Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Pedestrian Safety Crosswalks topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Trustees debate crosswalk design at Center Street/East Market and table task order pending fund‑balance review
Summary
Board discussed two crosswalk options — rectangular rapid‑flashing beacons (RRFBs) versus simpler signage and pavement markings — and agreed to hold the consultant task order while trustees sort out fund‑balance priorities and community preferences.
Trustees on June 10 reviewed Task Order 53, a consultant proposal to install crosswalk infrastructure at the Center Street and East Market intersection, and chose to hold the task order for further discussion.
Brandy (staff member) reviewed the two options presented: rectangular rapid‑flashing beacons (RRFBs), which include solar panels, poles and mounted beacons and require professional footing and higher installation costs; or a simpler MUTCD‑standard sign and high‑quality pavement markings similar to existing crosswalks near CVS. Brandy said the simplified option costs less, avoids triggering a formal bidding threshold, and could be installed using village crews with only a DOT permit required.
The task order from the consultant was quoted at $9,000 for the consultant services (permitting, layout, construction observation). Brandy and staff estimated that a fully‑installed RRFB crossing including materials and labor could approach $20,000 or more, while a simpler sign/paint installation would be materially less.
Trustees and members of the public debated safety tradeoffs, aesthetics, and cost. Several trustees and residents said they support additional safety measures at some crossings but cautioned against deploying flashing beacons at every intersection because of cost and quality‑of‑life effects. Eleanor (board member) urged caution and asked for more time to consider resident priorities. One trustee suggested seeking Dutchess County Transportation Council assistance for a corridor study to identify priority crossings.
After extended discussion the board decided to table Task Order 53, asking staff to hold the project while trustees complete a fund‑balance conversation and consider corridor prioritization and aesthetics. Staff said they will ask the county or consultants about potential planning resources and return with clarified cost estimates and a fund‑balance recommendation.
