2 2 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s)9.0 22.5 9.0 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 Total Split (s)9.0 54.0 9.0 54.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 Total Split (%)10.0% 60.0% 10.0% 60.0% 30.0% 30.0% 30.0% 30.0% Yellow Time (s)3.0 3.5 3.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Time (s)1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)4.0 4.5 4.0 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None Min Min Min Min Act Effct Green (s)11.3 10.1 11.3 10.1 6.2 6.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.42 0.37 0.42 0.37 0.23 0.23 v/c Ratio 0.00 0.44 0.04 0.39 0.05 0.16 Control Delay 4.0 9.2 3.9 8.7 11.6 5.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 4.0 9.2 3.9 8.7 11.6 5.8 LOS AA AA BA Approach Delay 9.2 8.3 6.8 Approach LOS A A A Stops (vph)1 163 12 141 15 19 Fuel Used(gal)0 5 0 3 0 0 EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 80 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Forge Opening Day AM Signalized - Weekday.syn 3: Walker Rd & Main St 11/13/2018 Forge Opening Day traffic 6:15 am 10/09/2018 Synchro 10 Report TERRA Engineering, Ltd.Page 2 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR CO Emissions (g/hr)1 324 19 219 13 34 NOx Emissions (g/hr)0 63 4 43 3 7 VOC Emissions (g/hr)0 75 4 51 3 8 Dilemma Vehicles (#)0 0 0 0 0 0 Queue Length 50th (ft) 0 22 2 19 1 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 97 7 85 13 22 Internal Link Dist (ft)1370 907 595 292 Turn Bay Length (ft) 200 200 115 Base Capacity (vph) 593 1853 584 1861 1223 1385 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.00 0.17 0.04 0.15 0.01 0.05 Intersection Summary Area Type:Other Cycle Length: 90 Actuated Cycle Length: 27 Natural Cycle: 55 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.44 Intersection Signal Delay: 8.6 Intersection LOS: A Intersection Capacity Utilization 31.6%ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 3: Walker Rd & Main St EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 81 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Forge Opening Day PM Signalized - Weekday.syn 3: Walker Rd & Main St 11/13/2018 Forge Opening Day traffic 4:30 pm 10/09/2018 Synchro 10 Report TERRA Engineering, Ltd.Page 1 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)16 481 31 70 495 18 14 2 41 28 5 27 Future Volume (vph)16 481 31 70 495 18 14 2 41 28 5 27 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft)200 0 200 0 115 0 115 0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft)100 100 132 108 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.991 0.995 0.856 0.872 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot)1770 1846 0 1770 1853 0 1770 1595 0 1770 1624 0 Flt Permitted 0.423 0.344 Satd. Flow (perm)788 1846 0 641 1853 0 1863 1595 0 1863 1624 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR)6 3 45 29 Link Speed (mph)30 30 30 30 Link Distance (ft)1450 987 675 372 Travel Time (s)33.0 22.4 15.3 8.5 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph)17 523 34 76 538 20 15 2 45 30 5 29 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 17 557 0 76 558 0 15 47 0 30 34 0 Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Perm NA Perm NA Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6 Detector Phase 7 4 3 8 2 2 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s)9.0 22.5 9.0 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 Total Split (s)9.0 54.0 9.0 54.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 Total Split (%)10.0% 60.0% 10.0% 60.0% 30.0% 30.0% 30.0% 30.0% Yellow Time (s)3.0 3.5 3.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Time (s)1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)4.0 4.5 4.0 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None None None None Act Effct Green (s)22.0 23.6 23.2 26.4 8.8 8.8 8.8 8.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.63 0.68 0.67 0.76 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 v/c Ratio 0.02 0.44 0.11 0.40 0.03 0.11 0.06 0.08 Control Delay 3.0 9.0 3.1 6.1 18.5 8.6 18.5 10.4 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 3.0 9.0 3.1 6.1 18.5 8.6 18.5 10.4 LOS AA AA BA BB Approach Delay 8.9 5.7 11.0 14.2 Approach LOS A A B B Stops (vph)7 277 20 211 15 16 26 16 Fuel Used(gal)0 8 1 6 0 0 0 0 EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 82 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Forge Opening Day PM Signalized - Weekday.syn 3: Walker Rd & Main St 11/13/2018 Forge Opening Day traffic 4:30 pm 10/09/2018 Synchro 10 Report TERRA Engineering, Ltd.Page 2 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR CO Emissions (g/hr)16 578 48 402 15 27 23 17 NOx Emissions (g/hr)3 112 9 78 3 5 4 3 VOC Emissions (g/hr)4 134 11 93 3 6 5 4 Dilemma Vehicles (#)0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Queue Length 50th (ft) 1 101 5 52 3 0 6 1 Queue Length 95th (ft) 5 195 15 197 17 23 27 21 Internal Link Dist (ft)1370 907 595 292 Turn Bay Length (ft) 200 200 115 115 Base Capacity (vph) 703 1812 663 1818 1271 1102 1271 1117 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.02 0.31 0.11 0.31 0.01 0.04 0.02 0.03 Intersection Summary Area Type:Other Cycle Length: 90 Actuated Cycle Length: 34.7 Natural Cycle: 60 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.44 Intersection Signal Delay: 7.7 Intersection LOS: A Intersection Capacity Utilization 50.4%ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 3: Walker Rd & Main St EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 83 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Forge Opening Day AM Signalized - Weekend.syn 3: Walker Rd & Main St 11/13/2018 Forge Opening Day traffic 6:15 am 10/09/2018 Synchro 10 Report TERRA Engineering, Ltd.Page 1 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 118 274 9 24 248 118 14 26 59 58 5 46 Future Volume (vph) 118 274 9 24 248 118 14 26 59 58 5 46 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft)200 0 200 0 115 0 115 0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft)100 100 132 108 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.995 0.952 0.896 0.864 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot)1770 1853 0 1770 1773 0 1770 1669 0 1770 1609 0 Flt Permitted 0.380 0.573 0.721 0.697 Satd. Flow (perm)708 1853 0 1067 1773 0 1343 1669 0 1298 1609 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR)3 42 64 50 Link Speed (mph)30 30 30 30 Link Distance (ft)1450 987 675 372 Travel Time (s)33.0 22.4 15.3 8.5 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph)128 298 10 26 270 128 15 28 64 63 5 50 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 128 308 0 26 398 0 15 92 0 63 55 0 Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Perm NA Perm NA Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6 Detector Phase 7 4 3 8 2 2 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s)9.0 22.5 9.0 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 Total Split (s)9.0 54.0 9.0 54.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 Total Split (%)10.0% 60.0% 10.0% 60.0% 30.0% 30.0% 30.0% 30.0% Yellow Time (s)3.0 3.5 3.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Time (s)1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)4.0 4.5 4.0 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None Min Min Min Min Act Effct Green (s)20.3 19.0 18.0 13.7 7.7 7.7 7.7 7.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.54 0.50 0.48 0.36 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 v/c Ratio 0.24 0.33 0.04 0.59 0.05 0.23 0.24 0.15 Control Delay 5.0 7.5 4.0 13.5 15.1 9.1 17.4 7.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 5.0 7.5 4.0 13.5 15.1 9.1 17.4 7.6 LOS AA AB BA BA Approach Delay 6.7 12.9 9.9 12.9 Approach LOS A B A B Stops (vph)45 142 11 241 15 34 50 19 Fuel Used(gal)2 4 0 5 0 1 1 0 EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 84 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Forge Opening Day AM Signalized - Weekend.syn 3: Walker Rd & Main St 11/13/2018 Forge Opening Day traffic 6:15 am 10/09/2018 Synchro 10 Report TERRA Engineering, Ltd.Page 2 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR CO Emissions (g/hr) 119 309 19 360 14 55 45 23 NOx Emissions (g/hr) 23 60 4 70 3 11 9 5 VOC Emissions (g/hr) 28 71 4 83 3 13 11 5 Dilemma Vehicles (#)0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Queue Length 50th (ft) 9 26 2 60 3 5 12 1 Queue Length 95th (ft) 27 106 8 133 15 35 41 23 Internal Link Dist (ft)1370 907 595 292 Turn Bay Length (ft) 200 200 115 115 Base Capacity (vph) 531 1853 607 1773 854 1085 826 1042 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.24 0.17 0.04 0.22 0.02 0.08 0.08 0.05 Intersection Summary Area Type:Other Cycle Length: 90 Actuated Cycle Length: 37.7 Natural Cycle: 55 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.59 Intersection Signal Delay: 10.1 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 47.5%ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 3: Walker Rd & Main St EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 85 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Forge Opening Day PM Signalized - Weekend.syn 3: Walker Rd & Main St 11/13/2018 Forge Opening Day traffic 6:15 am 10/09/2018 Synchro 10 Report TERRA Engineering, Ltd.Page 1 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)89 481 31 70 495 98 14 9 41 151 29 147 Future Volume (vph)89 481 31 70 495 98 14 9 41 151 29 147 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft)200 0 200 0 115 0 115 0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft)100 100 132 108 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.991 0.975 0.877 0.875 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot)1770 1846 0 1770 1816 0 1770 1634 0 1770 1630 0 Flt Permitted 0.226 0.339 0.579 0.721 Satd. Flow (perm)421 1846 0 631 1816 0 1079 1634 0 1343 1630 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR)6 18 45 160 Link Speed (mph)30 30 30 30 Link Distance (ft)1450 987 675 372 Travel Time (s)33.0 22.4 15.3 8.5 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph)97 523 34 76 538 107 15 10 45 164 32 160 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 97 557 0 76 645 0 15 55 0 164 192 0 Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Perm NA Perm NA Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6 Detector Phase 7 4 3 8 2 2 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s)9.0 21.5 9.0 21.5 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 Total Split (s)9.0 54.0 9.0 54.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 Total Split (%)10.0% 60.0% 10.0% 60.0% 30.0% 30.0% 30.0% 30.0% Yellow Time (s)3.0 3.5 3.0 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 All-Red Time (s)1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)4.0 4.5 4.0 4.5 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None None None None Act Effct Green (s)31.7 28.6 30.8 26.5 13.4 13.4 13.4 13.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.56 0.51 0.55 0.47 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 v/c Ratio 0.26 0.59 0.16 0.75 0.06 0.13 0.52 0.38 Control Delay 6.7 13.9 5.8 18.8 22.0 10.3 29.0 8.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 6.7 13.9 5.8 18.8 22.0 10.3 29.0 8.9 LOS A B A B C B C A Approach Delay 12.8 17.4 12.8 18.1 Approach LOS B B B B Stops (vph)31 313 25 416 12 17 120 39 Fuel Used(gal)1 9 1 9 0 0 2 1 EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 86 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Forge Opening Day PM Signalized - Weekend.syn 3: Walker Rd & Main St 11/13/2018 Forge Opening Day traffic 6:15 am 10/09/2018 Synchro 10 Report TERRA Engineering, Ltd.Page 2 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR CO Emissions (g/hr)91 627 53 638 14 33 139 73 NOx Emissions (g/hr) 18 122 10 124 3 6 27 14 VOC Emissions (g/hr) 21 145 12 148 3 8 32 17 Dilemma Vehicles (#)0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Queue Length 50th (ft) 10 131 8 161 4 3 49 9 Queue Length 95th (ft) 35 283 29 350 21 32 134 64 Internal Link Dist (ft)1370 907 595 292 Turn Bay Length (ft) 200 200 115 115 Base Capacity (vph) 375 1556 461 1533 510 797 635 856 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.26 0.36 0.16 0.42 0.03 0.07 0.26 0.22 Intersection Summary Area Type:Other Cycle Length: 90 Actuated Cycle Length: 56.4 Natural Cycle: 65 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.75 Intersection Signal Delay: 15.7 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 62.4%ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 3: Walker Rd & Main St EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 87 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Walker Rd & Main St 11/13/2018 Forge Future Build Weekday 6:15 am 10/09/2018 Synchro 10 Report TERRA Engineering, Ltd.Page 1 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)1 280 9 24 254 1 14 1 61 0 0 0 Future Volume (vph)1 280 9 24 254 1 14 1 61 0 0 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft)200 0 200 0 115 0 115 0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft)100 100 132 108 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.995 0.999 0.852 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot)1770 1853 0 1770 1861 0 1770 1587 0 1863 1863 0 Flt Permitted 0.589 0.570 0.757 Satd. Flow (perm)1097 1853 0 1062 1861 0 1410 1587 0 1863 1863 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR)3 66 Link Speed (mph)30 30 30 30 Link Distance (ft)1450 987 675 372 Travel Time (s)33.0 22.4 15.3 8.5 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph)1 304 10 26 276 1 15 1 66 0 0 0 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 1 314 0 26 277 0 15 67 0 0 0 0 Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Perm NA Perm Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6 Detector Phase 7 4 3 8 2 2 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s)9.0 22.5 9.0 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 Total Split (s)9.0 54.0 9.0 54.