Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Traffic Parking topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident Steve Wade urges traffic-calming measures and parking study as park fees take effect
Summary
Resident Steve Wade told the committee crosswalk paint, lighting, speed and parking problems are creating safety hazards in town and asked the committee to seek a comprehensive study of narrow residential streets and consider speed humps and parking restrictions to protect neighborhoods.
Steve Wade, who identified himself during public comment, told the committee the condition of crosswalk paint, signage and lighting around town is inconsistent and poses safety risks for pedestrians.
"The paint on all the crosswalks and the consistency of the crosswalks is a concern, for safety reasons," Wade said, noting faded markings at locations including Sunset and the Presidential-area streets. He also said lighting near some crosswalks is "very poor or nonexistent," making it difficult for people in crosswalks to be seen.
Wade urged the group to review posted speeds and add speed humps on several neighborhood streets — naming Dawes, Elliot, Hills, Ross and Arbor — because drivers often travel at unsafe speeds, especially in summer. He cited what he said is a state default of 15 miles per hour for gravel roads in urban and suburban areas and called for the committee to evaluate whether additional traffic-calming is needed.
He also asked the committee to consider a comprehensive study of residential parking on narrow streets to determine whether restrictions (for example, prohibiting parking on one side) are warranted. "When you have parking on narrow streets . . . it forces all traffic, pedestrian traffic, bicycle traffic, dog walkers, and cars in both directions into that very narrow corridor," he said, adding that vegetation trimming and parked vehicles can create a fire hazard.
Wade warned that the recent decision to charge $10 for parking at the state park lot will likely push more visitors into nearby neighborhoods and increase parking pressure, and he suggested the committee forward a study or proposal to city council to address residential impacts before visitor parking shifts into local streets.
Committee members acknowledged the concerns as "food for thought" and noted tradeoffs between creating pedestrian hubs and preserving safe sightlines for vehicles; no formal motion on the issues was taken at the meeting. The matter was discussed as part of public comment and committee members encouraged further consideration at future meetings or at the Budget Committee when transportation priorities are set.
