THE CORPORATION OF THE
CITY OF PORT COQUITLAM

MEMORANDUM

TO: City Administrator September 16, 1987

FROM: City Engineer

SUBJECT: Speed Limit Signs In Penny Place Lane = Public Works
Committees September 15, 1987

Recommendations

That Council confirm the policy that speed limit signs not
be installed in lanes within the City of Port Coquitlam.

Background and Comments:

oe

Bylaw 1117 provides that the Speed limit on lanes within
the City of Port Coquittam be 20 km/hr except where
specifically designated otherwise. This is consistent with the
Motor Vehicle Act, section 151, sub-section 8 and 9 which
provides that a municipality may by bylaw set a maximum speed
limit in lanes of 20 km/hr and that where a municipality has
enacted such a bylaw, it ts not required to erect signs
designating the rate of speed within Janes.

The Public Works Committee heard a delegation regarding
extra traffic and speeding In the lane between Penny Place and
Western Orive which Is paved and curbed. It was suggested that
-speed limit signs might be installed In this lane in order to
inform drivers of the regulations. The Public Works Committee
Was prepared to consider this request subject to their belng
Suitable space for the signs adjacent to the lane.

Council has, In the past, resisted reguests for the
Installation of various types of signs In lanes. One of the
main reasons Is that the public boulevard on elther side of a

paved lane is very limited. Approximately six inches exists
between the back of the curb and the property line. This means
That any sign installed In this position wit} overhang both the

paved lane and the private property. A sign overhanging the
lane {fs subject to damage by trucks driving close to the side
of the lane and, of course, the portion overhanging the private
property is an encroachment.

The second reason for not installing signs in lanes is the
pracedent is would set given the overal! problems throughout
the City of speeding and the number of residents who would want
to have some form of control in the lanes. It is doubtful that

the residents would be satistied with a Sign unless the sign Is
also enforced by the R.C.M.P. This is clearly Impractical and
tTherafora the installation of Signs can only lead to
frustration by both the residents and the ReCeMaP,

{8

-|~

wae