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 Total Split (%)10.0% 60.0% 10.0% 60.0% 30.0% 30.0% 30.0% 30.0% Yellow Time (s)3.0 3.5 3.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Time (s)1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)4.0 4.5 4.0 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None Min Min Min Min Act Effct Green (s)11.4 10.2 11.4 10.2 6.2 6.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.42 0.38 0.42 0.38 0.23 0.23 v/c Ratio 0.00 0.45 0.04 0.40 0.05 0.16 Control Delay 4.0 9.3 3.9 8.8 11.6 5.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 4.0 9.3 3.9 8.8 11.6 5.8 LOS AA AA BA Approach Delay 9.3 8.4 6.8 Approach LOS A A A Stops (vph)1 168 12 146 15 19 Fuel Used(gal)0 5 0 3 0 1 EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 88 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Walker Rd & Main St 11/13/2018 Forge Future Build Weekday 6:15 am 10/09/2018 Synchro 10 Report TERRA Engineering, Ltd.Page 2 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR CO Emissions (g/hr)1 331 19 225 13 35 NOx Emissions (g/hr)0 64 4 44 3 7 VOC Emissions (g/hr)0 77 4 52 3 8 Dilemma Vehicles (#)0 0 0 0 0 0 Queue Length 50th (ft) 0 23 2 20 1 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 99 7 87 13 22 Internal Link Dist (ft)1370 907 595 292 Turn Bay Length (ft) 200 200 115 Base Capacity (vph) 592 1853 585 1861 1218 1380 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.00 0.17 0.04 0.15 0.01 0.05 Intersection Summary Area Type:Other Cycle Length: 90 Actuated Cycle Length: 27.1 Natural Cycle: 55 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.45 Intersection Signal Delay: 8.6 Intersection LOS: A Intersection Capacity Utilization 31.6%ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 3: Walker Rd & Main St EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 89 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Forge Future Build PM Signalized - Weekday.syn 3: Walker Rd & Main St 11/13/2018 Forge Opening Day PM Weekday 4:30 pm 10/09/2018 Synchro 10 Report TERRA Engineering, Ltd.Page 1 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)16 493 32 71 507 18 14 2 42 28 5 27 Future Volume (vph)16 493 32 71 507 18 14 2 42 28 5 27 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft)200 0 200 0 115 0 115 0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft)100 100 132 108 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.991 0.995 0.856 0.872 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot)1770 1846 0 1770 1853 0 1770 1595 0 1770 1624 0 Flt Permitted 0.375 0.291 0.735 0.726 Satd. Flow (perm)699 1846 0 542 1853 0 1369 1595 0 1352 1624 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR)6 3 46 29 Link Speed (mph)30 30 30 30 Link Distance (ft)1450 987 675 372 Travel Time (s)33.0 22.4 15.3 8.5 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph)17 536 35 77 551 20 15 2 46 30 5 29 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 17 571 0 77 571 0 15 48 0 30 34 0 Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Perm NA Perm NA Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6 Detector Phase 7 4 3 8 2 2 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s)9.0 22.5 9.0 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 Total Split (s)9.0 54.0 9.0 54.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 Total Split (%)10.0% 60.0% 10.0% 60.0% 30.0% 30.0% 30.0% 30.0% Yellow Time (s)3.0 3.5 3.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Time (s)1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)4.0 4.5 4.0 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None Min Min Min Min Act Effct Green (s)21.9 18.9 23.4 22.1 7.1 7.1 7.1 7.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.54 0.47 0.58 0.55 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 v/c Ratio 0.03 0.66 0.16 0.56 0.06 0.15 0.13 0.11 Control Delay 3.0 13.0 3.7 8.7 19.4 9.2 20.0 10.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 3.0 13.0 3.7 8.7 19.4 9.2 20.0 10.8 LOS AB AA BA CB Approach Delay 12.8 8.1 11.6 15.1 Approach LOS B A B B Stops (vph)7 349 23 281 15 16 27 16 Fuel Used(gal)0 9 1 7 0 0 0 0 EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 90 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Forge Future Build PM Signalized - Weekday.syn 3: Walker Rd & Main St 11/13/2018 Forge Opening Day PM Weekday 4:30 pm 10/09/2018 Synchro 10 Report TERRA Engineering, Ltd.Page 2 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR CO Emissions (g/hr)16 647 51 456 15 28 24 17 NOx Emissions (g/hr)3 126 10 89 3 5 5 3 VOC Emissions (g/hr)4 150 12 106 3 7 6 4 Dilemma Vehicles (#)0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Queue Length 50th (ft) 1 105 5 54 3 1 7 1 Queue Length 95th (ft) 5 202 15 202 17 24 28 21 Internal Link Dist (ft)1370 907 595 292 Turn Bay Length (ft) 200 200 115 115 Base Capacity (vph) 525 1807 480 1814 836 991 825 1002 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.03 0.32 0.16 0.31 0.02 0.05 0.04 0.03 Intersection Summary Area Type:Other Cycle Length: 90 Actuated Cycle Length: 40.3 Natural Cycle: 60 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.66 Intersection Signal Delay: 10.6 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 51.1%ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 3: Walker Rd & Main St EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 91 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Walker Rd & Main St 11/13/2018 Forge Future Build Weekend 1:00 pm 10/09/2018 Synchro 10 Report TERRA Engineering, Ltd.Page 1 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 118 280 9 24 254 118 14 26 61 58 5 46 Future Volume (vph) 118 280 9 24 254 118 14 26 61 58 5 46 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft)200 0 200 0 115 0 115 0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft)100 100 132 108 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.995 0.952 0.895 0.864 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot)1770 1853 0 1770 1773 0 1770 1667 0 1770 1609 0 Flt Permitted 0.377 0.570 0.721 0.696 Satd. Flow (perm)702 1853 0 1062 1773 0 1343 1667 0 1296 1609 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR)3 41 66 50 Link Speed (mph)30 30 30 30 Link Distance (ft)1450 987 675 372 Travel Time (s)33.0 22.4 15.3 8.5 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph)128 304 10 26 276 128 15 28 66 63 5 50 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 128 314 0 26 404 0 15 94 0 63 55 0 Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Perm NA Perm NA Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6 Detector Phase 7 4 3 8 2 2 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s)9.0 22.5 9.0 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 Total Split (s)9.0 54.0 9.0 54.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 Total Split (%)10.0% 60.0% 10.0% 60.0% 30.0% 30.0% 30.0% 30.0% Yellow Time (s)3.0 3.5 3.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Time (s)1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)4.0 4.5 4.0 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None Min Min Min Min Act Effct Green (s)20.7 19.4 18.3 14.1 7.7 7.7 7.7 7.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.54 0.51 0.48 0.37 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 v/c Ratio 0.24 0.33 0.04 0.59 0.05 0.24 0.24 0.15 Control Delay 5.0 7.4 3.9 13.4 15.4 9.2 17.8 7.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 5.0 7.4 3.9 13.4 15.4 9.2 17.8 7.7 LOS AA AB BA BA Approach Delay 6.7 12.9 10.0 13.1 Approach LOS A B B B Stops (vph)44 145 11 244 15 34 50 19 Fuel Used(gal)2 5 0 5 0 1 1 0 EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 92 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Walker Rd & Main St 11/13/2018 Forge Future Build Weekend 1:00 pm 10/09/2018 Synchro 10 Report TERRA Engineering, Ltd.Page 2 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR CO Emissions (g/hr) 119 315 18 365 14 56 46 23 NOx Emissions (g/hr) 23 61 4 71 3 11 9 5 VOC Emissions (g/hr) 27 73 4 85 3 13 11 5 Dilemma Vehicles (#)0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Queue Length 50th (ft) 10 27 2 62 3 5 12 1 Queue Length 95th (ft) 27 108 8 135 15 35 41 23 Internal Link Dist (ft)1370 907 595 292 Turn Bay Length (ft) 200 200 115 115 Base Capacity (vph) 530 1853 609 1773 846 1075 817 1032 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.24 0.17 0.04 0.23 0.02 0.09 0.08 0.05 Intersection Summary Area Type:Other Cycle Length: 90 Actuated Cycle Length: 38.1 Natural Cycle: 55 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.59 Intersection Signal Delay: 10.1 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 47.8%ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 3: Walker Rd & Main St EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 93 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 7: Walker Rd & Overflow Parking 11/13/2018 Forge Future Build Weekend 1:00 pm 10/09/2018 Synchro 10 Report TERRA Engineering, Ltd.Page 3 Lane Group EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)0 0 0 262 109 0 Future Volume (vph)0 0 0 262 109 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft)0 0 76 0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft)25 108 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot)1863 0 1863 1863 1863 0 Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm)1863 0 1863 1863 1863 0 Link Speed (mph)30 30 30 Link Distance (ft)139 372 147 Travel Time (s)3.2 8.5 3.3 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph)0 0 0 285 118 0 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 285 118 0 Sign Control Stop Free Free Intersection Summary Area Type:Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 17.1%ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 94 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Forge Future Build PM Signalized - Weekend.syn 3: Walker Rd & Main St 11/13/2018 Forge Future Build PM Weekend 4:30 pm 10/09/2018 Synchro 10 Report TERRA Engineering, Ltd.Page 1 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)89 493 32 71 507 98 14 9 42 151 29 147 Future Volume (vph)89 493 32 71 507 98 14 9 42 151 29 147 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft)200 0 200 0 115 0 115 0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft)100 100 132 108 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.991 0.976 0.877 0.875 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot)1770 1846 0 1770 1818 0 1770 1634 0 1770 1630 0 Flt Permitted 0.216 0.326 0.596 0.720 Satd. Flow (perm)402 1846 0 607 1818 0 1110 1634 0 1341 1630 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR)6 17 46 160 Link Speed (mph)30 30 30 30 Link Distance (ft)1450 987 675 372 Travel Time (s)33.0 22.4 15.3 8.5 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph)97 536 35 77 551 107 15 10 46 164 32 160 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 97 571 0 77 658 0 15 56 0 164 192 0 Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Perm NA Perm NA Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6 Detector Phase 7 4 3 8 2 2 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s)9.0 22.5 9.0 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 Total Split (s)9.0 54.0 9.0 54.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 Total Split (%)10.0% 60.0% 10.0% 60.0% 30.0% 30.0% 30.0% 30.0% Yellow Time (s)3.0 3.5 3.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Time (s)1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)4.0 4.5 4.0 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None Min Min Min Min Act Effct Green (s)32.5 29.4 31.6 27.3 13.5 13.5 13.5 13.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.56 0.51 0.55 0.47 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 v/c Ratio 0.27 0.61 0.17 0.76 0.06 0.13 0.53 0.38 Control Delay 7.0 14.3 5.9 19.3 22.8 10.6 30.2 9.