2000-01-26 Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Minutes of the Meeting of June 24, 1999 Page 12 Councilmember Rose stated the Council has heard about this issue for some time and all agree that there was a traffic problem in their neighborhood. However, traffic was the number one complaint heard by the Council from all neighborhoods in the City. She stated a concern for setting a precedent and suggested there may be other altematives to reduce the level and speed of traffic. Councilmember Rose stated she believes speed humps were an option that would help and asked if a stop sign could be erected mid - block. The City Engineer stated that a mid -block stop sign would not meet warrants and suggested a legal opinion be requested on what that option may result in. Councilmember Rose stated she preferred to find other altematives than a street closure. Councilmember Daniels stated she was also concemed about a precedent and noted the Council had told other neighborhoods that closure was not an option and speed humps were an option. She recognized the contribution of the Initiative but noted that this along with all factors must be considered to arrive at the best solution. She noted the message from the Police Chief indicating he did not support the closure due to slowing the arrival of emergency services. Councilmember Daniels stated she cannot support the closure even on a temporary basis and suggested the pedestrian traffic be removed from the streets with sidewalks and trails. Councilmember Swanson stated the neighborhood has brought forward a problem but the neighborhood was not being given a solution. He asked if the City should consider paying the cost to install a speed hump to see if it really works. Councilmember Swanson asked if this neighborhood could be considered on a trial basis. Councilmember Daniels stated her support for this trial. Councilmember Clark stated he was torn on this issue. He noted the neighborhood was unanimous in saying there was a traffic problem. He stated he believed a closure of 89th Avenue would only divert the traffic, not solve it. Councilmember Clark stated that he would be disappointed if a plan of action was not determined tonight. He stated if the closure was a test, then the Council needed to be prepared to approve a permanent closure if the test was successful. He stated he was not ready to support a permanent closure. Mayor Ryan stated the problem with a speed hump was that all need to deal with it and it can cause damage to vehicles. He asked if another neighborhood had installed speed humps. The City Engineer stated there were inquiries but no speed humps have been installed. Councilmember Swanson stated if the City was suggesting speed humps as a possible remedy, they should be able to prove they are successful. The City Manager stated the neighborhoods have been invited tonight to talk about the problems that confront them but the issue was finding a practical solution. He stated it seems one thing not well confronted was that if infrastructure was going to work, it couldn't be assumed that the original design would continue to work as development occurs. He stated he believed the closure was inconsistent with the City's policies and practices due to it closing off neighborhoods and limiting interior neighborhood circulation. He suggested staff explore the suggestion of installing a speed hump or two on one of the streets as a test. The City Manager explained that if the speed hump was properly engineered, it does not hinder snow removal. Vote on the amendment: AYES: Councilmember Swanson. • NAYS: Councilmembers Clark, Daniels, Kolb, Rose, and Mayor Ryan.