City of Madison
Legislative File ID   08944
Type:   Miscellaneous    Status:   In Committee
Enactment Date:      Enactment No.:  
Title:  
2008 Neighborhood Traffic Management Program Priority List
Controlling Body:   Traffic Engineering Division
Introduced:   1/24/2008    Version:   1
Final Action:   3/25/2008    Contact:   gphillips@cityofmadison.com
Name:  
2008 Neighborhood Traffic Management Program Priority List
Extra Date 1:  
Requester:   PEDESTRIAN/BICYCLE/MOTOR VEHICLE COMMISSION
Sponsors:  
Legislative History
DateActing BodyAction TakenMotion
1/29/2008Unpublished Meeting Data Pending*
2/27/2008PEDESTRIAN/BICYCLE/MOTOR VEHICLE COMMISSION
3/25/2008PEDESTRIAN/BICYCLE/MOTOR VEHICLE COMMISSIONRoss referenced the updated list that was handed out to members at the meeting. The list was revised from the earlier version to add Prairie Road (Williamsburg Way-Maple Grove Drive) and remove Erin Street from the recommended collector locations. Ross suggested that the PBMVC recommend six rather than five collector locations and add Erin back. He felt the NTMP budget will handle all six and noted that it’s possible one of the other projects may not move forward in 2008 for some reason. Erin residents had seen the previous list which included Erin as a recommended location. Crandall asked about the next step in the NTMP process. Ross explained that Traffic Engineering staff will work with neighborhood residents to develop plans and specifications for the type of traffic calming project appropriate for their street. Conroy asked whether Keyes Street could be added to the recommended local locations since it is only two-tenths of a point behind Emerald Street. Ross noted that TE staff typically recommend the top five locations but made an exception for the collector locations because Prairie Road came in after the initial list had been developed and Erin residents had already seen that their street was in the top five. Conroy asked that Keyes Street be added to the recommended local streets with the understanding that it would be undertaken only if the budget allows. Members then heard from the registrants. Eldon Hoel, 3638 Tulane Avenue, opposed traffic calming on Tulane Avenue. · Has lived on Tulane for 53 years. · Opposed having obstructions in the street. · He reviewed a copy of the petition that started the process and felt the petition is invalid because of problems with some signatures and the lack of a date as to when the signatures were obtained. Problems with the petition include signatures from people who no longer live on the street, one household had three people sign, a person who signed the petition indicated to Hoel that they were not in favor of traffic calming, another person indicated they now object to traffic calming, and several others also said that even though they signed the petition, they are not in favor of traffic calming. · Adding speed humps to Tulane will make the street a roller coaster. He referenced the speed humps installed on Schenk Street, which he felt redirected many motorists to Walter Street. Now Walter Street is recommended for traffic calming (collector street). · He felt the City should facilitate traffic flow, not obstruct it. Motion by Skidmore/Compton to allow the speaker another minute, carried. · He hears motorists hitting the undercarriage of their vehicles when driving on Schenk. · Plowing around traffic islands is a real problem. · Doesn’t want to see his taxes dumped into the NTMP. · A group of retired City employees, including a few public works employees, talked about NTMP and all objected to obstructions in the street. Patrick Soukup, 3717 Dawes Street, opposed traffic calming on Tulane. · He is the director of the Eastmorland Community Association. · He supported the comments made by Hoel. · He opposes the speed humps installed on Schenk Street. · He also had concerns about the validity of the Tulane petition. It is undated so there’s no way to tell when it was circulated. One of the signers has moved out of the city, one household had three signatures, and one person didn’t understand what they were signing. He would like more information on the validity of the petition and would like to meet with City staff to resolve that issue. (He was advised to contact Mark Winter at Traffic Engineering.) · Is there another way to solve the speeding problem? · On Schenk Street, some motorists “fly” over the speed humps but those with lower profile vehicles suffer damage to their vehicle. · Compton noted there is a school on Schenk Street and asked how Mr. Soukup would recommend controlling traffic speeds if not by humps. Soukup replied that consistent enforcement, along with a hefty fine, would work. · If speed humps are subsequently found to be ineffective, then need to tear up the street again. Referencing the proposal to add Erin and have six collector locations, Ross explained that the Prairie Road petition came in after the initial list and ranked high. Prairie Road is scheduled for resurfacing this year so the traffic calming project should not cost that much, allowing Erin to be added as a sixth location. Ross clarified that TE staff will work with the neighborhoods on the traffic calming project. Once a plan is developed, the residents are surveyed and the survey response determines whether the project proceeds. Motion by Crandall/Strawser to recommend the top six collector locations and the top five local locations. Friendly amendment by Conroy, accepted by Crandall, to include Keyes as a recommended local location if enough funds are available. Ross reminded members that staff usually recommends proceeding with the top five locations. Compton felt that adding Keyes should not be controversial since it’s contingent upon funds being available. De Vos indicated she would oppose the motion. While she’s not against traffic calming, she does not support the NTMP. She felt that the research material relied upon by TE staff comes from locations without snow. Staff should not rely on design guidelines that don’t apply to Madison. De Vos remarked that in her neighborhood, traffic calming devices made it difficult for bicyclists. She stated she could not vote for the priority list without knowing the details as to what type of traffic calming is being recommended. Ross advised that once the locations are approved, TE staff will go back to the neighborhoods and work with the residents on developing the traffic calming plan. De Vos felt that TE will arrogantly impose what it wants. Crandall asked whether the traffic calming could be something other than speed humps and Ross replied yes, it could be humps, circles, islands, etc. Ross emphasized that all streets on the list are there because residents applied to participate in the NTMP and submitted a petition. He reiterated that TE staff will work with the neighborhoods to develop a traffic calming plan, including neighborhood meetings. A survey will then be sent to residents to determine whether the project should proceed. Motion carried with De Vos voting no.
Notes:

  powered by Daystar Computer Systems, Inc.