Narberth committee keeps traffic-calming policy flexible on speed thresholds, asks staff to refine toolkit

The Narberth Public Health and Safety Committee reviewed revisions to a draft traffic-planning and traffic-calming policy on Oct. 10, emphasizing flexibility over rigid numeric thresholds and asking staff to refine the language in consultation with the borough engineer and Montgomery County reviewers.

Committee discussion focused on a proposed speed-based eligibility metric in the draft. The draft referenced a percentile-measured speed rule and suggested giving higher priority to streets where that measure exceeded the posted limit by 5 miles per hour. Several members said context — for example, proximity to schools, parks or multi-directional traffic patterns — should be a deciding factor alongside any speed metric.

"Context is important," said Jean, committee member, during the discussion, adding that a posted limit can feel much faster depending on roadway character. Committee members agreed not to raise a strict numerical threshold and to allow professional staff to override petition thresholds when they judge an issue to be a safety concern.

On public engagement, staff noted a common traffic-calming approach is to require resident support on an affected block or a higher percent approval for installation or removal (examples discussed included 50% and 70% thresholds and a minimum response rate). The committee favored retaining community input as an advisory element rather than a binding numeric requirement and directed staff to keep engagement flexible so safety findings by qualified staff or the engineer would not be blocked by petition rules.

The committee also reviewed additions to the policy toolbox, including pavement markings and graphics, shade trees and landscaping, daylighting and corner clearing, decorative textured crosswalks and stamped or colored pavement. Members asked Public Works staff to investigate field performance, maintenance burden, and snow‑plow/salt durability before recommending adoption. Jeff, staff member, flagged maintenance and longevity concerns for colored or stamped pavement, and suggested staff speak with municipalities that have implemented similar measures.

Members raised caution about street murals and rainbow crosswalks. Committee members noted those interventions are outside the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices and PennDOT guidance; they are not formally prohibited but can raise liability and maintenance questions. The committee asked staff to research liability guidance from the borough’s insurer and to report back.

Next steps: staff will redraft proposed language on percentile-speed criteria and decision-making to emphasize road and community context, ask the borough engineer to propose a definition for what constitutes a "significant issue," and return recommendations to the committee for vote at a future meeting.