My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Council - 10/10/2006
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Council
>
2006
>
Agenda - Council - 10/10/2006
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/19/2025 3:51:39 PM
Creation date
10/6/2006 2:38:50 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Council
Document Date
10/10/2006
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.
/
201
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
Background: <br />REVIEW POLICY FOR CONSIDERING <br />TRAFFIC CONTROL MODIFICATION REQUESTS <br />By: Steven Jankowski, City Engineer <br />CASE #3 <br />The City receives a number of requests for traffic control modifications each year. In <br />reviewing the agendas for the Public Works Committee where such requests are initially <br />referred, there have been nine such cases that have been considered since January of <br />2005. A summary of these cases are summarized below: <br />1. Consider replacing Yield signs with Stop signs at Marmoset & 1 54` <br />2. Consider placing all way Stop signs at Radium & 144 Lane <br />3. Consider changing street sign name at Old County Road 5 <br />4. Consider placing crosswalk at 167 Avenue & Quicksilver Street <br />5. Consider raising the speed limit on Riverdale Drive <br />6. Consider realigning roadway at 169 Avenue & Neon Street <br />7. Consider traffic control measures in Regency Pond neighborhood in response to <br />CR 56 construction <br />Consider traffic control measures in Elmcrest Park neighborhood <br />Consider establishing a bike lane on Waco Street <br />Some of these issues have been initiated by individual Council members in response to <br />significant neighborhood concerns and others by a formal citizen petition. However, the <br />current policy for bringing an issue before the Committee requires only a written request <br />or an email from a single individual. A number of the above cases have been initiated in <br />this manner. As the City continues to grow in population the number of such requests can <br />be anticipated to increase in number. Researching such issues involves a considerable <br />amount of time and resources on the part of City staff associated with taking traffic <br />counts, reviewing accident histories, and preparing materials for presentation to the <br />Committee. <br />Staff is requesting input on the part of the Committee for modifying the current policy by <br />establishing appropriate criteria for submitting a traffic modification request to the <br />Committee for review. Such criteria might consist of a petition signed by a certain <br />number or percentage of residents within a specified distance of the traffic modification <br />request. <br />Recommendation: <br />Staff recommends that the policy for processing citizen traffic modification requests <br />before to Public Works Committee be modified by requiring a written petition for the <br />desired change signed by a specified number of property owners or residents residing <br />within a specified distance from the requested modification. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.