Laserfiche WebLink
Background: <br /> <br />DISCUSSION OF POLICY FOR PROCESSING <br />TRAFFIC CALMING REQUESTS <br /> By: Steve Jankowski, City Engineer <br /> <br /> ! <br /> I <br /> I <br /> i <br />II <br /> <br />Ii <br /> <br />! <br />i <br /> <br />For the past several months, the Road and Bridge Committee has been working on developing a <br />written policy fo~ dealing with various traffic calming requests. I am once again attaching a listing <br />of the most frequently requested traffic modifications along with reference material providing <br />background on ~eir detail and effectiveness. <br /> <br />Is~sue <br />Watch for Children Sign <br />Yield Signs <br /> <br />Lower Speed Limits <br /> <br />All-Way Stop p. 505 <br /> <br />Street Closure <br />Speed Humps <br />StOp Sign p. 505 <br /> <br />Daaf Child Area Signs <br /> <br />Reference <br />NCITE page 5-1 <br />NCITE chapter 11 <br />MI~CD page 2B-4 <br />NCITE chapter 13 <br />MN Statutes 169.14 <br />NCITE chapter 15 <br />MUTCD page 2B-3 <br />NCITE chapter 20 <br />NCITE chapter 24 <br />MUTCD page 2B-2 <br />Van Wormer Article <br />City of Blaine Policy <br /> <br />I am also attachin~g a draft policy which provides justification supporting various policies which <br />could be adopted~ With some issues I've included alternative policies or decision options. The <br />draft policy addr~ses stop signs, yield signs, all-way stops, speed limits and postings, Watch for <br />Children signs, aa~d Deaf Child Area signs. <br /> <br />I have not presented any draft policies relative to speed humps, street closures, chokers (curb <br />narrowing) and olher similar geometric alterations of the roadway. All of these measures are <br />similar in that the~ are an attempt to reduce speed or direct traffic. They all have substantial capital <br />cost associated wi~h them. An installation could be expected to be in excess of $5,000. I believe <br />additional discussion is warranted before a policy is developed for these traffic calming measures. <br />Several issues wh~h should be addressed include: <br /> <br />! <br />I <br /> <br />1) <br /> <br />2) <br /> <br />3) <br /> <br />Should other speed reduction methods be required prior to the installation of geometric <br />modifications? <br /> <br />Should a traffic engineering study be required as a prerequiSite for some modifications? <br />Should temporary simulated installation be required prior to permanent installation? <br /> <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />4) Should the costs of the traffic calming measures be assessed? <br /> <br />Committee Action: <br /> <br />Review and modify draft policy. Provide direction on the questions raised regarding the policy for <br />geometric modifications. <br /> <br />Reviewed by: <br />City Engineer <br />City Administrator <br />Police Chief <br />Public Works Supervisor <br />City Attorney <br />R&B: 10/08/96 <br /> <br />/jmt <br /> <br /> <br />