Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Traffic Calming topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Riverton discusses traffic calming after limited effect of speed dips; council weighs painting "do not block" zones and longer-term road links
Summary
City staff presented before-and-after data showing speed dips reduced the 80th-percentile speed by about 1 mph; the council debated short-term markings at a Parkside intersection, longer-term Dutchman Lane completion and a UDOT access-management study, and asked staff to return with options and counts.
Riverton ' City public-works and planning staff presented traffic-calming results and options March 25 after residents raised safety and queuing problems at several neighborhood exits onto 126 (Bangerter Highway). The review covered speed dips installed in two subdivisions, radar counter placements, and longer-term access questions tied to an unfinished Dutchman Lane connection.
Public-works staff member Carrie reported speed counts taken before and after installation at two locations (Lambton View Drive and Shaggy Peak). The 80th-percentile speeds fell from 30 mph to 29 mph in one location ' a roughly 1 mph change. Carrie said the concrete speed dips cost about $9,000 each to install and that removing or correcting them would require chiseling out the concrete and repaving the trench.
Council members and residents also discussed a separate problem: several small residential streets have limited egress onto 126, causing long queues and blocking intersections at peak times. Staff showed a plan that would paint "keep clear" or "do not block the intersection" markings at a Parkside access point; staff said painting the markings could free up roughly 250 feet of queuing space if motorists comply, but that the change would push traffic downstream and could affect signal timing.
Staff and council members emphasized that a UDOT access-management study already underway for the corridor (from Bangerter to Harriman/126) will supply data to prioritize solutions. Jason, the development director, noted the Dutchman Lane connection that would relieve a specific neighborhood is development-driven: a future phase of nearby development triggers the road completion. Staff said the city is exploring corridor-preservation funding and other mechanisms to accelerate the connection, and that legislative help has already removed a potential $4 million-$5 million jurisdictional-transfer charge the city would otherwise have faced.
Council directions and responses: Council members Perucci and McKay expressed support for applying a painted "do not block" marking at the Parkside location; Council member McDougall opposed making changes that would allow additional left turns for Parkside and urged more data about where the traffic would be pushed. Staff said it can deploy temporary radar counters to queue-count vehicles, refine the petition/threshold process for calming treatments and report back; staff also said it will include Dutchman Lane and potential corridor-preservation funding in future capital-facilities planning.
Ending: Staff will bring refined data and recommended actions back to the council (including counts and projected impacts) and coordinate with UDOT's access-management study. Council did not take a formal vote on any ordinance or funding during the work session.