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 7.0 14.3 5.9 19.3 22.8 10.6 30.2 9.2 LOS A B A B C B C A Approach Delay 13.2 17.9 13.1 18.8 Approach LOS B B B B Stops (vph)30 325 26 428 12 17 121 39 Fuel Used(gal)1 9 1 9 0 0 2 1 EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 95 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Forge Future Build PM Signalized - Weekend.syn 3: Walker Rd & Main St 11/13/2018 Forge Future Build PM Weekend 4:30 pm 10/09/2018 Synchro 10 Report TERRA Engineering, Ltd.Page 2 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR CO Emissions (g/hr)91 647 54 657 14 34 142 74 NOx Emissions (g/hr) 18 126 11 128 3 7 28 14 VOC Emissions (g/hr) 21 150 13 152 3 8 33 17 Dilemma Vehicles (#)0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Queue Length 50th (ft) 11 140 8 172 4 3 51 9 Queue Length 95th (ft) 35 294 29 362 21 33 137 65 Internal Link Dist (ft)1370 907 595 292 Turn Bay Length (ft) 200 200 115 115 Base Capacity (vph) 362 1535 447 1513 499 760 603 821 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.27 0.37 0.17 0.43 0.03 0.07 0.27 0.23 Intersection Summary Area Type:Other Cycle Length: 90 Actuated Cycle Length: 57.9 Natural Cycle: 60 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.76 Intersection Signal Delay: 16.2 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 63.4%ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 3: Walker Rd & Main St EXHIBIT D: TRAFFIC STUDY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 96 EXHIBIT E: MARKET RESEARCH STUDY NOT APPLICABLE THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 97 EXHIBIT F: ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY NOT APPLICABLE THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 2019.03.25 98 EXHIBIT G: PLAT OF SURVEY PLAT OF SURVEY THE FORGE NW CORNER WALKER RD./MAIN ST., LEMONT IL. THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 2019.03.25 99 EXHIBIT G: PLAT OF SURVEY PLAT OF SURVEY THE FORGE NW CORNER WALKER RD./MAIN ST., LEMONT IL. THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 100 EXHIBIT H: TITLE SEARCH THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 101 EXHIBIT H: TITLE SEARCH THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 102 EXHIBIT H: TITLE SEARCH THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 103 EXHIBIT H: TITLE SEARCH THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 104 EXHIBIT H: TITLE SEARCH THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 105 EXHIBIT H: TITLE SEARCH THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 106 EXHIBIT H: TITLE SEARCH THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 2019.03.25 107 K ID'SAERIA LC O UR SEAN D KID 'SB IKEPA RK (S EEBO NSAIA NDIM BA)PEDES TR IAN & C YC LISTPATH SDROPOFFKAYAKSTO RAG E,M EC H ,&TRASHAMPHITHEATER (1000PE O PLE)P A R KIN G (393S PAC ES)G R AVELDRIVEW AYP EDESTR IAN &CYC LISTP A TH S NEW RAILROADCROSSINGSPO ILPILESPO ILPILE &SIG NAG EM A IN S T R E E T WALKER ROAD EXTENSIONWALKER ROADTRAINTRACKSEX ISTIN G LANDSCAPEEX IS TIN G BIK EPA THZIPLINES (SEE BONSAI)THE FORGE QUARRY ADVENTURE COURSEPHASE 1 DEVELOPMENT PHASE 1 DEVELOPMENT (PER LICENSE AGREEMENT) MOUNTAIN BIKING TRAIL(SEE IMBA)ICE BOX QUARRY GREAT LAKES QUARRY I&M C ANA LKAYAKLAUNCH ZIPLINEPLATFORM AD A PA R K ING (NO WORK)PAVI LI ON50'CLIMBING3 0' CL I MBI NGCHECKINEVENTCENTERSTO RM W A TE R D ETE N TIO NSTO RAG E(D A SH E D )(SE EC IVILD R A W IN G S)STO R M W ATERD E TE N TIO N STO R AG E(D A SH E D )(SE EC IV ILD R A W IN G S)BASE CAMP etaDeussI 93406 LI ,tnomeLnagihciM & sionillI 50541 1801Project 312.951.6600 fax 312.951.6544420 West Huron Street Chicago, Illinois 60654 312.427.7240 fax 312.427.7241888 S. Michigan Avenue, Chicago, IL 60605 THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES John Ronan Architects Architect Landscape Architect Site Design Group 312.596.2000 fax 312.596.2001 Thornton Tomasetti, Inc. Structural Engineer 8102 rebmevoN 12ngiseD citamehcS 330 North Wabash Avenue Suite 1500 Chicago, Illinois 60611 Elevation +0'-0" = +587.00 CCD 312.977.2800 fax 312.951.055810 South LaSalle Street, #2700 Chicago, IL 60602 Affiliated Engineers MEP Engineer 312.467.0123 fax 312.467.0220225 West Ohio Street 4th Floor Chicago, Illinois 60654 Terra Engineering Ltd. Civil Engineer 312.559.4585 fax 312.559.53932 North Riverside Plaza, Suite 1460 Chicago, IL 60606 Shen Milsom & Wilke Acoustic/Audiovisual Consultants A0.1Site PlanScale: 1" = 100'-0"1 SITE PLAN PROJECT NORTH EXHIBIT I: SITE PLAN THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 2019.03.25 108 Schematic Design 21 November 2018 Issue Date 14505 Illinois & Michigan Lemont, IL60439 1801Project John Ronan Architects Architect Landscape Architect Thornton Tomasetti, Inc. Structural Engineer MEP Engineer Terra Engineering Ltd. Civil Engineer Acoustic/Audiovisual Consultants MATCHLINE C3.2 MATCHLINE C3.3KEYPLAN EXHIBIT J: ENGINEERING PLANS THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 2019.03.25 109 Schematic Design 21 November 2018 Issue Date 14505 Illinois & Michigan Lemont, IL60439 1801Project John Ronan Architects Architect Landscape Architect Thornton Tomasetti, Inc. Structural Engineer MEP Engineer Terra Engineering Ltd. Civil Engineer Acoustic/Audiovisual Consultants MATCHLINE C3.1 MATCHLINE C3.4KEYPLAN EXHIBIT J: ENGINEERING PLANS THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 2019.03.25 110 Schematic Design 21 November 2018 Issue Date 14505 Illinois & Michigan Lemont, IL 60439 1801Project John Ronan Architects Architect Landscape Architect Thornton Tomasetti, Inc. Structural Engineer MEP Engineer Terra Engineering Ltd. Civil Engineer Acoustic/Audiovisual Consultants MATCHLINE C3.4 MATCHLINE C3.5MATCHLINE C3.1KEYPLAN EXHIBIT J: ENGINEERING PLANS THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 2019.03.25 111 Schematic Design 21 November 2018 Issue Date 14505 Illinois & Michigan Lemont, IL 60439 1801Project John Ronan Architects Architect Landscape Architect Thornton Tomasetti, Inc. Structural Engineer MEP Engineer Terra Engineering Ltd. Civil Engineer Acoustic/Audiovisual Consultants MATCHLINE C3.3 MATCHLINE C3.6MATCHLINE C3.2KEYPLAN EXHIBIT J: ENGINEERING PLANS THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 2019.03.25 112 Schematic Design 21 November 2018 Issue Date 14505 Illinois & Michigan Lemont, IL 60439 1801Project John Ronan Architects Architect Landscape Architect Thornton Tomasetti, Inc. Structural Engineer MEP Engineer Terra Engineering Ltd. Civil Engineer Acoustic/Audiovisual Consultants MATCHLINE C3.6MATCHLINE C3.3KEYPLAN EXHIBIT J: ENGINEERING PLANS THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 2019.03.25 113 Schematic Design 21 November 2018 Issue Date 14505 Illinois & Michigan Lemont, IL 60439 1801Project John Ronan Architects Architect Landscape Architect Thornton Tomasetti, Inc. Structural Engineer MEP Engineer Terra Engineering Ltd. Civil Engineer Acoustic/Audiovisual Consultants MATCHLINE C3.5 MATCHLINE C3.4KEYPLAN EXHIBIT J: ENGINEERING PLANS THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 2019.03.25 114 Schematic Design 21 November 2018 Issue Date 14505 Illinois & Michigan Lemont, IL 60439 1801Project John Ronan Architects Architect Landscape Architect Thornton Tomasetti, Inc. Structural Engineer MEP Engineer Terra Engineering Ltd. Civil Engineer Acoustic/Audiovisual Consultants MATCHLINE C4.2 MATCHLINE C4.3KEYPLAN EXHIBIT J: ENGINEERING PLANS THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 2019.03.25 115 Schematic Design 21 November 2018 Issue Date 14505 Illinois & Michigan Lemont, IL 60439 1801Project John Ronan Architects Architect Landscape Architect Thornton Tomasetti, Inc. Structural Engineer MEP Engineer Terra Engineering Ltd. Civil Engineer Acoustic/Audiovisual Consultants MATCHLINE C4.1 MATCHLINE C4.4MATCHLINE C4.7 KEYPLAN EXHIBIT J: ENGINEERING PLANS THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 2019.03.25 116 Schematic Design 21 November 2018 Issue Date 14505 Illinois & Michigan Lemont, IL 60439 1801Project John Ronan Architects Architect Landscape Architect Thornton Tomasetti, Inc. Structural Engineer MEP Engineer Terra Engineering Ltd. Civil Engineer Acoustic/Audiovisual Consultants MATCHLINE C4.4 MATCHLINE C4.5MATCHLINE C4.1KEYPLAN EXHIBIT J: ENGINEERING PLANS THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 2019.03.25 117 Schematic Design 21 November 2018 Issue Date 14505 Illinois & Michigan Lemont, IL 60439 1801Project John Ronan Architects Architect Landscape Architect Thornton Tomasetti, Inc. Structural Engineer MEP Engineer Terra Engineering Ltd. Civil Engineer Acoustic/Audiovisual Consultants MATCHLINE C4.3 MATCHLINE C4.6MATCHLINE C4.2MATCHLINE C4.7 MATCHLINE C4.8 KEYPLAN EXHIBIT J: ENGINEERING PLANS THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 2019.03.25 118 Schematic Design 21 November 2018 Issue Date 14505 Illinois & Michigan Lemont, IL 60439 1801Project John Ronan Architects Architect Landscape Architect Thornton Tomasetti, Inc. Structural Engineer MEP Engineer Terra Engineering Ltd. Civil Engineer Acoustic/Audiovisual Consultants MATCHLINE C4.6MATCHLINE C4.3KEYPLAN EXHIBIT J: ENGINEERING PLANS THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 2019.03.25 119 Schematic Design 21 November 2018 Issue Date 14505 Illinois & Michigan Lemont, IL 60439 1801Project John Ronan Architects Architect Landscape Architect Thornton Tomasetti, Inc. Structural Engineer MEP Engineer Terra Engineering Ltd. Civil Engineer Acoustic/Audiovisual Consultants MATCHLINE C4.5 MATCHLINE C4.4MATCHLINE C4.8 KEYPLAN EXHIBIT J: ENGINEERING PLANS THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 2019.03.25 120 Schematic Design 21 November 2018 Issue Date 14505 Illinois & Michigan Lemont, IL60439 1801Project John Ronan Architects Architect Landscape Architect Thornton Tomasetti, Inc. Structural Engineer MEP Engineer Terra Engineering Ltd. Civil Engineer Acoustic/Audiovisual Consultants MATCHLINE C4.2 MATCHLINE C4.8MATCHLINE C4.4 KEYPLAN EXHIBIT J: ENGINEERING PLANS THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 2019.03.25 121 Schematic Design 21 November 2018 Issue Date 14505 Illinois & Michigan Lemont, IL60439 1801Project John Ronan Architects Architect Landscape Architect Thornton Tomasetti, Inc. Structural Engineer MEP Engineer Terra Engineering Ltd. Civil Engineer Acoustic/Audiovisual Consultants MATCHLINE C4.4 MATCHLINE C4.7MATCHLINE C4.6 KEYPLAN EXHIBIT J: ENGINEERING PLANS THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 2019.03.25 122 THE FORGE QUARRY 0 50 100 150 200' SEE L1.2 - E A S T SI T E L A N D S C A P E E N L A R G E M E N T P L A N SEE L2.1 - SI T E L A N D S C A P E ENLAR G E M E N T P L A N SEE L2.3 - SI T E L A N D S C A P E ENLAR G E M E N T P L A N SEE L2.2 - SI T E L A N D S C A P E ENLAR G E M E N T P L A N SEE L2.4 - SI T E L A N D S C A P E ENLAR G E M E N T P L A N SEE L2.5 - SI T E L A N D S C A P E ENLAR G E M E N T P L A N SEE L2.6 - SI T E L A N D S C A P E ENLAR G E M E N T P L A N SEE L1.1 - W E S T SI T E L A N D S C A P E E N L A R G E M E N T P L A N SEE L2.7 - SI T E L A N D S C A P E ENLAR G E M E N T P L A N SEE L2.8 - SI T E L A N D S C A P E ENLAR G E M E N T P L A N EXHIBIT L: LANDSCAPE PLANS THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 2019.03.25 123 EXHIBIT L: LANDSCAPE PLANS 0 50 100 150 200' MOUNTAIN BIKING TRACKS (SCHEMATIC ONLY) AERIAL ADVENTURE COURSE (SCHEMATIC ONLY) QUARRY 1 SWALES WITH MESIC-WET DOLOMITE PRAIRIE EXPOSED AGGREGATE CONCRETE LEGEND EXISTING VEGETATION TO REMAIN, MINIMAL CLEARING DOLOMITE SAVANNA RESTORATION GRAVEL PAVEMENT CRUSHED LIMESTONE PATHWAY SELECT VEGETATION TO REMAIN, SELECTIVE CLEARING LAWN AREA BEDROCK SHELF SPOILS PILE THE FORGE QUARRY THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 2019.03.25 124 EXHIBIT L: LANDSCAPE PLANS 0 20 40 60 10080 120' THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 2019.03.25 125 EXHIBIT L: LANDSCAPE PLANS MATCH LINE 1/L2.3MATCH LINE 1/L2.2 0 10 3020 40' I+M CANAL POST-CONSTRUCTION OF ASPHALT PUMP TRACK, KIDS BIKE PARK, AND KIDS AERIAL COURSE: RESTORE LANDSCAPE WITH DOLOMITE SAVANNA PLANTING(SHADE TREES, SHRUBS, SEED OF NATIVE SPECIES) EXPOSED AGGREGATE CONCRETE BEDROCK SHELF QUARRY 1 RAMP AND STAIRS STAIRS THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 2019.03.25 126 EXHIBIT L: LANDSCAPE PLANS MATCH LINE 1/L2.4MATCH LINE 1/L2.1 0 10 3020 40' DOLOMITE SAVANNA RESTORATION (SHADE TREES, SHRUBS, +SEED OF NATIVE SPECIES) BEDROCK SHELF FIREPIT QUARRY 1 SHADE TREE STAIRS CRUSHED LIMESTONE PATHWAY EXPOSED AGGREGATE CONCRETE EXPOSED BEDROCK SERFACE THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 2019.03.25 127 EXHIBIT L: LANDSCAPE PLANS MATCH LINE 1/L2.1MATCH LINE 1/L2.5MATCH LINE 1/L2.4 0 10 3020 40' SHADE TREES STORMWATER SWALE PLANTED WITH MESIC-WET PRAIRIE SPECIES (SHRUBS, PLUGS, SEED OF NATIVE SPECIES) CRUSHED LIMESTONE PATH EXISTING VEGETATION TO REMAIN, MINIMAL CLEARING SELECT VEGETATION