HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet
AGENDA
Traffic Safety Advisory Committee
October 10, 2012
3:00 p.m. – 4:30 p.m.
Prior Lake City Hall
Wagon Bridge Room
4646 Dakota Street SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
I. Old Business (Review Matrix)
II. New Business
a. Fish Point Road traffic and speeds due to Eagle Creek Estates development
b. “25 MPH When Children are Present” sign request – 160 th and Franklin Trail
c. Four way stop sign request at Hawk Ridge and Tahinka Court
d. Pedestrian crossing on Hawk Ridge Road on eastern edge of Bluffs of Northwood
Meadows
e. “No Parking” signage request on Dutch Ave. – Green Heights to Pershing
f. “No Parking” signage request on Wilds Parkway by golf course driving range
g. No on street parking on Todd Road
h. Evaluate Stop signs at 2 intersections (Hampton and Ferndale; Ash and Ferndale)
i. “Do Not Block Driveway” signage request for 4517 Pleasant Street
III. Updates
a. 2013 - CSAH 12 and Sunset Avenue
b. 2013 - Ridgemont/Main/TH 13
c. 2013 – Welcome Avenue
d. Developments
i. Eagle Creek Estates
ii. Maple Glen 4 th
iii. Jeffers Pond 6 th
iv. Hickory Shores 3 rd and 4 th
v. Stemmer Ridge
e. South Downtown Study
IV. Additional Traffic Safety Announcements or Issues
V. Future Meeting
VI. Adjournment
10/4/2012
RE
Q
U
E
S
T
E
D
B
Y
C
O
N
T
A
C
T
I
N
F
O
R
M
A
T
I
O
N
RE
Q
U
E
S
T
TY
P
E
/
D
A
T
E
RE
Q
U
E
S
T
TS
C
ME
E
T
I
N
G
DA
T
E
RE
S
O
L
U
T
I
O
N
DA
T
E
A
C
T
I
O
N
CO
M
P
L
E
T
E
D
COMMENTS
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
s
a
n
d
l
a
n
d
o
w
n
e
r
s
i
n
t
h
e
Sp
r
i
n
g
B
r
o
o
k
n
e
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
Pe
t
i
t
i
o
n
b
y
n
e
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
J
e
n
Ha
n
s
e
n
4
9
5
-
4
9
5
5
5/
1
0
/
2
0
1
2
Re
q
u
e
s
t
n
o
p
a
r
k
i
n
g
s
i
g
n
a
g
e
o
n
Du
t
c
h
A
v
e
n
u
e
b
e
t
w
e
e
n
G
r
e
e
n
Ht
s
a
n
d
P
e
r
s
h
i
n
g
S
t
r
e
e
t
.
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
s
b
e
l
i
e
v
e
t
h
a
t
p
a
r
k
i
n
g
is
a
l
l
o
w
e
d
p
r
i
m
a
r
i
l
y
f
o
r
C
a
p
t
a
i
n
Ja
c
k
s
R
e
s
t
a
u
r
a
n
t
.
T
h
i
s
h
a
s
cr
e
a
t
e
d
a
s
a
f
e
t
y
i
s
s
u
e
f
o
r
re
s
i
d
e
n
t
s
t
h
a
t
u
s
e
t
h
e
s
t
r
e
e
t
be
c
a
u
s
e
t
h
e
r
e
a
r
e
n
o
s
i
d
w
a
l
k
s
.
Th
e
r
e
i
s
n
o
p
a
r
k
i
n
g
o
n
t
h
e
st
r
e
e
t
s
i
n
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
r
a
r
e
a
n
e
a
r
th
e
r
e
s
t
a
u
r
a
n
t
f
o
r
t
h
e
s
a
m
e
re
a
s
o
n
s
.
10
/
1
0
/
2
0
1
2
C
C
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
0
4
-
6
2
a
n
d
0
4
-
9
4
Green Heights no parking on both sides of 26' b-b street, Dunkirk no parking on one side of 24' b-b street, Pershing no parking on one side of 26' b-b street, Dutch no parking on one side of 26' b-b street.
Po
l
i
c
e
C
h
i
e
f
5/
2
5
/
2
0
1
2
Re
q
u
e
s
t
n
o
p
a
r
k
i
n
g
s
i
g
n
a
g
e
o
n
Wi
l
d
s
P
a
r
k
w
a
y
n
e
a
r
t
h
e
g
o
l
f
co
u
r
s
e
d
r
i
v
i
n
g
r
a
n
g
e
.
T
h
e
cu
r
v
a
t
u
r
e
o
f
t
h
e
r
o
a
d
w
a
y
co
m
b
i
n
e
d
w
i
t
h
p
a
r
k
i
n
g
c
r
e
a
t
e
s
an
u
n
s
a
f
e
s
i
t
u
a
t
i
o
n
i
n
t
h
i
s
a
r
e
a
.
Po
l
i
c
e
h
a
v
e
s
i
g
n
e
d
t
e
m
p
o
r
a
r
y
no
p
a
r
k
i
n
g
s
i
g
n
a
g
e
u
n
t
i
l
T
S
C
ca
n
r
e
v
i
e
w
.
10
/
1
0
/
2
0
1
2
To
m
S
c
h
r
o
e
d
e
r
16
2
3
0
T
a
h
i
n
k
a
C
o
u
r
t
61
2
-
9
4
0
-
5
8
7
2
6
/
1
8
/
2
0
1
2
Re
q
u
e
s
t
s
t
o
p
s
i
g
n
o
n
H
a
w
k
Ri
d
g
e
a
t
T
a
h
i
n
k
a
C
o
u
r
t
f
o
r
a
fu
l
l
f
o
u
r
w
a
y
i
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
.
T
h
e
tr
a
f
f
i
c
i
s
g
o
i
n
g
t
o
o
f
a
s
t
o
n
t
h
i
s
ro
a
d
w
a
y
a
n
d
t
h
e
y
h
a
v
e
l
o
t
s
o
f
ki
d
s
i
n
t
h
e
a
r
e
a
.
T
h
e
c
u
r
v
a
t
u
r
e
of
t
h
e
r
o
a
d
w
a
y
h
e
r
e
a
l
s
o
pr
o
v
i
d
e
s
n
e
c
e
s
s
i
t
y
f
o
r
a
S
t
o
p
Si
g
n
10
/
1
0
/
2
0
1
2
Traffic studies indicate that the 85th percentile speeds are 27.75 and 28.81 mph.
Ro
n
n
i
e
S
h
r
o
e
d
e
r
61
2
-
8
7
5
-
3
8
6
6
ro
n
n
i
e
h
@
i
n
t
e
g
r
a
.
n
e
t
8/
8
/
1
2
Re
v
i
e
w
t
h
e
p
e
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
c
r
o
s
s
i
n
g
on
H
a
w
k
R
i
d
g
e
R
o
a
d
o
n
ea
s
t
e
r
n
e
d
g
e
o
f
B
l
u
f
f
s
o
f
No
r
t
h
w
o
o
d
M
e
a
d
o
w
s
.
10
/
1
0
/
2
0
1
2
To
d
d
E
b
e
r
t
6
1
2
-
7
1
6
-
3
4
7
6
7
/
3
1
/
2
0
1
2
Re
q
u
e
s
t
s
n
o
o
n
s
t
r
e
e
t
p
a
r
k
i
n
g
on
T
o
d
d
R
o
a
d
.
A
p
e
t
i
t
i
o
n
w
a
s
su
b
m
i
t
t
e
d
f
o
r
t
h
i
s
r
e
q
u
e
s
t
.
10
/
1
0
/
2
0
1
2
23.5' B-B. No Parking with Trailer signs on one side installed in 2006. The road was previous signed no parking on both sides.
TR
A
F
F
I
C
S
A
F
E
T
Y
C
O
M
M
I
T
T
E
E
-
N
E
W
R
E
Q
U
E
S
T
S
G:
\
S
t
r
e
e
t
s
_
a
n
d
_
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
\
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
S
a
f
e
t
y
C
o
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
\
T
S
C
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
s
_
P
a
s
t
&
P
r
e
s
e
n
t
\
N
e
w
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
s
10/4/2012
RE
Q
U
E
S
T
E
D
B
Y
C
O
N
T
A
C
T
I
N
F
O
R
M
A
T
I
O
N
RE
Q
U
E
S
T
TY
P
E
/
D
A
T
E
RE
Q
U
E
S
T
TS
C
ME
E
T
I
N
G
DA
T
E
RE
S
O
L
U
T
I
O
N
DA
T
E
A
C
T
I
O
N
CO
M
P
L
E
T
E
D
COMMENTS
TR
A
F
F
I
C
S
A
F
E
T
Y
C
O
M
M
I
T
T
E
E
-
N
E
W
R
E
Q
U
E
S
T
S
Le
e
S
h
i
m
e
k
/
S
c
h
o
o
l
D
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
8/
6
/
2
0
1
2
Co
n
c
e
r
n
e
d
w
i
t
h
s
p
e
e
d
s
a
n
d
tr
a
f
f
i
c
o
n
F
i
s
h
P
o
i
n
t
R
o
a
d
o
n
c
e
th
e
E
a
g
l
e
C
r
e
e
k
E
s
t
a
t
e
s
De
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
c
o
n
n
e
c
t
s
F
i
s
h
Po
i
n
t
t
o
C
R
2
1
.
10
/
1
0
/
2
0
1
2
Traffic volumes will increase to 12,000 in 2030 from 1,700 in 2005 on Fish Point Road
Ja
k
e
T
h
i
e
s
e
n
4
8
4
-
6
8
4
7
8
/
8
/
2
0
1
2
Ev
a
l
u
a
t
e
s
t
o
p
s
i
g
n
s
a
t
Ha
m
p
t
o
n
a
n
d
F
e
r
n
d
a
l
e
a
n
d
As
h
a
n
d
F
e
r
n
d
a
l
e
10
/
1
0
/
2
0
1
2
Issue was dealt with in 2006. Input was requested from all surrounding properties. Majority of those that responded were in favor of keeping STOP signs (attached spreadsheet)
Ju
l
i
e
O
b
r
i
e
n
6
1
2
-
5
9
8
-
6
4
6
7
8
/
2
0
/
2
0
1
2
Ca
r
s
a
t
t
e
n
d
i
n
g
c
h
u
r
c
h
o
r
fu
n
e
r
a
l
s
b
l
o
c
k
u
n
i
q
u
e
d
r
i
v
e
w
a
y
at
4
5
1
7
P
l
e
a
s
a
n
t
S
t
r
e
e
t
.
Ow
n
e
r
w
o
u
l
d
l
i
k
e
t
o
s
e
e
"
d
o
no
t
b
l
o
c
k
d
r
i
v
e
w
a
y
"
s
i
g
n
a
g
e
in
s
t
a
l
l
e
d
.
10
/
1
0
/
2
0
1
2
Ad
r
i
e
n
n
e
H
i
l
l
O
f
f
i
c
e
v
i
s
i
t
9
/
5
/
2
0
1
2
Re
q
u
e
s
t
i
n
g
a
s
i
g
n
f
o
r
s
l
o
w
e
r
sp
e
e
d
w
h
i
l
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
i
s
i
n
se
s
s
i
o
n
.
S
h
e
w
o
u
l
d
l
i
k
e
t
o
s
e
e
th
e
s
p
e
e
d
l
o
w
e
r
e
d
f
r
o
m
4
5
mp
h
t
o
2
5
m
p
h
o
n
1
6
0
th
&
Fr
a
n
k
l
i
n
T
r
a
i
l
w
h
e
n
s
c
h
o
o
l
i
s
i
n
se
s
s
i
o
n
.
