1. What is your past involvement with the Traffic Calming Program? (check all that apply)
I live on a street where traffic calming devices are installed
I regularly drive on streets where traffic calming devices are installed
I am interested in petitioning for traffic calming on my street
2. Which of the following do you view as benefits of the Traffic Calming Program? (check all that apply)
Reduced speed
Increased safety
Support for different modes of transportation (vehicles, bikes, pedestrians and transit)
3. Please check any concerns that you have about the Traffic Calming Program
Solutions driven by community preference rather than data or engineering expertise
Other - My main concern is that its deployment is too readily blocked by a vocal minority (mostly older residents who exclusively drive and have little 'skin in the game')
4. Do the proposed thresholds for community participation and support seem reasonable?
No
5. Does the community engagement format and strategy seem effective?
Yes
6. Do you have additional comments or questions related to the proposed engagement process?
I recently participated in the process on Bluett and found the process to be quite reasonable. Staff communicated design options very clearly.
I suggest two refinements:
(1) Lower thresholds, such as 33% to move forward, reflecting the overriding importance of childrens' and pedestrians' safety over concerns about inconveniencing drivers.
(2) Weight responses by number of persons in the household (e.g., a family of five should get five votes while someone living alone should only get one).
7. Do the proposed program objectives capture what you think is important?
Yes
8. Have we missed anything in the proposed objectives that you think should be added?
No response.
9. Do you have concerns about any of the proposed qualification criteria?
No concerns. This reflects a balanced view of factors relevant to traffic calming!
10. Have we missed any other factors that should be included in determining eligibility for the Traffic Calming Program?
No response.
11. Do you have concerns about anything included in the proposed toolbox of devices?
Traffic circles seem to vary in their effectiveness at slowing vehicles. For instance, it's possible to go through the one at Nixon and Huron Pkwy at 30 mph or more. At the speeds some cars use this one, drivers have no visibility and almost no lead time to stop for pedestrains in crosswalks. I wonder if this is because the approach to that circle is not angled enough, and hope that this and future circles can be engineered for max calming effect.
12. Have we missed any devices that should be added to the toolbox for traffic calming on local streets?
Speed bumps! They are *quite* effective at slowing traffic going down the hill through North Campus on Murfin Ave and on Hubbard Ave.
13. What questions or concerns do you have about how the Traffic Calming Program will function?
No response.
A2 Open City Hall is not a certified voting system or ballot box. As with any public comment process, participation in A2 Open City Hall is voluntary. The responses in this record are not necessarily representative of the whole population, nor do they reflect the opinions of any government agency or elected officials.
Translate
1. What is your past involvement with the Traffic Calming Program? (check all that apply)
2. Which of the following do you view as benefits of the Traffic Calming Program? (check all that apply)
3. Please check any concerns that you have about the Traffic Calming Program
4. Do the proposed thresholds for community participation and support seem reasonable?
5. Does the community engagement format and strategy seem effective?
6. Do you have additional comments or questions related to the proposed engagement process?
I recently participated in the process on Bluett and found the process to be quite reasonable. Staff communicated design options very clearly.
I suggest two refinements:
(1) Lower thresholds, such as 33% to move forward, reflecting the overriding importance of childrens' and pedestrians' safety over concerns about inconveniencing drivers.
(2) Weight responses by number of persons in the household (e.g., a family of five should get five votes while someone living alone should only get one).
7. Do the proposed program objectives capture what you think is important?
8. Have we missed anything in the proposed objectives that you think should be added?
No response.9. Do you have concerns about any of the proposed qualification criteria?
No concerns. This reflects a balanced view of factors relevant to traffic calming!
10. Have we missed any other factors that should be included in determining eligibility for the Traffic Calming Program?
No response.11. Do you have concerns about anything included in the proposed toolbox of devices?
Traffic circles seem to vary in their effectiveness at slowing vehicles. For instance, it's possible to go through the one at Nixon and Huron Pkwy at 30 mph or more. At the speeds some cars use this one, drivers have no visibility and almost no lead time to stop for pedestrains in crosswalks. I wonder if this is because the approach to that circle is not angled enough, and hope that this and future circles can be engineered for max calming effect.
12. Have we missed any devices that should be added to the toolbox for traffic calming on local streets?
Speed bumps! They are *quite* effective at slowing traffic going down the hill through North Campus on Murfin Ave and on Hubbard Ave.
13. What questions or concerns do you have about how the Traffic Calming Program will function?
No response.