Well, we'll do it.

Meeting of the Transportation and Transit Committee.

We have one topic to hear today regarding the neighborhood traffic management program.

We'll get some uh insights about the program as it exists today, and then we're being asked to opine on some um policy updates.

So I will turn it over to Assistant City.

Oh, and Councilmember Lambert Melton is absent and excused.

I'll turn it over to Assistant City Manager Michael Moore to TS Up.

Earlier this month, uh we had Will Shoemaker who's at the podium today.

Come and share some information uh about the neighborhood traffic management program.

Specifically, we uh shared with you some of the results of last year and ask you to approve a set of projects.

But as part of that, uh there were some changes uh that we would like uh to consider in policy about how we actually administer the program and how we go about balloting and making that kind of come together.

This is part of our effort to sort of make sure that we're continually evolving the program to make it more applicable and easier for our community and for our uh to be able to um access the program and and for us to be able to deliver on projects in a timely way.

So with that, I'm gonna ask uh Will to go through the presentation.

We'll probably go through part of the presentation again, but go through that quickly just to kind of level set a little bit, and then we will jump right on into those policy uh choices that we're asking you to look at.

Thank you for that.

Again, Will Shoemaker with the transportation department uh to to go over the questions and additional data and additional information asked out of the uh May 5th council meeting.

So again, it's gonna be a quick recap of the three options.

Look at the the toolkit that we have, uh, look at the engagement informed design process to really make sure that you understand what these policy uh recommendations change and what they don't.

Uh, based on on that, there's some questions about the regulatory signage options that we wanted to bring forward for you to consider, and then lastly, some some uh partnership opportunities or ability to do more what was brought up, and we want to talk about next steps and things that we're actively working on that we're not necessarily doing right now, but we're taking steps to achieve in and hopefully the very near future.

So again, the option summary that that we presented to you earlier this month uh were were one would be no change.

The program largely works, but it is with the adoption of the safety action plan.

Uh it is traffic calming is a form of vision zero, and with that, that uh endorsement wanted to make sure that all downstream programs and policies are in alignment with that.

Uh so again, option one would be no change, keep the status quo as it is.

Option two would be a two-tiered approval process where you would set the criteria for what you believe is is excessive speeding and crash problems, and that would become an automatic project, and those that qualify but don't meet those those thresholds uh would still go through the balloting process.

And then lastly would be an automatic project uh process where again you would set what those minimum thresholds are, but but all projects that meet or exceed would then be offered a project.

And we we're changing the question with this last option from do you want a project to help us uh figure out how to best solve your your problem that we've identified.

Um, and I do want to highlight uh that anyone can request a project.

We receive over 300 unique requests uh on every year, but but it's only those that meet or exceed those qualifying thresholds that get offered a project, and we are truly a needs-based worst first program.

So, wanted to look at at the traffic calming toolkit.

So we've worked really hard with our our internal partners, street maintenance, the fire department, uh, you know, everyone to make sure that we have a tight toolkit of of devices that that do a really good job, but can be basically universally uh put down based on street context, uh, but that are surface mounted um and and relatively easy from an engineering perspective.

So the one of the benefits of the traffic calming program is that uh all of our projects are relatively low cost, uh very low cost compared to most traffic uh most other transportation related projects, and also we're we're pretty nimble, we're pretty fast, and that comes from really having a laser focus on this toolkit.

Um what you're seeing now are the vertical treatments.

Again, that these are all you're going up and over, but it they all serve a different niche uh of device.

Um, so with that, uh the next slide is gonna be the horizontal devices in our toolkit, but but really want to focus on how we choose treatments and why we choose it.

So because we're we're really a tactical, fast moving uh program, we don't move curb lines, we try not to impact stormwater flows.

We're not trying to really dig because that's where the time and the engineering and the cost really start to add up.

And so we really take what the street gives us.

So we look at uh street dimensions, what the problems are and try to make sure that we're matching the right tool with the right need.

So so big picture things as streets that are 31 feet and less, there's really not enough room to do any horizontal treatment.

So we have to do vertical, so it really limits it uh on those more narrow streets.

If your street is greater than 31 feet, there's enough room that you can do either.

So you have the full um uh toolkit available to you.

Um other obstacles that we have to look at are driveways.

You know, we can't put it in front of a driveway, and and uh oftentimes with more dense developments, you've got really close driveways that are random, so that really further limits where we can put that.

Uh noise pollution is pretty minimal, but it's not zero.

So we try to target property lines because we don't want to uh over overly uh impact any singular property, we want to get it far as far away from those as possible, and that comes really into um effect whenever you got uh uh houses that are really close to the right-of-way line.

We want to minimize that impact again.

It's it's pretty minimal, but it's not zero.

So we're trying to be good neighbors and good partners uh to not decrease quality of life as we're trying to increase safety and increase quality of life on another hand.

Um and then hills and curves.

Uh that's another thing that we have to design around, avoid or accommodate for.

So all of those things go into to how we choose and why we choose certain things.

Uh, but ultimately, because this is resident engaged informed uh designs, you know, staff definitely influences what treatments, uh, but but ultimately, if you as a neighborhood say we want this and it's a viable place and a viable treatment, we try to work that in.

So it really is if you as a neighborhood want something, we try to accommodate to the best of our ability.

Uh and so that's why sometimes you see a mixture of devices because that's what the neighborhood wants.

Sometimes uh you see only one device because that's what the neighborhood has told us.

So again, we we put the guardrails on uh the the device selection a lot and make sure that whatever we put forward is uh is sound from an engineering perspective and it's constructible, but it really is resident choice.

Um, yeah.

Can we do a better job communicating that out that the residents, those on the street, know play uh a major role in determining what's on it because I hear people say, Well, why do we do all of these treatments on one street or another street in particular or one side of town or another side of town?

But I think to really sharing that these treatments come out of a collaboration with the residents on that street.