10
/
1
0
/
2
0
1
2
G:
\
S
t
r
e
e
t
s
_
a
n
d
_
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
\
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
S
a
f
e
t
y
C
o
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
\
T
S
C
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
s
_
P
a
s
t
&
P
r
e
s
e
n
t
\
N
e
w
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
s
10/4/2012
RE
Q
U
E
S
T
E
D
B
Y
C
O
N
T
A
C
T
I
N
F
O
R
M
A
T
I
O
N
RE
Q
U
E
S
T
TY
P
E
/
D
A
T
E
RE
Q
U
E
S
T
TS
C
ME
E
T
I
N
G
DA
T
E
RE
S
O
L
U
T
I
O
N
DA
T
E
A
C
T
I
O
N
CO
M
P
L
E
T
E
D
COMMENTS
We
s
M
a
d
e
r
we
s
m
a
d
e
r
@
i
n
t
e
g
r
a
.
n
e
t
e-
m
a
i
l
J
u
n
e
2
,
2
0
1
1
Su
b
m
i
t
t
e
d
p
e
t
i
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
n
o
pa
r
k
i
n
g
o
n
S
y
c
a
m
o
r
e
T
r
a
i
l
7/
2
8
/
1
1
Co
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
a
g
r
e
e
d
t
o
s
i
g
n
no
p
a
r
k
i
n
g
o
n
b
o
t
h
s
i
d
e
s
of
S
y
c
a
m
o
r
e
f
r
o
m
K
e
n
t
St
r
e
e
t
t
o
t
h
e
n
o
r
t
h
.
In
s
t
a
l
l
a
t
i
o
n
ve
r
i
f
i
e
d
1
0
/
1
/
1
2
Ni
c
o
l
e
M
a
r
t
i
n
61
2
-
8
1
7
-
1
2
8
8
a
d
d
r
e
s
s
o
f
16
4
3
7
S
t
e
m
m
e
r
R
i
d
g
e
R
D
N
E
Ph
o
n
e
4
/
8
/
1
1
Th
e
r
e
h
a
v
e
b
e
e
n
m
a
n
y
ne
a
r
m
i
s
s
e
s
i
n
t
h
i
s
ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
(
n
e
a
r
St
e
m
m
e
r
R
i
d
g
e
&
B
e
l
m
o
n
t
)
as
c
h
i
l
d
r
e
n
a
r
e
w
a
l
k
i
n
g
t
o
Ho
w
a
r
d
L
a
k
e
P
a
r
k
.
Th
e
y
'
v
e
n
o
t
i
c
e
d
n
o
s
p
e
e
d
li
m
i
t
s
i
g
n
s
i
n
t
h
e
ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
.
T
h
e
y
'
v
e
al
s
o
n
o
t
i
c
e
d
t
h
a
t
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
s
wi
l
l
s
p
e
e
d
u
p
a
s
t
h
e
y
'
r
e
ap
p
r
o
a
c
h
i
n
g
t
h
e
t
o
p
o
f
t
h
e
hi
l
l
.
M
a
y
b
e
i
f
t
h
e
r
e
w
a
s
a
te
m
p
o
r
a
r
y
s
t
o
p
s
i
g
n
o
n
St
e
m
m
e
r
R
i
d
g
e
R
o
a
d
a
t
Be
l
m
o
n
t
,
t
h
i
s
c
o
u
l
d
m
a
y
b
e
th
i
s
c
o
u
l
d
h
e
l
p
.
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
s
30
m
o
h
s
i
g
n
a
g
e
o
n
St
e
m
m
e
r
R
i
d
g
e
R
o
a
d
7/
2
8
/
1
1
Th
e
T
S
C
a
g
r
e
e
d
t
o
i
n
s
t
a
l
l
a
3
0
m
p
h
s
p
e
e
d
l
i
m
i
t
s
i
g
n
on
n
o
r
t
h
b
o
u
n
d
S
t
e
m
m
e
r
Ri
d
g
e
R
o
a
d
n
e
a
r
t
h
e
in
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
C
R
1
2
.
Th
e
c
o
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
f
e
l
t
t
h
a
t
th
e
s
i
g
n
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
p
l
a
c
e
d
ne
a
r
t
h
e
i
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
a
s
dr
i
v
e
r
s
e
n
t
e
r
a
d
i
f
f
e
r
e
n
t
st
r
e
e
t
o
f
f
t
h
e
C
o
u
n
t
y
Ro
a
d
.
In
s
t
a
l
l
a
t
i
o
n
ve
r
i
f
i
e
d
1
0
/
1
/
1
2
Jo
h
n
H
i
n
n
e
n
c
a
m
p
4
5
2
-
4
6
3
4
3
/
2
9
/
2
0
1
2
To
r
o
n
t
o
a
t
O
v
e
r
l
o
o
k
i
s
a
n
un
c
o
n
t
r
o
l
l
e
d
i
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
wi
t
h
n
o
s
t
o
p
s
i
g
n
s
i
n
a
n
y
di
r
e
c
t
i
o
n
.
B
e
c
a
u
s
e
n
o
s
t
o
p
si
g
n
s
e
x
i
s
t
,
t
h
e
r
e
i
s
co
n
f
u
s
i
o
n
o
v
e
r
w
h
o
g
o
e
s
fi
r
s
t
w
h
e
n
p
e
o
p
l
e
a
r
r
i
v
e
a
t
th
e
i
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
.
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
s
fo
u
r
w
a
y
s
t
o
p
f
o
r
s
a
f
e
t
y
a
n
d
as
s
i
g
n
i
n
g
r
i
g
h
t
o
f
w
a
y
.
4/
4
/
2
0
1
2
Ad
d
s
t
o
p
s
i
g
n
s
o
n
s
t
r
e
e
t
s
ap
p
r
o
a
c
h
i
n
g
T
o
r
o
n
t
o
.
(O
v
e
r
l
o
o
k
,
P
a
r
k
w
o
o
d
,
e
t
c
)
In
s
t
a
l
l
a
t
i
o
n
ve
r
i
f
i
e
d
1
0
/
1
/
1
2
The TSC reviewed adding stop signs on Toronto in 2009 but the request was denied.
TR
A
F
F
I
C
S
A
F
E
T
Y
C
O
M
M
I
T
T
E
E
-
R
E
Q
U
E
S
T
S
U
N
D
E
R
R
E
V
I
E
W
G:
\
S
t
r
e
e
t
s
_
a
n
d
_
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
\
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
S
a
f
e
t
y
C
o
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
\
T
S
C
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
s
_
P
a
s
t
&
P
r
e
s
e
n
t
\
I
s
s
u
e
s
U
n
d
e
r
R
e
v
i
e
w
10/4/2012
RE
Q
U
E
S
T
E
D
B
Y
C
O
N
T
A
C
T
I
N
F
O
R
M
A
T
I
O
N
RE
Q
U
E
S
T
TY
P
E
/
D
A
T
E
RE
Q
U
E
S
T
TS
C
ME
E
T
I
N
G
DA
T
E
RE
S
O
L
U
T
I
O
N
DA
T
E
A
C
T
I
O
N
CO
M
P
L
E
T
E
D
COMMENTS
TR
A
F
F
I
C
S
A
F
E
T
Y
C
O
M
M
I
T
T
E
E
-
R
E
Q
U
E
S
T
S
U
N
D
E
R
R
E
V
I
E
W
Ju
d
y
M
e
n
d
e
n
(
S
t
.
M
i
c
h
a
e
l
s
)
9
5
2
-
4
4
7
-
2
4
9
1
e
x
t
1
1
0
C
a
l
l
o
n
1
/
4
/
1
2
Re
q
u
e
s
t
s
b
r
i
g
h
t
e
r
s
t
r
e
e
t
li
g
h
t
a
t
t
h
e
N
E
C
o
r
n
e
r
o
f
Pl
e
a
s
a
n
t
S
t
r
e
e
t
a
n
d
D
u
l
u
t
h
.
Ch
i
l
d
r
e
n
u
s
e
t
h
i
s
in
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
t
o
c
r
o
s
s
t
o
g
e
t
to
s
c
h
o
o
l
.
H
e
r
b
e
l
i
e
f
i
s
t
h
a
t
th
e
l
i
g
h
t
i
n
g
o
n
t
h
a
t
c
o
r
n
e
r
is
n
o
t
b
r
i
g
h
t
e
n
o
u
g
h
.
L
o
o
k
at
C
o
l
o
r
a
d
o
S
t
r
e
e
t
a
l
s
o
.
4/
4
/
2
0
1
2
Ci
t
y
t
o
r
e
v
i
e
w
w
i
t
h
X
c
e
l
en
e
r
g
y
r
e
g
a
r
d
i
n
g
p
o
s
i
t
i
o
n
of
t
h
e
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
l
i
g
h
t
o
n
t
h
e
cu
r
r
e
n
t
p
o
l
e
o
r
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
il
l
u
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
li
g
h
t
.
I
f
t
h
i
s
d
o
e
s
n
'
t
pr
o
v
i
d
e
e
n
o
u
g
h
il
l
u
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
,
T
S
C
o
k
a
y
wi
t
h
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
o
f
l
i
g
h
t
s
a
t
th
i
s
i
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
.
The existing street light projects light down to one leg of the intersection
Ge
r
a
l
d
Z
i
t
k
o
f
s
k
y
6
1
2
-
3
1
0
-
6
3
0
5
1
/
1
3
/
2
0
1
2
Re
q
u
e
s
t
s
b
r
i
g
h
t
e
r
s
t
r
e
e
t
li
g
h
t
a
t
t
h
e
N
E
C
o
r
n
e
r
o
f
Pl
e
a
s
a
n
t
S
t
r
e
e
t
a
n
d
D
u
l
u
t
h
.
Ch
i
l
d
r
e
n
u
s
e
t
h
i
s
in
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
t
o
c
r
o
s
s
t
o
g
e
t
to
s
c
h
o
o
l
.
H
e
r
b
e
l
i
e
f
i
s
t
h
a
t
th
e
l
i
g
h
t
i
n
g
o
n
t
h
a
t
c
o
r
n
e
r
is
n
o
t
b
r
i
g
h
t
e
n
o
u
g
h
.
L
o
o
k
at
C
o
l
o
r
a
d
o
S
t
r
e
e
t
a
l
s
o
.
4/
4
/
2
0
1
2
Ci
t
y
t
o
r
e
v
i
e
w
w
i
t
h
X
c
e
l
en
e
r
g
y
r
e
g
a
r
d
i
n
g
p
o
s
i
t
i
o
n
of
t
h
e
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
l
i
g
h
t
o
n
t
h
e
cu
r
r
e
n
t
p
o
l
e
o
r
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
il
l
u
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
li
g
h
t
.
I
f
t
h
i
s
d
o
e
s
n
'
t
pr
o
v
i
d
e
e
n
o
u
g
h
il
l
u
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
,
T
S
C
o
k
a
y
wi
t
h
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
o
f
l
i
g
h
t
s
a
t
th
i
s
i
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
.
Pu
b
l
i
c
W
o
r
k
s
In
p
e
r
s
o
n
1
2
/
2
1
/
1
1
Re
q
u
e
s
t
s
n
o
p
a
r
k
i
n
g
si
g
n
a
g
e
o
n
W
a
t
e
r
s
e
d
g
e
Tr
a
i
l
n
e
a
r
t
h
e
l
i
f
t
s
t
a
t
i
o
n
.
Ic
e
f
i
s
h
e
r
m
e
n
a
r
e
b
l
o
c
k
i
n
g
ac
c
e
s
s
t
o
l
i
f
t
s
t
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
c
u
l
-
de
-
s
a
c
.
4/
4
/
2
0
1
2
Ad
d
n
o
p
a
r
k
i
n
g
s
i
g
n
a
g
e
fo
r
t
h
e
l
i
f
t
s
t
a
t
i
o
n
.
Temporary signage was installed over the course of winter.
