06/09/1975 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

- (7) Should conditions change or unsatisfactory results occur because of the installation, staff analysis and recommendation for remedial action shall be given the Council, after which the Council will hold public hearing and re-examine original findings on which approval was based. Assistant Manager cautioned that adoption of the policy would create major public discussion as each proposal for a diverter was received, but staff felt with the policy decision having been made and general reluctance of the community to construct new major arterials, that this would be the most effective way of keep- ing arterial traffic on arcerial streets. He said the policy statement was strongly recommended by staff, but if there was any hesitancy on the part of Council members to take the "flak" which was sure to corne, now was the time to take that into consideration because it would affect dealings with neighborhoods' plans and requests for solving traffic problems. Councilman Murray thought it important to make the policy statement with regard to traffic diverters. He said the reality of complications with traffic patterns would have to be faced and regardless of Council action the interest in diverters would not disappear - it was a case of staff taking a position on a case-by-case basis or the Council's doing it itself. He noted comments in the Livingston & Blayney commercial study with regard to traffic implications which would result from any commercial expansion program and the statement that traffic would have to be limited to certain specified streets or controlled by street closures. Also, the thrust of community development to maintain livability and environmental quality in the older central neighborhood presented the question whether anything could be done without also doing something about traffic patterns. He cited com- munity goals statements and policy already adopted about improving neighborhood areas within walking distance of downtown by redirecting traffic and limiting traffic to as few streets as possible and discouraging it on residential streets. He said unless the Council was willing to do something in the way of traffic di- verters, those policy statements should be struck. e Al Williams, traffic engineer, said if the Council did not intend to adopt this policy, some of the neighborhood plans would have to be altered, because neigh- borhood groups have in general built their plans around the community goals statements. He warned the Council however, that if the policy was adopted limited staff time would not permit a lot of diverter studies to proceed at one time. He wanted it understood that the process involved in each diverter was long and laborious and that quick action because of staff limitations was not possible. Also, budgetary limitations would more or less control some of the programs, unless funds were made available from other sources. The cautionary note was sounded, he said, because several neighborhood groups had plans for diverters,awaiting the Council's decis.ion, and there was not the staff capability nor funds to go ahead with all at the same time. - Councilman Keller asked whether more through streets would be created on the perimeters of neighborhoods as a result of installing diverters. Also, as traffic increased whether there would be problems with the flow on existing streets, back- ing up traffic, maybe creating air pollution problems. Traffic Engineer replied that the arterial street system was pretty well defined. However, it was his be- lief that on-street parking on arterials was a thing of the past, that as popula- tion and traffic increased without construction of more facilities the space would have to be provided through removal of parking. He emphasized that the idea which might develop in some neighborhoods of closing collector or arterial streets could not be supported by his department from a technical standpoint, and cautioned that that might become an issue if the Council proceeded with the proposed diverter policy. With regard to possibility of creating problems of traffic flow on the arterials, he said, none were anticipated unless new development should occur which would add more traffic than that normally projected. The amount of bypass traffic brought back to arterial stree~~didn't amount to that much. He added however that closing of any collector street would certainly cause problems. Mr. Murray commented that the anticipated buildup of traffic on arterials did not occur with the installation of the traffic diverter on the west side of town, probably because traffic was dispersed to so many different points that it added ~\~ 6/9/75 - 17