359 Degrees

One of the most common complaints an alderman gets is someone stating their neighborhood's traffic is too fast, too reckless, in too high a volume and that the situation is highly unsafe.  The Board of Public Works (BPW) adopted a new policy for "traffic calming" at its May 13, 2008 meeting.  The chief architect and champion of that new policy is 7th District Alderwoman Lisa Mellone, who placed it on the 2006-2008 City Strategic Plan and wrote about it on her blog.

I serve on the BPW and support the new policy.  The following is an overview.  I invite your comments!

Implementation

So, how do you get your street considered for this treatment?  The policy defines a process to be followed, roughly (see the link below for the complete policy) as follows:

1. A resident makes a complaint and fills out an application describing it.
2. The city staff determines if the complaint falls within the policy guidelines.  If so, continue on.
3. Supporting data is collected.  That's the police speed trailer, accident history, etc.  If the objective data looks bad, continue on.
4. Start the education and enforcement steps.  If the problem persists, continue on.
5. Select an engineering solution.  e.g speed bumps, etc.
6. Review of the proposal by BPW, budget for changes, give approval.
7. Continue to monitor to see if the changes solved the problem.

There are several good reasons for this seemingly complicated process.  One is to make sure the problem is real, and not just an isolated incident.  Another is to place all complaints on an equal footing and eliminate unfairness (real or imagined) on which neighborhood gets consideration.  This deliberate process defuses many of the opposing arguments by weeding out the questionable cases.

Education

The first component of the policy is education.  The idea is to remind people what safe driving is and to involve the people most aware of the situation in its solution. First, yard signs can be placed with messages like "Slow Down".  Second, the police trailer that shows an oncoming car it's speed as measured by radar can be used.  That also collects objective data to document traffic volume, average speed, time of day patterns and generally raise awareness in the minds of those driving by.  Another possibility is to lend residents radar guns to measure the traffic speed for themselves so that they understand that a car going 25 mph might appear to  going be a lot faster when you're close to the road.

Enforcement

Station police patrols to monitor the traffic and write citations as needed. 

Engineering

If an area has a recognized problem with speeding traffic, the road can be physically modified in an attempt to slow it down.  Keep in mind that the following list is what other cities have done.  They would be constructed only in extreme cases and only after careful consideration.  Some may not be used at all in Brookfield.

• Additional signs - Indicating the speed limit, asking for caution, warning of pedestrians. Simple and cheap, but easy to ignore.
• Vertical deflection - That's engineer speak for speed humps.  A hump is like a bump, only not as tall and steep and thus not as jarring.  There are a few in Weston Hills in the southwest corner of the city.  Another version is the speed table which is sort of a speed hump but not as high and as wide as your car.
• Horizontal deflection - More engineer speak for making the road curvy.  A good example is Norhardt Drive (west edge of Ruby Isle) where there is a curve in the middle, forcing traffic to slow down to see around it.
• Bulb (bump) outs - Curbs extending into the street creating a narrow point.  You see these in the Brookfield Road Village area defining parallel parking spaces and corners.
• Chokers - Make short sections of the road one lane to force one car to stop while a car heading in the opposite direction passes through. 
• Street closure - Make a dead end, ending cut through traffic but forcing all the residents of that street to exit the neighborhood in one less way.

There are other, in my experience less popular, constructs such as traffic circles (mini-roundabouts for low volume locations) and chicanes (think zig-zag), but you get the idea.

Cost

Nothing is free.  Here are some ballpark cost estimates from the consultant.

• Speed humps - $2,000 for several humps close enough to be effective.
• Bulbouts - $7,000+
• Partial (one way traffic) or full (dead end) closure - $120,000 for ripping out the pavement, planting grass, changing signs, etc.

Some cities will only implement traffic calming in a neighborhood if the adjacent residents pay for it.  It ensures people only pay for something that benefits their house and is a way of ensuring that neighborhood support is sincere.  Would you be willing to pay $100 for "your share" of the speed bump in the road in front of your house?  City assessments are treated like taxes.  Once the cost and affected area is determined, you must pay, whether you agreed with it or not.

 Official Policy - I know it's dry reading, but everything is there.

Policy adopted on May 13 by the BPW

Presentation by traffic consultant on February 19, 2008

Related Web Sites on Traffic Calming

Wikipedia entry on traffic calming.  A fair overview.

Traffic consulting firm's site on the topic.  Very similar to what Brookfield's consultant said.

Federal Highway Administration site on traffic calming

 An Opposing Viewpoint

There are some objections to traffic calming.  This is part of that other 359 degree of a debate that some blogs ignore because they don't agree with it.  I believe in a truly fair and balanced discussion before making a decision.  My affirmative vote speaks my decision after considering these points.