G:
\
S
t
r
e
e
t
s
_
a
n
d
_
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
\
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
S
a
f
e
t
y
C
o
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
\
T
S
C
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
s
_
P
a
s
t
&
P
r
e
s
e
n
t
\
I
s
s
u
e
s
U
n
d
e
r
R
e
v
i
e
w
10/4/2012
RE
Q
U
E
S
T
E
D
B
Y
C
O
N
T
A
C
T
I
N
F
O
R
M
A
T
I
O
N
RE
Q
U
E
S
T
TY
P
E
/
D
A
T
E
RE
Q
U
E
S
T
TS
C
ME
E
T
I
N
G
DA
T
E
RE
S
O
L
U
T
I
O
N
DA
T
E
A
C
T
I
O
N
CO
M
P
L
E
T
E
D
COMMENTS
TR
A
F
F
I
C
S
A
F
E
T
Y
C
O
M
M
I
T
T
E
E
-
R
E
Q
U
E
S
T
S
U
N
D
E
R
R
E
V
I
E
W
Ca
t
h
y
P
e
t
e
r
s
o
n
27
9
1
S
o
u
t
h
S
h
o
r
e
D
r
i
v
e
Pr
i
o
r
L
a
k
e
,
M
N
5
5
3
7
2
Ca
t
h
y
N
e
l
s
o
n
w.
p
e
t
e
r
s
o
n
@
m
c
h
s
i
.
c
o
m
e-
m
a
i
l
9
/
1
9
/
1
1
Th
e
e
n
t
r
a
n
c
e
t
o
t
h
e
V
i
l
l
a
g
e
Ma
r
k
e
t
/
W
e
l
l
s
F
a
r
g
o
o
f
f
Du
l
u
t
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
i
s
co
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
t
l
y
b
a
c
k
e
d
u
p
b
y
tr
a
f
f
i
c
t
h
a
t
w
a
n
t
s
t
o
m
a
k
e
a
le
f
t
-
h
a
n
d
t
u
r
n
w
h
e
n
t
h
e
y
ar
e
h
e
a
d
i
n
g
s
o
u
t
h
o
n
Du
l
u
t
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
i
n
t
o
t
h
e
pa
r
k
i
n
g
l
o
t
b
y
t
h
o
s
e
p
e
o
p
l
e
wh
o
d
o
n
o
t
k
n
o
w
h
o
w
t
o
st
o
p
b
e
f
o
r
e
t
h
i
s
e
n
t
r
a
n
c
e
.
Th
i
s
b
a
c
k
s
u
p
c
a
r
s
o
n
t
o
1
3
an
d
h
a
s
a
l
m
o
s
t
c
a
u
s
e
d
ma
n
y
r
e
a
r
-
e
n
d
c
o
l
l
i
s
i
o
n
s
.
Ca
n
a
s
i
g
n
b
e
p
l
a
c
e
d
o
n
no
r
t
h
b
o
u
n
d
D
u
l
u
t
h
S
t
t
h
a
t
sa
y
s
"
D
o
n
o
t
b
l
o
c
k
in
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
?
4/
4
/
2
0
1
2
Ad
d
"
D
O
N
O
T
B
L
O
C
K
EN
T
R
A
N
C
E
"
s
i
g
n
a
g
e
o
n
Du
l
u
t
h
o
n
a
6
m
o
n
t
h
t
r
i
a
l
ba
s
i
s
.
T
S
C
w
i
l
l
r
e
v
i
e
w
t
h
i
s
is
s
u
e
a
f
t
e
r
t
h
e
6
m
o
n
t
h
pe
r
i
o
d
.
Re
v
i
e
w
e
d
o
n
10
/
1
/
1
2
Issue was visible during site visit.
G:
\
S
t
r
e
e
t
s
_
a
n
d
_
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
\
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
S
a
f
e
t
y
C
o
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
\
T
S
C
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
s
_
P
a
s
t
&
P
r
e
s
e
n
t
\
I
s
s
u
e
s
U
n
d
e
r
R
e
v
i
e
w
TR
A
F
F
I
C
S
A
F
E
T
Y
C
O
M
M
I
T
T
E
E
TR
A
F
F
I
C
S
A
F
E
T
Y
C
O
M
M
I
T
T
E
E
TR
A
F
F
I
C
S
A
F
E
T
Y
C
O
M
M
I
T
T
E
E
TR
A
F
F
I
C
S
A
F
E
T
Y
C
O
M
M
I
T
T
E
E
ME
E
T
I
N
G
ME
E
T
I
N
G
ME
E
T
I
N
G
ME
E
T
I
N
G
Oc
t
o
b
e
r
1
0
,
2
0
1
2
Ne
w
B
u
s
i
n
e
s
s
Fi
s
h
P
o
i
n
t
R
o
a
d
t
r
a
f
f
i
c
a
n
d
s
p
e
e
d
c
o
n
c
e
r
n
s
d
u
e
to
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
“2
5
M
P
H
W
h
e
n
C
h
i
l
d
r
e
n
a
r
e
P
r
e
s
e
n
t
”
r
e
q
u
e
s
t
–
16
0
th
an
d
F
r
a
n
k
l
i
n
T
r
a
i
l
Fo
u
r
w
a
y
s
t
o
p
r
e
q
u
e
s
t
a
t
H
a
w
k
R
i
d
g
e
a
n
d
Ta
h
i
n
k
a
C
o
u
r
t
Pe
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
c
r
o
s
s
i
n
g
o
n
H
a
w
k
R
i
d
g
e
“N
o
P
a
r
k
i
n
g
”
r
e
q
u
e
s
t
o
n
D
u
t
c
h
A
v
e
.
–
G
r
e
e
n
He
i
g
h
t
s
t
o
P
e
r
s
h
i
n
g
“N
o
P
a
r
k
i
n
g
”
r
e
q
u
e
s
t
o
n
W
i
l
d
s
P
a
r
k
w
a
y
No
o
n
s
t
r
e
e
t
p
a
r
k
i
n
g
o
n
T
o
d
d
R
o
a
d
Fe
r
n
d
a
l
e
A
v
e
n
u
e
S
t
o
p
s
i
g
n
s
“D
o
N
o
t
B
l
o
c
k
D
r
i
v
e
w
a
y
”
r
e
q
u
e
s
t
4
5
1
7
P
l
e
a
s
a
n
t
St
r
e
e
t
FI
S
H
P
O
I
N
T
R
O
A
D
FI
S
H
P
O
I
N
T
R
O
A
D
FI
S
H
P
O
I
N
T
R
O
A
D
FI
S
H
P
O
I
N
T
R
O
A
D
16
0
TH
AN
D
F
R
A
N
K
L
I
N
T
R
A
I
L
16
0
TH
AN
D
F
R
A
N
K
L
I
N
TR
A
I
L
HA
W
K
R
I
D
G
E
R
E
Q
U
E
S
T
S
HA
W
K
R
I
D
G
E
R
O
A
D
IN
T
E
R
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
HA
W
K
R
I
D
G
E
R
O
A
D
CR
O
S
S
I
N
G
DU
T
C
H
A
V
E
N
U
E
DU
T
C
H
A
V
E
N
U
E
WI
L
D
S
P
A
R
K
W
A
Y
WI
L
D
S
P
A
R
K
W
A
Y
TO
D
D
R
O
A
D
TO
D
D
R
O
A
D
FE
R
N
D
A
L
E
A
V
E
N
U
E
FE
R
N
D
A
L
E
A
V
E
N
U
E
PL
E
A
S
A
N
T
S
T
R
E
E
T
PL
E
A
S
A
N
T
S
T
R
E
E
T
DU
L
U
T
H
A
V
E
N
U
E
PR
O
J
E
C
T
S
UP
D
A
T
E
S
20
1
3
C
S
A
H
1
2
A
N
D
S
U
N
S
E
T
A
V
E
20
1
3
R
I
D
G
E
M
O
N
T
/
M
A
I
N
/
T
H
1
3
WE
L
C
O
M
E
A
V
E
N
U
E
DE
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
S
SO
U
T
H
D
O
W
N
T
O
W
N
S
T
U
D
Y
DU
C
K
S
O
N
D
U
T
C
H
MEETINGDATEAGENDAPREPAREDBYREVIEWEDBYAGENDAITEMDISCUSSION512200416200EagleCreekAtYeeouNCILAGENDAREPORTPriorLakeMN553721714MAY17200410BMAKENZIEMCCORMICKPUBLICWORKSCOORDINATORBUDOSMUNDSONDIRECTOROFPUBLICWORKSCONSIDERAPPROVALOFARESOLUTIONAUTHORIZINGTHEREMOVALOFNOPARKINGSIGNSONGREENHEIGHTSTRAILANDDUTCHAVENUEANDADDRESSINGOTHERONANDOFFSTREETPARKINGISSUESWITHRESPECTTOCAPTAINJACKSHistorvInearly2004theownersofCaptainJacksapproachedCitystaffaboutoptionstoprovideadditionalparkingfortheirpatronsThenewlyformedTrafficSafetyCommitteeTSChasresearchedthisrequestTheTSChasthoroughlyresearchedtheareaseeattachedreportandhavemetwithtwooftheownerswhoprovidedtheTSCwithalistofoptionstheyhaveresearchedseeattachedreportThepurposeofthisagendaitemistorecommendtotheCouncilvariousactionsthatwouldprovideonandoffstreetparkingtogetherwithothersafetyimprovementsintheareaCurrentCffcumsmncesOnApril26ththeTSCmetwithSteveSammisandChrisRooneyownersofCaptainJackstodiscusstheoptionstheyhaveresearchedforadditionalparkingTheattachedreportshowsanumberofoptionstheyhavelookedatmostarecostprohibitivefromabusinessstandpointTwoviableoptionsthatwerediscussedaretoprovideadditionalonstreetparkingclosertotherestaurantandprovideatemporaryparkinglottotherestaurantinthevacantlotacrossGreenHeightsTrailThelotwouldbesurfacedclass5gravelandwouldonlybeaseasonaluselotfromMay1slOctober15thTheTSCdiscussedtheseoptionsandbelowareourrecommendationsOffStreetParkingAttheApril5thCouncilmeetingResolution0462wasadoptedwhichestablishedpoliciestohelpdirecttheTSCwithtrafficsafetyrequestsThepolicystatestheprimaryobjectiveistoobtainoffstreetparkingratherthanonstreetparkingifreasonablypossibleToremainconsistentwithResolution0462theTSChasrequiredtheCaptainJacksownerstoprovidetheCitywithsolutionsforoffstreetparkingTheownershiphasresearchedseveraloptionstoalleviatetheparkingissuesThemostviableoptionfromthebusinessstandpointistocreateanoffstreetparkinglotonthevacantlotacrossfromtherestaurantTheparkinglotwouldbegradedandaClass5surfacewouldbeinstalledwwwcityofpriorlakecomPhone9524474230IFax9524474245
TheTSChasmetwiththeplanningdepartmentwhohasdeterminedthataconditionalusepermitisneededforthisrequestThestaffbelievestheZoningOrdinanceallowsenoughdiscretionespeciallythroughtheCUPprocesstoallowtheClass5surfaceonatemporarybasisACUPapplicationhasbeensubmittedbytheownersofCaptainJacksfortheparkinglotCitystaffwillfollowthenecessarystepstocompletetheCUPStaffintendstorecommendthatoneconditionshouldrequireanagreementbetweentheCityandownersregardingthedurationoftheCUPandvestedrightsnoneissuesDuringthisprocessthehomeownersintheimmediateareawillbenotifiedoftheplansandwillhaveachancetoreviewthechangestotheoffstreetparkingaswellastheonstreetparkingchangesseebelowAtthattimethetemporaryonstreetparkingchangeswillbereevaluatedOnStreetParkingTheTSCisworkingwithCaptainJacksownerstoprovideonstreetparkingaswellTheTSCdoesrealizethereisaparkingproblemduringthesummerfortherestaurantTheTSCisrecommendingonatemporarybasistoallowonstreetparkingadjacenttothevacantlotacrossfromCaptainJacksonbothGreenHeightsTrailandDutchAvenueThiswouldresultincitystaffremovingtheexistingIINoParkingsignsThechangesinparkingwouldminimizetheimpactstothecurrenthomeownersintheareanochangesarerecommendedinfrontofanyhomesThesechangeswouldbeimmediateToencouragegreatersafetyintheareatheTSCrecommendsprohibitingparkingononesideofDunkirkAvenueandPershingAvenuewherecurrentlyparkingisallowedonbothsidesofthesestreetsPershingis24feetwideandDunkirkis22feetwideTheTSCrecommendscompletingthesechangesfollowingtheCUPprocesssothecurrenthomeownershaveachancetorespondtotheseimpactsISSUESInmostcasestheCityCoderequiresapavedparkinglotHowevertheCodedoesallowconcreteblacktoporequivalentmaterialsasapprovedythePlanningDepartmentTheCodealsoprovidesaddedflexibilityforlessthanfulltimelotsInthiscasetheproposedoffstreetlotwouldnotbeusedduringthewintermonthsOctober16thtoApril30thsincethereisnodemandforparkingatthattimeofyearSimilarlytheonstreetparkingonGreenHeightsandDutchwouldbelimitedtoMay1stthroughOctober15thThiswillavoidconflictswithCitysnowandicecontroloperationsTheadditionorremovalofNoParkingsignsistypicallyaccomplishedthroughpetitionofaffectedresidentsInthiscasenopetitionhasbeensubmittedTofacilitateresidentinputtheparkingchangesonPershingandDunkirkwouldnotbemadebeforethepublichearingprocessfortheoffstreetparkingconditionalusepermitisconsideredResidentsoftheareawillreceiveappropriatenotificationofboththeCUPprocessandthepossibleNoParkingsignremovalinorderthattheycansubmittheirinputbeforeanychangesaremadeSincenooneisimpactedbytheGreenHeightsandDutchparkingchangethosestepscantakeplaceuponadoptionoftheattachedresolution5122004
16200EagleCreekAvenueSEPriorLakeMN553721714RESOLUTION04xxRESOLUTIONAUTHORIZINGTHEREMOVALOFNOPARKINGSIGNSONGREENHEIGHTSTRAILANDDUTCHAVENUEFORADDITIONALOFFSTREETPARKINGFORTHERESTAURANTMOTIONBYSECONDBYWHEREASTheownersofCaptainJacksrestauranthaverequestedadditionalparkingfortheircustomersandWHEREASStaffwillremovetheexistingNoParkingsignsalongthevacantlotonGreenHeightsTrail75ftWestofDutchAvenueandDutchAvenue75ftSouthofGreenHeightsTrailpendingaCUPapplicationhasbeenfiledbytheCaptainJackownershipandWHEREASThehomeownersintheareaofCaptainJackswillhaveanopportunitytoreviewproposedonstreetparkingchangesonPershingandDunkirkthroughtheCUPprocessNOWTHEREFOREBEITRESOLVEDBYTHECITYCOUNCILOFPRIORLAKEMINNESOTAthat1Therecitalssetforthaboveareincorporatedherein2CitystaffisdirectedtoremovetheexistingNoParkingsignsadjacenttothevacantlotonGreenHeightsTrailandDutchAvenue3UsingtheConditionalUsePermitprocesstoconsidertheoffstreetparkingandonstreetparkingremovalononesideofPershingandDunkirkisherebyapprovedPassedthis17thdayofMay2004YESNOHaugenHauQenPetersenPetersenZieskaZieskaLeMairLeMairBlombergBlomberQSealFrankBoylesCityManager5122004wwwcityofpriorlakecomPhone9524474230IFax9524474245