TO REMAIN; SELECTIVE CLEARING TO: 1.REMOVE HAZARD TREES 2.REMOVE AND HERBICIDE INVASIVE SPECIES (INCLUDING BUCKTHORNS) EXISTING EPHEMERAL WETLAND, PROTECT TO REMAIN EXISTING I+M CANAL TRAIL POST CONSTRUCTION OFASPHALT PUMPTRACK, KIDS BIKE PARK, AND KIDS AERIAL COURSE; RESTORE LANDSCAPE WITH DOLOMITE SAVANNA PLANTING (SHADE TREES, SHRUBS, SEED OF NATIVE SPECIES) ASPHALT PUMP TRACK AND KIDS BIKE PARK (SCHEMATIC ONLY)KIDS AERIAL COURSE (SCHEMATIC ONLY)GRAVEL PARKING LOT THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 2019.03.25 128 EXHIBIT L: LANDSCAPE PLANS MATCH LINE 1/L2.2MATCH LINE 1/L2.3 0 10 3020 40'MATCH LINE 1/L2.6MATCH LINE 1/2.7 SHADE TREES STORMWATER SWALE PLANTED WITH MESIC-WET PRAIRIE SPECIES (SHRUBS, PLUGS, SEED OF NATIVE SPECIES) CRUSHED LIMESTONE PATH EXISTING VEGETATION TO REMAIN, MINIMAL CLEARING POST CONSTRUCTION OFASPHALT PUMPTRACK, KIDS BIKE PARK, AND KIDS AERIAL COURSE; RESTORE LANDSCAPE WITH DOLOMITE SAVANNA PLANTING (SHADE TREES, SHRUBS, SEED OF NATIVE SPECIES) ASPHALT PUMP TRACK AND KIDS BIKE PARK (SCHEMATIC ONLY) KIDS AERIAL COURSE (SCHEMATIC ONLY) GRAVEL PARKING LOT GRAVEL PAVEMENT DRIVEWAY AND DROP-OFF DOLOMITE SAVANNA RESTORATION (SHADE TREES, SHRUBS, +SEED OF NATIVE SPECIES) THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 2019.03.25 129 EXHIBIT L: LANDSCAPE PLANS MATCH LINE 1/L2.3MATCH LINE 1/L2.6 0 10 3020 40' EXISTING VEGETATION TO REMAIN, MINIMAL CLEARINGEXISTING I+M CANAL TRAILSTORMWATER SWALE PLANTED WITH MESIC-WET PRAIRIE SPECIES (SHRUBS, PLUGS, SEED OF NATIVE SPECIES) GRAVEL PARKING LOT DOLOMITE SAVANNA RESTORATION (SHADE TREES, SHRUBS, +SEED OF NATIVE SPECIES) SHADE TREES CRUSHED LIMESTONE PATH THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 2019.03.25 130 EXHIBIT L: LANDSCAPE PLANS MATCH LINE 1/L2.5MATCH LINE 1/L2.5 0 10 3020 40' MATCH LINE 1/L2.8 GRAVEL PARKING LOT CRUSHED LIMESTONE PATH STORMWATER SWALE PLANTED WITH MESIC-WET PRAIRIE SPECIES (SHRUBS, PLUGS, SEED OF NATIVE SPECIES) EXISTING VEGETATION TO REMAIN, MINIMAL CLEARING DOLOMITE SAVANNA RESTORATION (SHADE TREES, SHRUBS, +SEED OF NATIVE SPECIES) GRAVEL PAVEMENT DRIVEWAY SHADE TREES RAILROAD CROSSING, REFER TO CIVIL WALKER ROAD EXTENSION (REFER TO CIVIL) THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 2019.03.25 131 EXHIBIT L: LANDSCAPE PLANS MATCH LINE 1/L2.2 0 10 3020 40'MATCH LINE 1/L2.8MATCH LINE 1/L2.4 NOTE: EXISTING LANDSCAPE TO REMAIN POTENTIAL FOR FUTURE EXPANSION THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 2019.03.25 132 EXHIBIT L: LANDSCAPE PLANS MATCH LINE 1/L2.7MATCH LINE 1/L2.4 0 10 3020 40' MATCH LINE 1/L2.4 WALKER ROAD EXTENSION (REFER TO CIVIL)MAIN ST R E E T CRUSHED LIMESTONE PATH NOTE: EXISTING LANDSCAPE TO REMAIN POTENTIAL FOR FUTURE EXPANSION THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 2019.03.25 133 EXHIBIT L: LANDSCAPE PLANS SLOPE = 1:1 15'3'EQ.EQ.EQ. 1.DETERMINE EXACT LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES AND VERIFY IN FIELD. REPORT ANY CONFLICTS TO AOR PRIOR TO BEGINNING WORK. 2.INFORM AOR AS EACH PHASE OF WORK IS UNDERTAKEN. 3.PROTECT EXISTING VEGETATION INCLUDING ALL EXISTING PARKWAY AND INTERIOR TREES. REPLACE DAMAGED VEGETATION WITH APPROVED SIMILAR MATERIAL. 4.MAINTAIN SITE DRAINAGE DURING LANDSCAPE INSTALLATION. 5.SLOPE ALL PLANTING AREAS AWAY FROM BUILDING AT 2% MINIMUM GRADE UNO. 6.PRIOR TO LANDSCAPE INSTALLATION, VERIFY PLANTING AREAS ARE GRADED AT +/- 0.1 FOOT TO FINISH GRADE. 7.IN LANDSCAPE AREAS, FINISH GRADE TO 4" MINIMUM BELOW ADJACENT BUILDING FINISH FLOOR ELEVATION UNO. 8.FINISH GRADE TO 1" BELOW FINISH PAVING SURFACE IN LAWN AREAS AND 2" BELOW IN PLANTING AREAS. 9.CONFIRM ALL PLANT QUANTITIES. PROVIDE PLANT MATERIALS SUFFICIENT TO COVER AREAS SHOWN ON PLANS AT THE SPACINGS INDICATED. 10.PROVIDE SINGLE TRUNK STANDARD TREES UNO. 11.PROVIDE IDENTIFICATION TAG FROM THE SUPPLYING NURSERY SHOWING COMMON AND BOTANICAL PLANT NAMES FOR AT LEAST ONE PLANT OF EACH SPECIES DELIVERED TO THE SITE. PROTECT ALL PLANTS AGAINST HEAT, SUN, WIND AND FROST DURING TRANSPORTATION TO THE SITE AND WHILE BEING HELD AT THE SITE. DO NOT STORE PLANTS IN TOTAL DARKNESS MORE THAN ONE DAY. 12.DO NOT DAMAGE PLANT ROOT BALL DURING TRANSPORTATION OR PLANTING. 13.NOTIFY THE AOR AT THE TIME OF DELIVERY OF ANY PLANT MATERIAL THAT IS DAMAGED OR IN POOR CONDITION. 14.AOR RESERVES THE RIGHT TO INSPECT ALL PLANT MATERIALS BEFORE PLANTING. MATERIAL MAY BE REJECTED AT ANY TIME DUE TO CONDITION, FORM OR DAMAGE BEFORE OR AFTER PLANTING. 15.IN PLANTING SOIL PIT, REMOVE CRUSHED AGGREGRATE TO AN ADEQUATE DEPTH TO ENSURE THAT NO PART OF THE PLANT MATERIAL IS IN CONTACT OR AFFECTED BY THE LIME OR LIMESTONE IN THE AGGREGATE 16.PROVIDE NEW TOPSOIL THAT IS FERTILE, FRIABLE AND NATURAL LOAM SURFACE SOIL, REASONABLY FREE OF SUBSOIL, CLAY, CLAY LUMPS, BRUSH, WEEDS, AND OTHER LITTER AND FREE OF ROOTS, STUMPS, STONES LARGER THAN 2" IN ANY DIMENSION AND OTHER EXTRANEOUS OR TOXIC MATTER HARMFUL TO PLANT GROWTH. OBTAIN TOPSOIL FROM LOCAL SOURCES OR FROM AREAS HAVING SIMILAR SOIL CHARACTERISTICS TO THAT NECESSARY FOR VIGOROUS GROWTH OF SPECIFIED PLANTINGS. OBTAIN TOPSOIL THAT OCCURS IN A DEPTH OF NOT LESS THAN 6". DO NOT OBTAIN SOIL FROM BOGS OR MARSHES. SEE SPECIFICATIONS 32 93 11 PLANTINGS AND/OR 32 92 23 SODDING. 17.MIX SOIL AMENDMENTS AND FERTILIZERS WITH TOPSOIL ON A SITE SPECIFIC BASIS AT RATES APPROPRIATE FOR PLANTINGS IN ACCORDANCE WITH SPECIFICATION SECTION 32 93 11 PLANTINGS AND/OR 32 92 23 SODDING. 18.STAKE LOCATION OF ALL TREES, HEDGE LINES AND PLANTING BEDS AND NOTIFY AOR FOR REVIEW PRIOR TO PLANTING. 19.THE PLANTING PLANS ARE DIAGRAMMATIC. SPOT PLANT MATERIALS APPROXIMATELY AS SHOWN ON THE LANDSCAPE DRAWING AND NOTIFY AOR FOR REVIEW BEFORE REMOVING FROM CONTAINERS. 20.INSTALL ALL PLANT MATERIAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH DETAILS AND SPECIFICATIONS. 21.REMOVE ALL PLANT TYING MATERIAL AND MARKING TAPES AT THE TIME OF PLANTING. 22.INSTALL A MIN 3" LAYER OF HARDWOOD BARK MULCH AROUND ALL TREES AND IN ALL PLANTING AREAS UNO. CREATE A NATURAL SPADED EDGE WHERE PLANTING BEDS MEET TURF AREAS. SEE SPECIFICATION SECTION 32 93 11 PLANTINGS. 23.WATER ALL PLANTS IMMEDIATELY AFTER PLANTING. FLOOD PLANTS TWICE DURING FIRST TWENTY-FOUR HOUR PERIOD OF PLANTING. 24.GUY AND STAKE TREES, AS DIRECTED BY AOR, IMMEDIATELY AFTER PLANTING. PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF TWO GUY WIRES PER TREE ON THE UPHILL SIDE OF TREES PLANTED ON SLOPES STEEPER THAN 3:1. 25.PRUNE ALL DECIDUOUS SHADE TREES FOR A MINIMUM LOWEST BRANCH HEIGHT OF 7 FEET. 26.INSTALL AND MAINTAIN SOD TO PREVENT EVIDENT SEAMS. 27.PROTECT SEEDED AREAS AND SLOPES AGAINST EROSION AND SEED LOSS DUE TO BIRDS AND OTHER WILDLIFE BY APPLYING SHORT TERM, BIODEGRADABLE EROSION CONTROL BLANKETS, MATS, AND/OR NETTING AFTER COMPLETION OF SEEDING OPERATIONS. ADHERE TO MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS FOR REQUIRED PLACEMENT AND STAKING. 28.WARRANTY ALL PLANTS AND LAWN EXPERIENCING DEATH AND DEFECTS INCLUDING UNSATISFACTORY GROWTH, EXCEPT FOR DEFECTS RESULTING FROM NEGLECT BY OWNER, ABUSE OR DAMAGE BY OTHERS OR UNUSUAL PHENOMENON OR INCIDENTS WHICH ARE BEYOND CONTRACTOR'S CONTROL. GENERAL PLANTING NOTES NOTE: 1.ADJACENT MULCH IS TO BE 3" HARDWOOD MULCH. SHRUB PLANTING SECTION NOT TO SCALE PERENNIAL PLANTING SECTION NOT TO SCALE SHADE TREE PLANTING SECTION NOT TO SCALE ORNAMENTAL TREE PLANTING SECTION NOT TO SCALE 36" DEPTH SPECIFIED PLANTING SOIL 4" HIGH SOIL SAUCER BEYOND EDGE OF ROOT BALL 3" MULCH LAYER IN 6' DIAMETER RING (DO NOT PLACE MULCH IN CONTACT WITH TREE TRUNK) REMOVE ALL TWINE, ROPE, WIRE, AND BURLAP FROM TOP HALF OF ROOT BALL (IF PLANT IS SHIPPED WITH A WIRE BASKET AROUND THE ROOT BALL, CUT WIRE IN FOUR PLACES AND FOLD DOWN 8" INTO PLANTING HOLE) MULTI-STEM ORNAMENTAL TREE CROWN OF ROOTBALL 2-3" ABOVE EXISTING GRADE LEAVING TRUNK FLARE VISIBLE AT THE TOP OF THE ROOT BALL TAMPED SOIL AROUND BASE ROOT BALL ON UNEXCAVATED OR TAMPED SOIL 3" HARDWOOD MULCH LAYER IN SAUCER SHAPE CROWN OF ROOTBALL FLUSH WITH EXISTING GRADE ROOT BALL WITH BURLAP 1/2 REMOVED SHRUB FINISH GRADE SPECIFIED TOP SOIL FOR PLANTING EXISTING SUBGRADE/APPROVED ENGINEERING BARRIER SPACING VARIES. REFER TO PLAN OR PLANT LIST FOR SPACING TYPICAL TRIANGULATED SPACING GROUNDCOVER SPECIFIED 3" MULCH LAYER PLANTING BED RAISED FOR ADEQUATE DRAINAGE SPECIFIED TOP SOIL FOR PLANTING EXISTING SUBGRADE FINISH GRADE 12"MIN24"MINSLOPE = 1:1 15'3'36" DEPTH SPECIFIED PLANTING SOIL 4" HIGH SOIL SAUCER BEYOND EDGE OF ROOT BALL 3" MULCH LAYER IN 6' DIAMETER RING (DO NOT PLACE MULCH IN CONTACT WITH TREE TRUNK) REMOVE ALL TWINE, ROPE, WIRE, AND BURLAP FROM TOP HALF OF ROOT BALL (IF PLANT IS SHIPPED WITH A WIRE BASKET AROUND THE ROOT BALL, CUT WIRE IN FOUR PLACES AND FOLD DOWN 8" INTO PLANTING HOLE) SHADE TREE WITH STRONG CENTRAL LEADER CROWN OF ROOTBALL 2-3" ABOVE EXISTING GRADE LEAVING TRUNK FLARE VISIBLE AT THE TOP OF THE ROOT BALL TAMPED SOIL AROUND BASE ROOT BALL ON UNEXCAVATED OR TAMPED SOIL SLOPE = 1:1 15'3'EVERGREEN TREE PLANTING SECTION NOT TO SCALE 36" DEPTH SPECIFIED PLANTING SOIL 4" HIGH SOIL SAUCER BEYOND EDGE OF ROOT BALL 3" MULCH LAYER IN 6' DIAMETER RING (DO NOT PLACE MULCH IN CONTACT WITH TREE TRUNK) REMOVE ALL TWINE, ROPE, WIRE, AND BURLAP FROM TOP HALF OF ROOT BALL (IF PLANT IS SHIPPED WITH A WIRE BASKET AROUND THE ROOT BALL, CUT WIRE IN FOUR PLACES AND FOLD DOWN 8" INTO PLANTING HOLE) EVERGREEN TREE CROWN OF ROOTBALL 2-3" ABOVE EXISTING GRADE LEAVING TRUNK FLARE VISIBLE AT THE TOP OF THE ROOT BALL TAMPED SOIL AROUND BASE ROOT BALL ON UNEXCAVATED OR TAMPED SOIL SOD SECTION NOT TO SCALE SOD PLANTING SOIL SUBGRADE12"MIN THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 2019.03.25 134 EXHIBIT L: LANDSCAPE PLANS SAWCUT CONTROL JOINT SECTION 1" = 1'-0"3 COMPACTED SUBGRADE X X X CONTROL OR EXPANSION JOINT, SEE DETAILS 2 & 3 EQX X PEDESTRIAN CONCRETE PAVING SECTION 1" = 1'-0"1 EXPANSION JOINT SECTION 1" = 1'-0"2 X WWF 6" x 6" W2.9 x W2.9 HEAVY DUTY MESH EPOXY COATED X X 6" CA-6 COMPACTED TO 95% MOD PROCTOR DENSITY INSTALLED IN (2) EQ LIFTS NOTES: 1.REFER TO PAVING PLANS FOR CONCRETE JOINT PATTERN AND SPACING. 2.TYP BROOM FINISH, MINIMUM DEPTH 1/32", MAXIMUM DEPTH 1/16", DIRECTION OF STROKE TO BE PERPENDICULAR TO DIRECTION OF PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. 3.NO WWF IN ROW. X X 5" THICK CONCRETE X REMOVABLE EXPANSION FILLER CAP. AFTER FILLER CAP IS REMOVED FILL WITH SEALANT BEAD X X COMPACTED SUBGRADE X 6" CA-6 COMPACTED TO 95% MOD PROCTOR DENSITY INSTALLED IN (2) EQ LIFTS X3/4"6"6" X X XXXXEQCONCRETE SEALANT BEAD 18" LONG X 1/2" Ø EPOXY COATED DOWEL @ 12" O.C. WITH SLEEVE SAWCUT CONTRACTION JOINT FOR DEPTH EQUAL TO AT LEAST 1/4 CONCRETE THICKNESS PAVING, SEE DETAIL X X XXX X1/2" EXPANSION JOINT @ 30'-0" MAX (OR AS NOTED) FILLER FULL DEPTH 6" CA-6 COMPACTED TO 95% MOD PROCTOR DENSITY INSTALLED IN (2) EQ LIFTS CONCRETE PAVING, SEE DETAIL X X COMPACTED SUBGRADE X 4" STABILIZED PATHWAY MIX W/ AGGREGATE BINDER AGGREGATE SECTION 1" = 1'-0"10 6" CA-6 COMPACTED TO 95% MOD. PROCTOR DENSITY INSTALLED IN (2) EQ. LIFTS, STONE FINES ROLLED INTO TOP 1" BASE COURSE TO FORM COMPACT, SMOOTH SURFACE COMPACTED SUBGRADE NOTE: 1.INSTALL STABILIZED DECOMPOSED AGGREGATE PER MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDED INSTALLATION INSTRUCTIONS. GEOTEXTILE FABRIC STABILIZED DECOMPOSED XX CONTROL OR EXPANSION JOINT, SEE DETAILS 2 & 3 EQX X VEHICULAR CONCRETE PAVING SECTION 1" = 1'-0"2 WWF 6" x 6" W2.9 x W2.9 HEAVY DUTY MESH EPOXY COATED X 6" CA-6 COMPACTED TO 95% MOD PROCTOR DENSITY INSTALLED IN (2) EQ LIFTS X X 8" THICK CONCRETE XX COMPACTED SUBGRADE X 6"6"EQ THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 135 EXHIBIT M: TREE SURVEY Tree Inventory of the Proposed Forge Recreation Park Prepared by Applied Ecological Services, Inc. 17921 Smith Rd, P.O. Box 256 Brodhead, WI 53520 608-897-8641 Susan Lehnhardt, Ry Thompson, Ben Burpee, Will Overbeck, and Steven Apfelbaum (AES Project # 18-0132) Submitted to John Ronan Architects 420 W. Huron Street Chicago, IL 60654 15 June 2018 THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 136 EXHIBIT M: TREE SURVEY Table of Contents Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 1 Methods ..................................................................................................................................... 1 Results ....................................................................................................................................... 1 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................. 1 Table 1. Tally of Inventoried Tree Species ................................................................................ 2 Table 2. Inventoried Trees (Organized by Tree Species Common Name) ............................. 3 Figure 1. Tree Inventory Map .................................................................................................. 10 Figure 2. Tree Survey Close-up 1 ............................................................................................. 