My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Council - 02/08/2005
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Council
>
2005
>
Agenda - Council - 02/08/2005
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/21/2025 1:40:16 PM
Creation date
2/7/2005 7:58:24 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Council
Document Date
02/08/2005
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
436
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
CHARTERED <br /> <br /> 470 Pil'bbur~ Center <br />200 South Sixth Sriee~ <br />"~inneapo!j~ MN' 5~5402 <br /> (6 t 2~} 337-9300 iel~phone ' <br /> <br /> ~-m~l: a~ kennadv-~ra~en.com <br /> <br />CHARI.F-~; [4. L£FEYERE <br /> <br />Direct Di~t (6.12) 337-9215 <br /> <br />August 1, 1997 <br /> <br />Mr. Matt Fulton <br />City Manager <br />City of New Brighton <br />803 5th Avenue NW <br />New Brighton MN 55112-2792 <br /> <br />RE: Liability for ?lacemenr of Stop Signs <br />Dear Matt: <br /> <br />Some time ago the council was consideOng the installation of a stop stgn at an intersecnoa where <br />the "warrants" for a: stop sign.did:not exist. The City Council requested that [ review the law <br />to determine whether placement of a Stop sign under these circumstances exposes the City tO <br />potential liability. A memorandum on the subject is attached. <br /> <br />To summarize the memorandum, if the City were sued for placing a stop sign at an intersection <br />where warrants for a stop sign did: not exist, 'the first line of defense would be to claim that the <br />City Council's decision was one which qual.ified for a defense of immunity,. In recent years, the <br />courts have expanded the applicability of the doctrine Of immunity so that more governmental <br /> ~"~' wihStn the docs'inc. ~:the City were ....... :,~ ...... <br />basis, there would be no liability. However,_ the law relating to immunity is not well settled, and <br />it is entirely possible that the immUnitY defense would not prevail. <br /> <br />If the City were not successful in defending such a claim on this basis, the question would be <br />whether the City, was negligent in.Ptaclng the sign. It is highly likely that the warrants of the <br />lMinnesota Manual would be: introduced as' evidence that the City had not exercised due care in <br />traffic management. AdditionallY, ~ have heard several engineers note that there are studies <br />which suggest that if the public perceives that a stop sign is p!aced in a location where <br />circumstances do not justify it, motor/sm will be inctined to disobey the sign, or they will be <br />more likely to increase their sPeed,after stopping at the sign to-make up for [ost time. Assuming <br />this is an accurate description of!reputable:traffic studies which are known and respecled by <br />traffic engineers, there may be additional evidence that the placement Of such signs creates an <br />unsafe condition. <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.