MemoToFrankBoylesCityManagerFromJaneKansierPlanningCoordinatorReUseofClass5forSeasonalParkingLotDateMay112004CCDRCMembersTheownersofCaptainJacksrestauranthaveaskedaboutthepossibilityofusingClass5materialtosurfaceaseasonaloffsiteparkingareaTheCityCouncilrecentlyadoptedOrdinance0413allowingfreestandingaccessoryparkinglotsinRUsedistrictssubjecttocertainconditionsandapprovalofaconditionalusepermitOneoftheconditionsrequirestheparkinglottomeettherequirementsofSection1107204Section11072045liststherequirementsforsurfacingThissectionstatesAlldrivewaysandalloftheareaintendedtobeutilizedforparkingshallbesurfacedwithaminimumof112ofbituminouspavingonasuitablebaseor6inchesofnonreinforcedconcreteorequivalentmaterialapprovedbytheCityDecorativeconcreteinterlockingpaversmayalsobeusedinparkinglotsInareaswhereparkingspacesareusedonanaverageoftwoorfewerdaysperweekgrassroadpaversRitterringsorothersuchpaversmaybeusedwhichpermitthegrowthofgroundcoversandtheinfiltrationofsurfacewaterSuchperviouspavingmaterialshallbeapprovedbytheCityEngineerInmyopinionthissectiongivestheCitythediscretiontodeterminewhatthesurfacematerialcanbeAspartoftheConditionalUsePermittheCitycanplaceconditionsontheuseincludinglimitingtheuseofthesitetocertaintimesoftheyearandsurfacematerialsIfeelcomfortablewiththisinterpretationduetothefactthatthisdecisionismadebythePlanningCommissionwithpublicinputcdocumentsandsettingskellymJocalsettingstemporaryinternetfilesolkdsurfacememodoc1
001IoUcoSrJccoSo1olJ0ocoS10coS1ujo1oEjlJQcSt10c0cdE5coScotZl00scjccj91coStl4g10oU2008sgs8QoOicQIscecdolJQlJccoScClJCdsoClJgQIt0dtcjtZlQc0aed0ttgj00CaclJotEeC5s8coSlJ001101du0clJEg01OtCISos88rJQElJQa0coSoCQa01coSrJo8QQtQc58oe8oOO00coSca5E05rJ19oQe0otZlsIorJQolJdooo0dcoS0oaQrJcjco6bErJIotZlCcj1QcalJdu9Qcod00rdo80tZlcSE138stZlgCIrocdcacjaOOcoSsut8sSooQfi5ItZltZltii8tZl0tZl80ccoS80Igf505cccoSlI00001coSto8tJd0o0NocoSI0E2on1QQc00aIIQYucl0012clQQ00ooro0lJrJorJcjooolJlJcoSQ3rJrJlJEo1oS0lJErJrJQcc3lJcjoonosoQCsd5JcS15lJlJoolJ0acjsucj00dufrQoosecaonElJlJQQoQlJcfi
Captain Jack s TSC Report
Page 1 of2
2 25 2004
Investigation of Request
To change the parking regulations to permit parking on the south side of Green
Heights Trail west side of Dutch Avenue north side of Pershing and no parking
on Dunkirk
February 25 2004
Prepared by Makenzie McCormick Public Works Coordinator
Introduction
The request was submitted by Steve Sammis part of the Captain Jack s ownership group
The request is to allow additional parking for Captain Jack s patrons
The information contained in this report was gathered from site investigations standard
engineering practices planning department and police and fire regulations
Existing Conditions
Captain Jack s is located at 3950 Green Heights Trail SW in Prior Lake The restaurant
has spaces for a total of 65 parking stalls which includes one handicap space one VIP
space and parking for the dock owners The planning requirement for commercial zoning
parking lots is one space for every 50 square feet of building Captain Jack s has a total
of 4024 square feet according to City records which would equate to 80 5 spaces The
number of parking stalls at Captain Jack s does not conform to the current requirements
Site Investigation
During the site investigation No Parking signs were found on both sides of Green
Heights Trail from Park Avenue continuing west to Dunkirk Avenue Green Heights
Trail from Dunkirk to the west end is signed No Parking by Order of Fire Chief posted
on the Dead End sign Dutch Avenue has No Parking signs on both sides from Green
Heights Trail to Roanoke Street and Park Avenue has No Parking signs on both sides
from Green Heights Trail to Cates Street The rest of the neighborhood streets currently
have no signage See attached map
Additionally street widths were collected during the site investigation Green Heights
Trail from Dunkirk Avenue to Park Avenue Park Avenue Dutch Avenue and Pershing
Street from Dunkirk Avenue to Dutch Avenue are 24 feet wide face to face Dunkirk
Avenue Spring Avenue and Roanoke Street are all 22 feet wide face to face Green
Heights Trail west of Dunkirk Avenue and Roosevelt Street which is a private street
are both 12 feet wide no curb Cates Street is 30 feet wide no curb There are no
sidewalks or trails along these neighborhood streets
Captain Jack s TSC Report
Page 2 of2
2 25 2004
Standard Engineering Practices
The typical street width is 28 32 feet for residential roads within Prior Lake In
accordance with the subdivision ordinance new roads are required to be 32 feet in width
with parking allowed on both sides 28 foot wide streets are allowed but only with
parking along one side of the street
Police and Fire Regulations
The Police department requested that one side of the street remain no parking This is
needed to provide access and enough turning radius for emergency vehicles servicing the
area The Fire department typically requires a 20 foot driving lane for their equipment
A parking lane is approximately 6 feet wide On a 24 foot wide street with parking on
one side an 18 foot driving lane would result While not the typical 20 feet desired the
fire department would allow parking on one side of a 24 foot wide road However the 24
foot wide street is the absolute minimum the fire department does not find the 22 foot
wide street adequate for their equipment and one parking lane
Public Works Maintenance Issues
The Streets and Utilities Supervisor is concerned snow removal with vehicles parking
along the neighborhood streets in a snowfall event Therefore the vehicles parked along
these streets would have to follow the City Code 901 207 Winter Parking Restrictions
This includes no Vehicles on any Street within the City between the hours of two o clock
2 00 A M and six o clock 6 00 A M from November 1 until March 31 of the
following year At all other times of the year it is unlawful for any Vehicle to stand on
any public Street within the City between the hours of two o clock 2 00 A M and six 0
clock 6 00 A M after a continuous or intermittent snowfall during which there has been
an accumulation of two inches 2 or more of snow on any Street and until the snow has
been plowed or removed to the full width of the Street Any Vehicle parked in violation
of this subsection may be towed pursuant to Minnesota Statutes section 169 041
Conclusion
Based on the information gathered for this report staff recommends to not allow parking
along either side of the street in the neighborhood near Captain Jack s that are not at least
28 feet in width The No Parking signs already in place on Green Heights Trail Roanoke
Street Dutch Avenue and Park Avenue are recommended to stay for the reasons
mentioned in the above report
oUz00UNCN
OJQoQQ1ouCSCIUCSQ14oto00ootouOcdNONCSucoI00cdEo8oo0ucE0CISd00a8sd9S00o3aN0UocNCS00S00do0octUQo0ccd00oc14doos0000g0t14oSo000cdI01010Q00odcdoSac5jd14IS8CS0Qdaci0c01oEQuoQ140cd00FAQ0to00d0001Qgu0s140OIcdoO00CS1I4CijUcdloISCSuOosaonoscS2ucd8s0Ol88rJu00008Q14aQ14ot000oPCSocti0oNtot140000Q00g8011o0jEu58u80QdvoScd0cd0CI59do14SQcdd0t1oo0000s6b2uddQQ00000l140cdusuost14rOQNQO00dd000tcdQdgtlldUOSEOIQdO00c00Q000CS14d00oSgo8gasgpilo0asS0Iol00dQgd00Q14d00oOJCSoCSQctCS801I1CliSojee00llgp2osgcil5u000t0tc00aQ0Iol0U14cQ0001QgOJgjOSIllgpgToll0itl000k01400Q0dO00rgdd0000vI0000sojoleeoooojJ0r0z0aoscEuzzoEQoE51rJuQ00uoosS00o00ooocd00o14oc0o00cdUcduo0Ss00aslij140ooSso8B9cdous00sod6b05bao0ooc00oCS000aQ0CSSoQoc005sQ8d01ssoo000CSiQ14OMcOo0en00o00auo0000oonen00scdu0000os00tocoso140Q0000oso1
bls011111oUu1oocotIouONooSNocouQJeJllllllJQJeJJCJeJllllllurtJeaouo00o10UtIocd9tIoZrtJoUoOJ0000stI00ooEo1000a0sotI011c1a0t10u00gdtl1OOu3rtJobls01300g0o00b1aoUOoooOJs0tsu0a01a9eblEss1c8rUjOCU0sotItI1000111n8ts080u00001@o00o1U100oU1900oZ0o1aOso01scastI00tI3100000c8000Ut5a040st5est08c1S0ts3s001su3ublsos00o1j1g3011aQ1000Uu1bl1sJjtI0oSOJoS180Uussl8008010u8ctssSos8oS90Oo3c800OP023rnBs300go00r00Otl0tOJ0030oga0080agpcoblsa0oss035os0J2ca
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
001Q1otoUlZuEt1loCort1d00sNCUrfJaaou00QQ5h3o0rnCCdotioto00180oo30u000ssFrnrklr000rnQ3ccEtEtUrfJoUctSOoCutocE0Ur100Qou11i4Cc90en00sO1rn0Ools8Qlr0Cp00303o0B0r0udocrnU00lolo10ISccj05ouguo911crc0rnc0ooa9CS10co00rc0uc0ocjdrnrnOlOsz85n0010ooc1rnrnEEto1r11OJjrnrncQoc0IrnJs0c0rn1Prn0uooOllZuc000050aJjo0rnOO100000513tt10attlt0CrnUlaOcu000rn0Cu0o00Q000000108Q001300ac1uCSrn0001os0ernQ0aurnUecuOorfJooio0Ua0gQJjurnU0S5rnrnlr1rnrnc0rnbEOot0000tL01rnrnc81caOOOOC1s8E8Ba1000oornorn11arnlcl0Cdt10poJN0rn0rornbc1o01t05ctc1ro8oocrnrnso501Jj3urra800o1ct1ornc01coJjrnIdo0ca0o80ClStd00JooI002000g3ClS0fJ0E0dou0Oc3s3orni4dorn9JjceCS0rnlEe8Et1iiCdct
