Traffic Signal Master Plan

Traffic Signal Master Plan
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS

Engineering Division
June 2006
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary ................................................................................................. iii
1.0 PURPOSE ................................................................................................................1
2.0 CITY TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYSTEM.....................................................................1

2.1 Introduction
2.2 City Traffic Signal System Defined...............................................................1
3.0 BACKGROUND ......................................................................................................2

3.1 Quantity of Existing Traffic Signals ..............................................................2
3.1.1 City-owned Traffic Signals..............................................................2
3.1.2 Traffic Signals Along State Routes..................................................2
3.1.3 Traffic Signals Owned by the University of Illinois........................3
3.1.4 Interconnect......................................................................................3
3.2 Traffic Signals Design and Construction Standards ......................................4
3.2.1 Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) ................4
3.2.2 IDOT Bureau of Design and Environment Manual (BDE) .............4
3.2.3 IDOT Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction..4
3.2.4 City of Champaign Design Standards..............................................4
3.3 Condition of Existing Traffic Signals ............................................................5
3.3.1 Condition ratings for City-owned Signals .......................................6
3.3.2 Condition of IDOT Signals..............................................................7
3.4 Prior Council Actions ....................................................................................8
3.4.1 1994 Traffic Signal Master Plan Study Session ..............................8
3.4.2 1994 Traffic Signal Master Plan Adoption......................................8
3.4.3 Approval of Contracts for Projects Included in the 1994 Plan ........8
3.4.4 Other Traffic Signal Installations.....................................................9
3.4.5 Traffic Signal Maintenance Agreement (IDOT)..............................9
4.0 CURRENT TRAFFIC SIGNAL SERVICE ACTIVITIES ...............................10

4.1 Personnel and Budget ..................................................................................10
4.1.1 Personnel........................................................................................10
4.1.2 Budget .........................................................................................13
4.2 Maintenance………………………………………………………………..13
4.2.1 Response Maintenance...................................................................15
4.2.2 Preventative Maintenance..............................................................16
4.2.3 Electricity.......................................................................................17
4.2.4 Phone Charges ...............................................................................18
4.2.5 IDOT Billing..................................................................................18
4.2.6 University of Illinois Billing..........................................................19
4.2.7 Traffic Signal Timing and Coordination........................................20
4.3 Design Modification and Traffic Signal Upgrades ......................................21
4.3.1 Traffic Signal Upgrades .................................................................22
City of Champaign Traffic Signal Master Plan June 2006

ii
4.3.2 Design Modification ......................................................................23

4.4 Capital Improvement Projects......................................................................23
4.4.1 Intersection Design Studies (IDS) .................................................24
4.4.2 Phase I Design Studies...................................................................25
4.4.3 Traffic Signal Replacement Projects .............................................25
4.4.4 New Traffic Signal Installations ....................................................26
4.4.4.1 Intersection Improvement Projects ................................27
4.4.4.2 Traffic Signal Projects ...................................................28
4.4.5 Upgrades Along State Routes ........................................................29
5.0 TRAFFIC SIGNAL PROGRAM DEFICIENCIES ...........................................30

5.1 Tracking Hours by Various Types of Traffic Signal Work .........................30
5.2 Preventative Maintenance............................................................................30
5.3 Uninterruptible Power Supply (UPS) ..........................................................30
5.4 Interconnect .........................................................................................30
5.5 Frequency of Traffic Signal Re-timing........................................................30
5.6 Frequency of Crash Analysis for Existing and Proposed Signal Locations 30
5.7 Condition of Existing Traffic Signals ..........................................................31
5.8 Emergency vehicle Pre-emption ..................................................................32
5.9 IDOT Reimbursement/Traffic Signal Maintenance Agreement..................32
5.10 Funding for New Traffic Signal Installations ..............................................32
6.0 TRAFFIC SIGNAL MASTER PLAN .................................................................32

6.1 Work Order System .....................................................................................32
6.2 Preventative Maintenance............................................................................32
6.3 Traffic and Lighting Operating Budget .......................................................33
6.4 Traffic Signal Upgrade Project ....................................................................33
6.4.1 Upgrades ........................................................................................34
6.4.2 Interconnect....................................................................................35
6.4.3 Uninterruptible Power Supply (UPS) ............................................36
6.5 Traffic and Lighting Staff Hour Estimates ..................................................37
6.6 Traffic Signal Timings.................................................................................38
6.7 Crash Analyses of Existing and Proposed Signalized Intersections............38
6.8 Emergency Vehicle Pre-emption .................................................................38
6.9 IDOT Reimbursement/Traffic Signal Maintenance Agreement..................38
6.10 Traffic Signal Replacements........................................................................39
6.11 New Traffic Signal Installations ..................................................................40
6.12 Staffing Levels .........................................................................................40
APPENDIX A - TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYSTEM LOCATION MAPS

APPENDIX B – INTERSECTION SUMMARY SHEETS
APPENDIX C – SUPPORT INFORMATION FOR SECTION 4.0
APPENDIX D – SUPPORT INFORMATION FOR SECTION 6.0

iii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
• There are 110 traffic signals within the City.

o 59 at the intersection of two City streets
o 42 along State routes
o 7 on the University of Illinois campus
o 2 fire station signals
• There are 8 interconnected signal systems consisting of 49 traffic signals within the City.
Interconnect maintains the integrity of coordinated traffic signal timings and provides remote
communication to PW for monitoring operations and error reporting.
• Traffic signals built in the last 15 years closely resemble those built today and satisfy, or are
close to satisfying current design standards. Of the 66 City-owned traffic signals, 41 fall into
this category.
• Of the remaining 25 signalized intersections,
o 15 are in poor condition, do not have signals located over the street and/or have
geometric deficiencies related to delay or safety issues. Of these, 10 are located
Downtown and 2 on campus.
o 8 are in need of an upgrade to some or all of the traffic signal equipment.
• Estimated resources dedicated to traffic signal maintenance for FY 2007 include:
o $41,340 for materials/repairs for maintenance activities
o $72,900 for utility costs
o $27,000 for overtime and standby
o $136,510 for the Traffic Signal Upgrade Project
• The City maintains State and University traffic signals through maintenance agreements and
bill each for the work performed. The City’s share of costs for improvements to intersections
of City streets with State routes is outlined through intergovernmental agreements.
• Current allocation of electrical technician staff hours include:
o Approximately 750 hours for response maintenance (knockdowns, outages, failures)
o Approximately 1,250 hours for preventative maintenance activities
o Approximately 1,500 hours for design modification (changes to improve operation) or
traffic signal upgrades (replacement of some or all above ground equipment at the end
of its life cycle)
• Traffic signal program deficiencies include:
o Hours related to specific maintenance tasks have not been tracked, making it difficult to
predict future staff hour commitments as the system ages and grows.
o Preventative maintenance activities have been performed on an ad hoc basis, rather than
at regularly scheduled intervals.
o Only six intersections have Uninterruptible Power Supply (UPS). UPS can keep a
signal operational for 3 hours and provides an additional hour of flashing operation in
the event of a power outage. The goal is to have UPS at all signalized intersections.
o Only 49 traffic signals are part of and interconnected signal system. The goal is to have
remote communications to all traffic signals.
o Traffic signal retiming by City staff is on a 7-year cycle. The recommended interval for
retiming is every 3 years.
o Crash analysis lags behind 4 to 5 years. The most recent report prepared by the
Champaign-Urbana Urbanized Transportation Study (CUUATS) included data up to
2002.
o 15 existing traffic signals require replacement.
iii
o 8 intersections are due for some type of upgrade between now and 2011.
o Traffic signal upgrades have not been budgeted and planned for based on the 20-year
life expectancy of the traffic signal hardware.
• Staff plans to address deficiencies by:
o Implementing a work order system in 2008.
o Implementing a regularly scheduled preventative maintenance program in 2007.
o Requesting a total of $257,500 in additional funding to the Traffic Signal Upgrade
Project over the next 5 years. The Traffic Signal Upgrade Project will:
Complete 3 traffic signal upgrades by upgrading the controller cabinet.
Perform 2 complete traffic signal upgrades of City-owned intersections.
Perform 3 complete traffic signal upgrades to the three University of Illinois
traffic signals maintained by the City. The University would be billed for this
work.
Three City-owned intersections that are due for upgrades will not be addressed.
The Kirby Avenue signals were chosen based on public benefit based on the fact
that Kirby is a major commuter route.
Install UPS at 25 intersections.
Complete 3 interconnected signal systems consisting of 18 intersections.
o Tracking time demands for traffic signal timing to determine what re-timing cycle is
feasible at current staffing levels and evaluating whether that is acceptable.
o Moving forward with projects budgeted in the CIP over the next 5 years, including:
Replacement of First and Green traffic signals in 2011.
Replacement of Fourth and University traffic signals in 2011.
Study of the 10 intersection Downtown that will result in approved design
concepts and an implementation plan.
Study of the intersection of Fourth and Daniel.
Installation of new traffic signals at the Duncan/Curtis and Mattis/Curtis
intersections.
o Submitting requests for funding through the CIP process for:
Left turn lanes and replacement of traffic signals at the Kirby/State and
First/Windsor intersections.
New traffic signal installations at the Bradley/McKinley, Kirby/Crescent and
Bradley/Duncan intersections.

1
1.0 PURPOSE
The purpose of the Traffic Signal Master Plan is to provide a comprehensive evaluation of
the City’s traffic signal system. There are three tasks associated with the Master Plan.
• Examine the current conditions, maintenance operations, and planned improvements

for the City's traffic signal system.
• Identify areas for improvement.
• Recommend courses of action to address those areas.
2.0 CITY TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYSTEM
2.1 Introduction.
The traffic signal system is one of the key components of the City’s transportation system.
The basic function of a traffic signal is to assign the right-of-way to vehicles and
pedestrians at busy intersections, enhancing the safe operation of the City’s street network
and reducing the potential for
crashes.
Traffic signals are also flexible

traffic management tools. They can
be programmed to move large
volumes of traffic along a major
arterial, to handle large volumes of
turning vehicles, or to favor
pedestrian movements. Traffic
signals can provide priority to
emergency vehicles responding to
service calls. Regardless of whether
a citizen is driving a car, riding a
bus, riding a bike, or walking, they
utilize traffic signals in their daily New traffic signal equipment at the Duncan-Windsor intersection.
activities.
2.2 City Traffic Signal System Defined.

The City traffic signal system is defined as all traffic signals located within the City. A
traffic signal consists of the traffic signal equipment and other related appurtenances such as
underground electrical conduit and concrete foundations.
The traffic signal system does not include improvements to intersections that are often
designed and constructed in conjunction with traffic signals as part of a project. These
additional improvements include pavement related to the addition of left or right turn lanes,
storm sewer or pavement related to the realignment of the curb around corners, the
installation of sidewalks or sidewalk ramps, and new pavement markings and signs. These
other improvements become part of other City systems once the project is completed.

2
3.0 BACKGROUND
3.1 Quantity of Existing Traffic Signals.

There are currently 110 traffic signals within the City. There are several different ownership
situations regarding the construction, maintenance, and replacement of traffic signals. Each
ownership situation is briefly described in the following sections.
3.1.1 City-owned Traffic Signals.

There are currently 66 City-owned traffic signals. The City owns and maintains 59 traffic
signals located at the intersection of two or more City streets along with five signal
installations along State routes that are the responsibility of the City. In both cases, the City
is solely responsible for the installation, maintenance, and eventual replacement of the
equipment. The projects to install or replace the traffic signal equipment are funded and
managed by the City.
Two of these 66 traffic signals are Fire Station Signals. These signals are located at the
intersection of the fire station driveway with a City street and provide protection to fire
equipment responding to and returning from an emergency call.
Some of these 66 City-owned signals include a private driveway or street that is opposite a
City street. The cost sharing arrangements for these locations vary and are outlined in
agreements between the City and the property owner negotiated and approved at the time of
the installation of the traffic signal.
The location of City-owned traffic signals is illustrated in Exhibit 1 of Appendix A.
3.1.2 Traffic Signals along State Routes.

A traffic signal located at the intersection of two streets both under the jurisdiction of IDOT
is owned by the State. There are 11 traffic signals located at the intersection of two State
Routes. The State is responsible for the installation, maintenance, and eventual replacement
of the equipment. The projects to install or replace the traffic signal equipment are funded
and managed by IDOT. The City provides maintenance services for IDOT signals within
the City through an intergovernmental agreement. The City is reimbursed for those
maintenance services. During projects installing or replacing traffic signal equipment, the
City is involved in the process and has the opportunity to add desired features above the
typical IDOT traffic signal installation at the City’s cost.
There are also 31 intersections where a City street and/or private drive intersects a State
route. Of these, five are the sole responsibility of the City as a result of conditions agreed
upon by the City and State at the time of installation. The installations were all related to
development. For the remaining 26 intersections, the costs associated with the traffic
signals are divided proportionally by the number of approaches under the jurisdiction of
each agency. The projects to install or replace the equipment are managed by IDOT and
funding is shared between the City and IDOT. Maintenance services are provided by the
City, with IDOT reimbursing the City for their proportional share of the costs.

3
The locations of the various situations outlined above appear in Exhibit 1 of Appendix A.
3.1.3 Traffic Signals Owned by the University of Illinois

The University of Illinois owns seven traffic signals, three of which are located at an
intersection of a City street, Kirby Avenue. The City maintains these three traffic signals
through an intergovernmental agreement and is reimbursed for maintenance activities
related to the signals. The remaining four traffic signals are maintained by the University.
The University is solely responsible for the costs associated with the installation,
maintenance and replacement of the traffic signal equipment located at these intersections.
The location of University-owned traffic signals is illustrated in Exhibit 1 of Appendix A.
3.1.4 Interconnect
In order for traffic signals to be simultaneously programmed and consistently work
together, they must be interconnected. This connection is usually through a physical wire or
fiber optic cable that connects the traffic signals at several intersections along a specific
street. The City also has two interconnects that utilize wireless technologies. The
intersections all communicate with a master controller, which acts as a hub for
communicating with the various signals in the group, similar to a network server with
individual desktop computers.
The master controller has several functions. It tells the individual intersections when to run
various signal timing plans. It can register the emergency vehicle preemption call from one
intersection and direct the other intersections to respond accordingly. It ensures that the
clocks at each intersection are in synch with one another so that coordinated timing plans
operate as intended. Through the use of software and a phone connection, it serves as the
point of contact from the office for investigating reports of malfunctions and to make
changes to timing plans. It can also be programmed to call the office computer and report
on the operation of intersections on a regular basis.
There are currently 8 groups of

signals interconnected,
representing 49 of the 110 traffic
signals in the City.
Communication between these
groups and the office are provided
by phone drops to the master
controllers. The North Prospect
group, consisting of 12 traffic
signals, is directly wired to the
office.
A map illustrating the 8 signal

groups is illustrated in Exhibit 2
of Appendix A.
Interconnected signals along North Neil Street near Interstate 74.

4
3.2 Traffic Signal Design and Construction Standards.

There are Federal and State standards related to traffic signals in addition to City standards
and preferences.
3.2.1 Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD)

The MUTCD is the National Standard for traffic control devices, including traffic signals,
as adopted by the Federal Highway Administration. Part 4 of the MUTCD deals with traffic
signals, outlining where traffic signals can and should be installed through a series of
warrants, and also outlining various design elements related to placement of signal
equipment and the operation of traffic signals. All traffic signal projects are required to
conform to the MUTCD.
3.2.2 IDOT Bureau of Design and Environment Manual (BDE)

The BDE is the State manual for the design of various infrastructure items, including traffic
signals and intersections. Chapter 14 - Intersection Design Studies, and Chapter 36 -
Intersections, outline design guidelines related to traffic signals and intersection projects.
Other chapters may apply to various projects. The City typically utilizes IDOT guidelines
and projects funded with Motor Fuel Tax (MFT) dollars are required to be designed per
IDOT guidelines.
3.2.3 IDOT Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction

The Standard Specifications are a collection of IDOT requirements for the construction of
various types of infrastructure, including traffic signals. Many sections are utilized during
traffic signal projects, covering everything from traffic control to sidewalk. Section 800 –
Electrical outlines the construction and material requirements for traffic signal equipment.
The City utilizes these specifications, augmenting them as necessary to address City needs
and preferences.
3.2.4 City of Champaign Design Standards

The City has a number preferences related to traffic signal design, traffic signal equipment,
and traffic signal operation. When the Manual of Practice was developed, some of these
items were included in Chapter 14 – Traffic Signal Standards. Although many of these still
apply, some have changed or additional items added since that time from experiences and
with the development of new technologies. On each project, the specifications from the last
traffic signal project are utilized as a starting point, editing and adding to them as needed for
the current project.
Table 3-1 City of Champaign Design Standards

Standard Comment
Black traffic signal hardware The interior of a cabinet painted black gets very hot in the
(except cabinet) summer. The extremely high temperatures reduce the
anticipated life of the electronic equipment in the cabinet.
Countdown pedestrian signals Improves comprehension of Walk/ Flashing Don’t Walk.
Internally illuminated street name Adopted in Sign Master Plan.
signs

5
Standard Comment
Video detection Provide detection without compromising integrity of
pavement. Can be serviced without extended lane closures.
Emergency vehicle pre-emption Provides priority to fire equipment.
Light Emitting Diode (LED) Have measured about a 75% savings in power consumption
signal indications over incandescent bulbs. Longer life cycle reduced service
calls.
Enhanced grounding system Provides additional protection from lighting strikes.
Electrical service installation Reduces clutter at intersection and provide power to
additions intersection lighting.
Street lighting photocell location Provided on cabinet to help with testing/troubleshooting
lighting problems.
Combination mast arms Provide intersection lighting.
Uninterruptible Power Supply Maintains signal operation or all-red flash during power
(UPS) outages.
Lower right signal indications for Improves signal visibility when sun is directly behind mast
east-west streets arm mounted signals in morning and evening.
Interconnection with adjacent Maintains integrity of coordinated signal timings. Provides
traffic signals communication back to Public Works.
3.3 Condition of Existing Traffic Signals.

After compiling and reviewing a list of the existing traffic signals within the City, it became
clear that traffic signal technologies made significant advances in the late 1980’s and early
1990’s. Advances in traffic signal equipment and hardware continue today. Traffic signal
installations within the last 15 years closely resemble those built today and satisfy, or are close
to satisfying, current design standards and hardware requirements. The following table breaks
down the ages of the 66 current City-owned traffic signal installations as of 2006.
Table 3-2 Age Distribution of

City-owned Traffic Signals
Age Number of Signals
0-9 29
10-14 13
15-19 4
20-29 5
30-39 3
40-49 9
50+ 3
Total 66

6
3.3.1 Condition Ratings for City-owned Signals.

Intersections signalized or replaced in the last 15 years are generally
in good condition and satisfy current design practices. Intersections
over 30 years old are generally in poor condition and do not satisfy
current design practices. The intersections in the 15 to 30-year
range fall somewhere between the two groups. Based on these
general observations, a determination was made to take a closer
look at all traffic signals 15 years old, or older.
For the purposes of this master plan the life of a traffic signal
installation is estimated to be about 40 years. This is based on the
anticipated life of mast arms, foundations, and electrical conduit.
At the 20-year mark, the remainder of the above ground and
electrical equipment has met the end of its useful life and should be
replaced to maintain reliability through the second 20-year period. Example of an 40+ year old traffic
signal post.
The reality of these life cycles depends on advances in technology,
changes in design practices, and changes in traffic volumes and patterns. Any of these areas
could shorten the effective life of portions of, or the entire, installation, especially change to
traffic volumes as the result of development. As an example, it is anticipated that a project will
need to improve the intersection of First Street and Windsor Road because it has become
inadequate for the increased traffic along Windsor Road, as well as increases anticipated from
the development of the University’s Research Park and other developments to the south in
Savoy.
Conditions were rated for all traffic signal installations over 15 years old. In general, the
ratings were based on the following:
Table 3-3 Traffic Signal Ratings Defined

Rating Conditions Generally Observed
Poor • Lack of mast arms
• 30+ year old wiring and conduits
• Geometric deficiencies related to delay or
safety issues
Fair • Mast arms present
• Signal hardware about 20 years old
• Operational deficiencies related to signal
equipment (detection or cabinet limitations)
Good • Mast arms present
• Newer installation or recently upgraded
• May need a minor equipment upgrades (e.g.
video detection or cabinet) but remainder had
been upgraded recently

7
The results are summarized below.
Table 3-4 Summary of Signal Ratings

Rating Number of Signals
Poor 15
Fair 4
Good 6
Total 25
Note: Includes ratings for 24 signals over 15 years old and the
intersection of First & Windsor.
A map illustrating where these signals are located is included in Exhibit 3 of Appendix A and
the individual intersection summary sheets are included in Appendix B. Some general
observations of the results are:
• There are 15 traffic signals that need to be replaced. Of

the 15, 10 are Downtown.
• There are 8 traffic signals that need to be upgraded in
some way.
• Poor intersections are generally over 40 years old. Ten of
the 15 are located Downtown and two are located on
Campus. Most of the intersections appear new above
ground but the wiring and conduit conditions still
compromise reliability. If the material encasing the copper
wire fails it could result in a short or cause the signal posts
to become electrified. If the intersection were to fail due
to a wiring problem, it would not be feasible to pull new
wire through the conduit to keep the signal in operation
due to the condition of the conduits. The conduits are
either collapsed, or full of dirt, mud, or other debris. The
intersection would require overhead wiring until the
conduit could be replaced or would remain inoperable.
First and Green wiring failure solution –
This scenario currently exists at the intersection of First overhead and along the side of the utility pole.
and Green.
3.3.2 Condition of IDOT Signals.