12 Figure 3. Tree Survey Close-up 2 ............................................................................................ 13 Figure 4. Tree Survey Close-up 3 ............................................................................................. 14 Figure 5. Tree Survey Close-up 4 ............................................................................................. 15 Figure 6. Tree Survey Close-up 5 ............................................................................................. 16 THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 137 EXHIBIT M: TREE SURVEY Tree Inventory of the Proposed Forge Recreation Park Introduction AES inventoried, assessed, and mapped selected trees on the proposed Forge Recreation Park property for the purpose of identifying and locating potentially desireable trees to consider in park design. This report summarizes the results of this survey. Methods On April 26 and 27th, 2018, AES ecologists identified, GPS-located, and assessed selected trees across the site. Criteria for selection included native tree species with landscape and habitat value, including silver maple, hackberry, green ash, black walnut, Eastern cottonwood, wild black cherry, bur oak, basswood, and American elm. Trees with minimum diameters at breast height (DBH) in the range of 4 – 6 inches and larger were targeted. Larger specimens of interest, including large non-native individual trees, were also inventoried. Data collected for each individual tree included species name, measurement of DBH, and a general classification of condition or health (G=good, M=medium, B=bad). The results were tabulated and mapped. Results A total of 11 tree species and 216 individual trees were identified and GPS-located within the search area (Table 1 tally, Table 2 individual tree data, and Figures 1 – 6 tree location maps). Native species with the largest counts include in descending order hackberry (70), black walnut (59), and wild black cherry (31). Other native trees with smaller numbers of individuals include silver maple (10), basswood (3), and bur oak (1). Inventoried American elm (11) and green ash (5), while native, are susceptible to disease, and thus are short-lived in the canopy. Two non-native tree species Norway spruce (15) and black locust were inventoried. Of the non-natives, black locust is considered invasive and undesirable to maintain onsite. Conclusion The inventoried trees were found concentrated or scattered in a few key locations in the project site: Spoils bordering the canal trail in the eastern sector of the site, which support larger numbers of hackberry and black walnut. Area with structures near the east shoreline of the large quarry pit, featuring larger silver maple and a number of large planted Norway spruce forming a tree row. Ridges in the outer perimeter of the larger tree and brush covered block in the western sector of the site, with scattered or loosely concentrated black walnut, Eastern cottonwood, hackberry, and wild black cherry. Among those tree species documented onsite, those that are durable and longer lived include the native hackberry, black walnut, oak, and basswood, along with silver maple and Eastern cottonwood which are tolerant of moist to wet conditions. 1 THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 138 EXHIBIT M: TREE SURVEY Table 1. Tally of Inventoried Tree Species Species Code Scientific Name Common Name Native (N) Non‐native (NN) Tree Count ACESAI Acer saccharinum Silver maple N 10 CELOCC Celtis occidentalis Hackberry N 70 FRAPES Fraxinus pennsylvanica Green ash N 5 JUGNIG Juglans nigra Black walnut N 59 PICABI Picea abies Norway spruce NN 15 POPDEL Populus deltoides Eastern cottonwood N 5 PRUSER Prunus serotina Wild black cherry N 31 QUEMAC Quercus macrocarpa Bur oak N 1 ROBPSE Robinia pseudo‐acacia Black locust NN 6 TILAME Tilia americana Basswood N 3 ULMAME Ulmus americana American elm N 11 Total 216 2 THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 139 EXHIBIT M: TREE SURVEY Table 2. Inventoried Trees (organized by Tree Species Common Name). The surveyed location of each individual tree is depicted in a series of six Tree Survey map figures (Figure 1: composite map; Figures 2 – 6: close-up of five areas of the map for readability). A digital GPS survey point file has also been provided to Ronan Architects. Tree Map No. Species Code Common Name Scientific Name Native (N) Non‐native (NN) Diameter (DBH) Condition Assessment 219 ULMAME American Elm Ulmus americana N 17 G 222 ULMAME American Elm Ulmus americana N 11 B 223 ULMAME American Elm Ulmus americana N 25 G 236 ULMAME American Elm Ulmus americana N 15 B 270 ULMAME American Elm Ulmus americana N 32 M 273 ULMAME American Elm Ulmus americana N 13 M 277 ULMAME American Elm Ulmus americana N 29 B 288 ULMAME American Elm Ulmus americana N 14 B 290 ULMAME American Elm Ulmus americana N 25 M 291 ULMAME American Elm Ulmus americana N 15 M 309 ULMAME American Elm Ulmus americana N 18 G 145 TILAME Basswood Tilia americana N 30 G 227 TILAME Basswood Tilia americana N 29 G 267 TILAME Basswood Tilia americana N 38 B 139 ROBPSE Black Locust Robinia pseudoacacia NN 36 G 140 ROBPSE Black Locust Robinia pseudoacacia NN 45 M 141a ROBPSE Black Locust Robinia pseudoacacia NN 12 M 141b ROBPSE Black Locust Robinia pseudoacacia NN 20 M 142 ROBPSE Black Locust Robinia pseudoacacia NN 25 G 143 ROBPSE Black Locust Robinia pseudoacacia NN 13 G 131 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 10 G 132 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 24 G 147 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 20 G 148 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 23 G 149 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 19 G 150 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 25 G 152 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 30 G 153 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 42 G 154 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 30 G 156 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 32 G 158 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 30 G 159 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 41 G 160 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 30 G 161 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 20 G 164 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 30 G 216 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 41 G 3 THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 140 EXHIBIT M: TREE SURVEY Tree Map No. Species Code Common Name Scientific Name Native (N) Non‐native (NN) Diameter (DBH) Condition Assessment 221 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 33 G 229 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 40 G 233 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 35 G 234 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 34 G 237 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 45 G 238 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 44 G 240 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 37 G 241 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 34 G 242 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 21 G 243 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 14 G 244 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 13 B 246 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 35 G 248 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 50 M 249 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 13 G 250a JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 18 G 250b JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 18 G 251a JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 17 M 251b JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 17 M 252 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 25 M 254 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 41 G 256 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 27 G 257 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 18 G 259 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 11 G 260 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 25 G 265 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 20 M 268 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 42 G 269 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 27 G 271 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 31 G 272 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 31 M 274 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 22 G 275 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 30 M 276 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 35 M 278 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 13 M 279 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 28 M 280 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 21 G 281 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 30 M 289 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 26 M 292 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 23 M 294 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 21 M 303 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 21 G 380 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 23 G 4 THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 141 EXHIBIT M: TREE SURVEY Tree Map No. Species Code Common Name Scientific Name Native (N) Non‐native (NN) Diameter (DBH) Condition Assessment 388 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 26 G 389 JUGNIG Black Walnut Juglans nigra N 20 G 157 QUEMAC Burr Oak Quercus macrocarpa N 12 G 146a POPDEL Eastern Cottonwood Populus deltoides N 60 G 146b POPDEL Eastern Cottonwood Populus deltoides N 60 G 218 POPDEL Eastern Cottonwood Populus deltoides N 36 G 382 POPDEL Eastern Cottonwood Populus deltoides N 76 M 387 POPDEL Eastern Cottonwood Populus deltoides N 80 G 217 FRAPES Green Ash Fraxinus pennsylvanica N 37 B 220 FRAPES Green Ash Fraxinus pennsylvanica N 19 M 225 FRAPES Green Ash Fraxinus pennsylvanica N 37 G 235 FRAPES Green Ash Fraxinus pennsylvanica N 30 B 311 FRAPES Green Ash Fraxinus pennsylvanica N 26 M 123a CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 15 G 123b CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 24 G 124 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 30 G 126 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 20 G 127 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 24 G 128a CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 15 G 128b CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 17 G 129 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 35 G 133 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 14 G 134 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 40 G 135 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 18 G 136 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 32 G 137 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 10 G 138 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 42 G 187 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 37 G 188 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 26 G 190 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 21 G 191 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 24 G 192 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 39 G 193 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 20 G 194 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 11 G 195 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 19 G 196 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 32 G 197 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 35 G 198 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 16 M 199 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 20 G 200 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 46 G 201 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 18 G 202 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 24 G 5 THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 142 EXHIBIT M: TREE SURVEY Tree Map No. Species Code Common Name Scientific Name Native (N) Non‐native (NN) Diameter (DBH) Condition Assessment 204 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 28 G 205 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 41 G 206 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 34 G 207 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 27 G 208 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 18 G 211 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 31 G 213 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 34 G 224 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 31 G 228 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 17 G 230 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 34 G 231 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 14 G 232 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 26 G 239 