Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council debate over speed humps, STP matches and CIP priorities exposes demand for traffic calming
Summary
Council members pressed staff on using EDST or CIP money for speed humps and traffic calming. Staff said speed humps were not currently budgeted in CIP but could be added to STP construction projects or funded by EDST; traffic-commission studies and engineering assessments remain required before installation.
Ferguson council members and staff spent substantial time June 3 debating whether to fund neighborhood speed humps and other traffic-calming measures in the capital-improvement plan.
Council members — led in remarks by Councilwoman Noah and Councilman Kasoff — argued residents repeatedly request speed humps and that speed humps produce immediate, self-enforcing speed reductions without needing persistent police presence. The council’s traffic-commission liaison said the commission would like funding to install a larger batch of speed humps this year and that the commission can provide a prioritized list of candidate locations.
Staff response: City staff told the council that speed humps were not currently included in the CIP for this budget year. Staff said the two primary paths to pay for traffic calming are: (1) include the work as a traffic-calming/traffic-engineering item in STP construction contracts (for streets that are being rebuilt under STP) or (2) fund speed-hump purchases and installations through EDST if council deems them an economic-development or downtown-safety priority. Staff cautioned some locations are not eligible for humps (for example, steep curves) and that state/local engineering studies and traffic-commission recommendations are required before installation.
Costs and constraints: Council members discussed a per-hump installed cost estimate in the low thousands (estimates referenced generally during the meeting) and noted the city’s limited CIP dollars. Staff said if the city can arrange for STP construction to include traffic-calming features those items can be designed into the project’s construction phase, but otherwise a budget amendment or EDST allocation would be needed to make targeted installations in neighborhoods.
Next steps: The council asked traffic commission staff and public works to compile a prioritized list, provide engineering feasibility for candidate locations, and return with estimated costs and funding sources. Council members asked staff to examine whether EDST could be used for neighborhood calming projects that aren't part of an STP construction contract.
Ending: The debate highlighted a recurring tension between limited capital dollars and visible neighborhood safety projects. Council members urged staff to pursue feasible, low-cost options and to return with a clearer plan and cost estimate.
