Laserfiche WebLink
I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />i <br /> <br />Councilmember Connolly explained that the speed humps were installed with the consensus of <br />the neighborhood and now they are being asked if the speed humps should remain and, if so, this <br />is the situation. <br /> <br />Councilmember Anderson suggested a neighborhood meeting to inform the residents of what has <br />happened. She stated that she does not believe speed humps are good traffic control and she <br />would not have voted to install one. She stated that she does not support fighting taking them <br />out because she does not believe they should have been installed in the first place. <br />Councilmember Anderson stated that residents should have been told speed humps were not <br />legal to install on a MSA street. <br /> <br />Councilmember Connolly stated the suggestion is to listen to residents and receive their input. <br />She stated that it appears all agree the City should meet with the neighborhood. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendriksen stated that there was some basis upon which the City could <br />challenge this issue. <br /> <br />City Engineer Jankowski explained the t~bhnical difference between a speed bump and a speed <br />hump which are recognized by traffic engineers as a traffic control measure. He explained that at <br />the time they were installed, there were guidelines which were followed. Since that time, <br />additional rules have been promulgated on the types of streets they should be used on, based on <br />traffic counts. City Engineer Jankowski stated that Dysprosium Street is probably one of the <br />streets that fits criteria that they should not be used on but this is a "gray" area. He clarified that <br />there is no written regulation against speed humps on MSA roadways but their design is usually <br />to move traffic quickly which speed humps discourage. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendriksen stated it is not clear whether they should or should not be there but <br />residents attended often and in great numbers saying they wanted the speed humps. It was the <br />Public Works Committee feeling they should "go to bat" for them, make them aware that in the <br />future there may be a choice and that will be to either keep them at some cost or to allow them to <br />go away. He explained the Public Works Committee felt it was not appropriate to demand for <br />everyone to pay for them. <br /> <br />A1 Pierson, 14821 Bowers Drive, Ramsey, stated he served on the Council when Dysprosium <br />Street was installed and, at that time, residents gave a lot of static due to traffic coming through <br />from Thurston Avenue so the speed humps were installed after that point. He asked why money <br />would have to be paid back since the speed humps were paid from General Fund money. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendriksen stated when Dysprosium Street was built, it was to reroute Highway <br />#47 and it was built wider and heavier in anticipation of that occurring. He stated the assumption <br />is if the funds need to be paid back because the residents want to keep the speed humps, they <br />should be responsible for the cost. <br /> <br />City Council/January 25, 2000 <br /> Page 26 of 34 <br /> <br /> <br />