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 17 G 245 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 25 G 247 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 47 G 253 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 23 G 255 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 37 G 258 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 12 B 261 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 27 G 266 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 38 G 282 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 43 G 284 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 24 G 285 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 32 G 287 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 29 G 293 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 27 G 295 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 20 G 296 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 17 G 297 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 16 G 298 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 29 M 299 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 25 G 300 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 17 G 301 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 34 G 302 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 25 G 304 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 34 G 305 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 32 G 306 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 19 M 307 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 27 G 308 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 22 G 310 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 26 G 379 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 25 G 386 CELOCC Hackberry Celtis occidentalis N 49 G 172a PICABI Norway Spruce Picea abies NN 30 G 6 THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 143 EXHIBIT M: TREE SURVEY Tree Map No. Species Code Common Name Scientific Name Native (N) Non‐native (NN) Diameter (DBH) Condition Assessment 172b PICABI Norway Spruce Picea abies NN 12 G 173a PICABI Norway Spruce Picea abies NN 15 G 173b PICABI Norway Spruce Picea abies NN 15 G 174 PICABI Norway Spruce Picea abies NN 35 G 175 PICABI Norway Spruce Picea abies NN 15 G 176 PICABI Norway Spruce Picea abies NN 25 G 177 PICABI Norway Spruce Picea abies NN 32 G 178 PICABI Norway Spruce Picea abies NN 31 G 179 PICABI Norway Spruce Picea abies NN 25 G 180 PICABI Norway Spruce Picea abies NN 42 G 181 PICABI Norway Spruce Picea abies NN 30 G 182 PICABI Norway Spruce Picea abies NN 40 G 183 PICABI Norway Spruce Picea abies NN 30 G 184 PICABI Norway Spruce Picea abies NN 31 G 118a ACESAI Silver Maple Acer saccharinum N 32 G 118b ACESAI Silver Maple Acer saccharinum N 25 G 119 ACESAI Silver Maple Acer saccharinum N 32 G 120 ACESAI Silver Maple Acer saccharinum N 40 G 121 ACESAI Silver Maple Acer saccharinum N 30 G 122a ACESAI Silver Maple Acer saccharinum N 25 G 122b ACESAI Silver Maple Acer saccharinum N 30 G 185a ACESAI Silver Maple Acer saccharinum N 35 G 185b ACESAI Silver Maple Acer saccharinum N 30 G 355 ACESAI Silver Maple Acer saccharinum N 60 G 125 PRUSER Wild Black Cherry Prunus serotina N 32 M 130 PRUSER Wild Black Cherry Prunus serotina N 36 M 144 PRUSER Wild Black Cherry Prunus serotina N 48 G 151 PRUSER Wild Black Cherry Prunus serotina N 12 M 155 PRUSER Wild Black Cherry Prunus serotina N 12 M 163a PRUSER Wild Black Cherry Prunus serotina N 40 M 163b PRUSER Wild Black Cherry Prunus serotina N 55 M 163c PRUSER Wild Black Cherry Prunus serotina N 45 M 165 PRUSER Wild Black Cherry Prunus serotina N 15 M 168 PRUSER Wild Black Cherry Prunus serotina N 55 M 171 PRUSER Wild Black Cherry Prunus serotina N 10 M 189 PRUSER Wild Black Cherry Prunus serotina N 30 B 203 PRUSER Wild Black Cherry Prunus serotina N 27 B 209 PRUSER Wild Black Cherry Prunus serotina N 25 B 210 PRUSER Wild Black Cherry Prunus serotina N 28 G 212 PRUSER Wild Black Cherry Prunus serotina N 38 B 214 PRUSER Wild Black Cherry Prunus serotina N 39 M 215 PRUSER Wild Black Cherry Prunus serotina N 32 M 7 THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 144 EXHIBIT M: TREE SURVEY Tree Map No. Species Code Common Name Scientific Name Native (N) Non‐native (NN) Diameter (DBH) Condition Assessment 226 PRUSER Wild Black Cherry Prunus serotina N 27 B 262a PRUSER Wild Black Cherry Prunus serotina N 31 M 262b PRUSER Wild Black Cherry Prunus serotina N 31 M 263 PRUSER Wild Black Cherry Prunus serotina N 31 M 264 PRUSER Wild Black Cherry Prunus serotina N 22 B 283 PRUSER Wild Black Cherry Prunus serotina N 22 B 376 PRUSER Wild Black Cherry Prunus serotina N 28 M 377 PRUSER Wild Black Cherry Prunus serotina N 19 M 378 PRUSER Wild Black Cherry Prunus serotina N 28 M 381 PRUSER Wild Black Cherry Prunus serotina N 40 M 383 PRUSER Wild Black Cherry Prunus serotina N 33 G 384 PRUSER Wild Black Cherry Prunus serotina N 29 M 385 PRUSER Wild Black Cherry Prunus serotina N 47 M 8 THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 2019.03.25 145 EXHIBIT M: TREE SURVEY 10 THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 2019.03.25 146 EXHIBIT M: TREE SURVEY 12 THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 2019.03.25 147 EXHIBIT M: TREE SURVEY 13 THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 2019.03.25 148 EXHIBIT M: TREE SURVEY 14 THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 2019.03.25 149 EXHIBIT M: TREE SURVEY 15 THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 2019.03.25 150 EXHIBIT M: TREE SURVEY 16 THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 2019.03.25 151 K ID'SAERIA LC O UR SEAN D KID 'SB IKEPA RK (S EEBO NSAIA NDIM BA)PEDES TR IAN & C YC LISTPATH SDROPOFFKAYAKSTO RAG E,M EC H ,&TRASHAMPHITHEATER (1000PE O PLE)P A R KIN G (393S PAC ES)G R AVELDRIVEW AYP EDESTR IAN &CYC LISTP A TH S NEW RAILROADCROSSINGSPO ILPILESPO ILPILE &SIG NAG EM A IN S T R E E T WALKER ROAD EXTENSIONWALKER ROADTRAINTRACKSEX ISTIN G LANDSCAPEEX IS TIN G BIK EPA THZIPLINES (SEE BONSAI)THE FORGE QUARRY ADVENTURE COURSEPHASE 1 DEVELOPMENT PHASE 1 DEVELOPMENT (PER LICENSE AGREEMENT) MOUNTAIN BIKING TRAIL(SEE IMBA)ICE BOX QUARRY GREAT LAKES QUARRY I&M C ANA LKAYAKLAUNCH ZIPLINEPLATFORM AD A PA R K ING (NO WORK)PAVI LI ON50'CLIMBING3 0' CL I MBI NGCHECKINEVENTCENTERSTO RM W A TE R D ETE N TIO NSTO RAG E(D A SH E D )(SE EC IVILD R A W IN G S)STO R M W ATERD E TE N TIO N STO R AG E(D A SH E D )(SE EC IV ILD R A W IN G S)BASE CAMP etaDeussI 93406 LI ,tnomeLnagihciM & sionillI 50541 1801Project 312.951.6600 fax 312.951.6544420 West Huron Street Chicago, Illinois 60654 312.427.7240 fax 312.427.7241888 S. Michigan Avenue, Chicago, IL 60605 THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES John Ronan Architects Architect Landscape Architect Site Design Group 312.596.2000 fax 312.596.2001 Thornton Tomasetti, Inc. Structural Engineer 8102 rebmevoN 12ngiseD citamehcS 330 North Wabash Avenue Suite 1500 Chicago, Illinois 60611 Elevation +0'-0" = +587.00 CCD 312.977.2800 fax 312.951.055810 South LaSalle Street, #2700 Chicago, IL 60602 Affiliated Engineers MEP Engineer 312.467.0123 fax 312.467.0220225 West Ohio Street 4th Floor Chicago, Illinois 60654 Terra Engineering Ltd. Civil Engineer 312.559.4585 fax 312.559.53932 North Riverside Plaza, Suite 1460 Chicago, IL 60606 Shen Milsom & Wilke Acoustic/Audiovisual Consultants A0.1Site PlanScale: 1" = 100'-0"1 SITE PLAN PROJECT NORTH EXHIBIT N: BUILDING ELEVATIONS N1-2 N4 MAIN STR E E T ( T W O W A Y )ILLINOI S & MI C HI G A N C A N A L CHICA G O S A NI T A R Y & SHIP C A N A L QUARRY 1 ICEBOX QUARRY CONSUMERS QUARRY GREAT LAKES QUARRIES THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 2019.03.25 152 EXHIBIT N1: BUILDING ELEVATIONS GROUNDLEVEL +12'-0" ROOF LEVEL +24'-0" PENTHOUSE+34'-0" HOT ROLLED STEELCLADDING (MTL-2) ELEVATOR OVERRUNBEYOND (DASHED) ARCHITECTURALLYEXPOSED BOARD FORMEDCONCRETE (CONC-5) STAIR BEYOND (DASHED)HOT ROLLED STEELBAR STOCKHANDRAIL (MTL-2) QUARRYLEVEL +0'-0" GROUND LEVEL +12'-0" ROOF LEVEL+24'-0" MEN'SRESTROOM WOMEN'SRESTROOM CORRIDOR PENTHOUSE +34'-0" HOT ROLLED STEELCLADDING (MTL-2) ELEVATOR OVERRUNBEYOND (DASHED) INSULATED GLASS WINDOWWALL SYSTEM WITH HOTROLLED STEEL FINS (GL-1) ARCHITECTURALLY EXPOSEDBOARD FORMED CONCRETE(CONC-5) FLOOR BEYOND(DASHED) HOT ROLLED STLBAR STOCKHANDRAIL (MTL-2) DECORATIVEGRAVEL AT GRADE(STONE-1) QUARRYLEVEL +0'-0" GROUND LEVEL +12'-0" T/ROOF+62'-0" CONCRETE STAIR ANDLANDING (CONC-2) EXPANDED METAL PARTITION (MTL-1) CORRUGATED STEELSIDING (MTL-1) INSULATED GLASS WINDOWWALL SYSTEM WITH HOTROLLED STEEL FINS (GL-1) CONCRETE PAVING (CONC-2)EXPOSED NATURALWALL BEYOND (STONE-3) CORRUGATED STEELSIDING (MTL-1) EXPANDED METAL MESHGUARDRAIL BEYOND (MTL-1)STEEL PLATE FIRE RING (MTL-1) QUARRYLEVEL +0'-0" GROUNDLEVEL +12'-0" ROOF LEVEL +24'-0" CORRUGATED STEELSIDING (MTL-1) INSULATED GLASS WINDOWWALL SYSTEM WITH HOTROLLED STEEL FINS (GL-1) CLERESTORY GLAZING (GL-1) CONCRETE STAIR ANDLANDING (CONC-2) HOT ROLLED STEEL BARSTOCK GUARDRAIL (MTL-2) DECORATIVE GRAVEL ATGRADE (STONE-1) QUARRYLEVEL +0'-0" GROUNDLEVEL +12'-0" ROOF LEVEL +24'-0" INSULATED GLASS WINDOW(GL-1) WITH PERFORATEDCORRUGATED STEEL SIDING(MTL-1) CONCRETE STAIRAND LANDING(CONC-2) CORRUGATED STEELSIDING (MTL-1) DECORATIVE GRAVELAT GRADE (STONE-1)STEEL COLUMN (MTL-1)REF: STRUCTURAL DWGS SKYLIGHT HOT ROLLED STEELBAR STOCKHANDRAIL (MTL-2) QUARRYLEVEL +0'-0" GROUNDLEVEL +12'-0" ROOF LEVEL+24'-0" JANITORCLOSETVESTIBULECORRIDORWINDOW BEYOND(DASHED) INSULATED GLASS WINDOWWALL SYSTEM WITH HOTROLLED STEEL FINS (GL-1) CONCRETE STAIR ANDLANDING (CONC-2) LINE OF BUILDINGBEYOND (DASHED) QUARRYLEVEL +0'-0" GROUNDLEVEL +12'-0" ROOF LEVEL +24'-0" PENTHOUSE+34'-0" ELEVATOR OVERRUNBEYOND (DASHED) HOT ROLLED STEELCLADDING (MTL-2) ARCHITECTURALLYEXPOSED BOARD FORMEDCONCRETE (CONC-5) LINE OF BUILDINGBEYOND (DASHED) STAIR BEYOND (DASHED) GROUNDLEVEL +12'-0" ROOF LEVEL +24'-0" PENTHOUSE+34'-0" EXPANDED METALGATE (MTL-1) GLASS ENTRY DOORS WITHSTAINLESS STEEL FRAME HOT ROLLED STEEL BARSTOCK HANDRAIL (MTL-2) QUARRYLEVEL +0'-0" GROUNDLEVEL +12'-0" ROOF LEVEL+24'-0" PERFORATED CORRUGATEDSTEEL SIDING (MTL-1) CORRUGATED STEELSIDING (MTL-1) STEEL COLUMN (MTL-1)REF: STRUCTURAL DWGS SKYLIGHT HOT ROLLED STEEL BARSTOCK HANDRAIL (MTL-2) T/ROOF +62'-0" ROOF LEVEL +24'-0" T/ ROOF+42'-0" CORRUGATED STEELSIDING (MTL-1) ARCHITECTURALLYEXPOSED BOARDFORMED CONCRETE(CONC-5) EXPANDED METALGATE (MTL-1) CORRUGATED STEELSIDING (MTL-1) CORRUGATED STEELFENCE (MTL-1) INSULATED GLASS WINDOWWALL SYSTEM WITH HOTROLLED STEEL FINS (GL-1) HOT ROLLED STEELCLADDING (MTL-2) ELEVATOR OVERRUNBEYOND (DASHED) GLASS ENTRY DOORSWITH STAINLESSSTEEL FRAME CORRUGATED STEELROOFING (MTL-1) HOT ROLLED STEELCLADDING (MTL-2) CORRUGATED STEELSIDING (MTL-1) STEEL COLUMN (MTL-1)REF: STRUCTURAL DWGS EXPANDED METAL PARTITIONBEYOND (MTL-1) EXPANDED METALGUARDRAIL (MTL-1) QUARRYLEVEL +0'-0" GROUNDLEVEL +12'-0" T/ROOF +62'-0" ROOF LEVEL +24'-0" T/ ROOF+42'-0" PENTHOUSE+34'-0" CORRUGATED STEELSIDING (MTL-1) EXPANDED METALPARTITION (MTL-1) ARCHITECTURALLY EXPOSED BOARDFORMED CONCRETE (CONC-5) HOT ROLLED STEEL CLADDING (MTL-2) INSULATED GLASS WINDOW WALL SYSTEMWITH HOT ROLLED STEEL FINS (GL-1) CONCRETE STAIR AND LANDING (CONC-2) CORRUGATED STEEL ROOFING (MTL-1) CLERESTORY GLASS (GL-1)CORRUGATED STEELFENCE (MTL-1) CONCRETE STAIR ANDLANDING (CONC-2) STEEL COLUMN (MTL-1). REF: STRUCTURAL DWGS CORRUGATED STEELROOFING (MTL-1) CORRUGATED STEEL SIDING (MTL-1) INSULATED GLASS WINDOW WALL SYSTEMWITH HOT ROLLED STEEL FINS (GL-1)STEEL COLUMN (MTL-1) REF: STRUCTURAL DWGS STEEL PLATE FIRE RING (MTL-1) EXPOSED NATURALWALL (STONE-3) Issue Date 14505 Illinois & Michigan Lemont, IL 60439 1801Project 312.951.6600 fax 312.951.6544420 West Huron Street Chicago, Illinois 60654 312.427.7240 fax 312.427.7241888 S. Michigan Avenue, Chicago, IL 60605 THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES John Ronan Architects Architect Landscape Architect Site Design Group 312.596.2000 fax 312.596.2001 Thornton Tomasetti, Inc. Structural Engineer Schematic Design 21 November 2018 330 North Wabash Avenue Suite 1500 Chicago, Illinois 60611 Elevation +0'-0" = +587.00 CCD 312.977.2800 fax 312.951.055810 South LaSalle Street, #2700 Chicago, IL 60602 Affiliated Engineers MEP Engineer 312.467.0123 fax 312.467.0220225 West Ohio Street 4th Floor Chicago, Illinois 60654 Terra Engineering Ltd. Civil Engineer 312.559.4585 fax 312.559.53932 North Riverside Plaza, Suite 1460 Chicago, IL 60606 Shen Milsom & Wilke Acoustic/Audiovisual Consultants A2.1Elevations Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"8 SOUTH ELEVATION Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"5 WEST ELEVATION Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"3 SITE SECTION Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"7 WEST ELEVATION Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"11 NORTH ELEVATION Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"6 EAST