Laserfiche WebLink
Public Input <br />AddressComment/InputResponse <br />1NASupports proposal in general. -Would like to add one additional speed table This location was not initially selected for a speed table due to the hilly grades. <br />between Fernsideand Chesterton (west) near the Hetch-hetchycrossing. Staff can revisit this specific location to determine if an additional speed table <br />Has observed pedestrians crossing the area and high vehicle speeds. can be accommodated. This would add approximately $10,000 to the project. <br />Believes that a speed table is greatly needed. <br />2ChestertonSupports speed tables. Does not support traffic circle because it will make it Staff recognizes that the circle will cause some inconvenience, but this is a <br />difficult it to maneuver around intersection. Also believes that parked cars tradeoff in an effort to address speeding concerns. The circle should not impact <br />will add to the difficulties. -Believes the circle is unneeded.parking. <br />3McGarveyOne of the proposed speed tables is to be located directly in front of their Staff believes that the speed tables should not impact street parking. Vehicles <br />house. Would like to relocate particular speed table. Believesvehicles can park on top of speed tables in the same location normal adjacent to the <br />parked in the street near speed hump are susceptible to being collided with.curb. Staff recommends installing the tables as proposed on a trial basis. If <br />parking is impacted and tables are not effective and well-received, they will be <br />removed or relocated. <br />4McGarveyWould like to install one additional speed table west of Chesterton (similar to See comment #1 above. <br />comment #1) <br />5HastingsThe proposed tables and circles are not bike-friendly. Measures are not Staff recognizes that the tables and circles can be undesirable to cyclists. Staff <br />cost effective. Recommends speed-feedback signs or "share the road" type will work with the bike group to select a table design that is acceptable (or least <br />signs as an alternative. Would like to see more bicycling on McGarveyand obtrusive). For the tables, there will be a gap between the ends of the tables <br />this is not conducive to cyclists.and the curb that would allow for passage of bicycles. <br />6MedfordThe stop signs will cause a hardship on drivers of manual-transmission Stopping on an incline will be a nuisance. -Staff believes that stop signs at <br />vehicles due to vehicles being required to stop on an incline (in the Connecticut rather that Euclid is an option. Connecticut has less traffic volume <br />westbound direction) -why not install stop sign at Connecticut?that Euclid and therefore a stop is less needed in terms of right-of -way control. <br />Also, Connecticut does not have the sigh-distance limitation as does Euclid. <br />However, Connecticut does also have a significant amount of pedestrian volume <br />and there is currently a crossing-guard stationed at this location. <br />7ChestertonRequests similar measures for Chesterton. Believes that the measure on Staff recommends proceeding with the proposed measures on McGarvey. <br />McGarveymay result in traffic diversion and more speeding on Chesterton. Chesterton can by analyzed separately. Staff can conduct beforean after <br />Would like to have a traffic study performed on Chesterton.volume/speed measurements to determine the impact of any on Chesterton. <br />Staff does not believe that the proposed measures on McGarveywill cause any <br />significant diversion. <br />8ChestertonDislikes proposed speed tables on McGarveynear Farm Hill Boulevard. The proposed table are located far enough back from Farm Hill that the traffic <br />Concerned that traffic may back up from the Farm Hill signal andtraffic queue will not reach speed tables. Also, tables will be locatedon the relatively <br />would be stopping on top of table.level portion of the roadway, before the sloped section. <br />9McGarveyGlad that the "chokers" were not installed permanently because they were Staff agrees with re-painting the existing lane lines as needed. -Regarding the <br />dangerous to bikers and hopes that the tables are not the same. -bicycling, see response #5 above. <br />Recommends re-painting the lane striping to provide a visual impact of a <br />less wide open lane. -McGarveyis a difficult road to bike and obstacles will <br />make if more difficult. <br />10NAConcerned regarding the side gradient of the temporary speed tables. Staff will work with the bike/pedgroup to select appropriate product to address <br />Gradient should be gentle so as to not cause a hazard to cyclists.this concern. <br />