RESOLUTION046216200EagleCreekAvenueSEPriorLakeMN553721714ARESOLUTIONESTABLISHINGPOLICIESTODIRECTTHETRAFFICSAFETYCOMMITTEEMotionByLEMAIRSecondByZIESKAWHEREAStheCityofPriorLakeisexperiencingrapidurbanizationwhichaffectstheCitystransportationsystemandWHEREASthePriorLakeCityCouncilplacesahighpriorityontransportationandrelatedsafetyissuesandWHEREASinanefforttoestablishaconsistentprocesstoreviewtrafficsafetyrequeststheCityCouncilhasestablishedaTrafficSafetyCommitteeandWHEREAStheTrafficSafetyCommitteehasrequestedthattheCityCouncilconsiderpolicieswhichwillhelpdirectthedeliberationsoftheTrafficSafetyCommitteeNOWTHEREFOREBEITRESOLVEDBYTHECITYCOUNCILOFPRIORLAKEMINNESOTAthat1Therecitalssetforthaboveareincorporatedherein2TheGeneralProceduresFlowChartidentifiedasExhibitItothisresolutionsetsforththegeneralprocesstobefollowedbytheTrafficSafetyCommitteeinconsideringTrafficSafetyrequests3OffStreetParkinqTheprimaryobjectiveoftheTrafficSafetyCommitteeistoencouragetotheextentreasonablypossibleoffstreetratherthanonstreetparkingOnlywhenapetitionerhasdemonstratedreasonableeffortstosolveparkingproblemsoffstreetwilltheCommitteeconsideronstreetparkingrequests4UnderStateStatuteafireroadmustbeaminimumof20feetwideAccordinglythisisconsideredtheminimumdriveaislerequiredtoallowpublicsafetyaccessforresidentialroadwaysThereforethefollowinggeneralstandardsareestablishedtoachieveconsistencyinonstreetparkingforvariousresidentialstreetwidthsStreetWidthinFeetOnStreetParkingAlloweds24none2831oneside32twosides5TheCommitteemayconsiderotherfactorsaffeictingresidentialonstreetparkingsuchasbutnotlimitedtocurrentandorfutureaveragetraffiicvolumegeneraltopographyofthearearoadconditionsincludingvisualobstructionsverticalandhorizontalroadcurvesnumberandlocationofresidentialaccessesdensityofdevelopmentoftheneighborhoodandanyotherfactorswhichtheTrafficSafetyCommitteedeemsappropriateinmakingtheirrecommendations6NoparkingrequestsfornonresidentialroadwaysshallbeconsideredonacasebycasebasiswwwcityofpriorlakecomPhone9524474230Fax9524474245
PASSEDANDADOPTEDTHIS5THDAYOFAPRIL2004YESNOHaugenXHaugenBlombergXBlombergLeMairXLeMairPetersenXPetersenZieskaXZieskaJCityManagerityPnorLakeRRESOLUTIADMINRES20040462DOC
16200EagleCreekAvenueSEPriorLakeMN553721714RESOLUTION0494ARESOLUTIONAUTHORIZINGTHEREMOVALOFNOPARKINGSIGNSONGREENHEIGHTSTRAILANDDUTCHAVENUEFORADDITIONALOFFSTREETPARKINGFORTHERESTAURANTMotionByZIESKASecondByPETERSENWHEREAStheownersofCaptainJacksrestauranthaveindicatedthattheyhaveaneedforadditionalparkingfortheircustomersandWHEREAStheownershaveproposedtotheCityvariousoptionstoaddresstheparkinglimitationsandWHEREAStheCitysTransportationSafetyCommitteehasmettoconsiderthevariousparkingoptionsandtomakearecommendationtotheCityCouncilNOWTHEREFOREBEITRESOLVEDBYTHECITYCOUNCilOFPRIORlAKEMINNESOTAthat1Therecitalssetforthaboveareincorporatedherein2AsoneoptiontoaddresstheparkinglimitationsatCaptainJacksCitystaffareherebyauthorizedtoremoveonlyfortheperiodbetweenJune12004andOctober152004theNoParkingsignsalongthevacantlotonGreenHeightsTrail75feetwestofDutchAvenueandDutchAvenue75feetsouthofGreenHeightsTrail3NothinginthisresolutionisintendedtoobligatetheCitytoaauthorizetheremovalofNoParkingsignsinsubsequentyearsorbidentifyandapproveotheroptionstoaddresstheparkinglimitationsatCaptainJacksPASSEDANDADOPTEDTHIS7THDAYOFJUNE2004YESNOHaugenXHaugenBlombergXBlombergleMairXleMairPetersenXPetersenZieskaXZieskaCityriorLakewwwcityofpriorlakecomPhone9524474230Fax9524474245
AGAINST
REMOVAL
IN FAVOR OF
REMOVAL
AGAINST
REMOVAL
IN FAVOR OF
REMOVAL
BRADLEY & SANDRA HAYCRAFT 14156 ASH CIR NE X X
JOSEPH G & DIANE M ZIESKA 5316 HAMPTON ST NE
KEITH R & ANNETTE DICKIE 5336 HAMPTON ST NE X
JAMES G & BRENDA S RASMUSSEN 5356 HAMPTON ST NE
GEORGE SENGPHANLAYA 5376 HAMPTON ST
RODGER E & ELAINE D OLSON 5396 HAMPTON ST NE X
DAVID T & KATHLEEN M SANDVIK 5410 HAMPTON ST NE
CHRISTOPHER T HEID 14093 FISHER AVE NE
JULIUS G & GAIL TADEVICH 5375 HAMPTON ST NE
LEAH PALMER 5357 HAMPTON AVE NE
CHAD A & KRISTIE J NIKLASON 5313 HAMPTON ST NE
GREG & JEAN JOHNSON 5295 HAMPTON ST NE
CHAD V LEMAIR 5524 HIGHPOINTE CT
CHAD A & KRISTIE J NIKLASON 5313 HAMPTON ST NE
TIM G & FUMOKO CONNORS 14113 ASH CIR NE X X
SHAWN K & JENNIFER S GARVEY 14149 ASH CIR NE
RICHARD G & SARA J KROHN 14179 ASH CIR NE X X No Parking on Ash
request.
PATRICK & SUZANNE C WALL 14209 ASH CIR NE
JUDITH R ALESSIO 14251 ASH CIR NE
DARRELL V HASTINGS 14114 ASH CIR NE
GREGORY G & ROBERT FARRELL 14128 ASH CIR NE X X Would like to see Ash
Circle sign stay.
TERRANCE A & TONI L HANSON 14142 ASH CIR NE X X
DANIEL E STEIN 3032 BOBCAT TRL NW
KARL D TURNLUND 14184 ASH CIR NE
RYAN A NELSON 14198 ASH CIR NE
KEITH W & BONITA K PLATH 14212 ASH CIR NE X X
JAMES K SPIEKER 14226 ASH CIR NE X X
EVE EASTERLY-GILDER 14240 ASH CIR NE X X
ROBERT D & LINDA L SCHEELER 14254 ASH CIR NE
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE 16200 EAGLE CREEK AVE SE
EARL W & DIA BLAKE 14119 FISHER AVE NE
EARL W & DIA BLAKE 14119 FISHER AVE NE
ARTHUR F & IONE P LAFOND,II 14143 FISHER AVE NE
MARK D HALLQUIST 14169 FISHER AVE NE
KELVAN ROOPNARINE 14191 FISHER AVE NE
LARRY S & SEVERSON 9885 OAK SHORE DR
PATRICIA A SOUKUP 14231 FISHER AVE NE
DAVID W & JOANNE F DALBY 14251 FISHER AVE NE X X Ash sign not as
important to Joanne.
PATRICK M & CATHERINE KELLY 14120 FISHER AVE NE
MATTHEW R & KIMBERLY D LITFIN 14146 FISHER AVE NE
THOMAS B GROTE 14174 FISCHER AVE NE
BRADLEY P PLUNKETT 1431 BEACH PARK BLVD
THOMAS & JOANNE SCHERER 14210 FISHER NE
SCOTT G HENNEN 14271 FISHER ST
DIANE M WELLS 14283 FISHER AVE NE
THADDEUS J & KIM M HAHN 14299 FISHER AVE NE
LYNN TORNEY ET AL 5286 HAMPTON ST
AARON G BARCLAY 5298 HAMPTON ST NE X
Final as of 8/11/06 TOTALS 7293
STOP SIGN REMOVALS
RESIDENT ADDRESS
ASH CIRCLE SIGN HAMPTON SIGN
COMMENTS
G:\Safety_and_Certifications\Traffic Safety Committee\Ash Circle Stop Removal
AA GuideGuide
to to EstablishingEstablishing
Speed LimitsSpeed Limits
in School Zonesin School Zones
Prepared by the Office of Traffic, Safety, and Technology
Minnesota Department of Transportation
2012
http://www.dot.state.mn.us/
A Guide to Establishing Speed Limits in School Zones
TABLE OF CONTENTS
page
Preface. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii
Introduction and Legislation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
The Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Definitions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
School Child Crash Experience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
The Traffic and Engineering Investigation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
School Route Plan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
School Zone Hazard Evaluation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Traffic Calming Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Safety Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Special Situations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Photo Credits and Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
FIGURES
Figure 1 - Sample School Route Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Figure 2 - Tabular Listing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Figure 3 - Road Log A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Figure 4 - Road Log B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Figure 5 - Sign Placement Diagram. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
i
PREFACE
The purpose of this document is to assist in conducting the traffic investigation, identifying haz-
ards and eliminating or reducing them.
THIS INVESTIGATION IS REQUIRED FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A LEGAL
SCHOOL SPEED ZONE ACCORDING TO MINNESOTA STATUTES, SECTION 169.14,
SUBDIVISION 5a.
The school zone investigation set forth in this document constitutes the prescribed engineering
and traffic investigation. As discussed above, this is a coordinated effort requiring several disci-
plines to accurately perform some of the duties described within this document.
ii
1
INTRODUCTION
Ensuring the safety of students on public streets and highways is the responsibility of parents, law
enforcement, school and government officials. Parents must provide day to day education and
supervision in order to develop safe behavior by their children. Roadway engineers must provide
a safe environment that minimizes vehicular-pedestrian crash probability. Enforcement officials
must provide regular patrols to discourage unlawful behavior and provide training for crossing
guards. School district personnel must communicate and coordinate safety programs (such as
school patrols or safety education) with children and their parents. Typically the road authority
provides the oversight in performing the traffic investigation described in these guidelines.
The responsibility to achieve pedestrian safety must be faced with the knowledge that, despite our
best efforts, children and drivers will make mistakes bearing tragic consequences. When this
occurs, conflicts between parents and officials may follow concerning the appropriate course of
action to avoid reoccurrence of a similar tragedy.
In order to provide a safe environment for children, a traffic investigation should be conducted
along school routes and in school zones. The desired results of such an investigation are effective
pedestrian and traffic controls, and the creation of a sound school route plan.
SPEED LIMIT LEGISLATION
In 1975, the Legislature changed Minnesota Statutes by adding Subd. 5a to Section 169.14.
This change enables local authorities to establish speed limits in school zones, an authority pre-
viously granted in 1937 solely to the Commissioner of Highways. Revisions to the legislation
have been made through the years. This law gives additional responsibility and control of
school zone safety to local authorities on those streets within their jurisdiction. In exercising
this prerogative, it is important that local authorities not permit pressures and emotions to out-
weigh reason and judgment, since improper speed zones can actually decrease safety.