ELEVATION Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"9 NORTH ELEVATION Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"4 EAST ELEVATION Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"10 SOUTH ELEVATION Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"1 BASE CAMP EAST ELEVATION Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"2 BASE CAMP WEST ELEVATION AT EVENT CENTER AT EVENT CENTER AT EVENT CENTER AT EVENT CENTER AT CHECK IN AT CHECK IN AT CHECK IN AT CHECK IN LOOKING NORTH THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 2019.03.25 153 EXHIBIT N2: BUILDING ELEVATIONS GROUND LEVEL +12'-0" T / ROOF+22'-0" GROUNDLEVEL +12'-0" T / ROOF+22'-0" OPEN OPEN GROUND LEVEL +12'-0" T / ROOF+22'-0" HOT ROLLED STEELCLADDING (MTL-2) CORRUGATED STEELSIDING (MTL-1) CORRUGATED STEELSIDING (MTL-1) CORRUGATED STEELROOFING (MTL-1)STEEL OVERHEADFOLDING DOOR (MTL-1) OPEN GROUNDLEVEL +12'-0" T / ROOF+22'-0" QUARRYLEVEL +0'-0" GROUNDLEVEL +12'-0" T/ ROOF +42'-0" CORRUGATED STEELSIDING (MTL-1) EXPANDED METALPARTITION (MTL-1) STEEL COLUMN (MTL-1)REF: STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS EXPANDED METALGUARDRAIL (MTL-1) CORRUGATED STEELROOFING (MTL-1) EXPANDED METAL MESHCLERESTORY (MTL-1) QUARRYLEVEL +0'-0" GROUNDLEVEL +12'-0" T/ ROOF +42'-0" EXPANDED METALGUARDRAIL (MTL-1) EXPANDED METALPARTITION (MTL-1) GROUNDLEVEL +12'-0" T/ ROOF+42'-0" QUARRYLEVEL +0'-0" GROUNDLEVEL +12'-0" T/ ROOF+42'-0" CORRUGATED STEELSIDING (MTL-1) EXPANDED METALGUARDRAIL (MTL-1) STEEL COLUMN (MTL-1)REF: STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS EXPANDED METAL PARTITION (MTL-1)FURNITURE STORAGE QUARRYLEVEL +0'-0" GROUNDLEVEL +12'-0" T/ROOF+62'-0" CORRUGATED STEELSIDING (MTL-1) INSULATED GLASS WINDOWWALL SYSTEM WITH HOTROLLED STEEL FINS (GL-1) CORRUGATED STEELROOFING (MTL-1) OPERABLE GLASSCLERESTORY (GL-1) QUARRYLEVEL +0'-0" GROUNDLEVEL +12'-0" T/ROOF +62'-0" CORRUGATED STEELSIDING (MTL-1) EXPANDED METALGUARDRAIL (MTL-1) INSULATED GLASS WINDOWWALL SYSTEM WITH HOTROLLED STEEL FINS (GL-1) FURNITURE STORAGE QUARRYLEVEL +0'-0" GROUNDLEVEL +12'-0" T/ROOF +62'-0" GROUNDLEVEL +12'-0" T/ROOF +62'-0" Issue Date 14505 Illinois & Michigan Lemont, IL 60439 1801Project 312.951.6600 fax 312.951.6544420 West Huron Street Chicago, Illinois 60654 312.427.7240 fax 312.427.7241888 S. Michigan Avenue, Chicago, IL 60605 THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES John Ronan Architects Architect Landscape Architect Site Design Group 312.596.2000 fax 312.596.2001 Thornton Tomasetti, Inc. Structural Engineer Schematic Design 21 November 2018 330 North Wabash Avenue Suite 1500 Chicago, Illinois 60611 Elevation +0'-0" = +587.00 CCD 312.977.2800 fax 312.951.055810 South LaSalle Street, #2700 Chicago, IL 60602 Affiliated Engineers MEP Engineer 312.467.0123 fax 312.467.0220225 West Ohio Street 4th Floor Chicago, Illinois 60654 Terra Engineering Ltd. Civil Engineer 312.559.4585 fax 312.559.53932 North Riverside Plaza, Suite 1460 Chicago, IL 60606 Shen Milsom & Wilke Acoustic/Audiovisual Consultants A2.2Elevations Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"3 EAST ELEVATION Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"8 NORTH ELEVATION Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"7 SOUTH ELEVATION Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"4 WEST ELEVATION Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"11 SOUTH ELEVATION Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"9 EAST ELEVATION Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"10 WEST ELEVATION Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"12 NORTH ELEVATION Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"6 NORTH ELEVATION Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"5 SOUTH ELEVATION 50' CLIMBING BLDG50' CLIMBING BLDG 50' CLIMBING BLDG50' CLIMBING BLDG 30' CLIMBING BLDG30' CLIMBING BLDG 30' CLIMBING BLDG30' CLIMBING BLDG PAVILION PAVILION PAVILION PAVILION Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"1 EAST ELEVATION Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0"2 WEST ELEVATION THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 2019.03.25 154 EXHIBIT N3: BUILDING MATERIALS THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 2019.03.25 155 EXHIBIT O: SIGN PLAN LEGEND: ENTRY SIGNAGE PLAN Regulatory ADA Stop Signs Pedestrian Crossing Directional / Wayfinding Identification (e.g. monument sig- nage with logo and park name) Informational / Interpretive (e.g. overlook, historical information, nat- ural features, educational) 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 2 3 PHASE 1 DEVELOPMENT PHASE 1 DEVELOPMENT THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 156 ADDITIONAL OFFICES IN CHICAGO, ILLINOIS AND MILWAUKEE, WISCONSIN Hey and Associates, Inc. Engineering, Ecology and Landscape Architecture 26575 W. COMMERCE DRIVE, SUITE 601 VOLO, ILLINOIS 60073 PHONE (847) 740-0888 FAX (847) 740-2888 M E M O R A N D U M TO: Jeanette Virgilio, The Forge CC: Danielle Kowalewski, TERRA Engineering FROM: Jeffrey Mengler, PWS Vince Mosca DATE: March 13, 2019 RE: Lemont Quarry Park Site Status of Wetlands on North Parcel, PIN 22-21-200-080-0000 PROJECT NO. 18-0429 This memorandum provides a summary of the waters and wetlands location north of the railroad tracks at the Lemont Quarry Park site, represented by the above PIN. Hey completed field reconnaissance of the wetlands on October 23, 2018, specifically focused on the previous delineation prepared by Applied Ecological Services (AES) and submitted as part of the Jurisdictional Determination request for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) application LRC-2018-505. Hey met with USACE staff at the site on 2/22/2019 to further discuss the jurisdictional status of several areas in question. In general terms, we believe that some of the areas previously delineated are exempt from USACE regulation. The main regulatory framework is the USACE does not necessarily take jurisdiction over human-induced “wetlands”, especially those areas of “Water-filled depressions created incidental to construction activity”. On a preliminary basis, the USACE did not disagree with our assessment. However, a final jurisdictional determination from the USACE is currently complicated by pending federal lawsuits in other jurisdictions (unrelated to this property). From the 2015 Clean Water Rule: Definition of “Waters of the United States” 38 CFR 328, 40 CFR Parts 110, 112, 116, 117, 122, 230, 232, 300, 302 and 401. (b) The following are not ‘‘waters of the United States’’ even where they otherwise meet the terms of paragraphs (a)(4) through (8) of this section. (1) Waste treatment systems, including treatment ponds or lagoons designed to meet the requirements of the Clean Water Act. (2) Prior converted cropland. Notwithstanding the determination of an area’s status as prior converted cropland by any other Federal agency, for the purposes of the Clean Water Act, the final authority regarding Clean Water Act jurisdiction remains with EPA. EXHIBIT P: WETLAND DELINEATION THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 157 EXHIBIT P: WETLAND DELINEATION The Forge – Lemont Quarry Park March 13, 2019 Page 2 ADDITIONAL OFFICES IN CHICAGO, ILLINOIS AND MILWAUKEE, WISCONSIN (3) The following ditches: (i) Ditches with ephemeral flow that are not a relocated tributary or excavated in a tributary. (ii) Ditches with intermittent flow that are not a relocated tributary, excavated in a tributary, or drain wetlands. (iii) Ditches that do not flow, either directly or through another water, into a water identified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (3) of this section. (4) The following features: (i) Artificially irrigated areas that would revert to dry land should application of water to that area cease; (ii) Artificial, constructed lakes and ponds created in dry land such as farm and stock watering ponds, irrigation ponds, settling basins, fields flooded for rice growing, log cleaning ponds, or cooling ponds; (iii) Artificial reflecting pools or swimming pools created in dry land; (iv) Small ornamental waters created in dry land; (v) Water-filled depressions created in dry land incidental to mining or construction activity, including pits excavated for obtaining fill, sand, or gravel that fill with water; (vi) Erosional features, including gullies, rills, and other ephemeral features that do not meet the definition of tributary, non-wetland swales, and lawfully constructed grassed waterways; and (vii) Puddles. In the text within the Federal Register for this 2015 Rule, which Illinois still falls within despite court rulings affecting some other states, it offers the following interpretation on “Puddles.” “A puddle is commonly considered a very small, shallow, and highly transitory pool of water that forms on pavement or uplands during or immediately after a rainstorm or similar precipitation event.” AES Wetland 1 is a very small 0.01-acre area south of the trail, east of the larger quarry pond, and north of the railroad. It appears very ephemeral in nature and areas this small are not typically delineated. AES described it as dominated by rush species (Juncus dudleyi) but we only observed one small clump along the edge of it. If the actual square footage of this area is calculated, we’re not sure it would even round up to 0.01 acres (436 sq. feet). Based on this information, Hey believes AES Wetland 1 would fit within the intent of the term puddle in the 2015 Clean Water Rule and therefore will likely be exempt from regulation under the Clean Water Act by the USACE, as it is not a Waters of the United States, once the jurisdictional determination is ultimately completed. Wetlands 7, 8, 9, and 10, and Waters 1 and 2 are all features remaining from the historic quarrying operations. They will likely remain as is with the proposed project and their status is not disputed as delineated. THE FORGE: LEMONT QUARRIES 158 TERRA Wetland Boundary 1 2015 Lemont Quarry Adventure ParkAES Wetland Boundary Project Boundary0500Feet° Hey and Associates, Inc. Engineering, Ecology and Landscape Architecture WETLAND 1 0.01 ACRE Prepared by: Exhibit Title: Project Name:Scale: Prepared for: Project Number: 18‐0429 Exhibit: Legend:Orientation: Date: 3/13/2019 Aerial Date: WOTUS-1 9.08 ACRES WOTUS-2 3.74 ACRES WETLAND 10 0.02 ACRE WETLAND 9 0.05 ACRE WETLAND 8 0.24 ACRE WETLAND 7 0.07 ACRE EXHIBIT P: WETLAND DELINEATION 8 Exhibit C Findings of Fact FINDINGS. Based upon the evidence and testimony presented in the public hearing, the Lemont Village Board of Trustees finds the following: 1. The Lemont 2030 Comprehensive Plan’s future land use map designates the subject site as Open Space and Recreation (OS&R) and Multi-Family Residential (MFR). 2. The proposed PUD implements many of the recommendations from the Lemont 2030 Comprehensive Plan. 2. The PUD request achieves the UDO 17.08.010.C.1 objective of ensuring that the future growth and development which occurs is in accordance with policies and goals of the Village. 3. The PUD request achieves the UDO 17.08.010.C.2 objective of providing a more desirable living environment by integrating the natural environmental and landscape features of the property into land development. 4. The PUD request achieves the UDO 17.08.010.C.4 objective of stimulating economic development within the Village. 9 Exhibit D Comment Letters WweWeWWillowW 1 | Page LTAP Acquisition LLC Jeanette Virgilio 340 River Street Lemont, IL 60439 April 17, 2019 RE: The Forge Adventure Park UDO Zoning Review [1] Current Zoning: R‐1 (Single‐Family Detached Residential District) and R‐5 (Single‐Family Attached Residential District) Proposed Zoning: B‐3 (Arterial Commercial District) and B‐4 (Commercial Recreation) Subject Property Size: ± 40.5 acres Proposed Use: Outdoor Recreation Dear Ms. Jeanette Virgilio: The Village of Lemont has received your application and plans for:  Phase I Final Planned Unit Development and Plat  Rezoning  Phase II for a Preliminary PUD and Plat The Village’s Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) can be found here and there are references to this code in the letter below: https://library.municode.com/il/lemont/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=TIT17UNDEOR The following UDO comments must be addressed regarding the entitlement applications and some remarks are meant to provide guidance. A written response should be provided with the next submittal. Phase I – Final PUD Architecture 1. Provide more detail on how a cargo container will be used as a kitchen. Any use of a cargo container as a structure and building for occupancy is an exception in the PUD. WweWeWWillowW 2 | Page 2. The maximum building height in the B‐4 district is 35’. Any structure greater than 35’ will require an exception in the PUD. 3. All other lot and dimensional standards for B‐4 are met due to the proposed structures being temporary in nature. Provide an estimate of how many cargo containers are anticipated onsite. For example, how will storage on‐site be done (i.e. storage of signs, traffic cones, and other things required for this use). Will the aerial adventure course staging area have a cargo container? How will equipment for this area be stored? 