Mountain View County's policies and priorities committee has endorsed a plan to reduce the speed limit from 80 km/h to 60 km/h near the intersections of Twp. Rd. 340 and range roads 43 and 44 to address concerns from some residents of the area.The P&P decision, which still has to be ratified by council, will also see two stop signs posted at the Rge. Rd. 44 intersection and one stop sign placed on Rge Rd. 43. A third measure ñ to post signs requesting truckers not to use engine retarder brakes ñ was also passed.The decisions were not unanimous.After administration told P&P that Chinook's Edge School Division reported its bus drivers had ìno issues or incidents with trafficî at the intersections, and county patrol gave a similar assessment, two councillors asked why any changes were being contemplated.ìOur patrol officers are saying we don't have a major problem. School bus drivers who go out there twice a day don't have a problem. I don't know what we're talking about,î Div. 3 Coun. Duncan Milne said.Div. 1 Coun. Kevin Good said the county was setting a bad precedent to appease ìpeople who live in the area (and) don't want a road next to their place, basically.îìIf we have two people on a road who love gophers, do we reduce the speed and say don't use your engine retarder brakes because they might hurt gophers?î Good asked.The only traffic safety issue along that stretch of Twp. Rd 340, he added, was created by trees growing on the property of one of the complainants at the Rge. Rd 44 intersection.When pressed by Good to give his opinion, peace officer Rob Ridley conceded: ìI see no reason why this stretch of road is any different from any stretch of road in the county.îOpening the discussion, Reeve Bruce Beattie said he didn't agree with placing a second stop sign at the Rge. Rd. 43 intersection, as administration has originally proposed, but had talked to a school bus driver who supported the reduced speed limit.Beattie also pointed out that the AMEC engineering study contracted by the previous council had recommended the speed limit and stop sign changes if major reconstruction of the two intersections was not forthcoming.Div. 6 Coun. Paddy Munro ñ who represents the area ñ strongly urged fellow councillors to take action.ìThe problem is with increased oilfield activity ñ we have to do something,î Munro said, adding that he did not support spending $2.4 million on a major reconstruction project.Munro also told Ridley that peace officers should patrol the area more intensively, including at night, but Ridley later said: ìIn response to complaints we've done heavy, heavy patrols and the complaints are not consistent with what we've found.îAmended by Beattie and Munro, Div. 7 Coun. Al Kemmere's motion to recommend council approve reducing the speed limit and installing stops signs was carried, with Good and Milne opposed. A followup motion to recommend posting signs asking truckers to avoid using engine retarder brakes was also passed, with Good, Beattie and deputy reeve Patricia McKean opposed.If approved at council, the reduced speed-limit zone on Twp. Rd. 340 will start half a mile east of Rge. Rd. 43 and continue to a half-mile west of Rge. Rd. 44. It will also include Rge. Rd. 43 for a half-mile north of the intersection and Rge. Rd. 44 for a half-mile south of the intersection.