• Fire trucks, ambulances and police cars have to slow down when they encounter them, even in an emergency.
• The problem is not speed or recklessness, but heavy traffic.  These measures just chase the traffic into someone else's neighborhood, solving nothing.
• None of this stuff is free.  Are you willing to pay for it?
• How can you plow snow with all that junk in the road?
• Cars running over speed bumps make a "thump" noise that wasn't there before.  Is it too noisy?  Does it ruin the car's suspension or tire balance?
• Anything can be abused.  Two cars may reach a choker and "play chicken."  Speed bumps may be seen as a challenge.
• I've lived on this street for 30 years and raised my kids here without a problem.  This is just some worry wart parents too lazy to supervise their kids properly.
• Air pollution increases.  You slow down coming to the barrier, then accelerate leaving it rather than keeping a fuel conserving steady speed.

Americans Against Traffic Calming

Road Access for Disabled Americans

National Motorists Association

At the Council meeting of May 6, I submitted the following legislative referral to study the preservation of historic structures in the City of Brookfield, possibly leading to a new protective ordinance.  Brookfield has been my home for over 20 years and I understand just how fragile our link is to the city's roots. 

In response to this referral, the planning office has given me several documents concerning previous unsuccessful efforts for preservation.  One was the historic building inventory of 1993.  There were also minutes of Plan Commission meetings in 1995-96 and results from a special citizen task force.  No action was taken then because, in the Commissioner's opinion, there was insufficient public support and fierce opposition from owners who feared such an ordinance would unduly limit their ability to  manage their own property with no proportionate compensation.  Planning is often about balancing the rights of property owners against the desires of the larger community. I'll keep you posted as this develops during the coming months.

The complete referral:

This is a service request / legislative referral I will make at the May 6, 2008 Council meeting.

I request that the city consider a historic building preservation ordinance.  There are still many fine examples of late 19th and early 20th century buildings that remind Brookfield residents of their roots and of how much life has changed in a relatively short time.  Besides, Brookfield will never have 300 year old farmhouses if they are all torn down when they are “only” 100 years old!

This complex task was attempted in (I believe) the early 1990’s and the records from that effort may provide a better definition of the task. Some concepts include:

1. Update the inventory of historic buildings created by the planning department in the earlier effort.  I believe some of the buildings have been razed or renovated beyond recognition.

2. Outline what other communities have done in this area.  I am especially interested in Cedarburg (often cited during the Village Neighborhood Plan meetings),Waukesha (nearby and its downtown has many significant buildings), Town of Brookfield (neighboring community with many historic and demographic connections) and major historical sites such as Boston.

3. Give special attention to the Ruby Farm property, the Dousman-Dunkel-Behling House and the Village Railroad Station, which are probably the largest and most prominent structures.

4. Solicit public comment.  I believe the heart of the issue will be whether the burden of new, severe restrictions on historic structure property owners is outweighed by a greater public good of preservation.

5. Suggest ordinances, creation of historic building district(s), historic building review boards and other planning tools as may be needed to achieve the desired results.

In Brookfield city government, the first detailed debate on an issue happens in a committee.  That allows a few alderman to focus on a topic and make the first judgment on what is reasonable. 

Here are the committees appointed on Tuesday, May 6.

The Finance committee sets policy on the entire city budget.  One major task is debating the annual budget proposed by the Mayor and staff every October for the following year.  Continuing duties include approving purchases over $50,000, dealing with claims from residents (e.g. snowplow hit my mailbox), selecting the bank for city funds, etc.

One common debate is whether the Finance Committee can effectively nullify some other committee's decision by removing all funding for it.  That's common at the state and federal level.  The reverse is to fund a program that was rejected by the "correct" committee, which is the heart of the federal earmark spending actions.  That doesn't really work at the city level since the budget is relatively simple and transparent.  Besides, the entire Council, including the originating committee members, have to approve such a decision.  Continuing issues for finance include funding services while keeping taxes in check, despite declining federal and state aid, little new construction (new tax base) increasing employee insurance costs, etc.

A central activity is reviewing the past budgets and setting the next one:

• May - Set broad budget parameters.  e.g. property tax rate can go up 2%
• Summer months - Mayor and department heads discuss what to spend for the next year, balancing new services against the limits set
• September - Mayor submits the Executive Budget to the aldermen
• October - A series of marathon meetings reviewing the Executive Budget and amending as desired
• November - Public hearing on budget.  I've seen as many as two (2) residents at this meeting. 
• December - Final adjustments to the budget based on state aid, etc.  Tax bills get mailed out and paid.

The Human Resources and Public Safety (HRPS) committee (I'm the only alderman to have opposed that unfortunate name) sets policy for city employees, including salaries, benefits, harassment lawsuit claims, behavior standards, etc.