The 37 signals shared or owned solely by IDOT were not rated for this master plan. A general
look at the age of the traffic signal equipment indicates that IDOT does not have any traffic
signal installations with equipment over 20 years old. As a result, most of these intersections
would likely have been rated in good condition by the rating system used to rate City signals.
In the late 1980’s and 1990’s, IDOT participated in a federal program referred to as Operation
Green Light, which provided funds to upgrade or rehabilitate traffic signals. This program
funded a large portion of the costs of various traffic signal projects in Champaign along State
routes, with IDOT and the City funding a small percentage. Operation Green Light has since
been discontinued and the current practice is to upgrade signals when there is a safety issue, or

8
as part of a larger scale projects such as road projects or intersection projects changing the
geometry of the intersection.
3.4 Prior Council Actions.
3.4.1 1994 Traffic Signal Master Plan Study Session – July 12, 1994.
Council reviewed and approved the list of the top 20 needed improvements to existing
signalized intersections, as well as a list of ten locations in the City that were potential locations
for new traffic signals. Council also directed staff to continue to let traffic signal projects
compete for funding in the capital improvements plan on their own merits and construct signals
in conjunction with road projects.
3.4.2 1994 Traffic Signal Master Plan Adoption – Council Bill 94-214.
On August, 2, 1994, Council adopted the 1994 Traffic Signal Master Plan.
3.4.3 Approval of Contracts for Projects Included the 1994 Master Plan – Various.
Since 1994, Council has approved various Council Bills, approving contracts for engineering
and construction of various traffic signal projects outlined in the 1994 master plan (some were
part of larger road projects). Of the replacement 20 projects identified in the 1994 master plan,
9 have been completed. Of the 10 new signal locations identified in the 1994 master plan, 8
have been installed. These locations are listed in the following table:
Table 3-5 Traffic Signal Projects Completed –

Included in 1994 Traffic Signal Master Plan
Rank in 1994
Year Plan (if a
Locations
Completed Replacement)
or New
1994 Marketview & Moreland New
Prospect & Windsor New
1995 Prospect & Town Center New
1996 Bradley & Market #12
Bradley & Neil #1
Bradley & Randolph New
Bradley & State New
Prospect & Kirby #5
1997 Mattis & Windsor New
2000 Bradley & Clayton New
Bradley & Country Fair New
2001 First & University #9
Mattis & John #16
2002 Green & Sixth #13
Green & Fourth #4
Prospect & Green #3
2004 Church/Main & Neil #20

9
3.4.4 Other Traffic Signal Installations – Various.

Since 1994, Council has approved the installation of traffic signals at 19 other intersections of
two City streets through the approval of annexation agreements, development agreements,
and/or engineering and construction contracts. Most, if not all of the installations, were related
to new development. These locations are listed in the following table:
Table 3-6 Traffic Signal Installations –

Not included in 1994 Traffic Signal Master Plan
Year
Locations Reason
Installed
1995 Bloomington & Hagan Development
Bloomington & Home Depot Development
Prospect & Baytowne Development
Prospect & Marketview Development
Prospect & Meijer Development
Prospect & Lowe’s Development
1997 Windsor & Galen Development
University & Chestnut Illinois Terminal Project
1999 Neil & Center Mall Expansion Project
Duncan & Kirby Growth
2002 Sixth & John Identified through CATS
2003 Prospect & Olympian Development/Growth
Mattis & Olympian Development/Growth
2004 Neil & Town Center Development/Growth
2005 Prospect & Wal-Mart Development
Prospect & Interstate Development/Growth
Staley & Kirby Installed by the County
Duncan & Windsor Development/Growth
In addition, Council approved various agreements between the City and IDOT regarding cost
share arrangements on projects to install or replace traffic signals along State routes within the
City.
3.4.5 Traffic Signal Maintenance Agreement with IDOT

On June 5, 2001, Council approved Council Bill 2001-136, approving an agreement between
the City and IDOT for the maintenance of traffic signals along State routes. The agreement is
effective until June 30, 2011.
The agreement outlines the level of maintenance required of the City, the cost sharing
arrangements for energy costs related to traffic signal installations along State routes, details
regarding billing, signal timing development and implementation, pavement markings and
emergency vehicle preemption.
The City of Champaign was the lead agency in renegotiating several key points of the
agreement relative to the past maintenance agreements:

10
• Under the current agreement, the State pays 100% of its share of the energy costs, which
are determined by the number of approaches under the jurisdiction of IDOT; under
previous agreements the local agencies were responsible for all energy costs.
• A multiplier for wages was added to include direct and indirect labor costs, retirement,
social security, health, hospitalization and life insurance, holidays, vacation, sick leave
and workers compensation; resulting in the City being able to bill IDOT at a higher rate
than under previous maintenance agreements.
• The standards for maintenance were changed to more closely reflect what is required for
modern signal equipment; the old agreement was based on what was required for
equipment from 1980, which is now obsolete.
• The length of the maintenance agreement was reduced from 20 years to 10 years; this
was based on the fact that signal technology continues to evolve and the terms of the
agreement need to be revisited more than once every 20 years.
The maintenance agreement is included in Appendix C.
4.0 CURRENT TRAFFIC SIGNAL SERVICE ACTIVITIES
4.1 Personnel & Budget
The purpose of this section is to outline current job duties of the various personnel associated
with traffic signals and outline the funding levels for traffic signal activities.
4.1.1 Personnel
The vast majority of current activities are carried out by the Traffic and Lighting Section of
Engineering and a Civil Engineer II. The exception would be the management of larger scale
projects that may include traffic signal replacements or installations. In these cases, the
personnel described below are often asked for input, to review plans, and/or to set up the
intersection settings once the traffic signal is installed.
Electrical Technicians
The City has four electrical technicians responsible for the maintenance of traffic signals and
street lighting. All four work on traffic signals at one time or another. Taking into account
time off for vacation, sick leave, training, and breaks, each electrical technician accounts for
1,580 regular working hours. The Engineering Division timesheet program reports from the
last two full fiscal years indicate that between 50% and 60% of this available work time is
devoted to traffic signals.
This translates to roughly one technician for every 53 traffic signals

maintained. For discussion purposes in this document, the average
over the last two fiscal years of 56% of available working hours
spent on traffic signals will be used.
Currently work activities are tracked through the Traffic and

Lighting Activity Manager. Information on the number and types of tasks is entered, but the
information does not include the number of hours associated with each task. It is useful in

11
identifying how many recurring tasks are completed and includes descriptions of work
performed. The shortcoming of the system is that the amount of hours spent on various types of
work is not available. In lieu of available information, annual hours spent on various activities
have been estimated using available information and estimates provided by staff regarding
various work activities for use in later sections.
The Institute of
Transportation Engineers
(ITE) guidelines for
electrical technician
staffing are in the
neighborhood of one
technician for every 40 to
50 traffic signals. This
number depends on the
complexity of the
intersections and the level
of maintenance desired.
Champaign’s staffing
level for electrical
technicians is between
75% and 95% of ITE
guidelines.
Traffic and Lighting Supervisor

The Traffic and Lighting Supervisor plans the work of four electrical technicians and three sign
workers. Using the timesheet program as a source, it is estimated that approximately 50% of
the Traffic and Lighting Supervisor’s time is dedicated to traffic signals, with the remainder of
time allocated to signs, pavement markings, and street light management.
In addition to supervisory and administrative duties related to traffic signals, the supervisor
position is currently responsible for the diagnostics and repair of controllers and other
electronic devices located in the controller cabinet. This person also tests incoming equipment,
participates in plan review for traffic signals, programs traffic signal timings and occasionally
works in the field with the technicians to return equipment to normal operation.
ITE refers to the person responsible for these duties as a Traffic Signal Engineer and estimates
that one full time traffic signal engineer per 100 signals is sufficient. Champaign’s staffing
level for Traffic Signal (Engineer) Supervisor is about half of the ITE recommended level.
Traffic and Lighting Technician

The Traffic and Lighting Technician screens underground locate requests to determine if they
are in conflict with traffic signal infrastructure, maintains the work activity database and maps
detailing the location of underground signal facilities, processes material orders and produces
invoices for maintenance performed on IDOT and University traffic signals.

12
These duties can be characterized as support activities. In the ITE guidelines, these duties are
not mentioned in any of the descriptions for traffic signal personnel. It is estimated that
approximately 20% of the Traffic and Lighting Technician’s time is dedicated to traffic signals.
Civil Engineer II
A Civil Engineer II is assigned to traffic signal related work activities. The duties of this
position include:
• managing engineering design consultants and contractors for traffic signal replacement and
traffic signal installation projects
• developing and maintaining traffic signal timings
• performing traffic signal warrant studies
• developing the traffic signal master plan
• providing input as requested on development issues related to traffic signals
• investigating complaints related to signal timings
• working with the Traffic and Lighting Supervisor to identify upgrade and design
modification projects.
It is estimated that approximately 25 to 30% of the Civil Engineer II’s time is dedicated to
traffic signal related work, consisting of both capital improvement projects and traffic signal
operational items such as traffic signal timing development.
The time spent on traffic signal projects varies year to year, depending on the scope of active
projects. Some years the percentage of available staff time has been much lower due to time
demands on other projects or work activities. Until the last few months, time spent on traffic
signals timings and addressing traffic signal issues outside of capital improvement projects was
not tracked individually, but instead was included in the general description of traffic
management, which also included Traffic Service Requests. These two work activities are now
tracked separately, which will allow for future evaluations of Civil Engineer II time spent on
traffic signal operations.
ITE refers to the engineer level staff as a Traffic Engineer. Under the ITE model the traffic
engineer is responsible for traffic signal design, keeping equipment up with technology, signal
timing plans, and administration of signal installations and maintenance. ITE estimates that one
traffic engineer can properly operate and maintain 75 to 100 traffic signals. A survey of 23
cites conducted by ITE found an average of one traffic engineer per 76 signals. Champaign’s
staffing level for Traffic (Civil II) Engineer is about between 25% and 30% of the ITE
recommended level.

13
4.1.2 Budget
The potential annual funding resources for traffic signals are outlined in the following table.
Table 4-1 Estimated Funding for Traffic Signals1 FY 2006-2007
Line Item Description Amount
02-0702-63002 Traffic Signals - Materials $38,840
02-0702-74001 Utilities – Power2 $71,000
02-0702-74002 Utilities – Phone $1,900
02-0702-512 Electrical Standby3 $17,000
2
02-0702-511 Electrical OT $10,000
02-0702-750 Repair and Maintenance Services $2,500
4
02-0702-720 Miscellaneous Contractual $0
23-0700-0087 Traffic Signal Upgrade CIP Project $136,510
5
Estimated Electrical Technician Staffing Costs $132,209
5
Estimated Staffing Costs $55,623
Estimated Equipment Usage Costs5 $44,480
Total $510,062
1
Outlines maintenance and upgrade funding; does not include individual one-time funding from CIP projects to
install or rehabilitate traffic signals. Traffic Signal Upgrade Project funding level varies from year to year.
2
The line items for electricity and overtime include funding for both traffic signals and street lighting. The
electricity budget is updated annually with the previous year’s expenditures serving as the basis for the funding
level. The amounts shown here only reflect anticipated costs related to traffic signals.
3
Electrical Standby provides an on-call electrician on weekends. The IDOT maintenance agreement calls for
skilled maintenance personnel available for emergency calls.
4
Misc. Contractual is generally used for pavement marking contracts and boring work or painting for street
lighting. It is also available for painting of traffic signals or other work that would be contracted out. This is not
anticipated to be used for traffic signals.
5
Based on IDOT Billing Rate. These costs are funded through several line items that include funding for the
entire Traffic & Lighting Section. The funding directly related to traffic signals for these items is not identifiable.
The operating budget for Traffic and Lighting is updated annually. From year to year,
depending on the needs and priorities identified for the section, the budgeted amount in a given
line item may fluctuate, but generally the operating budget as a whole is relatively stable.
Several of these line items include funding related to street lighting and/or traffic signs and
markings; for those line items, only the portion anticipated for use on traffic signals is shown in
the table. Also, funds can be transferred from one line item to another to address unforeseen
needs during the course of the fiscal year.
4.2 Maintenance.
An effective maintenance program is essential to the successful performance of any traffic
control system. A poorly maintained traffic signal system can compromise the safe and
efficient movement of traffic. As is the case with most equipment, signal systems that are
neglected will likely perform inefficiently and experience premature failure, which could lead
to traffic delay or be a contributing factor in traffic crashes.
The City maintains 106 traffic signals. Of these, 66 are City-owned, 37 are IDOT or IDOT-
City traffic signals, and three are University of Illinois traffic signals. For all of these signals,
the City provides two types of maintenance: response maintenance and preventative

14
maintenance. Incurred costs associated with IDOT and University traffic signals are billed to
those entities based upon maintenance agreements.
The list of equipment

maintained as part of a
traffic signal includes
electronic components
located within the controller
cabinet, the information
contained in the controller
itself, underground conduit
and wiring, signal hardware
such as posts, mast arms and
signal heads, internally
illuminated street name
signs, and emergency
preemption. In addition, the
timing plans in the
controllers must also be
maintained and updated
periodically. Maintenance
also includes electricity,
communications, staff and
equipment.
The current estimated

annual cost outlay of the
City for maintenance of the
existing 106 traffic signals
the City is responsible for is
$373,552, or about $3,500
per intersection. Appendix
C outlines how this estimate
was determined and also The “guts” of a traffic signal cabinet.
provides estimates of
corresponding reimbursements from other agencies.
The staff hour estimates in this report are based on a combination of available billing
information, timesheet reports and entries in the Traffic and Lighting Activity Manager.
Because the Activity Manager does not track the number of hours it takes to perform various
tasks and is also dependent upon the information entered, this information was estimated by
staff.
A breakdown of the electrical technician hours spent maintaining the 106 traffic signals the City
is currently responsible for is outlined in the following table:

15
Table 4-2 Maintenance Hours Breakdown

Regular Extra
Response Maintenance Activities
Hours Hours
Accident Response 119 20-40*
Lamp Changes 400
Power Failures (stop sign placement) 48 15-25*
Preemption Issues 58
Repairing/ Replacing Failed Hardware 136 15-25*
Preventative Maintenance Activities
Drive Thru Inspection 430
UPS Battery Maintenance 120
Controller Cabinet 80
Clock Setting for TBC 14
Video Detection 135
Pedestrian Push Button Testing/Repair 260
Preemption 200
Standby Hours** 600-650
Response Maintenance Total 761 650-740
Preventative Maintenance Total 1,239 0
Total 2,000 650-740
* Overtime
** On weekends, one electrician is on standby to respond to response maintenance calls. Standby is paid
at the regular hourly rate.
The City’s purchase of equipment for the maintenance of all traffic signals the City maintains
whether they are the City’s, IDOT’s or the University’s, is funded by the operating budget of
the Traffic and Lighting Section of the Engineering Division. This consists of one line item
(Traffic Signals 02-0702-63002) with an annual amount around $35,000 available. This
amount can be adjusted on an annual basis and, if needed, funds can be transferred from other
line items, as identified in Section 4.1.2.
4.2.1 Response Maintenance

Response maintenance consists of responding to reports of traffic signal malfunctions and
damage to traffic signals caused by traffic accidents, storm events, or by some other means.
When possible, these activities are conducted during
the regular work day. However, by the very nature
of response maintenance, events such as crashes and
storm events occur outside of regular hours.
Coverage outside of regular work hours is provided
on a 24-hour basis through the use of pagers, on-call
personnel and electrical technician standby for
weekend duty. The most common type of response
maintenance outside regular work hours is a traffic
signal knockdown as a result of an accident. For
each of these, the Traffic and Lighting Technician
receives a crash report, costs associated with the

16
repairs are tracked, and the responsible party is billed for the costs.
This procedure results in an accurate record of costs associated with response maintenance
related to traffic accidents since the start of FY 01-02. The information was summarized to
calculate the staff hours and annual costs associated with traffic accidents over the last 5 years.
Table 4-3 Accident Response Data FY 01 through FY04

Electrician Labor and Material &
Fiscal Electrician Total
Incidents Hours Equipment Contractor
Year Hours (OT) Billed**
(Reg.) Costs Costs*
01-02 12 81 39 $4,766 $15,153 $19,919
02-03 16 165 28 $8,291 $13,983 $22,274
03-04 6 26 4 $1,355 $5,036 $6,391
04-05 21 205 33 $10,641 $17,069 $27,710
Average 14 119 26 $6,263 $12,810 $19,073
*A contractor is required in cases where mast arms have to be replaced.
**The amount billed to the third party and reimbursed to the City includes costs for labor, equipment
usage, materials, and contractor costs.
The costs and hours outlined in the table represent:

• The initial response, which removes damaged equipment and secures electrical wiring;
in some cases the traffic signals can still operate. If a knockdown occurs outside of
regular hours, this activity requires overtime.
• Shop preparation or fabrication of signal posts, signal heads, cabinets, etc. for
installation during regular hours.
• Field procedures to install the replacement equipment during regular work hours.
The City is often times reimbursed for these costs. However, the reimbursement is not returned
to the operating budget; they are considered general revenues. The operating budget absorbs
the costs of repairs from crashes. In cases of controller cabinet or mast arm damage, Traffic
and Lighting may work with the City’s Risk Manager to fund the repairs, as the cost of these
items is significant enough that the operating budget may not be able to absorb the costs.
4.2.2 Preventative Maintenance

Preventative maintenance is defined as a set of checks and procedures to be performed at
regular scheduled intervals for the upkeep of traffic signal equipment. Preventative
maintenance includes inspection, record keeping, cleaning, and replacement based on the
function and rated service life of the components.
Activities such as cabinet inspections, cabinet cleaning, and hardware maintenance are
performed, but occur as staff availability permits rather than on a calendar interval. The amount
of preventative maintenance performed in a given year is dependent on amount of staff time
spent on response maintenance calls and street lighting work.

17
4.2.3 Electricity
Ameren IP currently provides electrical service for traffic signals through 91 separate service
connections. The following table illustrates the annual estimated electrical costs billed to the
City for traffic signals:
Table 4-4 Annual Electrical Service Cost Estimate (FY 2006)

Amount Billed for Signals on State Routes $49,000
Amount Billed for Intersection of City Streets $22,000
Total $71,000
The electricity costs of each traffic signal installation vary from one to another depending on
the size of the intersection, the equipment present at that location, and whether intersection
lighting and/or other street lighting are included on the same electrical service. Each service
connection is billed individually. In addition to the energy charges, there is also a service
connection fee for each. In order to minimize service connection costs, it is to the City’s
benefit to combine service connections when possible.
For each new traffic signal installation, energy use is metered to determine the amount of
electricity used over a set time period to calculate an unmetered service billing rate. The
information is shared with the utility company and an agreed upon monthly charge for the
intersection is established.
In the event that conditions change at the intersection,

the location may be metered again and a new monthly
charge established. The most common example of this
occurred during the replacement of 1,076 incandescent
signal indications with Light Emitting Diode (LED)
indications over the past few years at 44 City-owned
intersections through a grant from the Illinois Clean
Energy Community Foundation.
The switch to LED’s resulted in a 73% overall

reduction in power consumption at those 44
intersections. This change resulted in a reduction in
consumption of 28,257 kilowatt hours per month and a
corresponding reduction in the overall billing. The LED signals.
City has been awarded a second grant to convert the

remaining IDOT intersection to LEDs, which will
result in a further reduction in electricity costs. IDOT
is reimbursing the City for the labor costs associated
with the effort. LED signal indications at State and Church.
The electricity costs are funded through the Utilities – Power line item in the Traffic & Lighting
operating budget (02-0702-74001). Additional information regarding the calculation of the
electrical costs is included in Appendix C.

