Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Neighborhood Traffic Management topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bel Air work session presses for clearer, data‑driven Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
Summary
Commissioners and staff reviewed a revised NTMP booklet and scoring worksheet that emphasizes measured speed and crash data, debated how to handle "nonlocal" traffic scoring, and asked staff to refine petition thresholds and neighborhood boundaries before finalizing.
At the Jan. 27 Bel Air work session, staff presented a revised Neighborhood Traffic Management Program (NTMP) packet — including an application, evaluation worksheet and a sample petition — and asked the commission to review proposed scoring and procedural changes.
Kevin, who led the revision effort, said the updated materials were tested on current traffic requests and place more emphasis on objective measurements such as speed and crash history. "The booklet that you have does have the application... the evaluation worksheet... puts more emphasis on the ability for the [system] and takes away some of the vagueness of the previous worksheet," Kevin said. He noted some items were adapted from Harford County's updated manual.
Commissioners focused discussion on three procedural areas: how to treat requests that would require budget funds (Level 2 and Level 3 measures), how to define and measure "nonlocal" or cut‑through traffic, and the petition/approval thresholds for neighborhood measures. Several commissioners urged that higher‑cost measures be returned to the board for budget authorization and that staff keep clear language so residents understand the process. One commissioner asked that petition language not guarantee installation but require staff to "seek permission of the commissioners to review the request," preserving board oversight.
On nonlocal traffic scoring, Kevin said camera‑tag studies (used in a Howard Park study) can identify cut‑through trips precisely but are costly and not practical for all locations; commissioners discussed whether to reduce or remove nonlocal points and redistribute them to speed or volume metrics. Staff agreed to revise the calculation sheet and resend it to commissioners, including clarifying neighborhood boundaries and correcting identified typos such as petition signature fractions and point caps for accident scoring.
The board also discussed transparency: commissioners asked that NTMP minutes be posted online, that meetings receive advance notice and that a commissioner liaison attend committee meetings. Staff said Level 1 low‑cost measures would be handled administratively while Level 2 and 3 measures involving significant capital would come before the commission as budget items.
Next steps: Kevin will circulate a revised calculation sheet incorporating commissioner direction; staff will also clarify petition language, the 75% community approval reference and the definition of qualifying playgrounds and sidewalks.
