4 - Recommendation on the Neighborhood Traffic Mitigation Program (NTMP)
CITY OF BOULDER
TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY BOARD AGENDA ITEM
(MEETING DATE: SEPTEMBER 9, 2002)
Agenda Item Preparation Date: Au st 26 2002
SUBJECT:
Public hearing and consideration of a recommendation to City Council on the Neighborhood
Traffic Mitigation Program terminology related to traffic mitigation devices.
REQUESTING DEPARTMENTS:
Public Works Department
Tracy Winfree, Director of Public Works for Transportation
Mike Sweeney, Transportation Planning and Operations Coordinator
Bill Cowem, Transportation Operations Engineer
Teresa Spears, Neighborhood Traffic Mitigation Program Liaison
Fire Department
Larry Donner, Fire Chief
Steve Stolz, Deputy Fire Chief
Police Department
Mark Beckner, Police Chief
Jim Hughes, Deputy Police Chief
Tom Wickman, Commander of Police Traffic Unit
FISCAL IMPACT:
To be determined.
PURPOSE:
This memorandum provides background information for the Transportation Advisory Board's
(TAB) consideration and recommendation on the terminology used in the Neighborhood Traffic
Mitigation Program (NTMP) to describe a grouping of mitigation devices that cause delay in
emergency response time.
BACKGROUND:
City Council requested that staff research changing the term "delay-inducing" to another term
that describes NTMP's group of physical mitigation devices, which result in delay to emergency
response vehicles. City Council's request was prompted by a citizen's concern regarding the
prejudicial affect of the term delay-inducing when creating traffic mitigation proposals that
sought solely to reduce speeding and increase safety in their neighborhoods.
Currently, the NTMP policy document differentiates between mitigation devices, those which
result in a delay to emergency response and those that do not, thereby creating two groups of
devices: delay-inducing and non-delay-inducing devices. In the city of Boulder's NTMP, this
distinction is important because it designates a decision point in the policy guidelines.
tab08272002delayinducing.doc AGENDA ITEM # Paue 1
In order to proceed with any traffic mitigation on a Critical Emergency Response Route (CERR),
the NTMP has to obtain a recommendation from TAB and an approval from City Council to
consider delay-inducing devices on a proposed mitigation plan.
ANALYSIS:
Staff from the Transportation Division, Fire Department and Police Department identified the
following possible options:
• Retain the use of the term "delay-inducing" when describing the group of traffic mitigation
devices that create delay in emergency response time.
• Use non-descriptive terms such as, type I and type 2 to describe the two groups of mitigation
devices used by the NTMP.
• Clarify that we are talking about devices, which calm traffic, they could he called delay-
inducing traffic calming devices.
• Discontinue with the concept of delay-inducing and non-delay-inducing grouping of traffic
mitigation devices.
Staff conducted a nation wide Web and phone search of over 37 cities, including seven in
Colorado, to ascertain what term they used when describing physical mitigation devices which
delayed emergency response (due to length, these research materials are available on request).
Although some programs were similar to the city of Boulder's NTMP, none of the other cities
separated their mitigation devices into groups which differentiate between devices which delay
and those that do not delay. The terminology used in these other cities include:
• speed reduction devices
• traffic control measures
• physical features
• traffic calming measures
• volume reduction strategies
• traffic management devices
• physical measures
• engineering retrofit
• permanent speed reducers
• access restrictions
In two instances insight was given into how well the programs were able to accomplish their goal
of mitigating speeding/traffic. By not creating groups of devices based on whether or not the
devices resulted in delay, there was confusion with the citizens and frustration with emergency
services once the proposed mitigation plans reached City Council. Citizens were not clear about
the possibility or amount of delay associated with each device, and the emergency response
personnel felt their need to respond to emergencies was not being addressed. The Boulder
NMTP has worked to create an environment where all associated city departments and the
community understand the potential impact of any mitigation device used as well as address, as
best possible, the needs of all in order to create a balanced approach to traffic mitigation.
Since the other programs do not separate their mitigation devices into groups, they did not have
the need to differentiate between groups. The city of Boulder's NTMP policy does separate the
tab08272002delayinducing.doc AGENDA ITEM # Page 2
traffic mitigation devices into two groups based on whether or not the mitigation device creates
delay. Staff believes that changing the terminology to something other than delay-inducing/non-
delay-inducing increases the likelihood of confusion. To address the concern of the prejudicial
affect, the term could be lengthened to delay-inducing traffic calming device. This would meet
the both the citizen's concern and reduce chances of confusion.
There is the possibility of discontinuing the grouping of devices based on whether or not the
device results in delay, however that would result having to redesign the NTMP program. An
additional point to consider is that any change to the terminology would create a financial impact
to the already reduced budget of the NTMP because of having to update brochures and
neighborhood kits to reflect the change.
RECOMMENDATION:
City staff from the Transportation Division, Fire Department and Police Department has
considered the findings and recommend retaining the use of the term "delay-inducing" when
describing the group of traffic mitigation devices that create delay in emergency response time.
tab08272002delayinducing.doc AGENDA ITEM # Page 3