Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation Speed Limits topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Greenville council concurs with NCDOT study, lowers speed limits on East 10th Street
Summary
The Greenville City Council on Feb. 9 voted 6-0 to concur with a North Carolina Department of Transportation speed study that establishes a 25 mph pedestrian zone through the ECU campus corridor on East 10th Street, with transitional 35 mph fringes and 45 mph beyond. A public commenter urged keeping 35 mph to Greenville Boulevard to protect bus stops and park access.
Greenville, N.C. — The Greenville City Council voted unanimously Feb. 9 to adopt an ordinance concurring with a North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) speed study that lowers posted speeds on portions of East 10th Street.
Director of Engineering Lisa Kirby told council that NCDOT’s study found the corridor is functioning more like an urban downtown area and recommended a 25 mph pedestrian-friendly zone from Elm to Evans, with 35 mph transition zones on the corridor’s fringes and 45 mph beyond. "They are recommending we reduce the speed limit from 35 miles an hour to 25 miles an hour," Kirby said during the presentation.
The change responds to faster traffic and increased pedestrian activity since the 10th Street connector opened, Kirby said; NCDOT will place signage and manage the official ordinance implementation while the city handles enforcement and a planned education period.
During public comment, Mary Anne Blackburn of the River Hills neighborhood thanked the council for pursuing safety measures but urged the body to keep the surface-street speed limit at 35 mph from Brownlee to Greenville Boulevard rather than reverting to 45 mph. "I recommend that rather than resuming a 45 mile per hour speed limit at Brownlee, the council instead maintain the city wide speed limit of 35 miles per hour from Elm to Greenville Boulevard," Blackburn said, citing bus stops, park access and nearby daycare facilities.
Councilmembers asked whether the city could independently set different limits; Kirby explained this is an NCDOT-controlled corridor and the city’s role was to concur with the state’s ordinance. If the council did not concur, the limits would remain as they are today, she said.
After brief discussion about signage, enforcement and possible additional measures from schools or other partners, Councilmember Hardy moved to approve the ordinance; Councilmember Scully seconded. The motion passed 6-0.
The city manager and engineering staff said they will follow up with NCDOT on an implementation timeline and public education plan for drivers and pedestrians. The council did not adopt any additional local speed changes at the meeting.
