My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Public Works Committee - 04/21/2009
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Public Works Committee
>
2000 - 2009
>
2009
>
Agenda - Public Works Committee - 04/21/2009
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/14/2025 9:33:06 AM
Creation date
4/17/2009 7:33:05 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Public Works Committee
Document Date
04/21/2009
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
90
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br /> <br /> <br />50 <br /> <br />In order to test the-Task Force assumption andto determine the, proper speed, the <br />Task Force suggested, and Iv1n!DOT conducted, a number of speed studies 011 <br />representative Rural Residential District roadways. The individual roadway studies <br />exhibited a broad range of average and 85th percentile speeds. These data were <br />further exam1neciwith the understanding that for the sake of uniformity the intent was <br />toestabUsha single statutory speed for the entire categolj' ofruralresidential roads. <br />Also; a major consideration was that the, selected' ~peed be appro_priate and safe in the <br />densest ofthe rural residential areas. Bl;sed on these analyses, the recomniended- <br />statutory speed limit for all rural residential roadways should be 35 !v1PH. Aswith <br />_ other roadwaytypes, if that statutory speed does not appear reasonable for a specific <br />,condition, the~road authority may request a speed study. . <br /> <br />If the 35 Iv1PHRural Residential speed limit were to be adopted., it was the view of <br />the Task Force that it would need to be signed. Since it is a different value than the <br />Urban District speed limit, it could not be covered in a blanket statement addressing <br />all statutory 30 MPH zones. Similarly, it was thought that it would not be practical to <br />expect motorists to distinguish a Rural Residential zone, and to know that the <br />statutory speed limit is 35, if signing of the 35 MPH area were not provided. <br /> <br />An option was considered that required the road authQrity to adopt the 35 MPH zone <br />for the Rural Residential District (and post appropriate signing). In this option, a <br />Rural ResidentialPistrict road would have to be adopted by a formal process, so only <br />roads that really needed the speed control could be selected. If not selected, a road <br />would remain at a st'B.tutory 55 MPH limit or could be addressed through a speed <br />. zoning study request Task Force members felt strOllg1ythat this option deviated <br />,from the core principle of uniformity and consistency statewide. Placing an optional <br />decision in the authority of the local governments suggests that interpretation and <br />application of the Rural Residential District could vary from'city to city. This option <br />did not advance'beyond initial discussions within the Task Force. <br /> <br />4.2.2 Recommended Statute Text <br /> <br />The Task Force recommends adding provision Subd. 2(a)(8) to the speed limit <br />statute: <br /> <br />(8)' 3 5 miles per hour in a Rural Residential District and speed limit signs shall be <br />erected upon entering the Rural Residential District. <br /> <br />Page 23 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.