Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Traffic Signage topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council narrows signage-inspection resolution; DPW warns citywide survey will require more resources
Summary
The Providence City Council Public Works Committee narrowed a proposed resolution to require inspections of stop signs, one-way signs and do-not-enter signs, but DPW staff cautioned that a citywide survey and the 6-month/18-month reporting timelines would be difficult to meet with current staffing and budgets. The committee continued the item to
The Providence City Council Public Works Committee debated and narrowed a proposed resolution directing the traffic engineering division and the Office of Curbside Maintenance to inspect city traffic and parking signage.
The resolution was amended in committee to focus inspections on three categories: stop signs, one-way signs and do-not-enter signs. The amendment also preserved reporting deadlines included in the draft: a status update within six months, a second update at 12 months, and a goal to complete inspections, repairs and corrective actions within 18 months, with annual inspections thereafter to the extent practical.
DPW staff cautioned elected officials that the request could amount to an unfunded mandate. Staff estimated the city has thousands of signs (staff testimony cited "over 10,000 signs"), and described the two small divisions involved: a traffic unit led by traffic engineer Nate Urso with roughly three analysts and a four-person install crew (one foreman plus installers), and a curbside/permit unit with a small assigned crew. Staff said permit work and sign requests have risen in the last year (permits were reported up about 30 percent) and that the sign-production and installation workforce is limited: the department currently operates with a single sign maker and a small installation crew. A recent workplace injury to the sign maker created a substantial backlog, staff said.
DPW staff also described the city's cloud-based work-order system (Asset Essentials) and explained that 311 requests feed into that system, but they cautioned that the system's reporting features are still being tuned and that extracting a reliable, ward-level report would take setup work. Staff estimated the DPW materials budget is approximately $70,000 per year and said a citywide replacement program would likely cost "tens of thousands" to "hundreds of thousands" of dollars depending on scope.
Council members and staff discussed accessibility and placement concerns raised by residents, including an example at Hartford Avenue where a sign placement allegedly impedes wheelchair passage near commercial storefronts and a school. Council members asked DPW to follow up on specific locations while also acknowledging the department's limited capacity.
Given the workload concerns, the committee agreed to continue the item to allow DPW to quantify the survey effort, estimate additional personnel or vendor needs, and return with a scoped plan. The motion to continue passed by voice vote.
Council members suggested using the six-month report as a checkpoint to determine whether DPW can meet the resolution commitments with current staff, whether additional hires are required, or whether parts of the work should be subcontracted.
The amended resolution and the decision to continue the item leave in place a narrower inspection focus while directing DPW to return with a feasibility and resource assessment.
