Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Traffic Calming topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission seeks options after county says it controls traffic devices; wants permanent flashing signage and price for speed‑calming devices
Summary
After residents described crashes at neighborhood intersections, commissioners asked staff to obtain cost estimates for street calming and to pursue flashing slowdown signs after county officials said they control traffic devices.
Residents and commissioners pressed the City of Opa-locka for faster action on traffic calming for several residential corridors, including Northwest 20th Seventh Avenue and Shahrazad Boulevard, after repeated crashes and a recent hit‑and‑run.
Multiple speakers at the May 28 meeting described crashes on Jan Avenue and other neighborhood streets. Commissioner Santiago urged the city to push the county and said a four‑way stop or speed bumps were needed at a hazardous intersection.
City staff and legal counsel told the commission Miami‑Dade County asserts exclusive jurisdiction over traffic control devices. City Attorney (recorded as "Madam attorney") said the county code — cited as Miami‑Dade County code section 2‑96 — states the county "has exclusive jurisdiction over all traffic control devices on roadways in both the incorporated and unincorporated areas of the county." The attorney added the county may conditionally authorize municipalities to perform certain traffic engineering functions by written agreement.
Commissioners and staff discussed what the city can install without county approval. Vice Mayor Audrey Kelly noted the city can install flashing or speed‑feedback signage but cannot unilaterally add stop signs or other traffic control devices that fall under county jurisdiction. "We have the authority to install signage that flashing or otherwise that, slows the traffic," the attorney confirmed.
Mayor Taylor asked staff to obtain pricing for installing street calming devices on the affected street and to place a resolution on a future agenda to seek authorization or to pursue the matter politically if the county objects. Vice Mayor Kelly and others urged the manager to pursue permanent flashing slowdown signage as an interim solution that the city can implement with less risk of county removal.
The commission agreed to defer potential permanent installations until staff returns with cost estimates and a recommended path, while acknowledging the county could require removal of devices the county controls. The manager also said the county had been asked to complete a traffic study and the city was awaiting that study.
Discussion points included enforcement and whether the city could enter a written agreement with the county to assume responsibility for certain devices; the city attorney said such agreements are a possible avenue to pursue.
No ordinance or device was installed at the meeting; commissioners requested staff bring pricing and a proposed resolution for consideration at a future meeting.