18
4.2.4 Phone Charges

The City currently has six phone services that provide remote communication to signal systems.
These services allow staff to send and receive data with the traffic signals within these
interconnected systems from Public Works. These costs are funded through the Utilities –
Phone line item in the Traffic & Lighting operating budget (02-0702-74002).
The following table illustrates the annual estimated phone charges for these services:
Table 4-5 Annual Phone Service Cost Estimate (FY 2006)

Amount Billed for State-City Systems $1,080
Amount Billed for City Systems $800
Total $1,880
Additional information regarding the calculation of the phone charge estimates is included in
Appendix C.
4.2.5 IDOT Billing

Under the provisions of the maintenance agreement, the City generates invoices for electricity,
phone charges, and maintenance activity costs for the 37 traffic signals and signal systems that
are wholly or partially owned by IDOT on a quarterly basis. The funds received from IDOT are
deposited in the City’s general fund. The Traffic & Lighting Technician is responsible for
generating these invoices.
Maintenance tasks for IDOT intersections are tracked in the activity manager and a summary is
prepared for each activity. In addition to the activity manager information the sheet includes a
detail of the staff time spent, equipment used, and materials utilized along with a total cost.
The cost sharing arrangements for this work are outlined in Exhibit A of the maintenance
agreement, which is included in Appendix C of this report. In general, the costs for individual
intersections are shared proportionally based on the number of approaches under the
jurisdiction of each agency.
As of 2006, there are five intersections that are exceptions to this arrangement, where the City
is responsible for 100% of the costs. In all five cases, the traffic signal was installed as a result
of new development, where the development required the traffic signal installation. The State
does not pay for costs associated with private benefit signals.
Based on available information for 2005, the City spent 400 hours on maintenance of traffic
signals located along State routes. The following table outlines the costs associated with annual
maintenance of traffic signals along State routes, and the corresponding share of those costs for
the City and IDOT.
Table 4-6 Maintenance Costs for Signals on State Routes (2005)

Total Cost of Maintenance Along State Routes $23,000
City’s Share of Costs $6,500
IDOT’s Share of Costs $16,500

19
Cost sharing for electricity follows the same model with one exception. IDOT does not
currently share in the costs associated with intersection lighting installed at the request of the
City. In order to handle this, an agreed upon amount of $5 per street light is deducted monthly
from the total for that intersection before the cost share proportions are applied. The following
table is an estimate of the annual costs associated with electricity for traffic signals along State
routes, and the corresponding share of those costs for the City and IDOT.
Table 4-7 Electrical Costs for Signals on State Routes (2005)

Total Amount Billed to City/Paid to Ameren IP $49,000
City’s Share of Costs $17,000
IDOT’s Share of Costs $32,000
For maintenance and phone charges related to interconnected signal systems, the costs are
shared in proportion to the total approaches maintained by each agency within the
interconnected system. The following table is an estimate of the annual costs associated with
phone connections for interconnected signal systems along State routes, and the corresponding
share of those costs for the City and IDOT.
Table 4-8 Phone Service Costs for Signals on State Routes (2005)
Total Amount Billed to City/Paid to SBC $1,080
City’s Share of Costs $540
IDOT’s Share of Costs $540
The following table is a summary of the annual amount billed to IDOT. This estimate is based
on information from calendar year 2005:
Table 4-9 Total Costs Billed to IDOT (2005)

Signal Maintenance & Repair $16,500
Electricity $32,000
Phone $540
Total for 2005 $49,140
4.2.6 University of Illinois Billing

The City generates invoices for maintenance activities related to the three traffic signals owned
by the University along Kirby Avenue on an annual basis. The funds received from University
are deposited in the City’s general fund. The Traffic & Lighting Technician is responsible for
generating these invoices.
Maintenance tasks associated with the three University-owned intersections are tracked and
summarized following same process used for IDOT signals. Based on the billing information
from the past three calendar years, approximately 30 to 40 hours of regular staff hours are spent
annually maintaining these traffic signals.

20
The maintenance costs associated with maintaining these intersections are the sole
responsibility of the University. The University independently provides power to the traffic
signals. The following table summarizes the annual amounts billed to the University for the
past three calendar years:
Table 4-10 Maintenance Costs Billed to U of I

2003 Maintenance $1,500
2004 Maintenance* $3,200
2005 Maintenance $1,600
Average Annual Amount Billed $2,100
*2004 included some pedestrian-oriented design modification activities.
4.2.7 Traffic Signal Timing and Coordination

The maintenance of traffic signal timings, especially those associated with coordinating a series
of traffic signals to optimize the safe and efficient movement of traffic, is an important aspect
of traffic signal maintenance. Proper traffic signal retiming results in reductions in overall
travel time, delay, and fuel consumption, at the same time
improving air quality.
In addition to operational improvements, signal retiming is also

gaining recognition for improving safety. According to the
Federal Highway Administration and the Institute of
Transportation Engineers (ITE), five studies of signal coordination
indicate reductions in total crashes of about 15% and reductions in
right-angle crashes of 25%-38% as a result of coordination. In a separate effort, the National
Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) recently published a report on Low Cost
Safety Improvements, identifying employing signal coordination as an objective.
Using ITE estimates, it takes about 20 to 25 staff hours per intersection to conduct a retiming
project. The steps in signal timing are outlined below:
• Traffic Data Collection
• Intersection Data Collection
• Input information into traffic signal coordination software (e.g. Synchro)
• Run analysis and adjust based on experience
• Review
• Implement
• Field monitoring (driving) and field adjustments
• Documentation
Again using ITE estimates, traffic signal retiming costs are relatively small – ranging from
$500 to $3,000 per intersection. Traffic signal retiming is also very cost effective, producing
benefit to cost ratios as high as 40 to 1.
ITE recommends that signal timing should be considered at least every three years. In addition,
the following changes also warrant retiming of traffic signals:
• Addition of a signal or upgrade of an existing signal.

21
• When traffic or pedestrian volumes, or turning movements change significantly.

• When access to a roadway changes.
• When there is a change in the geometry of a roadway.
This work is currently performed by the Civil Engineer II and the Traffic and Lighting
Supervisor. To date, this activity has been performed when project management, supervisory,
neighborhood traffic issues and other work items considered a higher priority allow. In the last
6 years, 99 of the 106 traffic signals maintained by the City have been timed and coordinated.
The remaining 7 signals have been timed, but are isolated and are therefore not part of a
coordinated system.
On average, 15 traffic signals have been retimed each year. North Prospect Avenue has been
revisited several times during that period. At the conclusion of 2006, 86 of the 99 coordinated
traffic signals will have timing plans that are over three years old, including 34 intersections
with timings over five years old.
ITE estimates that it will take one traffic engineer to properly operate and maintain every 75 to
100 traffic signals. Currently about 25% - 30% of the Civil Engineer II’s time is dedicated to
traffic signal related work. It is estimated that less than 10% is currently allocated to signal
timing.
As the City grows, traffic patterns change, and the distances citizens are traveling within the
City increase, the need to keep traffic signal timings updated will become more pressing.
4.3 Design Modification and Traffic Signal Upgrades

In addition to general maintenance, the Traffic & Lighting Section also implements
improvements to existing traffic signal installations. Depending on the items being replaced or
added to an installation, the work falls into one of two categories: design modification or traffic
signal upgrade.
The staff hour estimates in this section are based on a combination the information in the
Activity Manager and staff estimates. The Activity manager does not track hours for the
various tasks. The quantity of various tasks was taken from the Activity Manager combined
with staff estimates of time to complete a type of task. Based on this estimating procedure,
over the last two years an average of 1,505 hours of Electrical Technician staff hours were
utilized on these activities. The following table provides a breakdown of those hours:

22
Table 4-11 Modification and Upgrade Hours Breakdown (2004-2005)

Design Modification Activities
LED Project (installations and power usage monitoring) 764
Video Detection Installations 164
Establishing Interconnect 35
Countdown Pedestrian Timer Installations 27
Pedestrian Pushbutton Replacements 34
Traffic Signal Upgrade Activities
Above ground signal post replacements (Downtown Area) 481
Design Modification Total 1,024
Traffic Signal Upgrade Total 481
Total 1,505
Currently, the materials for this work are purchased using funds from the Traffic Signal line
item in the Traffic and Lighting operating budget and the Traffic Signal Upgrade CIP project.
The total funding remains constant while the percentage assigned to each category may vary
from year to year and is dependent upon the funding needs associated with general
maintenance, repairs, fiscal obligation for IDOT initiated projects along State routes, and staff
availability.
4.3.1 Traffic Signal Upgrades.

A complete traffic signal upgrade replaces all of the traffic signal equipment at an existing
signalized intersection with new, state-of-the-art equipment. This included the signal heads,
signal posts, the controller cabinet and equipment within, as well as evaluating the electrical
wiring and replacing as needed. An upgrade project would not include replacement of the mast
arm assemblies, junction boxes, concrete foundations that
the controller cabinet and signal posts are set on, or the
underground conduit.
At present, upgrades are not regularly scheduled for signal

equipment. Installations are periodically identified for an
upgrade and implemented as funding and staffing allows.
ITE recommends that upgrades be scheduled every 20
years. Two intersections have been completely upgraded
in the last five years:
• Fourth and University – replaced signal posts, signal

heads, wiring, and controller cabinet to improve conditions
until the budgeted replacement project is constructed.
• Mattis and John – replaced the wiring, controller cabinet,
A Downtown intersection in mid-upgrade signal heads, and added mast arms.
of above-ground equipment.
In addition, all 10 of the older downtown installations have had partial upgrades, with
replacement of all of the above ground equipment. Due to the condition of the underground

23
conduits at these locations, some in excess of 50 years old, only portions of the deteriorating
wiring systems were able to be replaced. In order to replace the wiring, new conduit would
need to be installed. Signal indications were relocated to street light poles where possible to
improve signal visibility. In addition, this had the added advantage of removing street clutter
and reducing the number of fixed objects that could potentially be struck, including large
above-ground concrete foundations. The visibility will be improved further with the
installation of mast arms when the signals are replaced. Although these were not complete
upgrades, they are worth mentioning as an effort to keep the aging signals in the Downtown
area operating safely and as reliably as possible until replacement projects can be funded.
It is estimated that one to two intersections can be upgraded per year with current staffing
levels. Utilizing recent cost information for materials, a full upgrade of a typical four-approach
intersection is approximately $50,200.
4.3.2 Design Modification

A traffic signal design modification is a change to the approved design and operation of the
existing system to correct a recurring problem, to accommodate changes in prevailing traffic or
physical conditions, or update equipment to current technologies. Examples of design
maintenance activities include:
• Replacing troublesome in-pavement detector loops with video detection to improve

operation of the intersection
• Installing LED signal indications to save electrical costs and improve signal visibility
• Interconnecting of a series of traffic signals to improve operation along a major street
• Relocating a signal post location to reduce recurring knockdowns
• Adding signal indications or relocating indications to improve visibility
• Changing signal timing to improve operation of the intersection
A few examples of design modification projects completed in recent years include:

• The change over from electro-mechanical controllers to solid state controllers in the
1990’s.
• Prospect and Town Center – replaced failing detector loops with video detection.
• Prospect (Green to Bradley) – established a wireless interconnect.
• Various City-owned intersections – installed LED signal indications in 2005, utilizing a
State reimbursement grant.
Funding for design modification projects is dependent upon the funding demands of general
maintenance, the number of knockdowns, and obligations to projects along State routes.
Design modifications related to safety or recurring problems receive priority over projects such
as interconnect, updating technologies and signal upgrades.
4.4 Capital Improvement Projects.

Projects involving the complete replacement of a traffic signal installation or the installation of
a new traffic signal are funded through the Capital Improvements Plan (CIP). Engineering
design work is performed by engineering consultants and managed by City staff. The
construction work is advertised for bids and constructed by contractors. In the ten years from

24
1996 through 2005, CIP projects accounted for the replacement of 8 traffic signals and the
installation of traffic signals at 17 new locations, many of which were related to new
development. In addition, the City had cost shares for the replacement of 8 traffic signals and 5
new installations along State routes.
Each project has its own set of design issues that impact the cost of the project. The scope of
work surrounding a traffic signal installation is dependent upon the age of the existing
infrastructure, existing and projected traffic volumes and movements, the presence and location
of utilities, available City rights-of-way vs. right-of-way that must be purchased, and impacts to
adjacent properties. In addition, zoning plays a role as traffic signals are generally considered
an asset in commercial areas but are sometimes viewed as invasive in residential areas, leading
to a great deal more public participation and concern. All of these factors impact the cost.
Because of these variables, it is not possible to reliably allocate a long term annual amount for
the rehabilitation and installation of traffic signals. Nor is it possible to predict what a “typical
installation” would cost. The only way to truly identify likely costs for a traffic signal
installation is through an Intersection Design Study and/or a Phase I Preliminary Design Study.
The following table summarizes the cost ranges experienced for various types of studies and
projects involving traffic signals:
Table 4-12 Cost Ranges for Various Traffic Signal Projects

Project/Activity Cost Range
Experienced
Intersection Design Study $16,000 to $20,000
Phase I Design Study $45,000 to $70,000
Traffic Signal Replacement $325,000 to $3 Million
New Signal – Intersection Improvements $600,000 to $3 Million
New Signal – Electrical Installation Only $250,000 to $350,000
4.4.1 Intersection Design Studies (IDS).

Every traffic signal installation starts with an Intersection Design Study. An IDS is an
evaluation of an intersection’s ability to handle anticipated traffic for the next 20 years. The
20-year horizon is used because that is the estimated life of the majority of traffic signal
equipment. The purpose of an IDS is to identify the type of traffic control and the number and
type of lanes necessary to accommodate traffic. It also takes into account use by trucks and
buses, as well as sidewalk ramp locations, and adjusts curb alignments accordingly. In
addition, it proposes locations for traffic signal equipment, if warranted, and provides an initial
estimate of the amount of right-of-way needed to construct the improvements. An IDS
produces a preliminary cost estimate for these items.
An IDS generally takes only a cursory look at grade issues along the intersection. It does not
evaluate pavement, sidewalk, drainage or other infrastructure conditions, it does not address
grade issues with adjacent properties that may arise from widening, and it does not identify
potential utility conflicts. Obvious concerns may be noted on the IDS or in the corresponding

25
memorandum, but the full impact of these items on the cost of the improvements is not known.
Occasionally, the scope of an IDS may be expanded to take a look at grades if it is evident this
is a significant design issue.
IDS’s are currently prepared by engineering consultants and cost between $16,000 and $20,000.
In the past, IDS’s have been funded as the initial step of the CIP project that actually installs the
traffic signals. Construction budgets are not reliable until and IDS is prepared, reviewed, and
approved.
The other funding mechanism currently available is the Intersection Design Study Project
(Project 453). The IDS project was created to address situations where a preliminary budget
number is needed to program the project into the CIP. There are currently only two IDS’s
planned for and funded by this project (Fourth and Daniel; Columbia & Neil), both in fiscal
year 2007.
In addition to this project, the Downtown Signal Study (Project 452) funded in 2007 will
prepare IDS’s for 10 intersections in the Downtown area.
4.4.2 Phase I Design Studies.

A Phase I Design Study starts with the preparation of an IDS and builds upon it to examine the
additional design issues. It examines many of the design issues for the location (utility
conflicts, pavement needs, grading and drainage issues, impacts to adjacent properties, etc.),
evaluates options and proposes alternatives.
All of the items included in a Phase I study are part of the design process. The Phase I/Phase II
approach simply divides the activities into two parts. The Phase I portion can be performed
prior to allocating funding for the construction of the project. Phase II builds upon that
information and also prepares detailed plans and specifications for contracts to be bid for
construction.
During Phase I, the City can decide how to address construction issues. If feasible, phased
approaches to construction can be decided upon, different design alternatives can be considered
and public input sought. At the conclusion of Phase I, the City has determined the timing and
types of improvements that will be constructed. The engineering consultant then prepares an
estimate of cost. This estimate of cost is based on significantly more information than one
based on an IDS, and is therefore more accurate.
As examples, this approach was utilized for the Prospect and Green intersection in 2002 at a
cost of about $45,000 and for the Kirby and State intersection in 2005 at a cost of about
$70,000. As of April 2006, no other Phase I Design Studies appear in the CIP.
4.4.3 Traffic Signal Replacement Projects.

Replacement projects replace traffic signal equipment, underground equipment such as conduit,
hand holes and foundations, and often include physical changes to the intersection such as the
addition of turn lanes or the realignment of curb to accommodate large trucks and buses. In the
years since the installation of many of the City’s traffic signals, State and Federal laws have

26
changed, increasing the allowable sizes of trucks and giving

them complete access to City streets. The projects also often
include pavement repair, rehabilitation, or replacement within
the project limits. Traffic signal replacements are often
included as part of a larger road project.
Examples of recent traffic signal replacements:

• First and University – linked to the East Side
Streetscape Project
• Prospect and Green – a stand alone project
• Green Street (Wright, Sixth, Fourth) – included in
Campustown Infrastructure Project
• Main and Neil – tied to the One Main development
Traffic signal replacement projects are submitted for

The traffic signal replacement at Neil and Main
was tied to streetscape and development.
inclusion in the Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) and
compete for funding on their own merits. Funding is allocated for consulting engineers, right-
of-way purchases, construction and staff time.
The cost of a traffic signal replacement varies greatly from project to project and is dependent
on the amount of geometric changes needed to accommodate traffic and meet current design
standards. For example, the total cost for the Prospect-Green project, a straightforward signal
replacement without geometric changes, was $324,000 in 2002. On the other end of the
spectrum, the recently completed IDS for the First & Windsor intersection, including significant
widening to accommodate traffic growth resulting from the development of the University’s
Research Park, estimated the cost of the improvements at over $3 million.
The following signal replacements are currently funded in the CIP:

• Fourth and University (Project 359) – linked to East Side Streetscape Project; funded for
2011
• Downtown Signals (Project 453) – funding is provided in 2007, 2009, 2011 and 2014 to
design and construct improvements to one intersection each of those years; the design study that
will begin in fall 2006 will prioritize and provide preliminary cost estimates for the 10
intersections that need to be replaced.
• First & Green – funded for construction as part of a Green Street project (Projects 477 or
507) in 2011.
4.4.4 New Traffic Signal Installations.

Locations for the installation of new traffic signals are evaluated using the warrants outlined in
the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), generally as part of an IDS.
Locations satisfying the warrants are submitted for consideration as part of the CIP process.
The evaluation of an intersection for new traffic signals may occur as a result of a citizen
request, staff suggestion, or as part of a traffic impact analysis required of a proposed
development. There are two levels of new traffic signal installation projects, intersection
improvement projects and traffic signal projects.

27
4.4.4.1 Intersection Improvement Projects.

Traffic signal installations often require significant changes to an intersection. This is
especially true in older, established areas of the City or on the edge of the City where
arterial class streets still have the original two-lane, rural road geometry. When such
changes are necessary, the projects are often referred to as intersection improvement
projects or are constructed as part of a road project.
These projects typically include the traffic signal installation along with the addition of left
turn lanes and widening of the intersection to accommodate larger vehicles. Widening
projects usually include storm sewer and sidewalks. Significant pavement rehabilitation or
replacement may also be involved. The installations could also include the addition of right
turn or additional through lanes, sidewalk and sidewalk ramps. Intersection improvement
projects usually require the acquisition of right-of-way.
In some cases, changes to the vertical alignment of the road may also be necessary to satisfy
design standards. This involves flattening of rises and dips in the road alignment to
improve visibility, reduce abrupt changes of pavement grades across streets, and/or drainage
as traffic approaches or travels through the intersection.
Examples of intersections improved in the last 5 years include:

• Bradley Avenue at Clayton/Parkland Entrance and at Country Fair Drive
• Duncan Avenue and Kirby Avenue – part of the Duncan Road project
• Olympian Drive and Prospect Avenue and at Mattis Avenue – part of the Olympian
Drive project
The cost of these projects is

dependent on the age and
conditions of the existing
infrastructure, the amount of
widening needed to
accommodate traffic, right-
of-way needs, and direction
regarding how to handle the
pavement condition.
The lower end of the range is

likely around the cost of the
Bradley Avenue project
mentioned above. The total
cost of this project, an
intersection-only project
Signalization of Mattis Avenue at Olympian Drive involved changes in grades, widening,
which included widening
and traffic signal work. and a minimal overlay of
existing pavement at two
intersections, was

28
$1,057,000 (or about $600,000 per intersection) in 2001.
On the other end of the range, the recently completed IDS for the Bradley-Staley
intersection, which is a scenario involving widening, pavement replacement, grade issues
along Bradley and with adjacent properties, estimated the cost of that project at between
$2.5 and $3 million for one intersection in 2006 dollars.
There are currently no intersection improvement projects fully funded in the CIP. The
Bradley-Staley intersection is partially funded, with the bulk of funding appearing in 2013.
4.4.4.2 Traffic Signal Projects.

If the traffic signal installation does not require physical changes to the intersection, the
project is described as a traffic signal project. Physical changes may not be necessary
because:
• the intersection was designed and constructed with future signalization in mind as part
of a past road project because the location did not warrant signals at that time
• funding may not have been available to install warranted signals as part of a past road
project
• the signal was designed with physical changes in mind, but the physical changes are
planned for a future year
Traffic signal projects consist mostly of electrical work, with a small percentage of concrete
work for minor curb or sidewalk modification. Because they are smaller in scope, a signal
installation that falls into this category can be completed in a shorter timeframe than
installations categorized as intersection improvement projects or traffic signal replacement
projects.
The purchase and installation of all traffic signal equipment is included as part of the
construction contract. In some cases, where the project timeline has been accelerated, the
City purchases the combination mast arms in a separate bid prior to the bid process for
construction. Doing so allows the project to remain on schedule while accommodating the
10 to 15 week lead times for mast arm fabrication and delivery.
There have really only been two such projects, with both occurring in the last 3 years. The
Neil-Town Center project was completed in 2004 at a total project cost of $336,500. The
Duncan-Windsor project was completed in 2005 at a total project cost of $242,143. The
cost differential between the two is related tot the size of the intersections (Neil-Town
Center intersection has 3 approaches with 5 lanes while the Windsor-Duncan intersection
has all 3-lane approaches) and the amount of concrete work included (Neil-Town Center
required some median work and a larger amount of sidewalk modification).
There are currently two projects funded in the CIP that may fall into this category: The
Fourth-Bradley Project (Project 450) in 2008 and the Town Center-Moreland project in
2012.