2
THE LAW
Definitions for some of the terms used within the law are on the next page.
Minnesota Statutes, Section 169.14, reads in part:
Subd. 5a. Speed zoning in school zone; surcharge.
(a) Local authorities may establish a school speed limit within a school zone of a public or
non-public school upon the basis of an engineering and traffic investigation as prescribed by
the commissioner of transportation. The establishment of a school speed limit on any trunk
highway shall be with the consent of the commissioner of transportation. Such school speed
limits shall be in effect when children are present, going to or leaving school during opening
or closing hours or during school recess periods. The school speed limit shall not be lower
than 15 miles per hour and shall not be more than 30 miles per hour below the established
speed limit on an affected street or highway.
(b) The school speed limit shall be effective upon the erection of appropriate signs designat-
ing the speed and indicating the beginning and end of the reduced speed zone. Any speed in
excess of such posted school speed limit is unlawful. All such signs shall be erected by the
local authorities on those streets and highways under their respective jurisdictions and by the
commissioner of transportation on trunk highways.
(c) For the purpose of this subdivision, "school zone" means that section of a street or high-
way which abuts the grounds of a school where children have access to the street or highway
from the school property or where an established school crossing is located provided the
school advance sign prescribed by the manual on uniform traffic control devices adopted by
the commissioner of transportation pursuant to section 169.06 is in place. All signs erected by
local authorities to designate speed limits in school zones shall conform to the Manual on
Uniform Traffic Control Devices.
(d) Notwithstanding section 609.0331 or 609.101 or other law to the contrary, a person who
violates a speed limit established under this subdivision is assessed an additional surcharge
equal to the amount of the fine imposed for the violation, but not less than $25.
3
DEFINITIONS
". . . local authorities . . ." as defined in Section 169.011 Subd 38 means "every county, munici-
pal and other local board or body having authority to adopt local police regulations under the
constitution and laws of this state, . . ."School zone speed limits must be established by the appro-
priate city council or county board action, and cannot be established by school boards.
". . . upon the basis of an engineering and traffic investigation . . ." This document presents
guidance on the preparation of the necessary engineering and traffic investigation.
". . . as prescribed by the commissioner of transportation. . ." is meant to ensure that motorists
will encounter speed zones determined by valid methods applied uniformly statewide.
". . . the establishment of a school speed limit on any trunk highway shall be with the con-
sent of the commissioner of transportation. . ." The commissioner retains authority on trunk
highways that may be located in a school zone. If a school zone speed limit is desired on a trunk
highway, the appropriate Minnesota Department of Transportation District Office should be con-
tacted to coordinate the traffic investigation and provide guidance. If the school speed limit is
on a local road but a trunk highway is part of a school route plan, the District Office will provide
pertinent data to the local road authority as requested, in order for the local road authority to com-
plete their investigation.
". . . Such school speed limits shall be in effect when children are present, going to or leav-
ing school during opening or closing hours during school recess periods.. ." Because the
reduced speed may only be necessary during these times, it is unreasonable to require drivers to
reduce speeds during other times. The school zone limit is "part-time" and must be identified
accordingly. Non-school time speed limits must be determined in accordance with Minnesota
Statutes 169.14.
". . . the school speed limit shall not be lower than 15 MPH and shall not be more than 30
MPH below the established speed limit on the affected street or highway. . ." Limitations on
the speed zone reductions are meant to preclude creation of hazardous conditions.
"…school zone…" This is defined in MN statute 169.14 subd 5a and means the same in this doc-
ument including any maximum distances defined in the MN Manual on Uniform Traffic Control
Devices1 (MN MUTCD).
4
SCHOOL CHILD CRASH EXPERIENCE
Crashes on public roads cause billions of dollars in economic loses, sometimes tragic conse-
quences for those injured and grief caused by fatal crashes. Statewide data summarized for three
years (2005-2007) from MN Department of Public Safety Crash Facts2 , showed that there was a
total 248,063 crashes of which 5739 involved pedestrians and bicyclists. 21 children, ages 5-19,
died and 2817 were injured in vehicle/pedestrian crashes. The same 3 year records for that age
group revealed that 7 children died and 2839 were injured in vehicle/bicycle crashes. For 10 years
from 1998 to 2007 the range of pedestrian fatalities (all ages annually) has a wide fluctuation from
a low of 33 to a high of 56. Social and economic factors fluctuate, which impacts the number and
exposure of pedestrians but what doesn't change is the vulnerability of this group. For 2007, near-
ly 4% of pedestrian crashes resulted in a death, compared to about one-half of 1% for all traffic
crashes. Identification of the locations, the hazards, and nature of the child related crashes is nec-
essary in dealing with the prevention of these traumatic crashes.
WHERE AND WHEN CRASHES OCCUR
MN crash data was filtered using Geographic Information System (GIS) technology, for crashes
that involved school age pedestrians, occurred on a weekday, during school year times, and
occurred on MN trunk highways from 1998 to 2000. There were 89 plotted crashes meeting this
criteria. Of the 89, only 10 crashes occurred within 1,000 feet of a school. The data indicates that
many crashes are happening on the streets that may be leading to school but fewer crashes close
to the school.
Although crash data is subject to variability, such as busing or walking distance, it is apparent that
a program designed to improve safety for the total school trip should emphasize factors that will
also carry over to all streets used by the children.
WHO AND WHY CRASHES OCCUR
Further insights can be gathered from an analysis of circumstances contributing to school
child/vehicle crashes. A review of comments made by witnesses and officers investigating the
Minnesota crashes found that:
- many crashes occurred when the child dashed from behind or between parked cars.
- many occurred even though the vehicle was moving very slowly because of traffic delays,
control devices or obstructed views.
Previous reports3 involved the determination of who was involved and found that:
- the typical pedestrian involved in a crash was young (K- 3rd grade) and had considerable
difficulty understanding and properly using traffic control devices.
- the typical driver in the school area is a local resident driving to (or from) work. Further,
"the driver has a child between the ages of five and nine and is aware of the school area -
not because of signing, but because of familiarity with the area. "
5
SPEED LIMIT INFLUENCE
Often, people's first answer to hazard reduction is to reduce the speed limit. However, lower speed
zones are not the only solution to hazard reduction. It may not be an answer at all. Numerous stud-
ies show that the passive posting of a speed limit sign does not reduce the actual operating speed
of drivers and can actually increase the risk of crashes.
The increase in crash risk stems from a mismatch between the posted speed limit and the operat-
ing speed. The speed limit sign has a legal value on it but most drivers are basing their travel
speed on lane width, traffic volume, environment, etc. and reflects the driver's choice of what is
safe and reasonable. Some motorists may travel at the posted value while others are choosing a
different operating speed and this creates a large variation in travel speeds. The variation in these
travel speeds makes it difficult for pedestrians to accurately gauge safe crossings. The pedestrian
may perceive a safe crossing time based on the speed of one vehicle and not anticipate the high-
er speed of another approaching vehicle causing a misjudgment on the safe time to cross. Similar
misjudgments happen to vehicle drivers trying to cross or enter the road. The larger the range of
vehicle speeds, the more likely this will occur. When posted speed limits correspond more close-
ly to operating speeds, the consistent vehicle travel speeds permit better judgment calls thereby
improving the safety.
A 1990 Transportation Research Board(TRB) Record4 summarized that "on streets with normal
speed limits of 35 mph, the 85th percentile speeds in zones with 25-mph school speed limits were
lower than those in zones with 15- or 20-mph limits. Therefore, it was concluded that school speed
limits lower than 25 mph should probably not be used on these streets."Minnesota has studied
speed trends after changing posted speed limits and discovered similar results, that passive sign-
ing by itself does not achieve the desired speed reduction.
The legislation granting authority to establish school zone speed limits to local officials is not
intended as an endorsement of blanket zoning or maximum reductions. Rather, many techniques
should be considered. Other solutions include, but are not limited to: sidewalk construction, park-
ing restrictions, crossing guard utilization, stop sign or signal placement and pedestrian re-rout-
ing. These measures are almost always more effective in reducing a pedestrian hazard. Effective
safety results from the careful consideration of all possible solutions to a hazard. The school zone
hazard inventory and the school route plan are of great value in determining appropriate actions
in particular situations.
6
THE TRAFFIC AND ENGINEERING INVESTIGATION
The engineering and traffic investigation consists of:
1) Preparing a school route plan. See Figure 1
2) Conducting a school zone hazard evaluation
3) All hazards should be placed in a tabular listing with a recommended corrective action.
See Figure 2.
SCHOOL ROUTE PLAN
The school route plan is most effective for schools serving kindergarten, elementary and middle
school students. High school students generally have better skills in judging traffic hazards but a
school route plan is still useful by encouraging those students to use protected crossings. The plan,
developed jointly by the school, enforcement and traffic officials responsible for school pedestri-
an safety, consists of a map showing streets, the school, existing traffic controls, established
school routes and established school crossings. An additional benefit of having a plan, is that it
can be used to identify areas that may qualify for special grant money that is sometimes available
for safety improvements.
The plan permits the orderly review of school area
traffic control needs, and the coordination of
school pedestrian safety education and engineer-
ing activities. The preparation of such a plan is
vital to the effective analysis of a school zone, and
is necessary in determining an appropriate solu-
tion to a hazardous school zone situation. The
school route plan is the primary tool in this effort.
Engineering officials can use the plan to prioritize
maintenance of painting crosswalks, prioritize
infrastructure improvements such as sidewalks, or
prioritize sign replacement programs. Families
can use the plan to ensure their children are using
a safe route and can escort children to provide additional safety. School officials can use the plan
to schedule locations for crossing guards. Police can use the plan to schedule locations at criti-
cal crosswalks where additional enforcement may be needed for pedestrian or traffic control.
The main objective in creating a school route plan is to minimize the number of streets crossed,
maximize the safety of crossings and routes used by school children and utilize existing protect-
ed crossings. The number of crossings is minimized by concentrating students into larger groups
as they approach the school. Students are directed along common routes which merge with other
common routes until, near the school, all of the students are on very few routes.
The safety of the crossings is maximized by the effective use of vehicular and pedestrian controls.
Often the simplest and most efficient way to reduce a pedestrian hazard is to utilize existing
pedestrian facilities and vehicular traffic controls. The school route plan is the primary tool in this
effort. Crossings can be chosen in such a way that existing stop signs, signals, crosswalks, and
other traffic controls are used as much as possible. See Figure 1 for a sample school route plan
taken from the MN MUTCD.1
7
SCHOOL ZONE HAZARD EVALUATION
Since the preparation of a safe school route plan considers many factors, the hazards along alter-
native routes must be evaluated in light of what is present as well as what can be changed. The
first step is to determine what hazards exist in the "informal" route established by the children.
Next is a comparative evaluation of each route and all alternatives. Identified deficiencies or rec-
ommended improvements need to be documented and listed. Asample tabular listing is shown in
Figure 2. Finally, the "formal" designation of the routes is made, with route changes being made
to better utilize existing protections and with engineering changes being made to enhance the
safety of the planned routes. The following information must be gathered and analyzed:
1) Roadway Information Needed
Abasic feature of a hazard evaluation is an analysis of the roadway features which may cause
or contribute to a hazardous situation.
The width of the road, the width of the shoulders and the number of traffic lanes should be
determined and entered on a road log, see Figures 3 and 4 for examples. In the lower section
of the road log, the roadway should be sketched and the dimensions clearly marked. When
sketching the roadway, leave plenty of room to include fencing, sidewalks, bushes that restrict
sight, etc. on your drawing.
Other roadway features which should be considered are the existence of curves, hills and near-
by buildings which may cause a shortened sight distance. These features should also be
recorded on the road log form.
What to do:
After reviewing the above characteristics, look at them critically to determine possible prob-
lems. Are the lanes narrow with no shoulders? Is the shoulder so narrow that children nor-
mally walking off the roadway are within a few feet of traffic? Is the street so wide that cross-
ing the lanes of traffic will require a large time gap to cross?
If such problems exist they may be corrected by sidewalk construction, shoulder widening,
median safety refuge or the rerouting of children away from that area. Other solutions may be
discovered as each particular situation is analyzed.
