Government, don?t meddle.
That?s the message two engineers shared with commissioners at a public hearing Thursday on whether the county ? not developers ? should hire consultants to perform traffic studies on proposed houses and stores.
“The county is taking up work it doesn?t have to,” said David Roush, an engineer, former county zoning appeals board member and school board candidate.
“All the time and money, in my view, is unnecessary. It comes out of the incorrect perception that whoever orders the study [controls the results]. If [engineers] skewed reports, their livelihood would be finished.”
The county Planning and Zoning Commission and staff asked commissioners to consider a proposal under which the county ? not developers ? hires traffic engineers to determine how proposed development would affect roads. The measure was suggested to eliminate any perception of bias a consultant might have to downplay traffic jams to get a development approved, Public Works Director Michael Evans said.
In addition, allowing the county to hire engineers at the developer?s expense could let the county determine the scope of the study, officials said.
But Carroll already defines which rush hours engineers must study and at which intersections, said Mickey Cornelius, senior vice president of The Traffic Group, an engineering firm.
“Part of the problem is the misconception from the community,” Cornelius said.
“Every time they see a consultant, the consultant says everything?s OK” traffic-wise.
Only half of consultants? studies make it to the planning commission, he said, because if an engineer determines that road improvements must be made and the developer deems them too costly, the developer finds another engineer to present a more favorable study.
Not all consultants hired to present traffic studies to the planning commission are certified traffic engineers, Gouge said.
Commissioner Dean Minnich suggested consultants be certified in order to testify before the commission.
