Laserfiche WebLink
CASE <br /> <br />DISCUSSION <br /> <br />OF POLICY FOR PROCESSING TRAFFIC CALMING <br />REQUESTS <br />By: Steven Jankowski, City Engineer <br /> <br />Background: <br /> <br />For the past several months, the Road and Bridge Committee has been working on developing a <br />written policy for dealing with various traffic calming requests. At the October 8, 1996 meeting, a <br />draft policy was presented and discussed. Revisions to that draft policy based on comments at that <br />meeting have been made and are attached. The modifications include revisions to the procedure <br />portion of the policy. It was also suggested that a synopsis of the warrants for slope and yield <br />signs be included directly within the policy, rather than be incorporated by reference to the 1991 <br />Manual on Uniform Traffic Devices for Streets and Highways. This has also been incorporated <br />into this revision. The Committee should review these changes. <br /> <br />A number of issues still remain to be discussed by the Committee. These remaining issues include <br />the following: <br /> <br />Issue <br />Watch for Children Signs <br />Deaf Child Area Signs <br />Street Closure <br />Speed Humps <br /> <br />Reference Material <br />NCITE page 5-1 <br />City of Blaine Policy <br />NCITE Chapter 20 <br />NCITE Chapter 24 <br /> <br />I have not presented any draft policies relative to speed humps, street closures, chokers (curb <br />narrowing), and other similar geometric alterations of the roadway. All of these measures are <br />similar in that they are an attempt to reduce speed or direct traffic. They all have substantial capital <br />cost associated with 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 which should be addressed include: <br /> <br />Should other speed reduction methods be required prior to the installation of <br />modifications? <br />Should a traffic engineering study be required as a prerequisite for some modifcafions? <br />Should temporary simulated installation be required prior to permanent installation7 <br />Should the costs of the traffic calming measures be assessed? <br /> <br />geometric <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 />Police Chief <br />City Attorney <br /> <br />City Administrator <br />Public Works Supervisor <br /> <br />RB: 1/14/97 <br />/shared/councilc/trafcalm.doc <br /> <br /> <br />