City Council Minutes 1984 08 07 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

8/7/84 Page -16- Mayor when he was campaigning - stop signs - radar• and nothing has been done. She then inquired of the City Attorney - since the City has been aware of this problem for 2; years and nothing has been done, if a child tomorrow is hit, how liable is the City:' Attorney Rautenstraus replied that we are looking at that question and this is the reason the information is being obtained; check the warrant studies and review the mattE~r. He felt this was the process that we were in right now. Then make a reason- able determination, if you believe that it is rE~asonable, for a child's safety to place stop signs at the intersection of HoovE~r and West. Then that is an appro- priate step from the information. Mrs. Johnson stated that she agreed that a stop sign should be placed at Hoover and West. She then inquired what the criteria was for meeting warrants. Dire<:tor Kasch stated they are a combination of frequency of accidents, the nature of the streE,t itself, i.e. is it a hill, obtuse angle, blind intersection, are there unequal traffic trend movements. As to speed dips and speed bumps, Mr. Kasch did not favor these as many times they cause a nuisance and cause acci- dents. Also commented he did not favor over- signage. There are guidelines that are set up that the City must follow to justify warrants. He stated that a temporary stop sign could be placed at Polk and it may very well work; but then again there would be the liability problem. Attorney Rautenstraus advised that if the warrants are met you are usually in better shape than going against them. If you are trying to meet the proper standards and taking the evidence into effect, then normally at least from the City's liability standpoint, you are o.k. If too much flexibility is used in what the warrants say and the statutes say, then if something does happen, basically you are admitting liability.