29
4.4.5 Upgrades Along State Routes

Upgrades to signalized intersections of City streets with State routes are managed and
programmed by IDOT. The State does not have an upgrade or replacement schedule. In the
early 1990’s a federal program called Operation Green Light allowed for the upgrade and/or
replacement of many of the signals in Champaign. This program which accounts for the
generally good condition of IDOT signals in the City.
District 5 maintains a list of intersections that would benefit from upgrade or replacement
and submits the list to Program Development on an annual basis, updating it with input
from the City. The current list includes the intersections of Prospect Avenue with
University Avenue and with Church Street. These intersections compete with other
intersections in the District for funding.
For each project, the City and IDOT enter into an intergovernmental agreement outlining
the cost participation of each agency. In many cases, federal funding (available to IDOT,
but not the City) covers 80% of the costs for these projects, with the City and IDOT
splitting the remaining 20% of the costs proportionally based on the number of approaches
under the jurisdiction of each agency. Additional costs, associated with items included at
the request of the City (emergency vehicle preemption or street lighting as examples), are at
100% cost to the City. In addition, the City also pays for a portion of the engineering costs
associated with the project, typically calculated as 15% of the City’s share of construction.
As an example, IDOT will upgrade the Neil Street (U.S. Route 45) and Windsor Road
traffic signals in 2006. The project will replace all electrical wiring and above ground
equipment such as the controller cabinet, mast arms, signal posts, and signal heads along
with some median removal work and replacement of pavement markings. The total cost of
the project is anticipated to be $274,850 with the City’s share of the cost anticipated to be
$12,305.
The City’s share of these projects is funded through the CIP. The IDOT-City Traffic Signal
Upgrade Project (Project 0087) was created to pay for the City’s share of smaller scale
projects such as the Neil-Windsor project, with an annual funding level of $42,000. If
funding remains after obligations to projects on State routes have been addressed, the
remaining dollars are used to purchase equipment for upgrades or design modification
projects at City-owned intersections.
In general, the cost to the City for most IDOT projects is between $10,000 and $20,000 per
intersection. Generally, the State provides notice of upcoming projects well in advance,
allowing accommodations for funding to be handled through the CIP process for larger
scale projects where the City’s share would be above the budgeted amount.

30
5.0 TRAFFIC SIGNAL PROGRAM DEFICIENCIES

This section is a list of traffic signal deficiencies. Information regarding the benefits of
addressing these deficiencies is included in the master plan section of this report.
5.1 Tracking of Hours by Various Types of Traffic Signal Work.

The Traffic & Lighting Activity Manager tracks work activities associated with traffic
signals, street lighting, traffic signs, and pavement markings. The system is task based.
Information on the number and type of various activities can be pulled from the system.
However, the number of hours associated with each of these activities is not included and
the activities are not categorized into the various types of traffic signal work (preventative
maintenance, response maintenance, upgrades, etc.).
5.2 Preventative Maintenance.

Preventative maintenance activities have not been performed at regularly scheduled
intervals. Activities such as cabinet inspections, cabinet cleaning, and hardware
maintenance are performed, but not on a scheduled basis. The amount of preventative
maintenance performed in a given year and the amount of time between maintenance
activities has been inconsistent.
5.3 Uninterruptible Power Supply (UPS).

Of the 106 traffic signals that the City maintains, only 6 have the current City standard for
UPS. The current standard provides 3 hours of regular operation and another hour or so of
flash or 6-8 hours of flashing operations in the event of a power outage. Another 20 to 30
intersections have older versions of UPS which provide about 2-3 hours of flashing
operation. City standards include UPS as part of a traffic signal installation. The goal is to
have all 106 traffic signals the City maintains on an UPS.
5.4 Interconnect.
Of the 106 traffic signals maintained by the City, 49 are interconnected with established
communication back to Public Works. City standards include interconnect as part of a
signal installation. The goal is to have remote communication to all 106 traffic signals the
City maintains.
5.5 Frequency of Traffic Signal Re-timing.

The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) recommends re-timing traffic signals every
3 years. The 106 traffic signals maintained by the City have been timed over a 7-year
period. At the conclusion of 2006, 86 of the 99 coordinated traffic signals will have timing
plans that are over three years old, including 34 intersections with timings over five years
old.
5.6 Frequency of Crash Analyses for Existing and Proposed Signalized Intersections.
This is currently handled through the Champaign-Urbana Urbanized Transportation Study
(CUUATS). CUUATS publishes a Selected Crash Intersection Location Report for every
two years of crash data. The report is used as a preliminary review of all intersections. City
staff reviews the report and conduct additional analysis to confirm the conclusions.

31
The most recent report includes crash data up to 2002. Crash data is provided by IDOT and
is lagging behind. In addition, once data is received from IDOT, it is another year or so
before the report is published due to demands for CUUATS staff time. CUUATS reports
that the report preparation requires between 240 and 280 hours of staff time.
5.7 Condition of Existing Traffic Signals

Fifteen intersections (numbers 1 through 11 in Table 5-1) require replacement. Eight
intersections (numbers 12 through 19 in Table 5-1) are due for some type of upgrade during
the current planning period (2007 – 2011). To date, upgrades have been performed on an
ad-hoc basis as available maintenance funds allow, rather than scheduled and budgeted for
separately, based on the 20-year life expectancy of the equipment.
Table 5-1 Intersection Condition Ratings

Intersection Rating Main Factors in Rating
1 First & Green Poor Wiring failures, crashes related to lack of mast
arms
2 Fourth & University Poor Age of wire, crashes related to lack of mast arms
3* Market & Washington Poor Age of wiring/conduit, lack of mast arms, two
Walnut & Washington intersections on one controller
4* Neil & Columbia Poor Age of wiring/conduit/hardware; lack of mast
arms, geometric deficiencies
5* Neil & University Poor Age of wiring/conduit, lack of mast arms, two
Walnut & University intersections on one controller, geometric
deficiencies
6* Randolph & Church Poor Age of wiring/conduit, lack of mast arms
State & Church
7* Randolph & University Poor Age of wiring/conduit, lack of mast arms
State & University
8* Walnut & Main Poor Age of wiring/conduit, lack of mast arms
9 State & Kirby Poor Age of hardware, geometric deficiencies
10 First & Windsor Poor Geometric deficiencies causing delay
11 Fourth & Daniel Poor Age of wire/conduit/hardware, lack of mast arms
12 Neil & Marketview Fair Age of hardware (past due for upgrade)
13 Mattis & Anthony Poor Condition of the controller cabinet due to mice
14 Mattis & Interstate Fair Age of hardware (due for upgrade in 2007)
15 Mattis & Kirby Good Upgraded in 2000; cabinet replacement remains
16 Randolph & Green Good Upgraded in 2005; cabinet replacements remain
State & Green
17 Neil & Anthony Good Due for upgrade in 2011
18 Mattis & Paula Good Due for upgrade in 2008
19 Mayfair & Kirby Fair Hardware replaced in 2000 but does not have mast
arms
20 Round Barn & Springfield Good Cabinet upgraded in 2003, hardware in 2004
*Downtown Intersections

32
5.8 Emergency Vehicle Pre-emption.

The reliability of the current emergency vehicle pre-emption system is not meeting the
needs of the Fire Department. The equipment has also been a recurring and time consuming
response maintenance activity for Traffic and Lighting.
5.9 IDOT Reimbursement/Traffic Signal Maintenance Agreement.

The current Traffic Signal Maintenance Agreement, which expires in 2011, does not require
IDOT to pay for any portion of standby or street lighting at intersections along State routes.
The City is required by the agreement to provide an electrical technician on standby on
weekends to respond to call outs on State signals.
5.10 Funding for New Traffic Signal Installations.

Three intersections that currently warrant traffic signals, and have for some time, remain
unfunded.
• Bradley Avenue and McKinley Avenue
• Kirby Avenue and Crescent Drive
• Bradley Avenue and Duncan Road
6.0 TRAFFIC SIGNAL MASTER PLAN
6.1 Work Order System

Public Works is working toward the implementation of a department-wide work order
system. Implementation is currently planned for 2008. The tracking of activities and staff
hours for various types of activities associated with traffic signals will be addressed through
the work order system.
6.2 Preventative Maintenance.

Regularly scheduled preventative maintenance enhances the reliability of the traffic signal
system, ensures equipment is operating properly, and provides opportunities for
identification of problems at an early stage. City staff will implement a regularly scheduled
preventative maintenance plan in fiscal year 2007, consisting of:
• Cabinet cleaning and inspection
• Pedestrian pushbutton testing and maintenance
• Detection testing and maintenance
• Pre-emption testing and maintenance
• Uninterruptible Power Supply (UPS) battery maintenance
• Malfunction Management Unit (MMU) testing
• Time-based coordinated system maintenance (clock setting)
• Error and alarm monitoring of interconnected systems
An annual amount of about 1,200 electrical technician staff hours has been estimated for
scheduled preventative maintenance activities. The estimate was based on projections for
various tasks and may be adjusted once the program is up and established. Additional
information regarding how these estimates were developed is included in Appendix D. It is
anticipated that up to an additional 800 staff hours may be necessary to address issues found
during these scheduled activities. In addition, Traffic & Lighting Supervisor, Traffic &

33
Lighting Technician, and Civil Engineer II hours will be necessary to develop schedules,
checklists, and track progress.
6.3 Traffic and Lighting Operating Budget

The operating budget will fund preventative maintenance and response maintenance
activities, as well as pay for utilities related to traffic signals.
Table 6-7 Annual Funding for Traffic Signals based on FY 2007

Line Item Description Amount
02-0702-63002 Traffic Signals - Materials $38,840
02-0702-74001 Utilities – Power1 $71,000
02-0702-74002 Utilities – Phone $1,900
02-0702-512 Electrical Standby2 $17,000
1
02-0702-511 Electrical OT $10,000
02-0702-750 Repair and Maintenance Services $2,500
02-0702-720 Miscellaneous Contractual3 $0
1
The line items for electricity and overtime include funding for both traffic signals and street lighting. The
electricity budget is updated annually with the previous year’s expenditures serving as the basis for the
funding level. The amounts shown here only reflect anticipated costs related to traffic signals.
2
Electrical Standby provides an on-call electrician on weekends. The IDOT maintenance agreement calls for
skilled maintenance personnel available for emergency calls.
3
Misc. Contractual is generally used for pavement marking contracts and boring work or painting for street
lighting. It is also available for painting of traffic signals or other work that would be contracted out. This is
not anticipated to be used for traffic signals.
6.4 Traffic Signal Upgrade Project.

The Traffic Signal Upgrade Project in the Capital Improvements Plan will continue to fund
the purchase of materials for projects performed with City staff to address three
deficiencies: upgrades to traffic signals at the end of their 20-year life cycle, the installation
of Uninterruptible Power Supply (UPS) systems, and the establishment of interconnected
signal systems. In addition, a $25,000 contingency is budgeted in each fiscal year for two
purposes: to pay the City’s share of traffic signal upgrade projects at the intersections of
City streets with State routes and to provide for the purchase an expensive piece of
equipment, such as video detection, in the event of a failure. The current and proposed
funding levels are outlined in the following table, with additional details on the activities in
the subsections that follow.
Table 6-1 Traffic Signal Upgrade Project Funding 2007-2011*

FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 5-Year Total
Current CIP
$136,510 $42,000 $42,000 $42,000 $42,000 $304,510
Funding
Proposed
$136,510 $148,900 $87,700 $101,200 $87,700 $562,010
Funding
Additional
$0 $106,900 $45,700 $59,200 $45,700 $257,500
Funding
* Refer to Appendix D for complete details.

34
6.4.1 Upgrades
The life cycle of most traffic signal equipment (the signal heads, posts, pedestrian
pushbuttons, etc.) is 20 years. In order to maintain a reliable traffic signal system, the
traffic signal equipment at an intersection needs to be replaced around the 20-year mark
through an upgrade. The current estimate of in-house upgrade capacity is one large
intersection or two smaller or three-approach intersections in a given year. A full upgrade
of a large intersection was estimated to take about 305 staff hours to complete. This
estimate was used to develop the schedule for upgrades over the next five years. Time and
materials will be tracked so that time and funding needs for upgrades can be refined as the
program moves forward. The traffic signal upgrades planned for the next five years are
outlined in the following table:
Table 6-2 Scheduled Upgrades for 2007-2011

Fiscal Year Intersection(s) Estimated Cost
LED Installations at IDOT intersections $70,551
Randolph & Green $9,200 (cabinet only)
2007
State & Green $9,200 (cabinet only)
Mattis & Kirby $9,200 (cabinet only)
Mattis & Interstate $45,200
2008
Mattis & Anthony $45,200
2009 Kirby & Fourth $50,200
2010 Kirby & First $50,200
2011 Kirby & Oak $50,200
At the end of the 5-year planning period two traffic signals will be past due for an upgrade.
In addition, the next two 5-year planning periods (2012-2016 and 2017-2021) will each
require the upgrade of about 15 traffic signals, or an average of 3 per year. The experience
and knowledge gained over the next five years will be used to evaluate whether these
upgrades can be performed with City staff under current staffing levels.

35
6.4.2 Interconnect.
The City’s long term goal is to have all traffic signals interconnected with communications
between the systems and Public Works. Interconnection of traffic signals has three major
benefits:
• It maintains the integrity of coordinated traffic signal timings (all but 7 of the 106
traffic signals are part of a coordinated system) by ensuring the intersections in a
system are operating in-synch with one another.
• It improves the overall reliability of the signals through automatic reporting of errors
and alarms back to Public Works.
• It improves efficiency by allowing for the monitoring of operations and
investigation of reported controller problems remotely.
Over the next five years, staff will establish three additional interconnect systems totaling
18 intersections. The following table outlines the schedule and locations for interconnect
projects over the next five years:
Table 6-4 Interconnect Projects for 2007-2011

Fiscal Year System/Limits Estimated Cost
2007 North Neil System (7 intersections)
$23,000
• Kenyon to Town Center
2008 North Mattis System (7 intersections)
$21,000
• Bradley to Olympian
2010 Kirby-Neil System (4 intersections)
$13,500
• Fourth to State
Interconnect is also included as part of road projects and/or traffic signal projects when
practical.

36
6.4.3 Uninterruptible Power Supply (UPS).

The City’s long term goal is to have UPS systems at all signalized intersections. UPS
systems enhance the safe operation of signalized intersection in the event of a power outage.
For short duration outages, staff would not need to place stop signs out at the intersection.
For longer duration outages, such as those associated with large storm events, the systems
provide several hours of time for staff to respond to the multiple locations that will
experience outages with this type of event. UPS also reduces police staff hours associated
with power outages at signalized intersections.
Over the next five years, staff will install 25 UPS systems (5 per year), coordinating
installations with traffic signal upgrades where possible. Materials for each UPS system are
estimated to cost about $2,500 for an annual cost of $12,500 and each installation is
estimated to require about 12 staff hours. The following table identifies the 25 intersections
that are scheduled to receive UPS systems over the next 5 years.
Table 6-3 UPS Installations for 2007-2011

Fiscal Year Intersections
Randolph & Green
State & Green
2007 Neil & Green
Mattis & Kirby
Mattis & Windsor
Mattis & Anthony
Mattis & Interstate
2008 Mattis & Bloomington
Mattis & Bradley
Mattis & Paula
Fourth & Kirby
Neil & Kirby
2009 Prospect & Kirby
Bradley & Country Fair Drive
Bradley & Clayton/Parkland Entrance
First & Kirby
Prospect & Windsor
2010 Galen & Windsor
Prospect & Bloomington
Prospect & Town Center
Oak & Kirby
State & Bradley
2011 Randolph & Bradley
Neil & Bradley
Market & Bradley
The installation of a UPS system is also a City standard for all new traffic signal
installations and replacements.

37
6.5 Traffic and Lighting Staff Hour Estimates

Electrical technician staff hours for the various work activities outlined in the master plan
are estimated in the following table. Additional information regarding how the hours for
various tasks were developed is included in Appendix D.
Table 6-8 Electrical Technician Staff Hour Estimates for 2007-2011

Work Activity 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Preventative Maintenance-Scheduled Work 1,186 1,186 1,186 1,186 1,186
Preventative Maintenance-Resulting Repair Work 800 800 800 800 800
Response Maintenance-Accident Response 120 120 120 120 120
Response Maintenance-Lamp Changes 20 20 20 20 20
Response Maintenance-Equipment Failures 250 250 250 250 250
Upgrade - UPS Installations – 5 per year 60 60 60 60 60
Upgrade - Illuminated Street Name Signs - 3 per year 204 204 204 204 204
LED Installations - IDOT intersections 480
Upgrade - Randolph & Green (FC) 86
Upgrade - State & Green (FC) 86
Upgrade - Mattis & Kirby (FC) 86
Upgrade - Mattis & Interstate (H, FC, D, P) 304
Upgrade - Mattis & Anthony (H, FC, D, P) 304
Upgrade - Kirby & Fourth (H, FC, D, P) 304
Upgrade - Kirby & First (H, FC, D, P) 304
Upgrade - Kirby & Oak (H, FC, D, P) 304
Interconnect - North Neil (partial) - 7 intersections (fiber) 105
Interconnect - North Mattis - 7 intersections (radio) 63 63
Interconnect - Kirby (4th-State) - 4 intersections (radio) 36 36
Available Staff Hours 3,505 3,505 3,505 3,505 3,505

Preventative Maintenance Total 1,986 1,986 1,986 1,986 1,986
Traffic Signal Upgrade Projects Total 1,107 935 631 604 604
Response Maintenance Total 390 390 390 390 390
Contingency 22 194 498 525 525
Total Staff Hours Assigned 3,505 3,505 3,505 3,505 3,505
Balance 0 0 0 0 0
Prepared by GEB/cbs - May 2006

38
6.6 Traffic Signal Timings.

The City’s goal is to provide a safe and efficient traffic signal system. Coordinated traffic
signal timings result in reductions in overall travel time, delay, and fuel consumption, at the
same time improving air quality. In addition to operational improvements, signal retiming
is also gaining recognition for improving safety.
The Institute of Transportation Engineers recommends retiming traffic signals every three
years. Re-timing signals every three years is not realistic given the time demands of other
responsibilities on staff at the current level of staffing. The goal over the next five years is
to collect information that can be used to determine what is a realistic re-timing cycle under
current staffing and if that cycle is acceptable.
Over the next five years, the Civil Engineer II and Traffic and Lighting Supervisor will:
• Re-time at least one signal system per year.
• Track staff hours related to retiming traffic signals to develop a per intersection
estimate of staff hours required for retiming.
• Investigate data collection and data entry alternatives (e.g. intern/co-op hours).
• Evaluate whether the City’s signal timing needs can be met under current staffing
levels.
6.7 Crash Analyses of Existing and Proposed Signalized Intersections.

This deficiency cannot be addressed under current staffing levels. Analysis by City staff, in
lieu of the Champaign-Urbana Urbanized Transportation Study (CUUATS) report, would
require 240 to 280 hours of additional staff time that is not currently available. Staff will
continue to utilize the CUUATS Selected Crash Intersection Location Report to identify
high crash locations and follow up where appropriate with further analysis.
6.8 Emergency Vehicle Pre-emption.

Fire and Public Works, with Fire taking the lead, will research and identify a system that
will meet the City’s needs and request funding to implement through a grant or the Capital
Improvement Plan process.
6.9 IDOT Reimbursement/Traffic Signal Maintenance Agreement.

Staff will pursue reimbursement for electrical technician standby pay and street lighting at
IDOT intersections, working through the Illinois Municipal League during the negotiations
for the next master agreement, which will take place prior to its expiration in 2011.

39
6.10 Traffic Signal Replacements.

Fifteen intersections (numbers 1 through 11 in Table 5-1) require replacement. Staff will
move forward with the projects and studies outlined in the Capital Improvements Plan.
Information on each is outlined in the following table.
Table 6-5 Traffic Signal Replacements in the CIP

Build
Intersection(s) Details
Year
Replacement is included as part of Green Street
1 First & Green 2011
Improvements (Project 477).
Replacement (Project 359) budgeted separately but is
Fourth &
2 to be coordinated with Eastside Streetscape (Project 2011
University
407).
Design study (Projects 451 and 452) in 2007 will
Starting in
determine needs, cost estimates and a schedule for
2008, then
Downtown replacing 10 traffic signals Downtown. Some
3 in
(10 intersections) funding for construction is provided (Project 452) for
alternating
intersection in the TIF district; additional funding
years
will be requested through the CIP process.
Replacement (Project 374) along with pavement Not
4 State & Kirby
replacement. funded.
U of I is pursuing improvements to north leg of
intersection. City’s share is funded through this
2008
5 First & Windsor project (Project 195). Remaining improvements are
(north leg)
currently unfunded and will be resubmitted through
the CIP process.
Intersection Design Study to take place in 2007.
Currently no funding for construction. Once IDS is
6 Fourth & Daniel TBD
completed, a request for funding will be submitted
through the CIP process.

40
6.11 New Traffic Signal Installations

Staff will move forward with the project and studies outlined in the Capital Improvements
Plan.
Table 6-6 New Traffic Signal Installations in the CIP

Build
Intersection Details
Year
Traffic signals will be installed as part of the Curtis
1 Duncan & Curtis 2007
Road (Duncan to Wynstone) project (Project 399).
Traffic signals will be installed as part of the Curtis
2 Mattis & Curtis 2009
Road (Wynstone to US 45) project (Project 408).
This project (Project 471) is partially funded.
3 Staley & Bradley 2013
Additional funding will be necessary.
Project 450 currently provides funding for
construction. Installation is contingent upon
4 Fourth & Bradley 2008
redevelopment increasing traffic volumes to satisfy
warrants.
Staff will also submit requests for funding for three intersections through the Capital
Improvements Plan Process:
• Bradley & Duncan
• Kirby & Crescent
• Bradley & McKinley
There are also intersections that could potentially become future candidates for traffic signal
installations within the next 5 to 15 years depending on the rate of development on the
edges of the City. These intersections are generally the intersection of mile section roads
located along Staley Road, Rising Road, and Olympian Drive. The requests for funding
would be handled through the CIP process.
6.12 Staffing Levels

The five-year planning period of this master plan is a transition period for the traffic signal
system. The main goal over the next five years is to identify the capabilities of City staff at
current staffing levels to continue to maintain a growing and aging traffic signal system.
Over the last 10 years, the number of traffic signals that are 100% City owned has more
than doubled (from 31 to 66). In addition, many signals have been added along IDOT
routes, with the City providing maintenance through an agreement with the State.
During this same time, staffing related to traffic signals has remained constant. The
replacement of several aging street lighting systems and aging traffic signal installations,
along with advances in traffic signal technology, have allowed the City to continue to
maintain its growing system with the same amount of staff. It is not clear if this trend can
continue.

