HomeMy WebLinkAbout06.B- Council Office ITEM
613
HUMAN RESOURCES - JOB DESCRIPTION REVISION
TRANSPOSED WITH
COUNCIL OFFICE - SPEED HUMP;
03/18/2013
M/CC MEETING
DOC ID: 2325
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO—REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
.. 3 In Support/Opposition
From: Chas A. Kelley M/CC Meeting Date: 03/18/2013
Prepared by: Cheryl Weeks, (909) 384-5188
Dept: Council Office Ward(s): All
Subject:
Speed Hump Program (Recommended for Approval at the Legislative Review Committee
Meeting on Tuesday, March 5, 2013—Committee Members Present: Jenkins, Kelley,Valdivia.)
Current Business Registration Certificate: Not Applicable
Financial Impact:
Motion: Authorize the City Manager to Direct the Public Works Department to develop a
Speed Hump Program and guidelines utilizing warrant requirements similar to the
City's Stop Sign warrant format.
Svnoysis of Previous Council Action:
None.
Backaround:
At the Legislative Review Committee Meeting held on Tuesday, March 5, 2013, the committee
discussed information from the Public Works Department related to the use of speed humps on
City streets.
The majority of the committee referred this item to the full Council with the recommendation to
authorize the City Manager to direct the Public Works Department to develop a speed hump
program and guidelines utilizing warrant requirements similar to the City's stop sign warrant
format. (Yes -Kelley,Valdivia) (No -Jenkins)
During the discussion the committee recommended that the speed hump program include best
practices from other agencies and that the program be part of a future traffic management
program.
Su000rtin¢Documents:
SPEED HUMPS (PDF)
Updated: 3/11/2013 by Linda Sutherland Packet Pg. 103
*Bern ' CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO Robert Eisenbeisz,BE.-iNTE&rm D1"CTOR PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 300 North `D,,street
San Bernardino,G4 92418-0001
909384.5140
Date: February 28, 2013 w
aKm
To: Allen Parker, City Manager `
From: Robert G. Eisenbeisz, P.E.
JC �r
o ��Q
Subject: LRC Request for Speed Humps a�
rs
Attachment: Neighborhood Traffic Management Survey c
E
x
On Wednesday, February 20, 2013, the Legislative Review Committee requested the preparation of a d
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program that specifically provides for the use of speed humps on w
City streets. They requested that this be brought back to them in two weeks at their next meeting.
While such a program may be of some benefit to the City,I expressed a number of concerns about it.
Y
A significant concern is the time and resources required for this effort. The City does not currently have N
a Traffic Engineer so this would require the use of a consultant. A more realistic time to complete this
would be at least 6 months. This type of project should be budgeted as a project in the City's Capital
a.
Improvement Program (CIP); however, most all of the City's capital projects have been suspended in
accordance with the adopted Pendency Plan. Adding this project to the CIP would be in direct conflict
x
with the latest direction from the City Manager, Mayor and Council. While it would be desirable to °w
have such a program, it is unlikely that it would be considered a top priority. At the time that the ui
a.
Pendency Plan was adopted, the former Director of Public Works gave specific direction to all divisions
to focus only on basic essential services that directly impact public health, safety and welfare. The City
is currently struggling to provide basic essential services and there are many higher priorities that more E
directly affect the health, safety, and welfare of the public.
In addition, a significant amount of research will be needed to review the City's Municipal Code and a
identify sections that currently conflict with the use of speed humps on City streets. There are a number
of sections that will need to be amended before the requested program could be adopted.
The committee identified many streets for consideration and the cumulative cost of this could be
significant. It was also explained to the committee that long-term maintenance costs are also a concern
because proper maintenance of signing, striping, and markings is critical for safety in using speed
humps. We have concerns about whether the City will be able to keep up with the maintenance
requirements given the current situation.
Packet Pg. 104
RE: LRC Request for Speed Humps
February 28, 2013
One of the committee members expressed an opinion that speed humps are used by many agencies in the
area so we surveyed a number of area agencies to find out if they had a program that allowed the use of
speed humps. We found that while most agencies in our area have a Neighborhood Traffic Management
Program, none of those surveyed allow the use of speed humps. The results of this informal survey are
attached. Speed humps can be very controversial and some agencies have had to remove them due to
complaints about noise. -
The committee is expecting an update at their next meeting on March 5, 2013, and I recommend that
development of this new program be postponed until the City's financial situation improves, allowing
adequate funding for development, implementation, and long-term maintenance.
N
Q
t:
2
9
N
N
EL
d
m
Y
N
N
M
N
N
a
x
0
w
W
a
c
w
E
r
m
V
a
Packet Pg.,105
6.B.a
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT SURVEY
1 2 contact Phone Reasons
Muhammad
County of San Bernardino No No Qureshi (909)387-8186 Lawsuits and Noise
Transp. Chief
City of Fontana No No Dave Peters (909)350-7610 Cost
City of Grand Terrace Yes No (909)825-3825 City Policy
Jay Tuttle IV
City of Highland No No Engineering (909)864-6861 Liability Risk a
Assistant E
x
City of Loma Linda No No Jarb Thaipejr (909)799-2811 Noise
Director of PW u
a
d
City of Ontario Yes No (909)395-2025 City Policy Y
N
M
Greg Cruise
City of Rancho Cucamonga Yes No Engineering (909)477-2740 City Policy a
Dept.
x
Mr. Gotham o
Ui
City of Redlands No No Engineering (909)798-7698 Liability Risk a
Associate
Jarrod
City of Rialto No No Alexander (909)864-6861 City Policy
Eng. Dept.
a
QUESTIONS
1) Does your agency have a Traffic Calming Neighborhood Traffic Management Program?
2) Does your agency allow speed humps on public streets?
PacketPg. 106