Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Serviceability Alternatives topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City engineer says eliminating backing will improve safety; offers options instead of immediate connection
Summary
City traffic staff presented history and engineering rationale for considering a connection or other fixes on Westgate Drive, saying larger municipal equipment faces safety risks when backing in narrow cul‑de‑sac conditions and outlining alternatives and cost ranges.
Bill, the city traffic engineer, told the committee that Westgate was platted in 1953 and that the existing end‑of‑street pavement is not a standards‑size cul‑de‑sac ("less than 40 feet" vs. a typical 80–100 feet standard).
"If there was a connection, we wouldn't obviously be doing any backing," Bill said during the staff presentation and committee Q&A. "Eliminating backing is always safer." He told the committee the city has equipment that has grown larger—refuse trucks, plows and emergency vehicles—and that backing maneuvers in narrow residential pavement increase the probability of accidents. Bill said an in‑house connection would likely require only "several thousand dollars of asphalt and then our time and labor," while redesigning the end of Westgate into a full cul‑de‑sac with drainage and grading would probably be on the order of $30,000–$50,000 and require design and bidding.
Bill also outlined non‑connection alternatives the city could pursue to improve serviceability and safety: enlarging the cul‑de‑sac (which could impact front yards), eliminating on‑street parking to improve turning clearance, and adjusting refuse collection (single‑side collection or pads) to avoid tight backing maneuvers. Staff emphasized the issue as one of operational safety and serviceability rather than a general street‑paving priority; the committee probed funding and comparative priorities but received no final decision at the meeting.
