My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 2018/07/02
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2010-2019
>
2018
>
Agenda Packets - 2018/07/02
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/29/2025 2:32:38 PM
Creation date
9/11/2018 4:21:12 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
7/2/2018
Description
Work Session
Supplemental fields
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
6/25/2018
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
253
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
While each situation is unique, most requests can be addressed by following these general steps: <br />I Step 1: Problem Identification <br />1. Record the request in a spreadsheet or <br />database, ensure consistency in methodology <br />with every request. <br />2. Identify/understand the problem the citizen <br />is addressing, repeat issue back to them to <br />confirm your understanding. Try to get to <br />the true issue. Identify why/if the problem is <br />unique. A phone call or site visit to meet the <br />citizen at the location of the concern is more <br />effective in identifying the issue. <br />3. Questions to ask the citizen: <br />— What is your concern? <br />— Why are you concerned? <br />— Is there a specific day of the week you <br />have the concern? <br />— Is there a certain time of day that you <br />notice the concern? <br />IStep 2: Evaluation <br />Evaluation Steps: <br />1. Schedule a site inspection to determine if <br />other factors are leading to the issue. (i.e. sight <br />distance, lack of gaps, etc.) <br />a. Arrange for and collect necessary data <br />(traffic volumes, crash data, etc.) <br />b. Conduct an evaluation to determine if <br />the traffic safety device is warranted, if <br />necessary <br />c. Address advantages/disadvantages of <br />installing the traffic safety device. <br />d. Review findings from the evaluations and <br />determine a recommendation. <br />8 DECEMBER 2017 1 LOCAL ROAD RESEARCH BOARD <br />— Is there a specific vehicle that is causing <br />the concern or multiple vehicles? <br />— Is there a certain event or development <br />that causes the concern? <br />— How often does this happen? <br />— Have you noticed anything that helps <br />reduce the concern (for example, a vehicle <br />parked on the street)? <br />— Have you talked with your neighbors about <br />the concern? <br />— Do others in your neighborhood have the <br />same concern? <br />— Do they have a petition (if your agency <br />requires one)? <br />4. After completing items 1-3 above, sometimes <br />the concern and issue is clear and no additional <br />evaluation is needed. Offer what you can do to <br />help. If more work is needed, move to step 2. <br />2. If the requested traffic safety device is <br />obviously not the appropriate remedy for the <br />issue, provide the citizen with the appropriate <br />reasons why and offer what you can do. <br />3. Offer potential mitigation to the problem using <br />the following tools: <br />a. Installing temporary, low cost options to <br />see if the concern is minimized, (i.e, yard <br />signs, speed boards, enforcement, etc..) <br />b. Offer the citizen things they can do to help <br />their cause (i.e. park on street to reduce <br />speeds) <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.