Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Pedestrian Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council hears community concerns about Main Street crossings; staff recommends near-term driver feedback and crosswalk upgrades
Summary
Following a community meeting, staff presented several short-term safety improvements for Herriman’s Main Street corridor and longer-term capital options (raised intersections, medians) that would require CIP funding; council emphasized safety and asked staff for cost estimates for near-term measures.
Herriman City Council — Staff updated the council on a community safety review of Herriman Rose Boulevard/Main Street and proposed immediate, low-cost measures alongside possible long-term reconstruction options to improve pedestrian safety and walkability.
Speaker 8 told council members the traffic warrant study did not support installing a traffic signal at the community’s requested crossing, and that public feedback focused on corridor speed, traffic volume, lane width and alignment. “The community’s biggest concern was Herriman Main Street as a corridor — speeds, traffic volumes, width and curves — and general walkability,” Speaker 8 said.
Staff recommended near-term actions that could be implemented within existing budgets or traffic committee funds, including rotating driver feedback signs, RRFB crosswalk lighting upgrades, improved striping and targeted lighting for crosswalks. An asphalt path alternative near city hall was preliminarily estimated at roughly $15,000, while major corridor work — raised intersections, lane reconfiguration, medians or a full conversion to prioritize pedestrians — would require placement in the Capital Improvement Plan and significant funding.
Council members debated perceived safety versus measured risk and liability. Speaker 6 said the council should follow the “safest option we can realistically do” and warned that choosing a less-recommended approach could carry liability if an incident occurred. Others emphasized that some devices, such as flashing feedback signs, can lose effectiveness over time and that enforcement resources matter.
Staff agreed to produce budget estimates for the recommended near-term measures and to continue community engagement; they proposed adding any major reconstruction option to the CIP for future consideration, not immediate funding or construction.
This discussion resulted in direction to proceed with inexpensive, immediate improvements where feasible and return with cost estimates and a plan for community follow-up; no CIP project was programmed at this meeting.