Occasionally a sight distance restriction can be corrected by cutting back brush or leveling
hills; but usually rerouting children to an area where they are seen better by motorists is a
more effective method of correction. Any identified hazard should be put on the tabular list-
ing form, with a recommended course of action.
2) Traffic Volumes Information Needed
Traffic volumes should be determined by manually
counting vehicles during peak hours (tabulated by 5
or 15 minute periods) on an average school day,
when children are going to and from school.
Another acceptable but less accurate method would
involve contacting the appropriate road authority
and asking them for the traffic volumes on particu-
lar roads.
What to do:
Rerouting may be used to effectively increase
vehicular control by directing children to intersec-
tions where control devices are already in place. This sort of solution works well and yet
involves no substantial expense. A hazard due to children crossing high volume streets then
may be corrected through the use of crossing guards or additional vehicular control. School
routes should be crossing the lowest volume streets wherever possible. Any identified high
volume roads that require the children to cross and need additional control should be put on
the tabular listing form, with a recommended course of action.
3) Pedestrian Volumes Information Needed
Pedestrian volumes may be obtained either by
counting pedestrians on an average school day, or
by contacting school authorities who may have
pedestrian volume information. Pedestrian volumes
should be collected at critical intersections. The
simplest method of counting pedestrians is to count
them at a crossing, writing down the number in
each group that crosses, along with the time of each
crossing. The general age range of the pedestrians
should also be recorded. Jaywalking or other unsafe
behaviors should also be recorded since visible
enforcement can encourage them to act more
responsibly. If very wide roads need to be crossed, a more detailed pedestrian useable gap
study5 may need to be conducted to determine an appropriate traffic control measure.
What to do:
High pedestrian volumes alone are not a problem. Research has shown that it is high traffic
volumes that are more dangerous than high pedestrian volumes at crossings. It is safer, how-
ever, for a large pedestrian volume to be concentrated with an appropriate crossing treatment
than to be spread out over an area. The primary method of concentrating pedestrians is the
school route plan. Studies have shown that drivers respond favorably with increased care in
driving when child pedestrians are visibly present; and if the school route plan is properly
devised, children will be increasingly concentrated as they approach the school. Any identi-
fied high pedestrian volumes that are required to cross a road with no crossing treatment or
crossing guards, should be put on the tabular listing form, with a recommended course of
action.
8
4) Parking and Loading Zones Information Needed
Locations of parking and loading zones should be
noted on the road log, map or sketch. Off street
loading areas are desirable but even they should be
evaluated by the transportation director for the
school district. In loading and unloading zones, 2/3
of the fatal crashes are caused by the school bus
striking the child. 6
What to do:
School bus loading zones and parking or stopping
zones near entrances must be given careful atten-
tion. One of the greatest causes of child pedestrian
crashes is children crossing between parked cars.
Parking is a major sight distance limitation at crosswalks and intersections. In areas where
children are not readily seen by motorists, no parking zones are an important feature of child
safety. To improve both driver and pedestrian visibility, parking should be banned for at least
100 feet on the street where a hazardous situation has been noted. Where possible, loading
zones should be off the street. Any identified sight restrictions caused by stopped cars or buses
should be put on the tabular listing form with a recommended course of action.
5) Traffic Control Devices Information Needed
All traffic control devices such as school crossing signs, pavement markings, signals, school
patrol locations, school zone warning signs, and
speed limit signs should be precisely located on the
road log for use in developing the school route plan.
The condition and visibility of these control devices
should be determined by driving through the area.
A night time review should also be performed to
determine the retroreflectivity of signs and condi-
tion of pavement markings. Minnesota winter
nights are very long and may extend into the morn-
ing school start times or extracurricular activities
after school. A night review is a good practice to
evaluate if street lights would improve the visibility
of major pedestrian crossings.
What to do:
Just as schools have rule books, traffic engineers have rules also. All traffic control devices
must conform to the requirements of the current Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic
Control Devices(MN MUTCD). A typical sign placement diagram from Chapter 7 for a
school area is shown on Figure 5. Signs which are hidden by vegetation or poles should be
made visible. Sign placement locations and minimum sign panel heights should be checked
with the specifications listed in the MN MUTCD. Pavement markings and signs should be
replaced if worn out. Once the route plan has been developed, locations needing new or addi-
tional controls will be apparent. Locations that have crossing guards should have signs and
crosswalk pavement markings.Intersections can also have supplemental stop bars if stop signs
or signals are present. Pedestrian walk signals should be checked for adequate crossing time
based upon the pedestrian counts in Step 3 above and the crossing length. If any night time
pedestrian crashes have occurred, additional lower level street lights (not the typical high mast
mounted type) should be considered. Non compliant devices, signs or locations should be put
on the tabular listing form, with a recommended course of action.
9
6) Sidewalk Information Needed
Like the previous items, sidewalks should be
marked on the road log and on the school route
plan. Width and condition of the sidewalk should
also be noted.
What to do:
Drivers need a safe place to drive and children need
a safe place to walk. The installation of sidewalks
along streets creates this safe area and can reduce
the crash possibility. Intermittent gaps or broken sections in the sidewalk pathway system
cause children to enter the road at unexpected locations. Sometimes construction of relative-
ly little sidewalk can greatly improve safety. Proper maintenance of sidewalks in the winter is
also important. If this is not feasible it may be better to reroute students to a route with better
pedestrian facilities. Thus, sidewalks play an important part in devising a school route plan.
Identified missing sections of sidewalk, poor condition, or new path locations should be put
on the tabular listing form, with a recommended course of action.
7) Fencing Information Needed
Fencing should be shown on the road log.
What to do:
Like sidewalk, relatively little fencing can drastical-
ly alter walking patterns. Used along school
grounds it can effectively prevent children from
crossing mid-block. It also prevents bouncing balls
from entering the street, with children focused on
pursuit of the ball instead of crossing the street safe-
ly. Therefore, adding fencing along selected school
routes and school playgrounds can be an important
part of pedestrian protection and control. Proposed fence locations should be put on the tab-
ular listing form.
8) Crash History Information Needed
If the area studied includes high crash locations, they should be identified with an indication
of types of crashes and crash rates, such as crashes per year and/or severity rates.
What to do:
High crash locations demand intensive study and positive action. The nature and time of the
crashes should be considered to determine whether they are school related and whether these
crashes are truly impacting the pedestrian safety. Crashes should be analyzed in light of the
previously mentioned items in this investigation so that possible solutions such as sidewalk or
fencing placement, traffic control device installations, etc. may be discovered to prevent reoc-
10
11
curring type crashes. If hazards cannot be eliminated by proper use of standard control
devices, reroute children away from the area. If a pattern of crashes is discovered, a recom-
mended course of action should be put on the tabular listing form. While vehicle-to-vehicle
type crashes don't directly impact pedestrian safety, if they are occurring at the school
entrance they can be disrupting to traffic and pedestrians. The road authority should become
involved for appropriate solutions.
9) Speed Zones Information needed
In place speed limit signs should be recorded on the area map or road log. If normal zones
other than the typical 30 or 55 are inplace, verification should be made that these were author-
ized by the Mn/DOT Commissioner and are legally established speed limits.
What to do:
Determination of appropriate school speed limits
should be made after all of the inventory data have
been analyzed and appropriate corrective measures
have been taken. If possible, a speed check should
be performed to check current operating speeds of
motorists to determine the present compliance rates
for the normal speed limit and verify if the normal
speed limit is correct.
Stopping sight distance calculations should be made
by a qualified engineering professional. American
Association of State Highway and Transportation
Officials (AASHTO) road design guidelines recommend using an object height of 2 feet and
a driver eye height of 3.5 feet for calculating the stopping sight distance. If a sight restriction
exists, and the stopping sight distance will be used as the determining factor in setting the
school speed limit, a tighter specification may be appropriate. A small object such as a base-
ball should be placed on the centerline and distances calculated using the normal driver eye
height of 3.5 feet. Speed values calculated by using this more restrictive object height, would
justify a lower school speed limit thereby giving drivers improved reaction times for hazards
such as children chasing a ball. For other cases, if all the hazards have been identified and cor-
rected, and a lower speed limit is still necessary to improve sight distance or reaction times,
then a slower school speed limit may be warranted.
Proper speed zoning can reduce vehicular speed differentials, provide basis for enforcement,
increase driver respect for speed zoning, and decrease the crash potential. TRB research7
yielded some information about placement of the speed zone. The minimum speed in a school
zone typically occurred between the initial15 and 30 percent of the school zone length.
Regardless of the length of the school zone or the school speed limit, drivers tended to achieve
their minimum speed within the first 350 feet for low-speed sites and within 800 feet for high-
er-speed sites. The minimum speed in a speed zone always occurred in the first half of the
school zone but was rarely maintained into the second half of the zone.
Even though law permits as much as a 30 MPH reduction in school zones, this data and sim-
ilar research confirms that effective school zone speed limits should only be approximately 10
to 15 MPH below the normal value unless very unusual conditions are present. Also the zone
should be equally spaced on either side of a marked crosswalk if there is one. The speed limit
selected must be based on a common sense evaluation of the hazard potential and must be rea-
sonable to gain voluntary driver acceptance. If larger reductions in speed are absolutely
required, then a serious commitment from enforcement should be obtained to ensure compli-
ance.
Improper speed zoning may increase crash potential by increasing the vehicular speed differ-
entials, decreasing driver's respect for speed limits, misleading pedestrians as to true vehicu-
lar speed, leaving the actual speed virtually unchanged, making the majority of drivers 'speed-
ers', and creating enforcement problems.
After these guidelines have been followed, the school speed limit signs can be erected by the
local road authority on local roads or by the commissioner of transportation on trunk highways.
Signs shall be erected in accordance with the MN MUTCD. A courtesy copy of the enabling
resolution and backup data can be sent to the State Traffic Engineer at Mn/DOT if desired.
Summary
The hazard evaluation process enables you to determine which routes can be made the safest with
the least cost and most assurance that they will be used. The school route plan should be reeval-
uated whenever changes in traffic or pedestrian patterns occur, when control devices change or
when the route environment changes. If the physical hazards cannot be eliminated or minimized,
alternatives such as busing, hired police control, intelligent transportation system or another inno-
vative solution should be considered. Providing a safe environment for walking students is a key
first step in establishing safety but it still requires educating the student pedestrians about safe and
responsible actions and this is discussed later.
12
13
TRAFFIC CALMING METHODS
As indicated before, the erection of passive signs may not achieve the desired speed reductions.
Recent technological and innovative design improvements have resulted in methods and devices
that are more effective in increasing the driver's awareness, improving pedestrian safety, gaining
compliance to reduced speed limits and providing proactive safety solutions. This collection of
new tools is collectively called traffic calming and is functional in both residential settings and
school areas.
One of the innovative designs is nicknamed a "bump
out ". This design bumps out the curb section towards
the centerline at the intersection, thus eliminating park-
ing near the intersection. It narrows the road down to
the normal thru lanes. This has some positive impacts to
safety. It aids the driver in his sight lines of waiting
pedestrians who desire to cross and it provides a short-
er distance for the pedestrian to cross, thus reducing
their exposure time on the street. It also gives the per-
ception of a narrower road which causes the driver to
slow down. Several different designs exist and it is
important to coordinate with maintenance forces to develop a compatible bump out for the region.
Technology has produced changeable message signs which can change speed limit values based
upon time of day or remote activation. These signs can display normal speed limits for the usual
conditions and then display a new value for the planned event such as school release. This caus-
es less confusion to the driver about what value he should be driving since only one value will be
displayed at a time. Police are more confident about strict enforcement since there is no confu-
sion.
Another new technology is radar activated speed mes-
sage signs. As drivers approach these signs, a radar unit
activates the display on the sign giving the driver his
approach speed. This is immediate information about
the driver's compliance to the desired speed limit.
Several studies confirm that drivers slow down in an
attempt to reach the posted speed as they pass the sign.
As mentioned before, reasonable values must be used
in the reduced zone or even these devices will not have
the desired effect.
Other traffic calming techniques exist such as raised pedestrian crossings, speed tables (or bench-
es), and median planters and each has its pros and cons. Bump outs and speed tables can have
negative consequences for bicycle traffic so each road needs to be evaluated for its function. The
Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) maintains a library of traffic calming solutions at
http://www.ite.org/traffic/. Passive speed signs may not achieve the desired effect but combined
with a traffic calming technique, speed reductions can improve. The road authority should ana-
lyze the appropriate treatment for its effectiveness on the proposed roadway.
