City & County Dispute Over Traffic Signals on Williamson Blvd.

to: “Kisela, Greg” <>

Greg; _
I am perplexed with the County’s position regarding the installation of a Traffic Signal at the intersection of Williamson & Town West Blvd. 

What is the county’s problem?  If the traffic parameters at this location satisfy any one of the Warrants cited in the MUTCD,  and the signal construction has been fully funded by the developer, the signal should be installed ASAP (case closed).     The fact that there is another traffic control signal in the neighborhood does not in any way negate traffic safety deficiencies at this location.
If the county assumes the other traffic control signal at the Raydon intersection is somehow not needed, they should conduct a traffic engineering survey at that location and if results do not satisfy any of MUTCD warrants, then that traffic signal should be removed or the controller reset to flash mode. Or perhaps on flash at least during the off hours at Raydon
  Any concerns the county may have regarding the interruption of traffic flow along Williamson caused by two adjacent signalized intersections is by far outweighed by the need for traffic safety at those intersections.  Any real traffic friction concerns of the county could also be mitigated by interconnecting the two signals  

 Also the plan to build a new or relocated road for the sole purpose to circumventing a new signal installation is somewhat convoluted.   The county should start rethinking their old stance in opposition to additional new signalized intersections, and face the fact that this area is slowly becoming more urbanized. 
P. Nelan

Re:   Light on Williamson Blvd. and Town West Blvd.   December 7, 2013 9:27 AM

From:  “Greg Kisela” <>
To:  “Joshua Wagner” <>
I am sorry you feel I was blaming the County. That was not my intent. You asked for an update and I provided a status of the signal. This is a difficult issue. I understand and respect the County’s, Raydon and the neighborhood positions on this issue.  Unfortunately we are unable to satisfy all of the concerns based on everyone’s respective positions.
Please advise when the County would like to schedule this before the City Council.
Greg Kisela
City Manager
Sent from my iPad

On Dec 7, 2013, at 7:27 AM, “Joshua Wagner” <> wrote:

I will be at one of your next couple council meetings to discuss this issue on the record. I will fully advise the public of our position. We have given the city a viable option and will continue to try to help. By saying we were not willing to meet and implying that we have not been fully supportive is not the full story (i.e. their concerns unfortunately do not change the viable option). I am very disappointed that you would imply am unwillingness to help as the the county has done its part to accommodate the city changing its mind from a prior city commission and administration (i.e. the city made the decision to where the light is). I will ask staff to attend with me as well.

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 6, 2013, at 6:13 PM, “Kisela, Greg” <> wrote:
To all: several months ago  the City conceptually designed a new entrance road into Raydon utilizing the Town West Blvd. intersection.  We shared this design with Raydon.  While Raydon was sympathetic with the  Royal Palm neighborhood issues they desired a meeting with City and County officials to discuss this issue so they could explain their concerns. We were unsuccessful in getting the County to agree to meet with the affected parties.
Greg Kisela
City ManagerSent from my iPad
On Dec 6, 2013, at 2:39 PM, “” <> wrote:

Thank you for the response.  I look forward to hearing back from you and the city.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.