[MissoulaGov] Fwd: Committee Update 3-11-09

[Shakespeare & Co.]

Yes and a traffic ticket, as David suggests, would go a long way toward
helping out the motorist or cyclist cracked up or killed in an accident caused
by a cell phone distraction, how very true that is.

At 11:17 PM 3/17/2009, Jennie Dixon wrote:


>My first comment ever on the MissoulaGov Listerv:

>Ban simultaneous texting and driving, No Question!

>

> >>> <hdgray at modwest.com> 03/17/09 9:17 PM >>>

>Hi Bob,

>

>I do not really support a Ban on Cell phones while driving on the basis

>it

>creates a distraction for the driver. Having kids in the car is a much

>larger distraction for more people I would guess.  Little teddy

>screaming

>his head off in the back seat not only makes the parent/driver want to

>turn around and not even face the road to deal with the issue but pull

>their hair out at the same time. Now that is a distraction.

>

>If the city is looking at implementing a fine for people that get into

>accidents because they were on the cell phones I could support.  Those

>individuals would have proved that they cannot talk and drive at the

>same

>time and a ticket may help them remember that in the future. Convict the

>guilty and leave the innocent alone.

>

>Sincerely,

>David Gray

>Ward 6

>

> >

> >

> > Begin forwarded message:

> >

> > From: Lynn Ascher <lascher01 at bresnan.net>

> > Date: March 12, 2009 12:09:21 PM MDT

> > To: "Bob Jaffe" <BJaffe at ci.missoula.mt.us>

> > Subject: Re: [MissoulaGov] Committee Update 3-11-09

> >

> > I'm in favor of banning drivers (and bikers, if necessary) from using

> > cell phones while driving.  If you look at a driver's face while he's

> > on his cell, it's obvious that his attention is not on the traffic

> > around him but on the conversation he's having.  If a driver needs to

> > use his phone, then he can pull over, park for a minute and make or

> > take the call. This is very much about traffic safety and accident

> > prevention, and not about devising petty rules to harass citizens.

> > --  Lynn Ascher

> >

> >

> > On Mar 11, 2009, at 11:11 PM, Bob Jaffe wrote:

> >

> > Greetings,

> >

> > This morning in Public Safety we discussed an ordinance to ban the

> > use of cell phones while driving. Apparently there are studies

> > showing that talking on the phone while driving is just as dangerous

> > as driving drunk. Studies also show that hands free phones don’t

> > really help. The problem is not so much the physical ability to

> > manage the wheel while holding the phone, it is the distraction of

> > having the conversation.  I was also told that it is different from

> > having a conversation with someone in the car because the person on

> > the other end of the phone conversation is not responding to road

> > conditions like a passenger. The ordinance would also ban the use of

> > cell phones while riding a bike.

> >

> > As a frequent user of my cell phone while driving I am hesitant to

> > get behind this one. But on the other hand I know I have made

> > bonehead driving moves that would not have happened if I were not

> > distracted by the phone. So I imagine I will come around.

> >

> > I have also determined through firsthand experience that it is much

> > harder to talk on the phone while biking than driving. I have pretty

> > much given up that practice.  We already have an ordinance that

> > requires a cyclist to keep both hands on the handle bars so that one

> > is already covered.

> >

> > There was some discussion about problems with having a law that only

> > applied inside the city limits. But only a few years ago it was legal

> > to drive with an open container of alcohol outside city limits. And

> > fireworks are legal outside city limits.  And then there are dogs on

> > leash. That only applies in the city. So there are a lot of examples

> > of the city having laws that differ from the rest of the state. We

> > set a public hearing on the matter.

> >

> >

> >

> > In conservation we looked at a proposal from the Greenhouse Gas Team

> > promoting the use of local wood products. We had a presentation from

> > Professor Peter Kolb on the forest management practices in Germany.

> > Once again the Europeans make us look like Neanderthals. Germany is

> > almost the exact size of Montana but they have something like

> > 80,000,000 people. They have about the same amount of forest as we do

> > but produce about 16 times the number of board feet of wood

> > products.  And they do it all > diversified 

> wood products industry. It was a fascinating presentation

> > and we ran out of time before we got to look at the actual resolution

> > request. We will take it up again in a few weeks.

> >

> >

> >

> > In PAZ we discussed development agreements again. The development

> > agreement is a contract between the City and a developer that will be

> > required for annexation.  We first pursued the idea for properties

> > that were being annexed that were not going to go through

> > subdivision. Such as a large lot that will be divided into single

> > family detached condominiums.  A development agreement would be the

> > only opportunity for the council to review and condition the future

> > development.  A secondary interest in development agreements is to

> > make the conditions of subdivision part of the contract for

> > annexation. This is driven by the desire to make the terms under

> > which we are willing to approve a project more defensible in court.

> > Since our experiences with Bob Brugh and John Didel, I now see all

> > developers as potential litigants.  For that matter I see the

> > neighbors who protest the development as potential litigants as well

> > as anyone else who has a horse in the race.