SAFETY EDUCATION
Once the hazard inventory has been conducted and the route plan has been created, recommend-
ed changes in pedestrian and traffic control should be implemented. The implementation of the
recommendations involves not only practical activity such as constructing sidewalks or installing
signs, but also the educational activity of teaching students safety consciousness.
It was noted earlier in this report that children are rarely involved in crashes while crossing prop-
erly at an intersection. Rather, most child pedestrian crashes occur when the child is crossing mid-
block or running from behind parked cars. Physical changes in the child's walking environment
will provide a safe route but they need to be accompanied by an effective educational effort to
prevent erratic or unsafe behavior by the child.
Children must be aware of the routes they should take
to and from school, and a simplified school route plan
(see Figure 1) should be sent home with each child.
Crossing guards should inform transportation directors
or school officials of children seen disregarding their
route. All schools have a fire plan of which the students
are carefully informed and allowed to practice, yet stu-
dents are involved in crashes every year because their
walking routes are ill-defined or poorly controlled.
Certainly traffic safety deserves a good deal of educa-
tional time - time that will benefit the students not only when they going to or from school, but
whenever they are near a roadway.
A good deal of general traffic safety should be taught, as well as information on proper routes.
The internet contains curriculum guides, lesson plans, bike rodeo planning, walking school buses,
school safety patrols and much more information on pedestrian safety. These are sponsored by
national, state, local agencies and auto clubs such as AAA and are meant so that children, espe-
cially those in the earlier grades, are given the advantage of traffic safety knowledge. Such
instruction is an integral part of a pedestrian hazard reduction program.
14
SPECIAL SITUATIONS
The language in the law specifically states that the school speed limits shall be in effect when chil-
dren are present. The reduced school zone speed limits improve the reaction time for the driver
and reduce the speed of vehicles so that children have time to make better judgments about cross-
ing. Sometimes though, reduced speed limits near a school entrance can provide additional safe-
ty even though no children may be walking to school. Schools in rural locations may not have a
walking population but they do experience traffic conflicts caused by buses and parents all arriv-
ing in a short time frame to drop off or pick up children. These entrances may be on high speed
arterial type roads and the intense traffic at an isolated location may be unexpected by the driver.
Typically, these traffic problems can be resolved by traditional traffic engineering solutions such
as turn lanes, advance signing or a traffic control device. Very high volumes of traffic may even
warrant a signal. It is imperative to involve engineering professionals to evaluate the alternatives
at these unique locations and determine the correct solution. Reducing the speed limit is only one
of many tools available.
Since children are not present, and these roads may be high speed, a flashing beacon with the sup-
plemental plaque WHEN FLASHING (S4-4P) is an appropriate treatment for the school speed
limit. The beacon should only flash during the intense traffic periods at the beginning and end of
the school day. Experienced engineering professionals should evaluate the traffic pattern and
determine these time frames.
15
16
Figure 1
G
G
Legend
G
School
Marked Crosswalk
Crossing Guard
S
S
Signalized Intersection
STOP or YIELD Sign Approach
Pedestrian Route
SHEAWOOD CT.
GATESHEAD DR.
GATESHEAD DR.
COLORADO CT.
MO
O
N
L
I
G
H
T
C
T
.
KE
Y
S
T
O
N
E
C
T
.
JULIETTE ST.
DEENA
C
T
.
BROCKTON DR.
MAYLEAR LN.
C
O
U
R
T
N
E
Y
S
T
.
G
A
T
E
S
H
E
A
D
D
R
.
COPPERFIELD CT.
HAWLEY CT.
ELM CT.
TIFFANY CT.EM
I
L
Y
S
T
.
AL
Y
S
S
A
A
V
.
SIERR
A
A
V
.
SIERRA
CT.LINCOLN
CT.
N
E
W
P
O
R
T
D
R
.
ANDREW RD.
95TH ST.95TH ST.
PUEBLO ST.SHARI ST.
STACEY ST.
SAN LUIS CT.
KATHLEEN
CT.
DE LASALLE AV.
AM
A
N
D
A
ME
S
A
D
R
.
WEND
Y
D
R
.
WE
N
D
Y
DR
.
WI
N
T
E
R
P
A
R
K
D
R
.
BR
E
C
K
E
N
R
I
D
G
E
L
N
.
GL
E
N
E
A
G
L
E
D
R
.
ME
A
G
H
A
N
A
V
.
NE
W
P
O
R
T
D
R
.
R
D
.
WE
D
G
E
W
O
O
D
D
R
.
SP
I
N
N
E
R
C
T
.
JO
N
C
T
.
CO
P
P
E
R
F
I
E
L
D
D
R
.
NOTTINGHAM LN.
N
MN MUTCD, Figure 7A-1. Example of School Route Plan Map
Figure 2
Problem Number : #1
Location: On Ford St. between Lincoln Rd.and Victoria Rd.
Description: Sidewalk broken with missing sections
Extent: 440 feet, children walking in the street
Posted Speed: 30 MPH
Traffic Volume: 150 vph during school walking time - 7-8 AM : 3-4 PM
Number of Students Affected: 30 students, elementary age
Recommended Action: Advise city public works to replace sidewalk.
Problem Number : #2
Location: Chrysler Ave. intersection with Ford St.
Description: Chrysler Ave. is a 5-lane road
Extent: Very wide, 66 feet. with no supervision.
Posted Speed: 35 MPH
Traffic Volume: 400 vph during school opening and closing hours
Number of Students Affected: 50 Elementary children crossing
Recommended Action: School District needs to provide adult crossing guard
Problem Number : #3
Location: State Trunk Highway Route 66
Description: School Advance Sign S1-1 is completely dark at night
Extent: MN MUTCD requires sign to be reflective at night
Posted Speed: 40 MPH
Traffic Volume: AADT 3000
Number of Students Affected: Many - This is primary bus entrance and student pick up area for extracur-
ricular activities.
Recommended Action: Advise state transportation department to replace non-retroreflective sign to
improve drivers’ awareness of approaching school bus and student loading zone.
Problem Number : #4
Location: County Road 77 and Ford St.
Description: Crosswalk at intersection.
Extent: Crosswalk markings are nearly worn off where there are student crossing guards
Posted Speed: 30 MPH
Traffic Volume: 300 vph during school opening and closing hours
Number of Students Affected: 80 elementary and middle school students
Recommended Action: Contact the county engineer to repaint crosswalk or consider more durable pave-
ment markings.
17
Sample
Tabular Listing of Safety Issues for
Obama Elementary School
18
Figure 3
FIGURE 3
S
C
H
O
O
L
ZEALANDS T.N .
ZEALANDS T.N .
BOONE ST.N .
ROAD LOG (A)EX AMPL
E
TO CSAH8( W .Broadway)‘FROM CSAH1 8 ‘
SHEET 1 of4SHEETSCOUNTYBlueEarth‘
PROCESSED BY E. Brown ‘CITY New Hills ‘
DATE 5-3-2005 `ROAD 62nd Ave North `
BOONE ST.N .
XYLON ST.N .
VIRGINIAS T.N .
SUNNYS T.N .
0.725
ENTRANCE
R RESIDENCE
SIGN
LEGEND:
1.125
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
6’ BITUMINOUSSHOULDER
WITH CURB&GUTTER
N OS
I G H TR
E ST
R
I CT
I O N S
6’ BITUMINOUSSHOULDER
WITH CURB&GUTTER
0.855
0.865
0.925
0.9750.970 0.9650.960
1.030
1.040
1.050
1.060
1.080
1.105
0.762 0.762
0.795
0.805
0.695
0.855
0.900
0.995
1.085
0.875
6’GRAVELSHOULDER
0.838
19
Figure 4
FIGURE 4 ROAD LOG (B)EX AMPL
E
PRESENTS PEEDLIMIT 30 mph ‘
WIDTH8 ’’WIDTH2 4 ’’
TYPEB ituminous ’TYPEB ituminous ’
SHOULDER:ROADWAY:
CONDITION Good ’CONDITIONFair ’
APPROX.LENGTH OFZONE 0.3 miles ‘ROAD 62nd Ave North ‘
SIGHTDISTANCE RESTRICTIONS None
SIDEWALK __3 ft___________CONDITION___Good_________
PROCESSED BY E. Brown ‘DATE 5-3-2008 `
PEDESTRIANVOLUMES 125 school children cross at school crossing.’
VEHICULAR VOLUMES 2575 AADT ’
’
NUMBEROF PEDESTRIAN CRASHES 0 ’
NUMBEROF CRASHES 6 ’
STUDY PERIOD 2002-2004 ’
ACCIDENT EXPERIENCE:
CROSS TRAFFICa tZealand St.AADT 500, Boone St.AADT 350, Xylon St
AADT 200,Sunny St AADT 250, VirginiaS t.AADT 300
’
General Comments:
Recommend restricting parking adjacent to school on both sides of6 2nd Ave North.
LAND USE Residential,School ’
20
Figure 5
NOTE:The use of a School Advance
Crossing Assembly is optional
within a signed school zone
(see Section 7B.11)
SCHOOL
OR
O
R
S
C
H
O
O
L
W
H
E
N
A
R
E
P
R
E
S
E
N
T
C
H
I
L
D
R
E
N
2
0
S
P
E
E
D
L
I
M
I
T
SCHOOL
WHEN
ARE PRESENT
CHILDREN
20
SPEED
LIMIT
AHEAD
AHEAD
A
H
E
A
D
(optional)
(see note)
OR
(
o
p
t
i
o
n
a
l
)
(optional)
(
o
p
t
i
o
n
a
l
)
(optional)
(
o
p
t
i
o
n
a
l
)
200 FT
A
H
E
A
D
(
s
e
e
n
o
t
e
)
O
R
45
SPEED
LIMIT
4
5
S
P
E
E
D
L
I
M
I
T
45
SPEED
LIMIT
4
5
S
P
E
E
D
L
I
M
I
T
END
SCHOOL
SPEED
LIMIT
E
N
D
S
C
H
O
O
L
S
P
E
E
D
L
I
M
I
T
END
Z O NE
SCHOOL
E
N
D
Z
O
N
E
S
C
H
O
O
L
5
0
0
F
E
E
T
MN MUTCD, Figure 7B-5. Examples of Signing for a School Zone
with a School Speed Limit and a School Croosing
PHOTO CREDITS
Speed Display Sign picture - from www.walkinginfo.org - photographer Dan Burden, downloaded Aug 1,
2009
Route Plan, Traffic Volume, School Patrol and Pedestrian Waiting pictures from
http://www.pedbikeimages.org - photographer Dan Burden, downloaded Aug 1, 2009
Pavement Marking, Broken Sidewalk and Parked Car pictures from www.safekids.org/walk/usa.html -
photographer names not listed for security, downloaded Aug 1, 2009
Fenced Playground, Police Car by Sign, and Bump Out pictures -photographer Dan Brannan, Mn/DOT,
Oct., 2009.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1) Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, Mn/DOT Office of Traffic, Safety, and
Technology, http://www.dot.state.mn.us/trafficeng/otepubl/mutcd/index.html
2) Minnesota Motor Vehicle Crash Facts, Minnesota Department of Public Safety, Office of Traffic
Safety, http://www.dps.state.mn.us/OTS/crashdata/crash_facts.asp
3) School Trip Safety & the Traffic Engineer, Compendium of Technical Papers presented at 1975
Annual Meeting, Institute of Traffic Engineers. Reiss, M.L. and Robertson, H.D.
4) School Speed Limits and Speed in School Zones, TRB Record # 1254, McCoy,P T, Heimann, J E,
1990
5) Manual of Transportation Engineering Studies, Institute of Transportation Engineers, Jan 2000
6) School Safety Planning, prepared by Goodell-Grivas, Inc., for the Michigan State Univ., distribution
by Michigan Resource Center, Sept. 1996
7) Operating Speed Characteristics in School Speed Zones in Texas, TRB Report Paper #09-3031,
Brewer, Marcus A. and Fitzpatrick, Kay, 2009 TRB Annual Meeting.
21