CC Min 1997-12-08 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Couneil Member Leipzig asked staff to research the Fresno situation and report back to Council. MEMO 12/9/97 In response to Couneil Member Leipzig's questions regarding handling individual requests for speed humps without a Council approved policy, City Attorney Sehrieker said, "The notion of approving the guidelines particularly the specifications, is to provide what is referred to as design immunity under the Government Code. So that in a case where claims may be ... alleged to result from the installation of a traffic hump, where the City Council has specifically approved the design, the Government Code provides immunity against that kind of a claim, provided that the design is reasonable, (which is ) one of the issues I want to address with staff. I do recommend the approval of design from the standpoint of the Government Code provisions, but one of the issues is also placement, location of these. To achieve full design immunity it may be necessary to provide for Council review of that as well. That's one of the issues involved in our discussion at the staff level. The Policy that you are approving is self-explanatory. However, how it is to be implemented has not been decided... The Policy should be approved so that the... process by which it is implemented will follow the Policy." In response to Couneil Member Leipzig's questions regarding roadway changes to James A venue, Manager Patterson said that staff had come back to Council and asked for approval of the current design, because the design had not followed the standard criteria. He explained that the proposed Policy will allow staff to work with neighborhoods "where we have had requests for help with traffic and give them an idea of what actually can be done. Right now we say 'no' we don't allow speed humps, but if you went to the Council maybe they would let you use them. We don't really think that is an effective use of our time or your time to arbitrate these things." Manager Patterson said the Policy will establish guidelines that staff hopes will result in speedy resolutions of neighbors requests. He said he hoped these types of requests could be handled at the staff level, and that staff would not have to continue to rehash criteria for each request. City Manager Everett said the action before the Council at this point just concerned a speed hump policy, and the other Draft Report submitted to Council separately, contained other proposed policies, not implementation strategies, and was just a prelude to a more detailed Report to corne in January. City Attorney Schricker asked Council not to consider the second Draft Report at this time. In response to Couneil Member Hartnett's questions regarding time constraints, Manager Patterson explained that staff had hoped to present the traffic calming policies in one package, but due to the number of requests staff had received regarding speeding, staff wanted to expedite at least this mechanism to address the concerns of the neighborhoods as quickly as possible. He added that the more complicated the traffic device, the more the costs increases. REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTE BOOK NO. 56 DECEMBER 8, 1997 MINUTES Page No.1 02 PAGE 17