> >

> >

> >

> > A related matter we also took up was modifying our resolution

> > regarding contract sewer connections. We made a number of

> > modifications including the requirement for a development agreement

> > for developments outside of city limits that want access to the

> > sewer. For now on they will be subject to pretty much all the same

> > conditions as developments inside the city including park dedication

> > and payment in lieu of impact fees. We set a public hearing on both

> > items for April 6th.

> >

> >

> >

> > In A&F we approved some union contracts. Labor costs are the lion’s

> > share of our budget but we pretty much just rubber stamp these

> > agreements. They are the outcome of the negotiations between the

> > administration and the union. It would actually be a violation of

> > labor law if we didn’t approve them.

> >

> >

> >

> > The main item we discussed in Public Works was the request to make an

> > exception to our noise ordinance for some MDT resurfacing projects.

> > This enables them to do the work at night on high volume roads.  The

> > sticking point was the proposal to redesign South and Reserve. They

> > want to make it so there are double left turn lanes off of both

> > directions of South.  There were a few problems. One was the fact

> > that a major intersection in the city of Missoula was being

> > redesigned and we were only hearing about it because they wanted an

> > exemption from the noise ordinance.  Another problem was that there

> > was no provision for bicycle infrastructure. It was incomprehensible

> > to me that such a thing would even be considered. When City Engineer

> > Kevin Slovarp was asked about the bicycle lanes he said it never

> > occurred to him. He is really good at giving the wrong answer in

> > situations like this.

> >

> > Later I found out the right answer when I spoke with Phil Smith, our

> > bike and Ped coordinator, to find out why there was not some more

> > advocacy here. Phil’s answer was that we generally don’t put bike

> > lanes in at intersections with turning lanes. The cyclist is expected

> > to just take the appropriate lane.

> >

> > The problem with this intersection is that the road starts spreading

> > out into the various turning lanes about 585 feet away from the

> > actual intersection. So you are supposed to take the lane and ride

> > with 35-40 mile an hour traffic for 585 feet. Clearly there is an

> > opportunity here for some improvement.

> >

> >

> >

> > When the committee refused to grant the exception for the project on

> > South, John Hendrickson made a comment to the effect that this is why

> > MDOT screws us on funding. If only we would be more compliant and let

> > them build their highways through our community like they know best

> > we would get more money. After the meeting when he was having a good

> > ol’ boy chuckle with the MDT guy about us silly Missoula people I

> > as> wanting to have a say in the design of our transportation system. He

> > told me that in this case it was impossible to have anything less

> > than 12 foot lanes at the intersection so this was the only way it

> > could be built.  I’m having trouble believing that but need to look

> > into the 12 foot lane rule some more.

> >

> >

> >

> > In Committee of the Whole (COW) we heard from some FEMA people about

> > a workshop they were doing for Missoula.  They were here gathering

> > information for a disaster preparedness training they will be doing

> > for about 50 participants.  The training is in Maryland and the feds

> > are picking up the tab for the whole thing. We don’t have a lot of

> > natural disaster hazards here so the training will be about

> > earthquakes. My understanding is that the recent gas explosion in

> > Bozeman was related to seismic activity so it isn’t that off base. In

> > general, the biggest fear here relates to something going wrong with

> > a train which could of course be caused by an earthquake.

> >

> >

> >

> >   Thanks for your interest,

> >

> >

> >

> > Bob Jaffe

> >

> > Missoula City Council, Ward 3

> >

> > bjaffe at ci.missoula.mt.us

> >

> > 406-728-1052

> >

> > Messages and attachments sent to or from this e-mail account

> > pertaining to City business may be considered public or private

> > records depending on the message content. The City is often required

> > by law to provide city records to individuals requesting records,

> > some of which are not public records and have limited scope of

> > distribution pursuant to state law. The City is required by law to

> > protect private, confidential information. This message is intended

> > for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not

> > the intended recipient of this transmission, please notify the sender

> > immediately, do not forward the message to anyone, and delete all

> > copies. Thank you.

> >

> > _______________________________________________

> > -----Please delete extra content when replying to messages------

> >

> > Note: This list is NOT an official service of the City Of Missoula.

> > But posts to this list may be entered into the public record.

> > Subscribe or view archives at Missoulagov.org

> > List Serve hosting provided by www.CedarMountainSoftware.com.

> >

> >

> > _______________________________________________

> > -----Please delete extra content when replying to messages------

> >

> > Note: This list is NOT an official service of the City Of Missoula.

>But

> > posts to this list may be entered into the public record.

> > Subscribe or view archives at Missoulagov.org

> > List Serve hosting provided by www.CedarMountainSoftware.com.

>

>

>_______________________________________________

>-----Please delete extra content when replying to messages------

>

>Note: This list is NOT an official service of the City Of Missoula. But

>posts to this list may be entered into the public record.

>Subscribe or view archives at Missoulagov.org

>List Serve hosting provided by www.CedarMountainSoftware.com.

>_______________________________________________

>-----Please delete extra content when replying to messages------

>

>Note: This list is NOT an official service of 

>the City Of Missoula. But posts to this list may 

>be entered into the public record.

>Subscribe or view archives at Missoulagov.org

>List Serve hosting provided by www.CedarMountainSoftware.com.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.cmslists.com/pipermail/missoulagov/attachments/20090318/d754853d/attachment.htm>