Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Pedestrian Safety Crosswalks topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Improvement and Services Committee refers Bay Settlement crosswalk beacon request back to staff for study
Summary
After neighborhood complaints about drivers not yielding at a four-lane stretch of Bay Settlement Road, the committee voted to refer a request for rapid‑flashing beacons back to staff for a traffic/pedestrian study before deciding on installation.
The Improvement and Services Committee of the City of Green Bay on Oct. 1 voted to refer a neighborhood request for rapid‑flashing beacons at crosswalks on Bay Settlement Road back to staff for study and return to the committee.
The request sought beacons at two crossings: Bay Highlands Drive at Bay Settlement Road and Highland Center Drive at Bay Settlement Road. Committee members and staff said the Highland Center Drive crossing already has painted crosswalks, yield‑to‑pedestrian signs and field flags; the discussion focused on Bay Highlands Drive.
Alder Grant, representing the neighborhood, said the crosswalk was painted last spring and “even with... the yield‑to‑pedestrian signs, residents still are not having cars stop.” She described the site as a four‑lane road near a highway ramp and UW‑Green Bay, with growing nearby development and repeated neighborhood complaints.
City staff and committee members discussed estimated equipment costs and next steps. One committee member said they believed an individual flashing beacon could cost “only $8,000,” and staff responded that installation could be closer to $15,000 if concrete or a center device is required. Staff explained a pair of crossings could raise total costs proportionally — roughly doubling a one‑crossing estimate — depending on whether a median center device is needed.
Committee members noted an existing rapid‑flashing beacon on the same arterial farther down Bay Settlement Road and questioned why that location had been prioritized. Committee members also said past installations were often prioritized under Safe Routes to School and that standards and warrants are reviewed by the traffic engineer.
After discussion the committee approved a motion to refer the request to staff to complete a pedestrian/traffic study and return the item to the Traffic, Bike and Pedestrian committee (TBMP) or INS with findings. Alder Dewey made the motion; Alder Eck seconded it. The motion passed on a voice vote.
The committee recorded no formal timetable for the study during the meeting. Staff said the traffic engineer would check warrants and pedestrian counts to determine whether a rapid‑flashing beacon is warranted.
The referral means the committee did not authorize purchase or installation of beacons at this meeting; members emphasized step‑by‑step review and said the beacons could be considered later if the study supports them.
