QuickPoll: Do we want 'real' traffic enforcement on our streets?
Well, if you look at the "not sure" votes, then this poll is essentially a tie. It's interesting to compare this to the results of the security survey earlier this year: roughly 41% did not want real tickets, while 32% did want real tickets. However, at the same time, 63% thought that CSD enforcement of speeding and stop signs was important.
The difference between the 32% and the 63% is interesting to me. I wonder if those are the folks that think CCR enforcement applies to most everyone? Or if those are the ones that understand that there are some gaps in CCR enforcement, yet that trade-off is acceptable. Or if this is just the standard, we want something without having to pay for it, so to speak.
CSD earlier this year addressed the "unable to cite" issue: http://www.ranchomurieta.com/node/3624
We have an illusion of private streets. Our streets really aren't private. Every day, we operate as a small city. We have LOTS of folks that come in that are non-residents and non-guests. What wasn't mentioned in that article is that there are folks that either don't "belong to anyone" for citation reasons, or folks where "just asking" is not sufficient and there are no teeth for follow-up.
There are a number of people that drive on our roads with no accountability for their actions. The sports people drive our streets with no accountability, as they" belong to no one". Country club members that are not residents, I have never heard being held accountable. I have never heard of construction folks being held accountable, and I have never heard of vendors (housecleaners, lawn care, etc.) being held accountable. We do discriminate -- only residents can be held accountable, non-residents and non-guests are true "unable to cites".
I agree with what Wilbur said earlier about how our traffic problems will evolve. I also think that the RMA is looking for permission from the residents to bring in the vehicle code. I don't think that that permission will ever happen....well, not unless something really bad happens first. I believe that the only way that the vehicle code will ever be brought in is if there is an RMA board that feels strongly enough that it is necessary, after looking at how the community has evolved and will evolve. I don't think that they will ever get a large vocal majority of the residents to "give them permission" and make this step okay.
When I was speaking to CSDs about their security/police protection, I also asked about their roads. Nearly all of them had brought the vehicle code in. A couple didn't, but those had stiff penalities that the HOA enforced upon contractors -- firm financial penalites that were taken from a bond that the contractors had to put up before construction could begin. The places with multiple HOAs had brought in the vehicle code. This was from the handfuls of CSDs that I spoke with -- I didn't speak with the HOAs.
However, the communities that had the contractor enforcement that I did speak with, were small. One had only 30 homes, the other maybe a couple of hundred. While we might compare with some of the contractor traffic, we don't compare in terms of vendors -- with our large numbers of homes, we have many more vendors. We also don't compare because of the extensive recreation that we offer to non-residents, non-guests. And if we increase the lighting at the fields, which will increase the number of games that can be played, then those "unable to cite" folks increase in numbers.
Those are the trade-offs that this community has chosen. I just don't see any RMA board acting contrary to that vocal group.
(site updated 10/9/08)
It changes, yet stays the same....
Can someone comment on how much of the traffic study below has changed since 2001? Certainly there is no school to impact the traffic, what other changes have been made -- is the study still useful at all?
2001: Full Traffic Study
(site updated 10/9/08)