[Summit] Speed Bumps

Tue May 18 19:09:49 UTC 2021

If indeed these were aimed to curb motorcycle/ATV activity—which I would
wholeheartedly support—Hope street would have been the place to start.

Emlyn

On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 11:14 AM Gayle Gifford <gayle at ceffect.com> wrote:

> I am quite concerned about the lack of public engagement on the speed
> bumps that have been installed. According to that Go Local article, there
> was supposed to have been public engagement. The failure of anyone to reach
> out to the neighborhood association is quite distressing.
>
> Ethan, is SNA considering a formal letter to Mayor Elorza expressing
> distress at the lack of true public engagement and failure to consult the
> neighborhood association?
>
> John, I remember the last time around and the decision to install the bump
> outs. If I remember correctly one of the first choices was to convert Hope
> Street into a Boulevard, with a median strip. That was nixed by DPW,
> allegedly because of sewer line and other utility maintenance.
>
> I don't see how snow plows will deal with the Rochambeau bumps. It would
> seem areas that are lower wouldn't be plowable, unlike an equal sized
> across the full street bump like Kennedy Plaza. The Rochambeau hill can be
> quite challenging in the snow and ice.
>
> And why  those locations on Rochambeau? I haven't driven or biked or
> walked on Chase yet, so why there?
>
> I'm also wondering if these are part of the city's attempted solution to
> the off road vehicles. It would seem their riders will either  change
> streets once they encounter the bumps or use them for wheelies.
>
> Gayle
>
>
>
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Sun, 16 May 2021 23:05:54 -0400
> From: John Bazik <jbazik at gmail.com>
> To: Summit List <summit at sna.providence.ri.us>
> Subject: Re: [Summit] Speed Bumps
> Message-ID: <64b81d2b-7033-7267-c1df-88cd312c4b4d at gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
>
> Here's some more information about speed bumps, humps, tables and other
> calming measures from the US Dept of Transportation:
>
>
> https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/speedmgt/ePrimer_modules/module3pt2.cfm#mod310
>
> DOT guidelines say humps/lumps are recommended only for local roads <= 30
> mph, and are "typically" 12' in length and 3" high.  In its RFP, Providence
> specified lumps 7' in length and 3" high with 2' ramps (1:8 slope):
>
>
> http://www.providenceri.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/pvd20-117-CITYWIDE-SPEED-LUMPS-AND-RAISED-CROSSWALKS.pdf
>
> Those are pretty severe.
>
> John
>
> On 5/16/21 7:19 PM, Ethan Gyles wrote:
> > There was no consultation with the neighborhood association and this is
> generally a surprise to me. I much prefer neckdowns to speed bumps. I
> understand some of the background on the notion of traffic calming on these
> streets was discussed at community meetings Councilor LaFortune hosted,
> though she noted on our Facebook group that she didn?t know the speed bumps
> were being deployed until she saw them. Her Facebook comments are below:
> >
> > ?Hi Ethan, I actually did not know the city was installing the speed
> bumps the until I saw them. We have ?talked about the speeding and traffic
> mitigation at many community meetings, where folks have asked aboug speed
> bumps. For the last three years the traffic engineer has been conducting
> speed counts/traffic studies throughout the ward. Many people have
> complained about the speeding on all the streets. It looks like the speed
> bumps were the recommendations from the traffic commission. All
> recommendations are align with safety protocols and include imput from
> public safety (fire, police EMS). I do wish we were given a heads up. I am
> getting more information. I too live on the corner of one of these streets
> And have watched cars, motorcycles speed from N. Main to hope. Parents and
> residents have complained about speeding on cemetery road, and MHCC is
> asking for speed bumps on Camp. I'll get more details about how the
> decision was made.....and ask for information to share.?
> >
> >> On May 16, 2021, at 7:06 PM, Emlyn Addison <noisyblocks at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> ?
> >> I agree. I drove home via W River street today where there have been
> speed bumps installed for several years (behind the USPS facility); they're
> markedly lower and easier to drive over.
> >>
> >> I don't know how these came to be installed so suddenly
> (are?neighborhoods generally consulted first?) and why they appear to be so
> poorly constructed. Apparently they're not cheap either.
> >>
> >>
> >> Emlyn
> >>
> >> On Sat, May 15, 2021 at 5:37 PM John Bazik <jbazik at gmail.com <mailto:
> jbazik at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >>
> >>     I think the speed bumps are terrible.? Years ago, I helped bring
> curb extensions to the neighborhood for the same purpose: to reduce
> speeding and making our streets more pedestrian-friendly.? We looked at
> speed bumps back then, and there were strong emotions for and against.? One
> thing I learned was that there are good bumps and bad bumps.? Good bumps,
> as I understand it, are wide and parabolic.? At low speeds, they are easy
> to drive over and plows handle them easily.? Bad bumps are unpleasant at
> any speed and impossible for plows.? The good ones are more expensive and
> take more planning.? An example of the good ones are in Kennedy plaza.
> >>
> >>     As I drove up Rochambeau today, the guy behind me swerved into the
> opposing lane to avoid them.
> >>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Summit mailing list
> Summit at sna.providence.ri.us
> http://sna.providence.ri.us/mailman/listinfo/summit_sna.providence.ri.us
> SNA Website: http://sna.providence.ri.us/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sna.providence.ri.us/pipermail/summit_sna.providence.ri.us/attachments/20210518/c2ca68b3/attachment.htm>