4. Will storage containers be used for an office area? 5. What does Kayak and Canoe storage look like on Page L101? 6. Provide detail and description of ‘security fencing’. Signage 7. Clarify permission to locate signs off‐site. Particularly the signs at the entrance of Talcott & Main (monument & wayfinding). 8. The painted signs on the cargo containers will require an exception in the PUD. 9. All monument signs must be landscaped in accordance with §17.20. 10. Provide more details in the signage plan. §17.11.150 Signs for PUDS requires: a. Site plan and/or elevations that indicate locations of all signs; and b. Computation of aggregate maximum sign area, the maximum sign area for each individual sign, sign dimensions, and the height of all signs; and c. Materials; and d. Illumination details (if this applies) Other 11. All garbage containers must be placed within a dumpster enclosure per §17.06.030 G. Is there only one dumpster enclosure for the entire site? 12. §17.07.030 Any lots zoned B that abut residential zoning (the land not being proposed to be rezoned) require a transitional yard of at least a depth of 12’. The transition yard cannot be used to parking, loading, servicing or storage and it must meet the landscape standards of §17.20.060. Verify the transition area meets this requirement. 13. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designates this area as primarily OS&R (Open Space and Recreation) and the proposed B‐3 parcel is designated MFM (Multi‐Family Mid‐rise). PUDs should be in substantial compliance with the Comprehensive plan. The open space portion of the proposed development is in compliance with the Lemont 2030 Comprehensive Plan. 14. There are intentions to be open throughout all the seasons. Detail how someone would know if the park is closed due to weather (onsite). 15. Clarify maintenance on shared facilities (such as parking lots, access road, etc.). If there is a large pot‐hole in the access road, who’s responsibility is it to fix? How will these things be managed? WweWeWWillowW 3 | Page 16. Clarify the purpose to rezone to B‐3 at this time without a plan. While anticipated uses are sufficient, the rezoning to B‐3 is not in line with the Village Comprehensive plan. A formal response and/or concept plan on the site is needed to clarify the purpose of the proposed rezoning. 17. Verify the ADA parking meets code (for all proposed parking lots). It is proposed as gravel parking stalls to mulched pathways per Page L 101. 18. Parking is a concern when a mix of uses such as a restaurant, adventure park and outdoor amphitheater and stage (with an open lawn, so not a set amount of seats or attendance). There appears to be approximately 257 (249+8 ADA) parking stalls (including ADA) and 10 boat parking stalls at full Phase I build out. The one access point to all these parking stalls in the times where the park will be busy or if there is a concert is of concern. Provide a detail and narrative of how the Forge would handle maximum capacity events with the one gravel access road. 19. Verify parking lot lighting is sufficient for visibility especially with being open late. (It is recommended to provide a photometric plan). Lighting throughout the site is important. Are all areas of the park open during dark hours? 20. Parking lot is showing striping, but since the lot is proposed as gravel, how will it be striped? How will customers know what is boat/trailer parking versus vehicle parking stalls? 21. Outdoor recreation parking requirements is ‘per approved special use’. 22. Per §17.10.110 it shall be unlawful to store or park boats or RVs between 2am and 6am unless within a fully enclosed structure. If overnight boat or RV storage is expected, it should be discussed in the PUD. 23. Clarify how deliveries will be made to the restaurant. Timing? Type of truck? 24. Clarify how portable restrooms will be maintained. How will vehicles get to the location to service them? 25. The gravel parking lots and drive aisles will require an exception in the PUD. 26. An exception in the PUD is required for no connection to Village water and the sanitary system. 27. No storm sewer connections are proposed for phase 1 and will require an exception in the PUD. 28. Clarify in the traffic study for Phase I when it states that there will be approximately (estimate) 390 cars parked at 3pm (on Page 7) on weekends. Is this what the study is stating? What would be the parking plan for this amount of vehicles? Phase 1 appears to have 249 parking stalls, 8 ADA parking stalls and 10 boat parking stalls. Landscaping 29. The landscaping plans appear to meet the UDO. Further landscaping comments may come from the Village Arborist and/or Ecologist. WweWeWWillowW 4 | Page Phase II – Preliminary PUD Architecture 30. Corrugated steel buildings and roofs require an exception in the PUD. 31. The height of the permanent structures requires an exception in the PUD. The figure provided is 62’ at the roof line, but provide a dimension of height to the top of the roof peak. Signage 32. Clarify if all signage will remain from Phase I. 33. Provide more details in the signage plan. §17.11.150 Signs for PUDS requires: a. Site plan and/or elevations that indicate locations of all signs; and b. Computation of aggregate maximum sign area, the maximum sign area for each individual sign, sign dimensions, and the height of all signs; and c. Materials; and d. Illumination details (if this applies) 34. Monument signs require masonry bases. All monument signs shall be landscaped accordingly. Other 35. Clarify if the potential overflow parking on the proposed B‐3 lot is only for Phase II or is it available for Phase I? Provide more detail on the overflow parking on the lot south of the railroad tracks. 36. Clarify how the applicant is addressing this statement in the Traffic Study for Phase II: “Based on the weekend traffic flows it will be necessary to consider mitigation alternatives to keep the traffic from backing up both across the railroad tracks and into the site when the site opens.” 37. A traffic signal is warranted at time of opening Phase II. Verify the applicant is satisfied with this condition. 38. Further describe the spoil pile areas. 39. Does the Walker access provide secondary access? Or will the parking still be utilized from Phase I? 40. The gravel parking lots are an exception in the PUD. 41. Same comment on this phase regarding parking stall markings. How will they be marked on gravel? What are their dimensions? Landscaping 42. Add landscape islands at the end of all parking stall aisles (i.e. closest to buildings). 43. The parking lot is required to have screening on all perimeters per §17.20. There only appears to be internal landscaping proposed (islands). 44. Page L.2 appears to have trees floating in the middle of the kid’s area and spoil pile (seemed to repeat from landscape islands in the parking lot). WweWeWWillowW 5 | Page The purpose of this review is to make certain its general compliance with Village ordinances and standard practices regarding site development, landscaping and design. This review is only for general conformance with the design criteria established by the Village and is subject to both the completeness of the information submitted by the developer’s professional staff and also the actual ability of the plan to perform in accordance with its intent. Actual field conditions may vary and additional items may arise which are not readily apparent based on this submittal. The developer’s design professionals are responsible for performing and checking all design computations, dimensions, and details relating to design, construction, compliance with all applicable codes and regulations, and obtaining all permits. Additionally, other bodies of government may have jurisdiction over various aspects of this development. The developer should be advised that additional measures may be required based on actual field conditions and formal approvals of the other agencies. A written response must be provided to all comments with the next submittal. Please contact me with any questions. Sincerely, Jamie Tate, AICP Consulting Planner 630.640.5860 jtate@lemont.il.us Project Traffic Review To: Mark Herman and Jason Berry Village of Lemont From: Bill Grieve Date: May 1, 2019 Subject: The Forge: Lemont Quarries Adventure Park Gewalt Hamilton Associates, Inc. (GHA) has reviewed the various materials submitted for the proposed outdoor activity park to be known as “The Forge”. Initially the thought was that the activity park would be constructed in a single phase. The current prog ram separates out the development into two phases: • Phase 1 will be located on the north side of the Illinois & Michigan (I&M) Canal. Access will be via an existing gravel path located and a connection to Talcott Avenue on the immediate north side of the I&M Canal. Parking for about 210 cars would be provided. • Phase 2 will be located between the IC/CN railroad tracks and the I&M Canal. Access would be provided via a new connection from the Main Street / Walker Road intersection across the railroad tracks. Parking for almost 400 cars would be provided. We offer the following comments for your consideration regarding the Traffic Impact Studies (TIS) prepared by Terra Engineering Ltd. dated November 14, 2018 and April 12, 2019 and the Phase 2 and 1 site plans prepared by John Ronan Architects. Phase 1 • The Terra TIS follows guidelines published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). We concur with their findings regarding existing conditions and roadway operations. • Weekday morning and evening and Saturday midday traffic counts should be con ducted at the Talcott Avenue intersections with Main Street and the access road immediately north of the IC/CN railroad tracks as these intersections will be most impacted by Phase 1 activity from the Forge. The counts should include both cars and trucks to understand the operations of the chemical facility that will intersect immediately at the proposed access connection into Phase 1. • A separate eastbound left turn lane should be striped on main street at Talcott Avenue. • Appropriate wayfinding signage should be provided to best direct Phase 1 patrons of The Forge to the parking facilities. • We concur with the Terra methodology for developing trip generations. As noted, the Institute of Transportation Engineers does not have a land -use category that conforms to the recreational and athletic activities to be offered. • The existing gravel road for Phase 1 access appears substandard with several ruts noted. Per FHWA guidelines (see attached), the suggested minimum gravel layer assuming a low subgrade support condition should be at least 6.5 inches thick. The Forge – Lemont, Illinois Gewalt Hamilton Associates, Inc. - Page | 2 • The gravel road will also be used as a “major access” and also per FHWA guidelines should be at least 18-foot wide. Phase 2 • The Terra TIS follows guidelines published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). We concur with their findings regarding existing conditions and roadway operations. The traffic counts in August 2018, although school was not in session, makes sense as the Summer months will be the peak generator of The Forge. • We concur with the Terra methodology for developing trip generations. As noted, the Institute of Transportation Engineers does not have a land -use category that conforms to the recreationa l and athletic activities to be offered at The Forge. • We also concur with the Terra strategies for mitigating the traffic impacts. The installation of a traffic signal at the Main Street / Walker Road intersection will help “monitor” traffic in/out of the site across the IC/CN railroad crossing. • Will there ever be the opportunity for connecting Phase 2 with Phase 1 via a vehicular bridge over the I&M Canal? This would significantly improve accessibility for Phase 1 traffic. • What is planned for the “No Work” area located in the northwest corner of the Main Street / Walker Road intersection? This approximate 5.5-acre parcel could directly impact operations at the Main Street / Walker Road intersection, especially if access is provided on the Walker Road extension . • The Terra study models the Main Street / Walker Road intersection assuming that separate left turn lanes would be constructed on all four approaches. The widening project should include improving the sight distance in the southeast corner as right-of-way (ROW) allows. * * * * * * * * * * * * This Project Traffic Review conducted by: William C. Grieve, P.E., PTOE Senior Transportation Engineer bgrieve@gha-engineers.com