1. What is your past involvement with the Traffic Calming Program? (check all that apply)
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)
Less cut-through traffic
Other - address safety concerns on streets that allow parking on both sides - i.e. a unique interface between a "parking lot" and a street.
3. Please check any concerns that you have about the Traffic Calming Program
Other - historic use profile not consisted with demand created by recent development (condos and large apartments "ringing the downtown" driving "new" traffic to the adjacent residential street network).
4. Do the proposed thresholds for community participation and support seem reasonable?
Yes
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?
No response.
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?
It looks like a nice improvement. Because parking is a contributing issue, I think we need to include a visitor ("= some looking for parking" test. In this context, visitors both hunt for street parking and use the street as a cut through. This means the visitor test should be pretty specific: does not have an address on the actual street.
10. Have we missed any other factors that should be included in determining eligibility for the Traffic Calming Program?
Not sure if cut through includes a minor street parallel to a major street. These are interesting because they offer visitors two advantages: perceived as a faster route to downtown (fewer lights and traffic) and free "close in" parking. This makes their use (at elevated speeds) even more dangerous.
Also, our grid network should be utilize to disperse traffic, improve safety, and increases attractiveness by closing some blocks (or appropriate portions of a block) and forming pedestrian malls in certain areas to slow traffic. A good example is Washington directly in-front of the Y. (Concept: keep through cars off Washington in the short section from 3rd to the Y parking lot exit). Here (for example) cars can get everywhere they need to go, they just can't pass directly in-front of the very busy Y front door. (And, maybe this focus on that area could help find a use for the old building across the street.) This could also be used in-front of some of our schools. (It makes use of our very connected grid in the neighborhoods.) I think we could test this easily with temporary barriers and signage for several month or maybe 1 year.
11. Do you have concerns about anything included in the proposed toolbox of devices?
No.
12. Have we missed any devices that should be added to the toolbox for traffic calming on local streets?
A stop sign. I think of Spring Street.
One-way street.
In the full grid area of town, blocking of portions of blocks directly in-front of high people / car interface areas. (schools, the Y, etc.)
13. What questions or concerns do you have about how the Traffic Calming Program will function?
I think we need to envision a test option. A non-permanent but accurate test of the impact of calming in some of the perceived "hard to calm areas".
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?
No response.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?
It looks like a nice improvement. Because parking is a contributing issue, I think we need to include a visitor ("= some looking for parking" test. In this context, visitors both hunt for street parking and use the street as a cut through. This means the visitor test should be pretty specific: does not have an address on the actual street.
10. Have we missed any other factors that should be included in determining eligibility for the Traffic Calming Program?
Not sure if cut through includes a minor street parallel to a major street. These are interesting because they offer visitors two advantages: perceived as a faster route to downtown (fewer lights and traffic) and free "close in" parking. This makes their use (at elevated speeds) even more dangerous.
Also, our grid network should be utilize to disperse traffic, improve safety, and increases attractiveness by closing some blocks (or appropriate portions of a block) and forming pedestrian malls in certain areas to slow traffic. A good example is Washington directly in-front of the Y. (Concept: keep through cars off Washington in the short section from 3rd to the Y parking lot exit). Here (for example) cars can get everywhere they need to go, they just can't pass directly in-front of the very busy Y front door. (And, maybe this focus on that area could help find a use for the old building across the street.) This could also be used in-front of some of our schools. (It makes use of our very connected grid in the neighborhoods.) I think we could test this easily with temporary barriers and signage for several month or maybe 1 year.
11. Do you have concerns about anything included in the proposed toolbox of devices?
No.
12. Have we missed any devices that should be added to the toolbox for traffic calming on local streets?
A stop sign. I think of Spring Street.
One-way street.
In the full grid area of town, blocking of portions of blocks directly in-front of high people / car interface areas. (schools, the Y, etc.)
13. What questions or concerns do you have about how the Traffic Calming Program will function?
I think we need to envision a test option. A non-permanent but accurate test of the impact of calming in some of the perceived "hard to calm areas".