Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Pedestrian Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Holland council rejects removal of 40th Street mid‑block crosswalk, directs staff to upgrade it to current standards
Summary
After debate and public comment, Holland City Council voted down a staff recommendation to remove a noncompliant mid‑block crosswalk on 40th Street and instead unanimously directed the transportation department to implement an upgraded, ADA‑compliant design in spring/summer.
HOLLAND, Mich. — The Holland City Council on Nov. 19 heard a lengthy presentation and public comment on a contested mid‑block crosswalk on 40th Street and ultimately voted to upgrade the crossing to meet modern safety and accessibility standards rather than remove it.
Transportation staff told the council the crosswalk is not up to current design standards and that the traffic committee’s recommendation had been to remove the crossing. Bridal White, the city’s transportation director/engineer, said the city documented peak‑hour use (seven users in one morning count, six in another) but that the north ramp is steep and does not meet current ADA requirements. White presented two options: full removal (signage/ramp removal, curb and gutter, reconfigured fencing/chicane) or an upgrade (reconfigured ramp, new pavement markings, signage, lighting and a chicane to slow nonmotorized users).
“As it stands currently, that crosswalk is not up to standards,” Bridal White said while outlining the engineering exhibits. Staff noted the site’s recorded 80th‑percentile speeds (about 38–39 mph historically) and explained how higher speeds increase reaction distances and crash severity.
Council members and residents debated the tradeoffs between encouraging walkability and reducing risk. Council Member Shea said the crosswalk had become “a symbol for something larger” and urged clearer council direction on nonmotorized infrastructure. Several neighbors said they and schoolchildren use the crossing frequently and urged improvements rather than removal.
After discussion, Council Member Rowan moved to remove the crosswalk; that motion failed on a roll call (4 yes, 5 no). Council then moved to direct staff to implement an upgrade to bring the crossing into compliance, selecting the staff‑recommended option 2 (reconfigured ramp, chicane/fencing, lighting, updated signage and markings). The amended motion to “upgrade the referenced crosswalk to compliance” passed on roll call with council voting in favor.
Mayor Nathan Box, who said he would not let his grandchildren cross at the site, framed the decision as balancing safety and public expectations. City Manager Keith Van Beek and staff said the work requires survey and detail work and is likely to be executed next spring or summer.
What happens next: staff will prepare design details, complete any required surveying and coordinate construction planning; the council directed implementation of the upgrade option rather than removal.
Votes and procedural notes: the initial removal motion failed on a 4‑to‑5 roll call. The subsequent motion to upgrade the crosswalk was approved on a roll call following an amendment specifying the upgrade option and implementation approach.
The crosswalk discussion — including usage counts, ADA ramp noncompliance, 80th‑percentile speed information and the engineering exhibits presented — remains the record basis for the council’s direction to proceed with the upgrade.