41
The implementation and evaluation of several of the elements of the master plan over the
next five years will allow the City to determine the capacity of current staff and determine
how best to maintain the traffic signal system at an acceptable level into the future.

Appendix A
Traffic Signal System Location Maps
Appendix B
Intersection Summary Sheets
City of Champaign
Intersection Summary Sheet
Intersection: First & Green

Also #2 recommended improvement in the 1994 Master Plan
Current Conditions: The overall condition of the intersection is poor. The electrical
wiring and conduit is over 40 years old. Wiring failures and crushed conduit have
necessitated the use of overhead wiring to several signal heads. The intersection does not
have mast arms and the pavement and infrastructure are in need of replacement. The
signal heads and posts were replaced in 2003 as an interim measure.
Crash History: This intersection was a SCIL for 24 of the 26 years from 1976 through
2002. It will not likely be a SCIL starting in 2004 due to interim safety enhancements
implemented in fall 2003 (split phasing) and revised in fall 2005 (3-lane cross section).
Type of Crash 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Angle 5 1 8 6 3
Turning 14 11 9 6 2
Rear End 8 3 3 1 2
Ped/Bike 0 2 2 0 1
Other 1 3 0 1 1
Total 28 20 22 14 9
Prior to 2003, the predominant crash pattern at the intersection was turning crashes
related to visibility of on-coming traffic; a situation created by the four-lane cross section.
Split phasing was implemented in 2003 to address this issue on an interim bases and
greatly reduced turning crashes (2 in 2004) by providing a protected only left turn. In
2005, Green Street was re-striped to 3-lanes, providing a dedicated left turn lane and
improving the visibility of on-coming traffic. This allowed the split phasing to be
removed. Since going back to standard operation in July 2005 (through March 2006)
there has been 1 Turning crash at the intersection and 8 total reported crashes.
The remaining safety issue at the intersection appears to be signal visibility. Of the 8
crashes reported from July 2005-March 2006, 5 crashes have involved red light running,
with signal visibility of post-mounted traffic signal a potential cause. Installation of mast
arm mounted signal heads would improve signal visibility and would reduce
unintentional red light running.
Recommendation: Replacement and intersection improvements.
Current Status: Funded as part of Campus Improvement (Project 477) scheduled for
construction in 2011.
City of Champaign
Intersections: Fourth & University

Current Condition: The overall condition of the intersection is poor. Portions of the
electrical wiring were replaced in 2003 but the conduit is over 40 years old and electrical
junction boxes are located in the street. The intersection does not have mast arms or left
turn phasing. Signal heads and signal posts were replaced in 2004 and, when possible,
were relocated to improve signal visibility until replacement and installation of mast
arms. The intersection has minor geometric deficiencies, with the north and south legs
offset and an island located on the north leg separating the northbound right turn and
through movements.
Crash History: This intersection was a SCIL in 2000 and in 2002.
Type of Crash 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Angle 9 7 15 6 2
Turning 2 1 0 4 6
Rear End 0 0 2 3 0
Ped/Bike 1 0 1 0 0
Other 1 0 1 0 0
Total 13 8 19 13 8
The predominant crash patterns at this intersection are angle and turning crashes,
accounting for 52 of the 61 crashes (85%). Conditions related to these types of crashes
are signal visibility of the post-mounted signals and possibly the lack of a protected left
turn phase. The odd geometry of the intersection may also play a role.
Recommendation: Replacement and intersection improvements. Coordinate design and

construction with the Eastside Streetscape Project.
Current Status: Funded by the Fourth and University Traffic Signal project (Project
359), currently scheduled for construction in 2011 (Project 359). This project funds the
construction of the traffic signal equipment, not the geometric improvements, which will
be funded through the Eastside Streetscape Project (Project 407). The two projects will
need to be coordinated.
City of Champaign
Intersections: Neil & University (7) Walnut & Main (15)

Walnut & University (6) Randolph & Church
Randolph & University (8) State & Church
State & University (10) Walnut & Washington (18)
Neil & Columbia (11) Market & Washington
(#) = the ranking of the intersection in the 1994 Master Plan
Current Condition: All ten of these intersections are in poor condition. The traffic
signal equipment was installed between 1953 and 1963. The conduit and, in most cases,
the electrical wiring are over 40 years old with junction boxes located in the street. The
intersections do not have mast arms. Over the last 3 years, signal posts and signal heads
were replaced to improve signal visibility and allow for the installation of LED’s to
reduce power consumption. In 2004, the signal posts and bases were painted black to
match the new signals installed at Main & Neil and First & University. These
improvements are mostly cosmetic and are intended to be interim enhancements to bridge
the gap until the installations can be completely replaced.
Crash History: See the individual intersection assessments at the end of this Appendix
for details of the crash history of these intersections. In general, all but two (Randolph &
Church, State & Church) of these ranked in the top ten for highest 2002 crash rate among
the signalized intersections evaluated by CUUATS. In addition, the predominant crash
types at many of the intersections are angle crashes. The lack of mast arm mounted
traffic signal indications over the street can be a contributing factor to angle crashes.
Recommendation: Conduct a preliminary design study of the intersections as one study.

Develop recommendations for design as well as the order and staging of replacing the
various signals. All ten signals will need to be replaced.
Current Status: The Downtown Traffic Signal Rehabilitation Project (Project 452) is
funded through the Downtown TIF over the next 10 years, beginning with the
recommended study of the intersections in 2006. Funding for design and construction of
traffic signal replacements currently appears in 2007, 2009, 2011 and 2014 ($55,000 for
design and $275,000 for construction).
The study of the State/Church, State/University, and Columbia/Neil intersections are

funded through the CIP fund since they are not entirely within the TIF District. Final
design and construction of these intersections remains unfunded.
City of Champaign
Intersection: State & Kirby

Current Condition: The overall condition of this intersection is poor. The traffic signal
equipment was installed in 1983 and the signal hardware is original to the installation.
The signal hardware is 3 years past due for replacement. The intersection does not have
left turn lanes or left turn phasing on Kirby Avenue. The mast arms are aluminum, which
are no longer used and have a tendency to age quicker than steel. Video detection was
installed in 2003 to replace failing loop detectors and the controller cabinet was replaced
to accommodate the video detection.
Left turning traffic on Kirby creates congestion at this intersection, which is the highest
volume intersection without dedicated left turn lanes. With redevelopment of the site on
the north side of Kirby and potential redevelopment on the south side, traffic volumes are
likely to increase at this intersection.
Crash History: This intersection was a SCIL for 1999 and 2000.
Type of Crash 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Angle 9 4 3 0 1
Turning 4 2 4 5 4
Rear End 3 1 0 0 1
Ped/Bike 0 0 0 0 0
Other 1 1 0 1 1
Total 17 8 7 6 7
The predominant crash pattern at the intersection is eastbound turning (44%) and angle
(38%) crashes. The cause of the turning crashes is most likely the absence of left turn
lanes and phasing. The development on the north side of the intersection will likely
increase left turns, which may in turn increase the number of crashes.
Recommendation: Design and construct the improvements identified in the Phase I

Design Study completed in 2005 (estimated total cost of $2.3 million including pavement
replacement).
Current Status: Funded by the Kirby and State Project (Project 374) currently
scheduled for construction in 2007.
City of Champaign
Intersection: First & Windsor
Current Condition: The overall condition of this intersection is poor mainly due to
geometric deficiencies. The intersection does not have left turn lanes and operates under
split phasing for Windsor Road. The split phasing was implemented in 1995 to address a
safety issue related left turning crashes (one of which resulted in a fatality). It was
intended to be an interim measure until left turn lanes could be constructed as part of an
intersection project. Under the current conditions delays along First Street can approach
3 minutes per vehicle in the PM peak according to CUUATS information.
The traffic signal was installed in 1993 and all traffic signal hardware is original to the
installation. The intersection will be due for an upgrade in 2013. The mast arms are in
good condition but do not have intersection lighting.
Crash History: The intersection has a safe operating history over the last 5 years.
Type of Crash 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Angle 1 0 1 1 1
Turning 1 1 1 0 1
Rear End 0 2 0 1 2
Ped/Bike 0 0 0 0 0
Other 0 0 0 0 0
Total 2 3 2 2 4
Recommendation: Design and construct the improvements identified in the 2005

Intersection Design Study (estimated total cost of $3.3 million).
Current Status: Funded by the Windsor and First Intersection Improvement Project
(Project 195).
Currently the construction of improvements to the north leg of the intersection, which
serves as the main entrance into the University’s South Research Park, are funded for
2008. Prior to the start of design, an intergovernmental agreement between the
University and the City will be necessary.
The improvements to the other three legs of the intersection are currently unfunded. The
University and the City are working to identify potential funding sources to aid in
financing the improvements.
City of Champaign
Intersection: Fourth & Daniel
equipment was installed in 1968. The signal posts, wiring, conduit and foundations are
original to the installation. The signal heads are smaller than current standard. The
intersection does not have mast arms.
Crash History: This intersection has a safe operating history.
Type of Crash 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Angle 0 0 1 0 1
Turning 0 1 0 0 0
Rear End 2 1 1 1 0
Ped/Bike 0 0 0 1 0
Other 0 1 1 0 0
Total 2 3 3 2 1
Recommendation: Replacement and intersection improvements. The intersection

improvements should incorporate pedestrian friendly features such as shortened crossing
distances and/or a pedestrian refuge median. If the replacement is not anticipated to
occur for some time, consider upgrading the signal indications, if feasible, to the larger
indications.
Current Status: The Intersection Design Study project (Project 453) provides funding
to conduct an Intersection Design Study in 2006.
City of Champaign
Intersection: Neil & Marketview
Current Condition: The overall condition of this intersection is fair. The intersection is
6 years past due for an upgrade. The traffic signal was installed in 1980. The mast arms,
signal posts, signal heads, wiring and conduit are original to the installation and are now
26 years old. Video detection was added to the north and south approaches in 2005 to
replace failing in-pavement loops. The east and west approaches remain under loop
detection, which were replaced around 2000.
Crash History: This intersection has been a SCIL every year from 1994 through 2002.
The number of crashes in 2003 and 2004 were about half the number seen on an annual
basis the previous three years.
Type of Crash 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Angle 9 6 9 3 1
Turning 6 7 5 4 5
Rear End 3 1 2 2 0
Ped/Bike 0 0 0 0 0
Other 1 0 0 0 0
Total 19 14 16 9 6
The predominant crash patterns at the intersection are angle and turning crashes,
accounting for 86% of the crashes. The predominant directions of travel for vehicles
involved have been northbound and eastbound. Several factors may play a role in the
crash pattern: drivers unfamiliar with the area, the proximity of this intersection with the
Neil and Anthony intersection (225 feet), and a horizontal curve just north of the
intersection.
Recommendation: Perform a traffic signal upgrade to the intersection. As part of the

upgrade install a signal indication for each through lane and include wiring for future
pedestrian indications and pushbuttons to be installed as part of a future sidewalk gap
project.
Current Status: An upgrade is funded for 2006 through the Traffic Signal Upgrade
Project (Project 87). The upgrade will include the wiring for future pedestrian
indications.
City of Champaign
Intersection: Mattis & Anthony
Current Condition: The overall condition of the intersection is poor based on the
condition of the cabinet. The traffic signal equipment was installed in 1988. The mast
arms, signal posts, signal heads, wiring and conduit are original to the installation. The
cabinet has been damaged by mice the condition of its wiring is questionable. The loop
detection on Anthony is operational but suspect. There is no intersection lighting.
In 2003, the east leg was re-striped to provide dual left turn lanes for traffic turning from
Anthony onto southbound Mattis.
Crash History: The intersection has a safe operating history.
Type of Crash 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Angle 0 0 0 0 0
Turning 0 1 0 0 2
Rear End 1 0 0 0 2
Ped/Bike 0 0 0 0 0
Other 0 0 0 0 0
Total 1 1 0 0 4
A crash pattern could not be established. The increase in 2004 could be a statistical
anomaly or related to an increase in traffic volumes.
Recommendation: Perform a traffic signal upgrade to the intersection.
Project (Project 87).
City of Champaign
Intersection: Mattis & Interstate
Current Condition: The overall condition of this intersection is fair. The traffic signal
equipment was installed in 1987. Most of the traffic signal equipment is original to the
installation and will be due for an upgrade in 2007. New detector loops were installed on
Interstate Drive as part of a City project in 2001.
The installation has many design features that do not meet the City’s standards. The
cabinet and cabinet wiring are not standard. There are currently the minimum 2 signal
indications per direction allowed by the MUTCD for northbound and southbound traffic
with unreliable motion sensor detection on Mattis. A dual mast arm, which is also
nonstandard, was used at this intersection. There is a right turn lane of substandard
length for northbound traffic turning onto Interstate that does not include a right turn
overlap. The intersection also lacks a southbound left turn lane for traffic turning onto
Interstate Drive.
Type of Crash 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Angle 0 0 0 0 0
Turning 1 0 0 0 0
Rear End 2 3 1 2 1
Ped/Bike 0 0 0 0 0
Other 0 0 0 0 0
Total 3 3 1 2 1
The predominant crash pattern at the intersection is southbound rear end crashes,
accounting for 6 of the 10 total crashes and 6 of the 8 rear end crashes. The motion
sensor detection, a lack of advance detection to extend the green indication, and the lack
of a left turn lane may be contributing factors.
Recommendation: Perform a Traffic Signal Upgrade at the intersection including

replacement of the motion detection with video detection and the implementation of a
northbound right turn overlap.
Prior to the upgrade, the status of development activities in the area should be checked to
see if development of the land directly to the west that would impact the intersection is
anticipated in the near future. In addition, a turning movement count should be
performed at the intersection to assess the need for a southbound left turn lane and the
crash history should be examined to make sure the intersection is still operating safely.
Project (Project 87).
City of Champaign
Intersection: Mattis & Kirby
Current Condition: The overall condition of this intersection is good. The traffic signal
equipment was installed in 1986. The signal heads were replaced around 2000. Video
detection was installed in 2003 to provide fully actuated control. The mast arms are
original to the installation and are in good condition but do not have street lighting.
Crash History: The intersection was a SCIL for 2001.
Type of Crash 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Angle 0 2 1 0 2
Turning 6 5 6 3 3
Rear End 2 5 4 3 5
Ped/Bike 0 0 0 1 0
Other 0 3 1 0 0
Total 8 15 12 7 10
The predominant crash types at the intersection were turning (23 of 52 – 44%) and rear
end (19 of 51 – 43%) crashes. The intersection is one of the busiest in the City. The
volume of traffic is directly related to the number of crashes. At peak periods the
northbound through movement and the southbound left turn movement compete for green
time. The southbound left turn averages more than 175 vehicles per hour through out the
day with peaks approaching 250 to 300. However, there is not room at this intersection
to add capacity through the addition of lanes without significant right-of-way acquisition.
Recommendation: Complete the traffic signal upgrade by replacing the controller

cabinet.
Current Status: A cabinet replacement is funded for 2007 through the Traffic Signal
Upgrade Project (Project 87).
City of Champaign
Intersections: Randolph & Green / State & Green
Current Condition: The overall condition of these signals is good. The traffic signal
equipment was installed in 1985. The signal hardware was replaced in 2005 and the
intersection was painted black. The mast arms and conduit are original to the installation.
The only detection present at these intersections is for the left turn arrows for traffic
turning from Green Street onto Randolph and State.
Crash History: The intersections have a safe operating history.
Randolph & Green

Type of Crash 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
Angle 2 1 3 2 4
Turning 0 0 0 0 1
Rear End 1 0 0 0 0
Ped/Bike 0 1 0 0 0
Other 0 0 0 0 0
Total 3 2 3 2 5
The predominant crash pattern is an angle crash resulting from red light running along
Green Street. All crashes were during daylight hours.
State & Green

Type of Crash 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
Angle 2 1 2 3 2
Turning 1 2 0 0 2
Rear End 1 0 0 0 0
Ped/Bike 0 0 0 0 0
Other 0 0 0 1 0
Total 4 3 2 4 4
The predominant crash pattern involved a southbound vehicle being ticketed, with 10 of
the 16 (63%) crashes taking place at night.
Recommendations: Complete the traffic signal upgrade by replacing the controller

cabinets at these two intersections.
Current Status: Cabinet replacements are funded for 2007 through the Traffic Signal
Upgrade Project (Project 87).
City of Champaign
Intersection: Neil & Anthony
Current Condition: The overall condition of this intersection is good. The traffic signal
equipment was installed in 1991. The signal hardware is original to the installation and is
due for replacement in 2011. The mast arms are in good condition.
Crash History: The intersection has appeared as a SCIL for 1996 and 2002.
Type of Crash 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Angle 1 0 1 2 1
Turning 1 0 1 1 0
Rear End 2 1 5 2 3
Ped/Bike 0 0 0 0 0
Other 1 0 0 0 0
Total 5 1 7 5 4
The predominant crash pattern at this intersection is southbound rear end crashes,
accounting for 10 of the 13 rear end crashes (77%) and 10 of the 22 total crashes (45%).
A contributing factor could be the proximity of the I-74 westbound ramp (435 feet to the
south) and possibly confusion regarding the signal indications at the two intersections.
Recommendation: Perform a Traffic Signal Upgrade at the intersection including

replacement of the failing in-pavement loops after 2011.
Current Status: Nothing planned for 2007-2011 planning period. This intersection
would be upgraded in the next five-year planning period (2012-2016).
City of Champaign
Intersection: Mattis & Paula
Current Conditions: The overall condition of the intersection is good. The traffic
signal equipment was installed in 1988. The signal equipment is original to the
installation and will be due for replacement in 2008. The detector loops in the pavement
are operational but are suspect. The preemption at this intersection is activated be a
pushbutton in the Fire Station located on the southeast corner.
Type of Crash 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Angle 0 0 0 0 0
Turning 3 2 1 2 1
Rear End 1 1 0 1 1
Ped/Bike 0 0 0 0 0
Other 1 1 0 0 0
Total 5 4 1 3 2
Recommendation: The signal hardware is due for replacement in 2008. Given the safe
operating history, condition of the signal hardware and needs for upgrades elsewhere,
defer the upgrade until the 20012-2016 planning period.
Current Status: Nothing planned for 2007-2011 planning period. This intersection
would be upgraded in the next five-year planning period (2012-2016).
City of Champaign
Intersection: Mayfair & Kirby
Current Condition: The overall condition of this intersection is fair, due to the lack of
mast arms. The traffic signal equipment was installed in 1971. The traffic signal posts
and signal heads were replaced in 2000. However, the conduit and wiring are original to
the installation. The intersection only has detection on the side street and the loop
detectors are suspect. The intersection does not have mast arms but rather has median
mounted signals on Kirby. The intersection does not have left turn lanes.
Crash History: This intersection was a SCIL in 2002.
Type of Crash 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Angle 0 0 0 0 2
Turning 2 3 4 2 4
Rear End 1 0 2 1 2
Ped/Bike 1 1 0 0 0
Other 2 1 2 1 0
Total 6 5 8 4 8
The predominant crash type at the intersection is turning, accounting for 15 of the 31
crashes (48%). The most common cause of this type of crash on streets with four lanes is
the visibility of oncoming traffic in the curb lane due to the presence of an oncoming
vehicle in the travel lane. This is due to the lack of left turn lanes at the intersection.
Recommendation: The first step is to identify the improvements needed through an

Intersection Design Study.
Current Status: Nothing planned for 2007-2011 planning period.

City of Champaign
2004 Traffic Signal Master Plan
Intersections: Round Barn & Springfield
Current Condition: The overall condition of this intersection is good. This is a private
benefit signal on a State route that has become the responsibility of the City by default.
The signal is part of a fiber optic closed loop system that includes signals on Springfield
Avenue and Mattis Avenue. The interconnect wiring and cabinet were upgraded by an
IDOT interconnect project in 2003. As part of an overlay project along Springfield
Avenue, IDOT replaced the detector loops in 2004. Also in 2004, the City swapped out
the signal posts and heads for newer equipment transplanted from downtown signals
(which were changed to black hardware).
Crash History: This intersection has a safe operating history.
Type of Crash 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Angle 0 0 0 0 1
Turning 1 0 0 0 0
Rear End 0 0 0 0 1
Ped/Bike 0 0 0 0 0
Other 0 0 0 0 0
Total 1 0 0 0 2
Recommendation: The safe operating history indicates that the intersection geometry is
fine in its current configuration. The equipment had been upgraded. No actions are
recommended at this time.
Current Status: Nothing planned for 2007-2011.