The Legislative and Licensing (L&L) committee grants liquor and bartender licenses and, more significantly, originates most city ordinances.

The Board of Public Works (BPW) manages the streets, stormwater and city buildings.  Continuing issues include building the fire stations and continuing the Calhoun Road expansion.  Yard waste disposal (leaf burning) will be discussed here.  This committee is unusual in that the Mayor is a full member but can appoint an alderman to serve in his place.  In practice, the alternate almost always serves.  In addition, if one of the other aldermen is absent there is an aldermanic alternate to serve in his place.  In other communities it is common to have citizen members or to have a staff member (usually the City Engineer or Director of Public Works) to be a voting member.

The Water & Sewer Board (two separate committees until 2006) sets policy for the water utility and sewer utility.  Continuing issues include building out the water system, finding a safe and plentiful water supply (Lake Michigan water?) and dealing with the endless lawsuits from the Town of Brookfield over sewers.  This committee deals with a lot of public hearings for installing water mains.  I recall very clearly when, in the course of one minute, a resident called the committee members *** and Communists.  It's not a ho-hum committee when people's basements fill up with sewage!  Up until 2006, the mayor was a committee member and appointed an alderman as his alternate.

The Forestation committee sets policy for planting trees in city parks, roadsides, building yards, etc.  Many cities merge this function with the Board of Public Works.  However, since the BPW is always tempted to keep the roadside right of way clear of all plantings, there is always a conflict of goals.  Having a separate committee was the compromise to plant a reasonable number of trees along roadsides.

A few comments:

Almost every week, each alderman receives a packet of information regarding the city.  It is delivered to their house, usually on Saturday morning, by a Brookfield Police Reserve officer.  This ensures delivery in a timely manner, especially for those aldermen who have full time jobs, who travel often, etc. and thus would otherwise have difficulty getting the pacet.  The old joke is that once someone is elected aldermen, "the cops are always over at their place."

The packets range in length from a dozen pages to hundreds of pages.  They include the agenda and supporting information for each committee meeting that alderman must attend during the coming week.  Also included are minutes of past meetings, letters from residents sent to city hall, special reports, the library newsletter, and the occasional miscellaneous item.

At the council meeting of April 15, 2008, I requested a study be done to:

• convert the packet information (supporting information for committee meetings) to electronic form for delivery to the aldermen
• place the electronic packets on the city web site where they would be available to anyone at anytime for free
• convert all past city records into electronic form and stored in a searchable database. 

Click here to see my referral on electronic packets.

It's all about making the city's business as open and available as possible.  Round the clock for free seems pretty available to me, and would be a natural outgrowth of modernizing the current paper bound system.  Of course, it won't be free since a new database tool would have to be acquired, old documents would have to be located and imported into the system, etc.  Brookfield already has agendas, minutes, some reports and planning documents available in this way, but I want to expand it greatly.  The city clerk's office has long used a special database product designed for city clerks.  My point is that it doesn't include everything and is not available to the general public or even the aldermen.

To help you understand what this information is, I have scanned every packet I received since January, 2008 into a PDF file and stored it on my web site.  Here are a couple of examples:

So, what do you think?  Would allowing everyone full access to exactly the information the aldermen see, at the same time it is delivered to the aldermen, be worth a few bucks?  Do you think it would create better public policy, debate and decisions?  Do you think it would address the accusation that the city is always hiding something?

I want to share with you some photos of recent vandalism activity in Brookfield.  An important part of the city's job is ensuring the safety of its residents and protection of private property.  I would like your opinions on whether this stuff is harmless or dangerous.   

• How many of your tax dollars do you want spent on police patrols looking for this sort of midnight hijinks? 
• Do you think it's fair to the property owner and his neighbors who have to clean this stuff up?
• What would you do if your kid (!) was caught doing this?  Boys will be boys?

First, here are some photos of a "TP-ing" that was probably the result of high school "Junior - Senior Wars".  Two trees in the front yard were covered in toilet paper, the front yard had dozens of plastic forks inserted and landscape rocks (75 lb+) were moved out of position.

Here are a few photos from a back yard.  The rear lot line abuts one of the walking/biking paths being installed throughout the city.  Kids turn off the path to take a shortcut through the backyard, leaving tire marks.  This time, one of those kids threw a bottle bomb.  The chemicals killed the grass and debris was thrown over seven (7) feet.  Do you want your kid biking around with caustic and volatile chemicals to throw in someone's back yard?  And so much for privacy!  By the way, you can get the recipe for this in about two minutes with a Google or YouTube search.  Even the local TV news has covered it a few times.  The yellow arrows point out the impact point and shrapnel.

Now the final question:  Do you think these kids flew in from St. Louis for the day to vandalize Brookfield?  I mean, your kids would never do this stuff, right?  At least, they were never caught doing it!