Prior Creek residents press council for measures to slow traffic at North Elliot and E 480 Road

Residents urged the Prior Creek City Council to take action after repeated crashes, property damage and near-misses at the curve where North Elliot meets East 480 Road.

The appeal came during the petitions-from-the-audience portion of the meeting when several neighbors described vehicles “like NASCAR on that curve,” damaged mailboxes, and personal property repeatedly struck. Chris, a resident who lives at 1016 North Elliot, said residents have placed rocks to protect yards and that the problem has made him dread returning home. “It’s like NASCAR on that curve,” Chris said.

City staff and elected officials discussed several short-term and long-term options. Residents suggested rumble strips, additional signage, targeted enforcement and — for the long term — redesigning the intersection as a T. Street Superintendent Buddy said the existing pavement is an oil-and-chip surface that would require cutting out sections and installing concrete to support rumble strips; his rough estimate for a typical solar‑flashed stop sign installation was about $500 per sign and converting an intersection would require surveying, engineering and possible right‑of‑way or easement work.

Police Chief Jeremy Cantrell told the council his department has conducted extra patrols after earlier complaints and that officers collected video and vehicle information in one incident that led to follow-up. But he also said the department is down five officers from last year and that reduced staffing has cut proactive enforcement such as traffic stops.

Mayor Doyle and council members stressed both enforcement and engineering. Several council members and staff recommended a two-track approach: short-term countermeasures (signage, targeted enforcement and contractor-installed rumble strips where the pavement allows) and a long-term engineering study that would evaluate converting the curve into a safer geometry or other major changes. Councilmember Terry Lamar (street committee chair) asked staff to prepare cost estimates and feasibility for both short- and long-term options and to bring proposals to the street committee for detailed review.

After discussion the council voted to take no immediate ordinance action and to formally refer the matter to the street committee for development of specific recommendations, cost estimates and an implementation timeline. Chief Cantrell and Buddy agreed to meet with staff to prepare the committee packet.

Residents at the meeting emphasized the presence of children who walk along the corridor to Roosevelt School and the steady development northeast of town as reasons to prioritize a solution. Council members repeatedly said the city would avoid quick fixes that create new safety problems (for example, certain types of speed bumps) and would prioritize measures that can be enforced and maintained.

The council invited additional written suggestions from neighbors and asked staff to include O&M, maintenance and long-term replacement costs in the street committee materials.

Ending: The council took no immediate action on changes to traffic laws but instructed staff to produce short‑term and long‑term proposals and to present those options, with estimated costs, at the street committee meeting for a decision timeline and next steps.