Downtown Area
Intersection Summary Sheets
City of Champaign
Intersections: Market & Washington / Walnut & Washington
Current Condition: The overall condition of these intersections is poor. These two
intersections are controlled by one controller. The traffic signal equipment was installed
in 1963. The electrical wiring and conduit and foundations are over 40 years old. The
intersection does not have mast arms. The signal indications and posts were replaced in
2004 as an interim measure until a replacement project can be funded.
These intersections are located in an area of downtown Champaign that is starting to see
significant redevelopment. The driveway that is the south leg of the intersection does not
have signal indications for it and the property has seen more activity in the last couple of
years. Walnut Street transitions from one-way northbound traffic to two-way traffic at
this intersection. Redevelopment near Market and Washington has increased pedestrian
activity but the intersection does not have any pedestrian indications or pushbuttons and
the current installation cannot be modified to include them due to its age.
Crash History: Market & Washington has a safe operating history. Walnut &
Washington was a SCIL in 2002.
Market & Washington
Type of Crash 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Angle 0 0 0 0 0
Turning 0 0 0 0 0
Rear End 0 1 1 2 0
Ped/Bike 0 0 0 0 0
Other 0 0 2 0 0
Total 0 1 3 2 0
Walnut & Washington
Type of Crash 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Angle 1 0 0 2 0
Turning 0 1 2 1 0
Rear End 0 1 1 0 0
Ped/Bike 0 0 0 0 0
Other 1 1 0 0 0
Total 2 3 3 3 0
Recommendation: Evaluate as part of the Downtown Signal Rehabilitation Study.

City of Champaign
Intersections: Neil & Columbia
equipment was installed in 1963. The wiring and conduit are over 40 years old. The
intersection does not have mast arms, left turn lanes, or left turn phasing. Most of the
signal heads are original to the installation.
Crash History: This intersection was a SCIL in 1999, 2000 and 2001.
Type of Crash 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Angle 4 4 1 5 0
Turning 2 1 3 0 0
Rear End 2 5 1 0 2
Ped/Bike 0 0 1 0 0
Other 1 1 0 0 1
Total 9 11 6 5 3
The predominant crash types at the intersection are angle (14 of 34 – 41%) crashes.
Signal visibility of post mounted traffic signals are a contributing factor to angle crashes,
and rear end crashes (of which there were 10 – 29%). The lack of turn lanes is a
contributing factor to turning crashes, which accounted for 5 crashes (15%).

City of Champaign
Intersections: Neil & University

Walnut & University
Current Condition: The overall condition of this intersection is poor. These two
intersections are controlled by one controller. The traffic signal equipment was installed
in 1963. The electrical wiring and conduit are over 40 years old. The intersection does
not have mast arms. In 2004, the signal posts and signal heads were replaced with larger
signal indications including LED’s and black signal heads. The signal posts were also
painted black in 2004.
The westbound left turn onto Neil Street is very busy most of the day and backs up
through Walnut at times. The current setup (one controller) limits options for dealing
with this problem.
Crash History: Neil & University has been a SCIL every year since 1992 except for
2000. Walnut & University was a SCIL in 1998.
Neil & University
Type of Crash 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Angle 2 7 8 4 3
Turning 5 3 5 1 2
Rear End 1 2 3 0 2
Ped/Bike 0 0 0 0 0
Other 0 0 1 2 1
Total 8 12 17 7 8
Walnut & University
Type of Crash 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Angle 7 3 5 2 3
Turning 1 2 1 4 2
Rear End 0 1 1 1 2
Ped/Bike 0 0 1 0 1
Other 0 0 1 0 2
Total 8 6 9 7 10
The predominant crash type at both intersections is the angle crash. Signal visibility
related to the lack of mast arms is a contributing factor to angle crashes.

City of Champaign
Intersections: Randolph & Church / State & Church
Current Conditions: The overall condition of these intersections is poor. The traffic
signal equipment was installed in 1953 at Randolph and in 1963 at State. Most of the
equipment is over 40 years old. The signal heads and signal posts were replaced in 2005
and some were relocated to improve visibility in the interim.
Crash History: Randolph & Church was a SCIL in 2000, 2001 and 2002. State and
Church was a SCIL in 1999, 2000, 2001 and 2002.
Randolph & Church

Type of Crash 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
Angle 7 4 5 5 4
Turning 0 3 0 0 1
Rear End 0 0 0 0 0
Ped/Bike 0 0 0 0 0
Other 1 0 0 1 1
Total 8 7 5 6 6
State & Church

Type of Crash 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
Angle 9 4 4 4 1
Turning 0 3 0 0 0
Rear End 0 0 1 2 0
Ped/Bike 0 0 0 0 0
Other 1 1 1 0 0
Total 10 8 6 6 1
The predominant crash type at both intersections is the angle crash. Signal visibility
related to the lack of mast arms is a contributing factor to angle crashes.

City of Champaign
Intersections: Randolph & University

State & University
Current Conditions: The overall condition of these intersections is poor. The traffic
signal equipment was installed in 1955 at Randolph and in 1963 at State. The wiring and
conduit is over 40 years old. In 2004, the signal posts and signal heads were replaced
with larger signal indications including LED’s and black signal heads. The signal posts
were painted black.
Crash History: Randolph & University was a SCIL in 2001 and 2002. State and
University was a SCIL in 1998, 1999, 2001 and 2002.
Randolph & University
Type of Crash 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Angle 3 12 13 7 6
Turning 0 1 5 2 3
Rear End 1 1 2 2 2
Ped/Bike 0 0 0 0 0
Other 2 0 0 1 0
Total 6 14 20 12 11
The predominant crash type at this intersection is the angle crash (41 of 63 for 65%).
Signal visibility of post mounted signals could be a contributing factor.
State & University
Type of Crash 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Angle 2 4 2 0 2
Turning 1 3 8 2 4
Rear End 0 0 0 0 0
Ped/Bike 0 0 0 0 0
Other 0 2 1 1 2
Total 3 9 11 3 8
The predominant crash type at this intersection is the turning crash (16 of 34 for 47%).

City of Champaign
Intersections: Walnut & Main
Current Condition: The overall condition of the intersection is poor. The traffic signal
equipment was installed in 1955. The wiring and conduit are over 40 years old. The
intersection does not have mast arms. The signal equipment on the southwest corner is
mounted over a vault. The signal heads, posts, electrical service and controller were
replaced in 2003. The signal posts were painted black in 2004.
Crash History: This intersection was a SCIL in 2001 and 2002.
Type of Crash 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Angle 0 3 2 2 1
Turning 1 2 2 2 3
Rear End 0 0 0 0 1
Ped/Bike 0 0 0 0 0
Other 1 1 1 1 2
Total 2 6 5 5 7
The predominant crash types at this intersection are angle and turning crashes.

Appendix C
Support Information for
Current Activities
Estimate of Maintenance Costs for FY 2007
Traffic Signals (02-0702-63002) Annual Budget = $38,840

Revenue from
Estimated Upfront Costs Reimbursement* Net Cost to City
Anticipated for Signals on State Routes $5,800 $4,160 $1,640
Anticipated for University Signals on Kirby $200 $200 $0
Remaining for City -City Intersections $32,840 $32,840
Totals $38,840 $4,360 $34,480
Exact amt not easily obtained from billing - estimated using the proportion of equivalent signals.
Repair and Maintenance Services (02-0702-750)

Revenue from
Anticipated for Signals on State Routes $500 $500 500
Anticipated for City-City intersections $2,000 $2,000
Totals $2,500 $500 $2,500
This line item is used to pay for repair to controllers. Revenues for repair of State signal controllers are included in
Traffic Signal line item for this analysis - can be tracked in future if desired.
Miscellaneous Contractual (02-0702-720)

Revenue from
Anticipated for Signals on State Routes
Anticipated for City-City intersections
Totals $0 $0 $0
This is generally used for pavement marking contracts, boring work and painting for street lighting. This is not
anticipated to be used for traffic signals.
Utilities - Power (02-0702-63002) Annual Budget** = $170,801

Revenue from
Estimated Upfront Costs Reimbursement Net Cost to City
Anticipated for City-City Intersections $22,000 $22,000
Totals $71,000 $32,000 $39,000
**Includes funding for street lighting & school flashers.
Utilities - Phone (02-0702-74002) Annual Budget = $1,900

Revenue from
Anticipated for Systems on State Routes $1,100 $540 $560
Anticipated for Systems on City Streets Only $800 $800
Totals $1,900 $540 $1,360
Electrical Standby (02-0702-512) Annual Budget = $17,000

Revenue from
Calculated for Signals on State Routes $6,736 $6,736
Calculated for University Signals $481 $481
Calculated for City-City Intersections $9,783 $9,783
Totals $17,000 $0 $17,000
*Assumed all funds are spent on standby and divided total by number of signals.
Electrical OT (02-0702-511) Annual Budget = $10,000

Revenue from
Accident Response - Third Party $1,995 $1,995 $0
Other OT $8,005 $8,005
Totals $10,000 $1,995 $8,005
Regular Electrical Technician Staff Hours (Estimate)*
Revenue from
Accident Response - Third Party Incl. in following est. $4,338 $0
Anticipated for University Signals $1,509 $1,509 $0
Anticipated for City-City Intersection Maint. $58,843 $58,843
Anticipated for City-City Upgrade/Design Mod. $56,769 $56,769
Totals $132,209 $14,680 $121,866
*The purpose of this is to show the proportion of equiavent value spent on City intersections using the billing rate
charged to outside agencies as the basis for comparison. This may not reflect acutal costs to the City.
Other Staff Time (Estimated)

Revenue from
Traffic & Lighting Supervisor $38,350 $38,350
Traffic & Lighting Technician $13,203 $13,203
Civil Engineer II* (Maintenance) $4,069 $4,069
Totals $55,623 $55,623
*Maintenance activities (timings and general) - used salary times benefit calcs used for IDOT billing rates.
** For CIP Projects - used salary times the overhead rate used to develop CIP funding levels.
Equipment Usage - Vehicles (Estimated)

Revenue from
Accident Response - Third Party $1,589 $1,589 $0
Anticpated for Signals on State Routes $5,294 $3,100 $2,195
Anticipated for University Signals $440 $440 $0
Anticpated for City-City Intersection Maint. $18,912 $18,912
Anticipated for City-City Updgrade/Design Mod. $18,245 $18,245
Totals $44,480 $5,129 $39,352
Note: This is the estimate based on the least available information of all of the incurred costs.
Exact amt not easily obtained from billing - estimated using the proportion of equivalent signals.
Summary
Revenue from
Traffic Signals (02-0702-63002) $38,840 $4,360 $34,480
Repair and Maintenance Services (02-0702-750) $2,500 $500 $2,500
Miscellaneous Contractual (02-0702-720) $0 $0 $0
Utilities - Power (02-0702-63002) $71,000 $32,000 $39,000
Utilities - Phone (02-0702-74002) $1,900 $540 $1,360
Electrical Standby (02-0702-512) $17,000 $0 $17,000
Electrical OT (02-0702-511) $10,000 $1,995 $8,005
Regular Electrical Technician Staff Hours (Estimat $132,209 $14,680 $121,866
Other Staff Time (Estimated) $55,623 $0 $55,623
Equipment Usage - Vehicles (Estimated) $44,480 $5,129 $39,352
Grand Totals $373,552 $59,204 $319,186
Estimated Cost Per Signal Maintained $3,524
Prepared 5/06 by CBS
Annual Electrical Technician Traffic Signal Hours
Annual Hours
Response Maintenance
Accident Response 119
Lamp Changes 400
Power failure responses 48
Preemption issues 68
Repairing/replacing failed hardware 176
Total 811
Preventative Maintenance - Routine

Daily drive thru inspection of signals - annual total 380
UPS inspections 120
Cabinet Cleaning 80
Set clocks for TBC coordination 14
Video Detection maintenance 135
Pedestrian push button testing 260
Preemption testing and repair 200
Total 1,189
Traffic Signal Upgrade Projects last two years

LED Project 554
Video Detection Installations 164
Above ground signal post replacements 481
North Prospect Fiber Optic Interconnect 35
Countdown pedestrian timer installations 27
Power usage monitoring (post LED) 210
Pedestrian Button Replacements 34
Total 1,505
Total Maintenance Hours 2,000

Total Signal Upgrade Hours 1,505
Total 3,505
Available Electrical Technician Staff Hours (Regular) Calculactions
Electrical Technicians work hour calcs Average Vacation Calculator

Total hours in a year 2,080 Initials Vacation Hours
-holidays 80 JB 200
-average vacation 176 GR 200
-average sick usage 40 JC 160
-personal leave 24 BA 144
-training/comp time off 40 Average = 176
-break time ** 143
=Average available work hours per tech 1,577
* number of technicians 4 Break Time Calculator
* % of time devoted to traffic signals 56% Available days 260
= Total technician hours for traffic signals 3,505 -vacation 22
-holidays 10
-personal leave 3
-CTO/training 5
-sick time 5
Working days 215
Total break hours 143
Annual Accident Damage Billing Summary
Year Incidents Electrician (Reg) Electrician OT PU Truck Bucket Staff Cost Equipment Cost Material Cost Contractor Cost Total Cost
1 FY 2005-2006* 6 45 16 2 21 $2,430 $585 $3,098 $0 $6,112
2 FY 2004-2005 21 205 33 19 80.5 $8,331 $2,309 $13,569 $3,500 $27,710
3 FY 2003-2004 6 26 4 0 15 $958 $398 $2,938 $2,098 $6,391
4 FY 2002-2003 16 165 28 27 79 $5,973 $2,318 $13,983 $0 $22,274
5 FY 2001-2002 12 81 39 35.5 21 $3,915 $852 $15,153 $0 $19,919
4-Year Average 119 26 20 49 $4,794 $1,469 $11,411 $1,399 $19,073

* thru 12/31/05
Notes:
FY 04-05: Storm Damage totaled $4,493

FY 01-02: Two complete cabinet destructions accounted for $12,100 of the total for the year.
Contractor costs are associated with accidents requiring the replacement of a traffic signal mast arm.
The City is reimbursed for these costs. However the Traffic & Lighting Budget is not, and must absorb these costs.
Signal posts knockdowns account for most of the incidents. The costs for repairing range from $500 to $1,500 in general.
Cabinet knockdowns are the most costly from both a material and man-hour perspective. A cabinet knowckdown is around $7,000 to repair.
Mast arm damage requires the use of a contractor because a line truck is necessary to set the equipment. Mast arm replacement is around $6,000.
Electricity Charges Summary
Monthly Quarterly Annual

Total Estimate Estimate
Number of City Electrical Services for Signals 91 91 91
Total Amount Billed to City /Paid to Ameren $ 5,890.73 $ 17,672.20 $ 70,688.80
Amount Reimbursed to City from IDOT $ 2,655.25 $ 7,965.75 $ 31,863.02
Net Estimated Cost to City $ 3,235.48 $ 9,706.45 $ 38,825.78
Signals others receive/pay power # of Signals Locations

U of I Signals 3 Kirby at Oak, First, Fourth
Fire Station Signals 2 Bradley-Harris and Prospect-Broadmoor Stations
Parkland College 1 Bradley-Clayton/parkland
City of Urbana 1 Green & Wright by agreement
Home Depot 1 Bloomington & Home Depot Entrance
Lowe's 1 Prospect & Lowe's
Electrical Cost Estimate Summary for
Signals at Intersection of City Streets
Signals Signals
on on Illinois Power
Signals Signal
Services Street another Location Energy Bill as
billed count
Light Signal of 9/05
Circuit Service
1 1 1 Bloomington Road and Hagan Street $ 23.77
1 1 1 Bradley Avenue and Country Fair Drive $ 23.41
1 1 1 Bradley Avenue and Market Street $ 30.74
1 1 1 Bradley Avenue and Neil Street $ 30.18
1 1 1 Bradley Avenue and Randolph Street $ 22.70
1 1 1 Bradley Avenue and State Street $ 28.55
1 1 1 Duncan Road and Kirby Avenue $ 45.03
1 1 1 Duncan Road and Windsor Road $ 50.00
1 1 Fourth Street and Daniel Street $ -
1 1 1 Green Street and First Street $ 51.71
1 1 1 Green Street and Fourth Street $ 39.75
1 1 1 Green Street and Sixth Street $ 34.68
1 1 1 Kirby Avenue and Mayfair Road $ 29.67
1 1 1 Kirby Avenue and State Street $ 56.80
1 2 1 Market Street and Washington Street $ 23.56
1 1 1 Marketview Drive and Moreland Boulevard $ 21.42
1 1 1 Mattis Avenue and Anthony Drive $ 21.57
1 1 1 Mattis Avenue and Interstate Drive $ 17.05
1 1 1 Mattis Avenue and John Street $ 45.80
1 1 1 Mattis Avenue and Kirby Avenue $ 20.20
1 1 1 Mattis Avenue and Olympian Drive $ 29.06
1 1 1 Mattis Avenue and Windsor Road $ 22.13
1 1 1 Neil Street and Anthony Drive $ 22.29
1 1 1 Neil Street and Center Drive $ 22.49
1 1 1 Neil Street and Columbia Avenue $ 66.36
1 1 Neil Street and Main Street $ -
1 1 1 Neil Street and Marketview Drive $ 22.18
1 1 1 Neil Street and Town Center Boulevard $ 53.18
1 1 Neil Street and University Avenue $ -
1 1 1 Prospect Avenue and Baytowne Drive $ 28.34
1 1 1 Prospect Avenue and Green Street $ 24.73
1 1 Prospect Avenue and Interstate Drive $ -
1 1 1 Prospect Avenue and Kirby Avenue $ 25.65
1 1 1 Prospect Avenue and Marketview Drive $ 30.99
1 1 1 Prospect Avenue and Meijer Drive/Walmart $ 51.51
1 1 1 Prospect Avenue and Meijer Entrance $ 50.84
1 1 1 Prospect Avenue and Olympian Drive $ 14.60
1 1 1 Prospect Avenue and Town Center Boulevard $ 28.04
1 1 Prospect Avenue and Windsor Road $ 50.00
1 1 1 Randolph Street and Church Street $ 66.72
1 1 1 Randolph Street and Green Street $ 94.71
1 1 1 Randolph Street and University Avenue $ 27.43
1 1 1 Sixth Street and John Street $ 19.03
1 1 1 Staley Road and Kirby Avenue $ 35.11
1 1 1 State Street and Church Street $ 24.73
1 1 1 State Street and Green Street $ 90.17
1 1 1 State Street and University Avenue $ 34.15
1 1 1 University Avenue and Chestnut Street $ 20.15
1 1 1 University Avenue and First Street $ 36.23
1 1 1 University Avenue and Fourth Street $ 29.56
1 1 1 Walnut Street and Main Street $ 25.70
1 1 Walnut Street and Washington Street $ -
1 2 1 Wanut Street and University Avenue $ 25.85
1 1 1 Windsor Road and First Street $ 102.84
1 1 1 Windsor Road and Galen Drive $ 20.40
49 52 3 2 55 Monthly Total $ 1,811.76
Annual Estimate $ 21,741.16
Average Monthly Cost Per Signal Billed $ 34.84

