Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Traffic Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners debate enforcement vs. engineering to slow traffic on I Street and A Street
Summary
Commissioners reviewed a traffic survey and debated speed tables, bump costs, signage, and whether enforcement (sheriff patrol checks) or street engineering is the most effective approach for I Street and A Street.
Commissioners took up traffic concerns from neighbors of A Street and I Street, reviewing a traffic survey and trade-offs between physical traffic-calming measures and targeted enforcement. Chair (S2) said the survey was useful but noted enforcement gaps: "The city manager, by by ordinance, is responsible for law enforcement in the city and try to arrange for the sheriff's department to come and do specific traffic control," and urged residents to contact city hall for enforcement requests.
Members discussed the cost and practicality of speed calming: one commissioner noted speed tables and bumps can be expensive and are not always effective; in the meeting a commissioner remarked, "They're about $10 a piece to put in with the engineering and with the materials and and having to figure out where they go so they don't interfere with traffic turning and whatnot." The group recommended adding more speed-limit signage, using feedback radar signs where feasible, cataloging formal complaints so the city can prioritize scarce road-maintenance dollars (the commission said about $29,000 is earmarked annually for pothole repair), and asking the sheriff to run targeted enforcement at identified intersections.
