Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
After crashes at hill, Saint Charles council leans toward improved signage, not immediate guardrail
Summary
Council reviewed crash data and MDOT advice and heard legal counsel advise that guardrails carry maintenance and tort liabilities; members favored passive protections, signage and grading adjustments over installing guardrail now.
Council members revisited a crash‑prone hill where staff reported three accidents since 2013 and briefed the council on an MDOT crash study and price guidance. Staff and consultants said guardrail is expensive, must meet DOT/MASH crash‑testing standards, and carries ongoing maintenance requirements.
Adam Florrie, an attorney from Smith Beauville, told the council the Governmental Tort Liability Act generally protects local governments but includes an exception for failure to maintain a public road when there is notice of defects. "Guardrails can be interpreted as artificial attachments to the road," Florrie said, adding such features require regular maintenance and can create exposure if damaged. He recommended passive measures—shrubs, trees or other natural buffers—and improved signage as the more prudent initial approach.
Council members discussed options including better curve signage, reflective material on posts, grading adjustments after water‑main work, and careful tree placement (noting fiber‑optic and other buried utilities). No immediate guardrail installation or funding motion was advanced; staff will pursue signage and passive protections and reassess after water‑main work.
Next steps: staff to coordinate with MDOT on signage and to evaluate passive‑protection planting options that avoid utility conflicts, then report back to the council.