Average Annual Cost Per Signal Billed $ 418.10
Electrical Cost Estimate Summary for
Signals Located Along State Routes
Illinois Power Signal City Amount to be
IDOT
Location Energy Bill Streetlight Subtotal Responsibility Responsibility Reimbursed
Ref #
as of 12/31/05 Deduction* State City by IDOT
1 IL 10 (Springfield Ave.) & Duncan Rd $ 48.83 $10.00 $ 38.83 0.5 0.5 29.42 $ 19.42
1.5 IL 10 (Springfield Ave.) & Kenwood Dr. $ 100.66 $10.00 $ 90.66 0.5 0.5 55.33 $ 45.33
2 IL 10 (Springfield Ave.) & Country Fair Dr. $ 100.50 $0.00 $ 100.50 0.5 0.5 50.25 $ 50.25
3 IL 10 (Springfield Ave.) & Round Barn Entrance $ 54.35 $0.00 $ 54.35 1 54.35 $ -
4 US 150 (Springfield Ave.) & State St. $ 109.46 $0.00 $ 109.46 0.5 0.5 54.73 $ 54.73
5 US 150 (Springfield Ave.) & Randolph $ 140.96 $0.00 $ 140.96 0.5 0.5 70.48 $ 70.48
6 US 150 (Springfield Ave.) & US 45 (Neil St.) $ 134.50 $5.00 $ 129.50 1 5.00 $ 129.50
7 US 45/US 150 (Springfield Ave.) & First St. $ 36.23 $0.00 $ 36.23 0.5 0.5 18.12 $ 18.12
8 US 45/US 150 (Springfield Ave.) & Fourth St $ 61.17 $0.00 $ 61.17 0.5 0.5 30.59 $ 30.59
9 US 45/US 150 (Springfield Ave.) & Sixth St $ 66.06 $0.00 $ 66.06 0.5 0.5 33.03 $ 33.03
10 US 45/US 150 (University) & US 45/US 150 (Wright) $ 87.57 $20.00 $ 67.57 0.5 0.5 53.79 $ 33.79
11 University Ave (extended) & Country Fair Dr. $ 118.36 $0.00 $ 118.36 0.5 0.5 59.18 $ 59.18
12 Church St (extended) & Country Fair Dr $ 124.14 $0.00 $ 124.14 0.5 0.5 62.07 $ 62.07
15 Neil St & I-74 North Ramp (eb) $ 118.16 $0.00 $ 118.16 1 0.00 $ 118.16
15 Neil St & I-74 South Ramp (wb) $ 98.37 $0.00 $ 98.37 1 0.00 $ 98.37
16 Neil St & Kenyon Rd $ 105.66 $0.00 $ 105.66 0.5 0.5 52.83 $ 52.83
17 US 45 (Neil St.) & Green St. $ 120.52 $10.00 $ 110.52 0.5 0.5 65.26 $ 55.26
18 US 45 (Neil St.) & Stadium Dr./Hessel Blvd. $ 54.61 $0.00 $ 54.61 0.5 0.5 27.31 $ 27.31
19 US 45 (Neil St.) & Kirby Ave. $ 128.52 $0.00 $ 128.52 0.5 0.5 64.26 $ 64.26
20 US 45 (Neil St.) & St. Mary's Rd $ 114.29 $0.00 $ 114.29 0.5 0.5 57.15 $ 57.15
21 US 45 (Neil St.) & Devonshire Rd $ 83.10 $0.00 $ 83.10 0.67 0.33 27.42 $ 55.68
21.5 US 45 (Neil St.) & Knollwood Dr. $ 31.71 $10.00 $ 21.71 1 31.71 $ -
22 US 45 (Neil St.) & Windsor Rd $ 159.87 $0.00 $ 159.87 0.5 0.5 79.94 $ 79.94
25 Prospect Ave. & I-74 South Ramp (sec) $ 80.35 $0.00 $ 80.35 1 0.00 $ 80.35
25 Prospect Ave. & I-74 North Ramp (nec) $ 66.61 $0.00 $ 66.61 1 0.00 $ 66.61
26 US 150 (Prospect Ave.) & Bloomington Rd $ 131.30 $0.00 $ 131.30 1 0.00 $ 131.30
27 US 150 (Prospect Ave.) & Bradley Ave $ 155.52 $20.00 $ 135.52 0.5 0.5 87.76 $ 67.76
28 US 150 (Prospect Ave.) & Church St. $ 86.91 $0.00 $ 86.91 0.5 0.5 43.46 $ 43.46
29 US 150 (Prospect Ave.) & University Ave. $ 93.35 $0.00 $ 93.35 0.5 0.5 46.68 $ 46.68
30 US 150 (Prospect Ave.) & IL 10 (Springfield Ave.) $ 191.54 $0.00 $ 191.54 1 0.00 $ 191.54
31 Mattis Ave. & US 150 (Bloomington Rd.) $ 151.77 $0.00 $ 151.77 1 0.00 $ 151.77
32 Mattis Ave. & Bradley Ave. $ 81.11 $0.00 $ 81.11 0.5 0.5 40.56 $ 40.56
33 Mattis Ave. & Paula Dr. (Post Office) $ 22.75 $0.00 $ 22.75 1 22.75 $ -
34 Mattis Ave. & Glenn Park Dr. $ 88.45 $0.00 $ 88.45 0.5 0.5 44.23 $ 44.23
35 Mattis Ave. & Church St. $ 147.18 $0.00 $ 147.18 1 0.00 $ 147.18
36 Mattis Ave. & University Ave. $ 154.82 $0.00 $ 154.82 1 0.00 $ 154.82
37 Mattis Ave. & IL 10 (Springfield Ave.) $ 250.08 $0.00 $ 250.08 1 0.00 $ 250.08
43 Mattis Ave. & Parkland Way $ 35.04 $10.00 $ 25.04 0.67 0.33 18.26 $ 16.78
44 Mattis Ave. & Springer Dr./Kraft Dr. $ 21.42 $0.00 $ 21.42 1 21.42 $ -
45 Market St. & Mercury Dr. $ 70.55 $0.00 $ 70.55 1 70.55 $ -
IL 10 (Springfield) & US 45/US 150 (Wright) $ 30.89 $20.00 $ 10.89 0.5 0.5 25.45 $ 5.45
IL 10 (Springfield) & Staley Rd. $ 21.73 $20.00 $ 1.73 0.75 0.25 20.43 $ 1.30
Monthly Total $ 4,078.97 $135.00 $ 3,943.97 24.59 17.41 1,423.72 $ 2,655.25

Annual Estimate $ 48,947.64 $ 1,620.00 $ 47,327.64 $ 17,084.62 $ 31,863.02
*$5.00 times number of streetlights at intersection. IDOT does not pay for intersection lighting.
Average Monthly Cost Per Signal Billed $ 97.12

Estimated Annual Average Cost Per Signal Billed $ 1,165.42
Phone Charges Summary
Master Controller Phone Charges Along State Routes

Percentage of Phone SBC City Share Amount to be
Phone No. Location Charge Responsibility Phone Bill of Costs Reimbursed
State City as of 11/05 by IDOT
217-355-3661 Neil St. Master 42 58 $ 17.45 $ 10.12 $ 7.33
217-356-2914 Bradley Ave. Master 20 80 $ 17.45 $ 13.96 $ 3.49
217-378-4397 Staley/Springfield Master 75 25 $ 17.45 $ 4.36 $ 13.09
217-355-2204 Duncan/Springfield Master 50 50 $ 17.45 $ 8.73 $ 8.73
217-359-9951 Mattis Ave. Master 63 37 $ 18.80 $ 6.96 $ 11.84
Monthly Totals $ 88.60 $ 44.12 $ 44.48
Annual Estimate $ 1,063.20 $ 529.49 $ 533.71
* Phone Charge Responsibility calculated as the percentage of approaches under the jurisdiction of agency in the signal system,
as outlined in the Maintenance Agreement.
100% City Master Controller Phone

Charges
Ameritech
Phone No. Location Phone Bill
as of 11/05
217-355-9936 North Mattis (Bradley & Mattis) $ 18.80
Monthly Total $ 18.80
Annual Estimate $ 225.60
Net City Total Monthly Phone Charges (City Responsibility) $ 62.92

Net Estimated Annual Cost $ 755.09
TO: Illinois Department of Transportation
P.O.Box 610
Paris, IL 61944-0610
FROM: City of Champaign Municipality:Champaign County:Champaign
SUBJECT: SIGNAL MAINTENANCE/REPAIRS AT (INTERSECTION):
DATE:
5287,1(0$,17(1$1&( $&&,'(17'$0$*(
WHAT ACTION HAS BEEN TAKEN TO COLLECT FROM THIRD PARTY?
&2175$&7255(3$,56 081,&,3$/,7<0$,17(1$1&(
SUBMIT CONTRACTOR'S ITEMIZED BILL OR LIST INFORMATION BELOW.

DESCRIPTION OF WORK:
NAME CLASSIFICATION HOURS RATE COST

Electrical Technician 0.00 $37.72 $0.00
Electrical Technician 0.00 $37.72 $0.00
Electrical Technician/OT 0.00 $49.87 $0.00
Electrical Technician/OT 0.00 $49.87 $0.00
EQUIPMENT HOURS RATE COST

Pick Up Truck 0.00 $9.40 $0.00
Bucket Truck 0.00 $26.94 $0.00
0.00 $0.00 $0.00
MATERIALS $0.00
TOTAL COST $0.00
LESS THIRD PARTY CLAIMS $0.00
NET COST $0.00
PERCENTAGE STATE SHARE 100% PAY $0.00
For District Use - Approved:___________________ SIGNATURE:Steve Wegman

TITLE:City Engineer
TRAFFIC SIGNAL TIMING
LAST RE-
INTERSECTION COORDINATION GROUP
TIMING
FIRST/GREEN CAMPUS GRID 2005
DUNCAN WINDSOR FREE 2005
MATTIS/PARKLAND NORTH MATTIS 2005
MATTIS/PAULA NORTH MATTIS 2005
MATTIS/BLOOMINGTON NORTH MATTIS 2005
PROSPECT/BROADMOOR FREE 2004
HARRIS/BRADLEY FREE 2004
STALEY/KIRBY FREE 2004
DUNCAN/SPRINGFIELD FREE 2004
STALEY/SPRINGFIELD FREE 2004
MATTIS/OLYMPIAN FREE 2004
PROSPECT/OLYMPIAN FREE 2004
NEIL/TOWN CENTER NORTH NEIL 2004
MATTIS/JOHN MATTIS-SPRINGFIELD SYSTEM 2003
MATTIS/SPRINGER MATTIS-SPRINGFIELD SYSTEM 2003
COUNTRYFAIR/SPRINGFIELD MATTIS-SPRINGFIELD SYSTEM 2003
KENWOOD/SPRINGFIELD MATTIS-SPRINGFIELD SYSTEM 2003
MATTIS/GLEN PARK MATTIS-SPRINGFIELD SYSTEM 2003
MATTIS/SPRINGFIELD MATTIS-SPRINGFIELD SYSTEM 2003
MATTIS/UNIVERSITY MATTIS-SPRINGFIELD SYSTEM 2003
MATTIS/CHURCH MATTIS-SPRINGFIELD SYSTEM 2003
COUNTRYFAIR/UNIVERSITY MATTIS-SPRINGFIELD SYSTEM 2003
COUNTRY FAIR/CHURCH MATTIS-SPRINGFIELD SYSTEM 2003
ROUNDBARN/SPRINGFIELD MATTIS-SPRINGFIELD SYSTEM 2003
NEIL/WINDSOR NEIL-KIRBY SYSTEM 2003
MATTIS/BRADLEY NORTH MATTIS 2003
PROSPECT/TOWN CENTER NORTH PROSPECT SYSTEM 2003
PROSPECT/MEIJER NORTH PROSPECT SYSTEM 2003
PROSPECT/MARKETVIEW NORTH PROSPECT SYSTEM 2003
KMART/BLOOMINGTON NORTH PROSPECT SYSTEM 2003
PROSPECT/LOWES NORTH PROSPECT SYSTEM 2003
HAGAN/BLOOMINGTON NORTH PROSPECT SYSTEM 2003
PROSPECT/BAYTOWN NORTH PROSPECT SYSTEM 2003
PROSPECT/BLOOMINGTON NORTH PROSPECT SYSTEM 2003
PROSPECT/BRADLEY NORTH PROSPECT SYSTEM 2003
PROSPECT/I-74 N NORTH PROSPECT SYSTEM 2003
PROSPECT/I-74 S NORTH PROSPECT SYSTEM 2003
GALEN/WINDSOR WINDSOR ROAD SYSTEM 2003
MATTIS/WINDSOR WINDSOR ROAD SYSTEM 2003
PROSPECT/WINDSOR WINDSOR ROAD SYSTEM 2003
FIRST/WINDSOR WINDSOR ROAD SYSTEM 2003
SIXTH/JOHN CAMPUS GRID 2002
NEIL/MAIN DOWNTOWN GRID 2002
STATE/CHURCH DOWNTOWN GRID 2002
MARKET/WASHINGTON DOWNTOWN GRID 2002
NEIL/COLUMBIA DOWNTOWN GRID 2002
WALNUT/UNIVERSTIY DOWNTOWN GRID 2002
WALNUT/MAIN DOWNTOWN GRID 2002
RANDOLPH/CHURCH DOWNTOWN GRID 2002
WALNUT/WASHINGTON DOWNTOWN GRID 2002
NEIL/GREEN DOWNTOWN GRID 2002
NEIL/SPRINGFIELD DOWNTOWN GRID 2002
STATE/SPRINGFIELD DOWNTOWN GRID 2002
RANDOLPH/SPRINGFIELD DOWNTOWN GRID 2002
STATE/GREEN DOWNTOWN GRID 2002
RANDOLPH/GREEN DOWNTOWN GRID 2002
FIRST/KIRBY NEIL-KIRBY SYSTEM 2002
OAK/KIRBY NEIL-KIRBY SYSTEM 2002
FOURTH/KIRBY NEIL-KIRBY SYSTEM 2002
STATE/KIRBY NEIL-KIRBY SYSTEM 2002
NEIL/KNOLLWOOD NEIL-KIRBY SYSTEM 2002
NEIL/DEVONSHIRE NEIL-KIRBY SYSTEM 2002
NEIL/HESSEL NEIL-KIRBY SYSTEM 2002
NEIL/KIRBY NEIL-KIRBY SYSTEM 2002
NEIL/ST.MARY NEIL-KIRBY SYSTEM 2002
MATTIS/KIRBY FREE 2001
COUNTRY FAIR/BRADLEY NORTH MATTIS 2001
CLAYTON/BRADLEY NORTH MATTIS 2001
WRIGHT/SPRINGFIELD CAMPUS GRID 2000
WRIGHT/GREEN CAMPUS GRID 2000
SIXTH/GREEN CAMPUS GRID 2000
FOURTH/GREEN CAMPUS GRID 2000
FIRST/SPRINGFIELD CAMPUS GRID 2000
FOURTH/SPRINGFIELD CAMPUS GRID 2000
SIXTH/SPRINGFIELD CAMPUS GRID 2000
FOURTH/DANIEL CAMPUS GRID 2000
FIRST/UNIVERSITY DOWNTOWN GRID 2000
WRIGHT/UNIVERSITY DOWNTOWN GRID 2000
CHESTNUT/UNIVERSITY DOWNTOWN GRID 2000
STATE/UNIVERSITY DOWNTOWN GRID 2000
FOURTH/UNIVERSITY DOWNTOWN GRID 2000
NEIL/UNIVERSITY DOWNTOWN GRID 2000
RANDOLPH/UNIVERSITY DOWNTOWN GRID 2000
PROSPECT/GREEN SOUTH PROSPECT SYSTEM 2000
PROSPECT/SPRINGFIELD SOUTH PROSPECT SYSTEM 2000
PROSPECT/UNIVERSITY SOUTH PROSPECT SYSTEM 2000
PROSPECT/CHURCH SOUTH PROSPECT SYSTEM 2000
MARKET/MERCURY BRADLEY AVE 1999
STATE/BRADLEY BRADLEY AVE 1999
RANDOLPH/BRADLEY BRADLEY AVE 1999
MARKET/BRADLEY BRADLEY AVE 1999
NEIL/BRADLEY BRADLEY AVE 1999
DUNCAN/KIRBY FREE 1999
NEIL/CENTER NORTH NEIL 1999
NEIL/I-74 S NORTH NEIL 1999
NEIL/ANTHONY NORTH NEIL 1999
NEIL/I-74 N NORTH NEIL 1999
NEIL/KENYON NORTH NEIL 1999
NEIL/MARKETVIEW NORTH NEIL 1999
MORELAND/MARKETVIEW FREE
PROSPECT/KIRBY FREE
MAYFAIR/KIRBY FREE
MATTIS/ANTHONY FREE
MATTIS/INTERSTATE FREE
PROSPECT/WALMART NORTH PROSPECT SYSTEM
PROSPECT/INTERSTATE NORTH PROSPECT SYSTEM
Appendix D
Support Information for Master Plan
2007-2011 Electrical Technician Staff Hour Estimates
Work Activity 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Preventative Maintenance-Scheduled Work (from PM sheet) 1,186 1,186 1,186 1,186 1,186
Preventative Maintenance-Resulting Repair Work (estimate) 800 800 800 800 800
Response Maintenance-Accident Response (Avg. last 5 yrs.) 120 120 120 120 120
Response Maintenance-Lamp Changes (estimate) 20 20 20 20 20
Response Maintenance-Equipment Failures (estimate) 250 250 250 250 250
Upgrade - UPS Installations - 5 (Upgrade Sheet) 60 60 60 60 60
Upgrade - Illuminated Street Name Signs - 3 (Upgrade Sheet) 204 204 204 204 204
LED Installations - IDOT intersections (based on last LED effort) 480
Upgrade - Randolph & Green (FC) 86
Upgrade - State & Green (FC) 86
Upgrade - Mattis & Kirby (FC) 86
Upgrade - Mattis & Interstate (H, FC, D, P) 304
Upgrade - Mattis & Anthony (H, FC, D, P) 304
Upgrade - Kirby & Fourth (H, FC, D, P) 304
Upgrade - Kirby & First (H, FC, D, P) 304
Upgrade - Kirby & Oak (H, FC, D, P) 304
Interconnect - North Neil (partial) - 7 intersections (fiber) 105
Interconnect - North Mattis - 7 intersections (radio) 63 63
Interconnect - Kirby (4th-State) - 4 intersections (radio) 36 36
Available Staff Hours 3,505 3,505 3,505 3,505 3,505

Preventative Maintenance Total 1,986 1,986 1,986 1,986 1,986
Traffic Signal Upgrade Projects Total 1,107 935 631 604 604
Response Maintenance Total 390 390 390 390 390
Contingency 22 194 498 525 525
Total Staff Hours Assigned 3,505 3,505 3,505 3,505 3,505
Balance 0 0 0 0 0
Prepared by GEB/cbs - May 2006
2006 Preventative Maintenance Staff Hour Estimates
Duration # of Annual
Activity Description How Often # of Techs
(hours) intersections total
vacuum cabinet, change filter, dust shelves, test fan motor, oil padlock,
Cabinet Cleaning and Inspections inspect ground rods, tighten back panel screws, check seals, check heat Annually 1 1 100 100
lamp
Pedestrian Pushbutton Testing use each button at the intersection Annually 2 1 79 158
Video Detection Maintenance/Testing clean lenses, adjust zones, repair cables as needed Annually 2 2 21 84
Loop Detection Maintenance/Testing adjust amplifiers, seal loops, replace loops as needed Annually 2 2 58 232
Pre-emption Maintenance/Testing clean shield tubes, test with strobe, repair boards as needed Annually 2 1 78 156
UPS Battery Maintenance clean terminals, test charge and life, replace batteries as needed Every other year 1 1 32 32
MMU Testing remove MMU, place on tester, reinstall MMU and document testing Every other year 2 2 106 424
Annual Total 1,186
Prepared by GEB/cbs 5/2006
Traffic Signal Upgrade Project FY 2007-FY 2011
Funding Source 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Current Funding Current CIP funding level $ 136,510 $ 42,000 $ 42,000 $ 42,000 $ 42,000
Additional Upgrade Funding To be requested upon MP approval $ 48,400 $ 8,200 $ 8,200 $ 8,200
Additional UPS Funding To be requested upon MP approval $ 12,500 $ 12,500 $ 12,500 $ 12,500
Additional Interconnect Funding To be requested upon MP approval $ 21,000 $ 13,500
Revenues
Contingency* To be requested upon MP approval $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000
Total Revenues $ 136,510 $ 148,900 $ 87,700 $ 101,200 $ 87,700
Intersection (20-year mark) Upgrade Work 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Various State-City Intersections LED installations (grant funded) $ 70,551
Randolph & Green (2005) FC $ 9,200
State & Green (2005) FC $ 9,200
Mattis & Kirby (2006) FC $ 9,200
Mattis & Interstate (2007) H, FC, D, P $ 45,200
Mattis & Anthony (2008) H, FC, D, P $ 45,200
Upgrades
Kirby & Fourth* (2003) H, FC, D, P $ 50,200
Kirby & First* (2009) H, FC, D, P $ 50,200
Kirby & Oak* (2009) H, FC, D, P $ 50,200
Upgrade Total $ 98,151 $ 90,400 $ 50,200 $ 50,200 $ 50,200
Intersections 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
With Upgrade: Randolph & Green, State & Green, Mattis & Kirby $ 7,500
With Upgrade: Mattis & Anthony, Interstate $ 5,000
With Upgrade: Kirby & Fourth* $ 2,500
With Upgrade: Kirby & First* $ 2,500
With Upgrade: Kirby & Oak* $ 2,500
UPS Only: Mattis & Windsor, Neil & Green $ 5,000
UPS Only:Mattis & Bloomington, Bradley, Paula $ 7,500
UPS Only:Kirby & Neil, Prospect; Bradley & CFD, Clayton $ 10,000
UPS Locations
UPS Only: Windsor & Prospect, Galen; Prospect & Bloom., Town Center $ 10,000
UPS Only:Bradley & State, Randolph, Neil, Market $ 10,000
Alt. UPS Only: Springfield & Neil, Randolph, State, Prospect, Mattis
UPS Total $ 12,500 $ 12,500 $ 12,500 $ 12,500 $ 12,500
System Name Number of Intersections 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
North Neil Interconnect (partial) 7 intersections - Fiber $ 23,000
North Mattis Interconnect 7 intersections - Radio $ 21,000
Kirby (4th-State) Interconnect 4 intersections - Radio $ 13,500
Interconnect
Interconnect Total $ 23,000 $ 21,000 $ - $ 13,500 $ -
Current Funding in CIP $ 136,510 $ 42,000 $ 42,000 $ 42,000 $ 42,000
Additional Funds Required $ - $ 106,900 $ 45,700 $ 59,200 $ 45,700
Projected Funding $ 136,510 $ 148,900 $ 87,700 $ 101,200 $ 87,700
Total Estimated Expenditures $ 133,651 $ 123,900 $ 62,700 $ 76,200 $ 62,700
Contingency* $ 2,859 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000
Balance $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
*Contingeny funds are reserved to pay the City's share of traffic signal upgrades at the intersection of City streets with State routes. It is also reserved in the event of the failure of an
expensive piece of equipment that the Traffic & Lighting Operating budget could not absorb (most commonly to purchase a video detection system when detection at an intersection fails).
H = Signal Hardware Replacement RI = Radio Interconnect Installation

