My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
12-18-1995
Clerk
>
Minutes
>
CITY COUNCIL
>
1952-1999
>
1995
>
12-18-1995
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/26/2012 2:04:22 PM
Creation date
5/12/2003 12:09:54 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Doc Type
Minutes
Date
12/18/1995
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
JOINT WORK STUDY SESSION - CITY COUNCIL AND ENVIRONMENTAL & <br />TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE (ETAC) <br /> <br />NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC PLANS <br /> <br />Public Works Agency Associate Engineer-Transportation Ruth Smith explained the study session <br />on neighborhood traffic planning would include diverters, but not speed humps. Smith gave a <br />historic overview of the City's neighborhood traffic planning process, cited several case studies <br />beginning with the 1982 Park Santiago Neighborhood Traffic Plan, outlined the elements of a <br />successful traffic plan, and noted the City's formal process for responding to neighborhood traffic <br />plan requests was originally developed in 1989. <br /> <br />Smith then briefed the Council on new procedural revisions approved by the Environmental and <br />Transportation Advisory Committee (ETAC). According to Smith, the revisions were intended to <br />increase neighborhood awareness of traffic proposals and to establish guidelines on how staff <br />extends technical assistance to neighborhoods confronted with complex traffic issues. An open <br />forum followed. Smith concluded by citing the benefits of following the formal process. <br /> <br />City Council and ETAC members discussed several issues relating to Neighborhood Traffic Plans <br />including but not limited to: <br /> <br />a lengthy approval process; <br /> <br />the possibility that individuals initially requesting traffic plans might not be <br />available to see plans through to completion; <br /> <br />a potential rash of traffic planning requests from the City's fifty-one (51) <br />neighborhood associations; <br /> <br />criteria for forming a neighborhood association; <br /> <br />modification of the approval process time line for urgent traffic problems; and <br /> <br />clearer definition of a traffic plan's "area of impact." <br /> <br />The following persons raised traffic planning issues such as costs, documentation of deviations <br />from the formal process, more stringent criteria for developing and implementing traffic plans, <br />creation of a procedure for removing traffic mitigation measures, citywide voting on traffic plans, <br />traffic restrictions that close off neighborhoods, conflict between senior citizens' need for access <br />to emergency care and young families' traffic safety concerns, and neighborhood demographic <br />profiles: <br /> <br />Stan Long <br />James O'Connor <br />Miles Leach <br />Norma Callaghan <br /> <br />CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 360 DECEMBER 18, 1995 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.