C = Controller Replacement FI = Fiber Interconnect Installation
FC = Full Cabinet Replacement P = Paint Signal Hardware Black
UPS = Uninterruptilble Power Supply Installation D = Video Detection Installation
2006 Traffic Signal Upgrade Estimates
Signal Hardware Replacement (4 mast arms, 4 signal Duration Total Staff
H= # of Techs
posts) (hours) Hours
Remove old mast arm signal heads and brackets 2 16 32
Reinstall mast arm signal heeads, brackets & wiring 2 24 48
Remove old post mounted signals 2 8 16
Build new post mounted signals 2 20 40
Install new post mounted signals and wiring 2 20 40
Est. Cost of Materials = $5,000 per leg Total Hrs. 176
Duration Total Staff

C= Controller Replacement # of Techs
(hours) Hours
Download program to new controller 1 2 2
Put intersection in flash 2 0.5 1
Install new controller and return to regular operation 2 1 2
Est. Cost of Materials = $2,500 per controller Total Hrs. 5

FC = Full Cabinet Replacement # of Techs
(hours) Hours
Set up traffic control at intersection 2 1 2
Mark wires 1 1 1
Remove controller 2 2 4
Install new cabinet (wiring, plugables, sealing, testing) 2 4 8
Break down traffic control at intersection 2 0.5 1
Est. Cost of Materials = $9,200 per cabinet Total Hrs. 18

UPS = Uninterruptible Power Supply Installation # of Techs
(hours) Hours
Engineer wiring changes 1 2 2
Add cabinet, controls, batteries 2 4 8
Program and test 2 1 2
Est. Cost of Materials = $2,500 per installation Total Hrs. 12

D= Video Detection Installation # of Techs
(hours) Hours
Install cables, power, and coax 2 16 32
Terminate coax and mount cameras 2 4 8
Install controls 2 2 4
Adjust cameras 2 4 8
Adjust zones 1 2 2
Est. Cost of Materials = 17,500 per installation Total Hrs. 54

RI = Radio Interconnect Installation (per intersection) # of Techs
(hours) Hours
Install antennae wire 2 2 4
Terminate wires and install equipment 2 2 4
Connect controller and modem 1 4 4
Program master and phone drop 1 4 4
Est. Cost of Materials = $2,500 per intersection plus $3,500 for master Total Hrs. 18
Fiber Interconnect Installation (between two Duration Total Staff
FI = # of Techs
intersections) (hours) Hours
Pull fiber in existing conduit 3 4 12
Install fiber termination enclosures 2 2 4
Complete fiber connections and terminations 1 6 6
Install controller modems 1 4 4
Est. Cost of Materials = $5,000 per intersection plus $3,500 per master Total Hrs. 30

P= Paint Signal Hardware Black # of Techs
(hours) Hours
Paint posts 2 8 16
Paint mast arms 2 16 32
Touch up 2 4 8
Est. Cost of Materials = $2,000 per intersection by contract Total Hrs. 56

ISN = Illuminated Street Name Sign Installation # of Techs
(hours) Hours
Vinyl Work 2 8 16
Install wiring for the signs in mast arms 2 16 32
Install signs 4 4 16
Install control wiring (tie to street lighting/photocell) 2 2 4
Est. Cost of Materials = $5,000 per intersection Total Hrs. 68
Prepared by GEB/CBS 5/2006
Traffic Signal Project Planning Sheet
Upgrade
Location Install Year Upgrade Year Status Comments/Notes Replacement Year
Walnut Street and Washington Street 1950 NA X in need of replacement 1990
Randolph Street and Church Street 1953 NA X in need of replacement 1993
Neil Street and University Avenue 1955 NA X in need of replacement 1995
Randolph Street and University Avenue 1955 NA X in need of replacement 1995
Walnut Street and Main Street 1955 NA X in need of replacement 1995
Green Street and First Street 1963 NA X in need of replacement 2003
Market Street and Washington Street 1963 NA X in need of replacement 2003
Neil Street and Columbia Avenue 1963 NA NA conditions make upgrade unfeasible 2003
State Street and Church Street 1963 NA X in need of replacement 2003
Replacement
State Street and University Avenue 1963 NA X in need of replacement 2003
University Avenue and Fourth Street 1963 NA X in need of replacement 2003
Wanut Street and University Avenue 1963 NA X in need of replacement 2003
40-year Old Signals in Need of

Fourth Street and Daniel Street 1968 NA NA in need of replacement 2008
Kirby Avenue and Mayfair Road 1971 1991 X-2000 2011
Springfield Avenue and Round Barn** 1973 1993 X-1995 2013
Neil Street and Marketview Drive 1980 2000 X-2006 2020
Kirby Avenue and Fourth Street* 1983 2003 S-2009 2023
Kirby Avenue and State Street 1983 2003 NA geometric deficiencies - in need of replacement 2023
Randolph Street and Green Street 1985 2005 S-2007 hardware replaced in 2005; still needs cabinet 2025
State Street and Green Street 1985 2005 S-2007 hardware replaced in 2005; still needs cabinet 2025
Mattis Avenue and Kirby Avenue 1986 2006 S-2007 hardware replaced in 2000; still needs cabinet 2026
Mattis Avenue and Interstate Drive 1987 2007 S-2008 2027
Mattis Avenue and Anthony Drive 1988 2008 S-2008 2028
Mattis Avenue and Paula Drive** 1988 2008 deferred as it is in better shape than the next 3 2028
2011 (14 intersections)

Kirby Avenue and First Street* 1989 2009 S-2010 2029
Kirby Avenue and Oak Street* 1989 2009 S-2011 2029
Signals Due for Upgrades 2007-

Neil Street and Anthony Drive 1991 2011 2031
Windsor Road and First Street 1993 2013 2033
Mattis Avenue and Springer Drive** 1993 2013 2033
Marketview Drive and Moreland Boulevard 1994 2014 2034
Prospect Avenue and Windsor Road 1994 2014 2034
Bloomington Road and Hagan Street 1995 2015 2035
Bloomington Road and Home Depot 1995 2015 2035
Prospect Avenue and Baytowne Drive 1995 2015 2035
Prospect Avenue and Lowe's 1995 2015 2035
Prospect Avenue and Marketview Drive 1995 2015 2035
Prospect Avenue and Meijer Entrance 1995 2015 2035

Prospect Avenue and Town Center Boulevard 1995 2015 2035
Bradley Avenue and Neil Street 1996 2016 2036

Prospect Avenue and Kirby Avenue 1996 2016 2036
Prepared By:CBS 1 6/21/2006

Bradley Avenue and Market Street 1997 2017 2037
Bradley Avenue and Randolph Street 1997 2017 2037
Bradley Avenue and State Street 1997 2017 2037
Mattis Avenue and Windsor Road 1997 2017 2037
Windsor Road and Galen Drive 1997 2017 2037
Neil Street and Knollwood Drive** 1997 2017 2037
University Avenue and Chestnut Street 1998 2018 2038
Duncan Road and Kirby Avenue 1999 2019 2039
Mattis Avenue and John Street 1999 2019 2039
Neil Street and Center Drive 1999 2019 2039
(14 intersections)
Market Street and Mercury Drive** 1999 2019 2039
Bradley Avenue and Clayton Blvd. 2001 2021 2041
Bradley Avenue and Country Fair Drive 2001 2021 2041
Signals Due for Upgrades2017-2022

University Avenue and First Street 2001 2021 2041
Green Street and Fourth Street 2002 2022 2042
Green Street and Sixth Street 2002 2022 2042
Green Street and Wright Street 2002 2022 2042
Prospect Avenue and Green Street 2002 2022 2042
Sixth Street and John Street 2002 2022 2042
Fire Station Signal - Bradley/Harris 2003 2023 2043
Fire Station Signal - Prospect/Broadmoor 2003 2023 2043
Prospect Avenue and Olympian Drive 2003 2023 2043
Mattis Avenue and Olympian Drive 2004 2024 2044
Neil Street and Main Street 2004 2024 2044
Neil Street and Town Center Boulevard 2004 2024 2044
Prospect Avenue and Interstate Drive 2004 2024 2044
(15 intersections to date)

Prospect Avenue and Meijer Drive/Walmart 2004 2024 2044
Staley Road and Kirby Avenue 2004 2024 2044

Duncan Road and Windsor Road 2005 2025 2045

2006 Traffic Signal Upgrade Estimates
Signal Hardware Replacement (4 mast arms, 4 signal Duration Total Staff
H= # of Techs
posts) (hours) Hours
Remove old mast arm signal heads and brackets 2 16 32
Reinstall mast arm signal heeads, brackets & wiring 2 24 48
Remove old post mounted signals 2 8 16
Build new post mounted signals 2 20 40
Install new post mounted signals and wiring 2 20 40
Est. Cost of Materials = $5,000 per leg Total Hrs. 176

C= Controller Replacement # of Techs
(hours) Hours
Put intersection in flash 2 0.5 1
Install new controller and return to regular operation 2 1 2
Est. Cost of Materials = $2,500 per controller Total Hrs. 5

FC = Full Cabinet Replacement # of Techs
(hours) Hours
Set up traffic control at intersection 2 1 2
Mark wires 1 1 1
Remove controller 2 2 4
Install new cabinet (wiring, plugables, sealing, testing) 2 4 8
Break down traffic control at intersection 2 0.5 1
Est. Cost of Materials = $9,200 per cabinet Total Hrs. 18

UPS = Uninterruptible Power Supply Installation # of Techs
(hours) Hours
Engineer wiring changes 1 2 2
Add cabinet, controls, batteries 2 4 8
Est. Cost of Materials = $2,500 per installation Total Hrs. 12

D= Video Detection Installation # of Techs
(hours) Hours
Install cables, power, and coax 2 16 32
Terminate coax and mount cameras 2 4 8
Install controls 2 2 4
Adjust cameras 2 4 8
Adjust zones 1 2 2
Est. Cost of Materials = 17,500 per installation Total Hrs. 54

RI = Radio Interconnect Installation (per intersection) # of Techs
(hours) Hours
Install antennae wire 2 2 4
Terminate wires and install equipment 2 2 4
Connect controller and modem 1 4 4
Program master and phone drop 1 4 4
Est. Cost of Materials = $2,500 per intersection plus $3,500 for master Total Hrs. 18
Fiber Interconnect Installation (between two Duration Total Staff
FI = # of Techs
intersections) (hours) Hours
Pull fiber in existing conduit 3 4 12
Install fiber termination enclosures 2 2 4
Complete fiber connections and terminations 1 6 6
Install controller modems 1 4 4
Est. Cost of Materials = $5,000 per intersection plus $3,500 per master Total Hrs. 30

P= Paint Signal Hardware Black # of Techs
(hours) Hours
Paint posts 2 8 16
Paint mast arms 2 16 32
Touch up 2 4 8
Est. Cost of Materials = $2,000 per intersection by contract Total Hrs. 56

ISN = Illuminated Street Name Sign Installation # of Techs
(hours) Hours
Vinyl Work 2 8 16
Install wiring for the signs in mast arms 2 16 32
Install signs 4 4 16
Install control wiring (tie to street lighting/photocell) 2 2 4
Est. Cost of Materials = $5,000 per intersection Total Hrs. 68
Prepared by GEB/CBS 5/2006
Traffic Signal Project Planning Sheet
Upgrade
Location Install Year Upgrade Year Status Comments/Notes Replacement Year
Walnut Street and Washington Street 1950 NA X in need of replacement 1990
Randolph Street and Church Street 1953 NA X in need of replacement 1993
Neil Street and University Avenue 1955 NA X in need of replacement 1995
Randolph Street and University Avenue 1955 NA X in need of replacement 1995
Walnut Street and Main Street 1955 NA X in need of replacement 1995
Green Street and First Street 1963 NA X in need of replacement 2003
Market Street and Washington Street 1963 NA X in need of replacement 2003
Neil Street and Columbia Avenue 1963 NA NA conditions make upgrade unfeasible 2003
State Street and Church Street 1963 NA X in need of replacement 2003
Replacement
State Street and University Avenue 1963 NA X in need of replacement 2003
University Avenue and Fourth Street 1963 NA X in need of replacement 2003
Wanut Street and University Avenue 1963 NA X in need of replacement 2003
40-year Old Signals in Need of

Fourth Street and Daniel Street 1968 NA NA in need of replacement 2008
Kirby Avenue and Mayfair Road 1971 1991 X-2000 2011
Springfield Avenue and Round Barn** 1973 1993 X-1995 2013
Neil Street and Marketview Drive 1980 2000 X-2006 2020
Kirby Avenue and Fourth Street* 1983 2003 S-2009 2023
Kirby Avenue and State Street 1983 2003 NA geometric deficiencies - in need of replacement 2023
Randolph Street and Green Street 1985 2005 S-2007 hardware replaced in 2005; still needs cabinet 2025
State Street and Green Street 1985 2005 S-2007 hardware replaced in 2005; still needs cabinet 2025
Mattis Avenue and Kirby Avenue 1986 2006 S-2007 hardware replaced in 2000; still needs cabinet 2026
Mattis Avenue and Interstate Drive 1987 2007 S-2008 2027
Mattis Avenue and Anthony Drive 1988 2008 S-2008 2028
Mattis Avenue and Paula Drive** 1988 2008 deferred as it is in better shape than the next 3 2028

Kirby Avenue and First Street* 1989 2009 S-2010 2029
Kirby Avenue and Oak Street* 1989 2009 S-2011 2029

Neil Street and Anthony Drive 1991 2011 2031
Windsor Road and First Street 1993 2013 2033
Mattis Avenue and Springer Drive** 1993 2013 2033
Marketview Drive and Moreland Boulevard 1994 2014 2034
Prospect Avenue and Windsor Road 1994 2014 2034
Bloomington Road and Hagan Street 1995 2015 2035
Bloomington Road and Home Depot 1995 2015 2035
Prospect Avenue and Baytowne Drive 1995 2015 2035
Prospect Avenue and Lowe's 1995 2015 2035
Prospect Avenue and Marketview Drive 1995 2015 2035
Prospect Avenue and Meijer Entrance 1995 2015 2035

Prospect Avenue and Town Center Boulevard 1995 2015 2035
Bradley Avenue and Neil Street 1996 2016 2036

Prospect Avenue and Kirby Avenue 1996 2016 2036

Bradley Avenue and Market Street 1997 2017 2037
Bradley Avenue and Randolph Street 1997 2017 2037
Bradley Avenue and State Street 1997 2017 2037
Mattis Avenue and Windsor Road 1997 2017 2037
Windsor Road and Galen Drive 1997 2017 2037
Neil Street and Knollwood Drive** 1997 2017 2037
University Avenue and Chestnut Street 1998 2018 2038
Duncan Road and Kirby Avenue 1999 2019 2039
Mattis Avenue and John Street 1999 2019 2039
Neil Street and Center Drive 1999 2019 2039
(14 intersections)
Market Street and Mercury Drive** 1999 2019 2039
Bradley Avenue and Clayton Blvd. 2001 2021 2041
Bradley Avenue and Country Fair Drive 2001 2021 2041

University Avenue and First Street 2001 2021 2041
Green Street and Fourth Street 2002 2022 2042
Green Street and Sixth Street 2002 2022 2042
Green Street and Wright Street 2002 2022 2042
Prospect Avenue and Green Street 2002 2022 2042
Sixth Street and John Street 2002 2022 2042
Fire Station Signal - Bradley/Harris 2003 2023 2043
Fire Station Signal - Prospect/Broadmoor 2003 2023 2043
Prospect Avenue and Olympian Drive 2003 2023 2043
Mattis Avenue and Olympian Drive 2004 2024 2044
Neil Street and Main Street 2004 2024 2044
Neil Street and Town Center Boulevard 2004 2024 2044
Prospect Avenue and Interstate Drive 2004 2024 2044
(15 intersections to date)

Prospect Avenue and Meijer Drive/Walmart 2004 2024 2044
Staley Road and Kirby Avenue 2004 2024 2044

Duncan Road and Windsor Road 2005 2025 2045

UPS Installation Planning Sheet
Upgrade UPS Install Battery

Location Status Year Replacement
IL 10 (Springfield) & Staley Rd. 2002 2010
Duncan Road and Windsor Road 2004 2012
IL 10 (Springfield Ave.) & Duncan Rd 2004 2012
Neil Street and Town Center Boulevard 2004 2012
Prospect Avenue and Interstate Drive 2004 2012
Prospect Avenue and Marketview Drive 2004 2012
Prospect Avenue and Meijer Drive/Walmart 2004 2012
Staley Road and Kirby Avenue 2004 2012
Neil Street and Marketview Drive X-2006 2006 2014
US 45 (Neil St.) & Windsor Rd 2006 2014
Mattis Avenue and Kirby Avenue S-2007 2007 2015
Mattis Avenue and Windsor Road 2007 2015
Randolph Street and Green Street S-2007 2007 2015
State Street and Green Street S-2007 2007 2015
US 45 (Neil St.) & Green St. 2007 2015
Mattis Ave. & Bradley Ave. 2008 2016
Mattis Ave. & US 150 (Bloomington Rd.) 2008 2016
Mattis Avenue and Paula Drive** 2008 2016
Mattis Avenue and Anthony Drive S-2008 2008 2016
Mattis Avenue and Interstate Drive S-2008 2008 2016
Bradley Avenue and Clayton Blvd. 2009 2017
Bradley Avenue and Country Fair Drive 2009 2017
Prospect Avenue and Kirby Avenue 2009 2017
US 45 (Neil St.) & Kirby Ave. 2009 2017
Kirby Avenue and Fourth Street* S-2009 2009 2017
Prospect Avenue and Windsor Road 2010 2018
Windsor Road and Galen Drive 2010 2018
Prospect Avenue and Town Center Boulevard 2010 2018
US 150 (Prospect Ave.) & Bloomington Rd 2010 2018
Kirby Avenue and First Street* S-2010 2010 2018
Bradley Avenue and Market Street 2011 2019
Bradley Avenue and Neil Street 2011 2019
Bradley Avenue and Randolph Street 2011 2019
Bradley Avenue and State Street 2011 2019
Kirby Avenue and Oak Street* S-2011 2011 2019
US 150 (Prospect Ave.) & IL 10 (Springfield Ave.) ALT
US 150 (Springfield Ave.) & Randolph ALT
US 150 (Springfield Ave.) & State St. ALT
US 150 (Springfield Ave.) & US 45 (Neil St.) ALT
Mattis Ave. & IL 10 (Springfield Ave.) ALT

Traffic Signal Master Plan

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Traffic Signal Master Plan

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Traffic Signal Master Plan

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS

Executive Summary ................................................................................................. iii

1.0 PURPOSE ................................................................................................................1

2.0 CITY TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYSTEM.....................................................................1

3.0 BACKGROUND ......................................................................................................2

4.0 CURRENT TRAFFIC SIGNAL SERVICE ACTIVITIES ...............................10

City of Champaign Traffic Signal Master Plan June 2006

4.3.2 Design Modification ......................................................................23

5.0 TRAFFIC SIGNAL PROGRAM DEFICIENCIES ...........................................30

6.0 TRAFFIC SIGNAL MASTER PLAN .................................................................32

APPENDIX A - TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYSTEM LOCATION MAPS

City of Champaign Traffic Signal Master Plan June 2006

• There are 110 traffic signals within the City.

City of Champaign Traffic Signal Master Plan June 2006

• Examine the current conditions, maintenance operations, and planned improvements

2.0 CITY TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYSTEM

Traffic signals are also flexible

2.2 City Traffic Signal System Defined.

City of Champaign Traffic Signal Master Plan June 2006

3.1 Quantity of Existing Traffic Signals.

3.1.1 City-owned Traffic Signals.

The location of City-owned traffic signals is illustrated in Exhibit 1 of Appendix A.

3.1.2 Traffic Signals along State Routes.

City of Champaign Traffic Signal Master Plan June 2006

3.1.3 Traffic Signals Owned by the University of Illinois

The location of University-owned traffic signals is illustrated in Exhibit 1 of Appendix A.

There are currently 8 groups of

A map illustrating the 8 signal

City of Champaign Traffic Signal Master Plan June 2006

3.2 Traffic Signal Design and Construction Standards.

3.2.1 Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD)

3.2.2 IDOT Bureau of Design and Environment Manual (BDE)

3.2.3 IDOT Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction

3.2.4 City of Champaign Design Standards

Table 3-1 City of Champaign Design Standards

City of Champaign Traffic Signal Master Plan June 2006

3.3 Condition of Existing Traffic Signals.

Table 3-2 Age Distribution of

City of Champaign Traffic Signal Master Plan June 2006

3.3.1 Condition Ratings for City-owned Signals.

Table 3-3 Traffic Signal Ratings Defined

City of Champaign Traffic Signal Master Plan June 2006

The results are summarized below.

Table 3-4 Summary of Signal Ratings

• There are 15 traffic signals that need to be replaced. Of

3.3.2 Condition of IDOT Signals.

City of Champaign Traffic Signal Master Plan June 2006

3.4 Prior Council Actions.

Table 3-5 Traffic Signal Projects Completed –

City of Champaign Traffic Signal Master Plan June 2006

3.4.4 Other Traffic Signal Installations – Various.

Table 3-6 Traffic Signal Installations –

3.4.5 Traffic Signal Maintenance Agreement with IDOT

City of Champaign Traffic Signal Master Plan June 2006

The maintenance agreement is included in Appendix C.

4.0 CURRENT TRAFFIC SIGNAL SERVICE ACTIVITIES

4.1 Personnel & Budget

This translates to roughly one technician for every 53 traffic signals

Currently work activities are tracked through the Traffic and

City of Champaign Traffic Signal Master Plan June 2006

Traffic and Lighting Supervisor

Traffic and Lighting Technician

City of Champaign Traffic Signal Master Plan June 2006