Comments

I will oppose any plan that involves more vertical deflection on the drive to my home on Bayonne Ct. While speed humps can slow traffic somewhat, they are also designed to be so uncomfortable as to discourage shortcut traffic through our neighborhood which is the biggest source of the speeders. If they are installed, those of us that live here will have to suffer speed humps so extreme that no one will want to use Rollins Rd that doesn't have to. To discourage the few, we all have to suffer. I'm also frustrated by this plan because of the lack of transparency and communication in its development. My perception of the speeding problem is due to arterial spill—people cutting through because the traffic on adjacent high capacity roadways is being unnecessarily restricted due to larger systemic traffic problems such as poor signal timing and coordination. People are choosing to travel through our neighborhood because it's easier than using the roadways designed to handle their traffic. General guidelines for traffic calming such as the primer from the Federal Highway Administration recommend studying and understanding the root cause before adopting any calming measures because solving those problems will be better accepted by the community than more aggressive methods like vertical deflection. Understanding the source of this excess traffic is needed to ensure there are no other unintended consequences. For example, failure to treat the cause of traffic overflow will simply cause a new desire path elsewhere as traffic calming on residential streets is instituted. And still the larger systemic traffic issues persist and then more calming is needed elsewhere. Unfortunately the above plan is severely deficient in information. At the time I write this, there are only two documents provided that show the section of road under consideration, and some drawings of signs and speed humps. No document is provided communicating the causes and predicted outcomes nor alternatives considered in developing this plan. These sparse documents provided don't include traffic volume or 85th percentile speeds, nor do they give dimensions for the proposed speed humps! Neither the lateral footprint nor the anticipated vertical deflection are given. The city is requesting comment on a plan that doesn't include how big the speed humps will be? Looking at the FHWA guidelines and referencing the ITE "Updated Guidelines for the Design and Application of Speed Humps", we can't begin to anticipate the amount of traffic volume or speed reduction without that information. It's possible unless these are very extreme speed humps, we may see no more than 5-6 mph reduction in speed. But these are details the public should not have to decipher for themselves; the city should be determining and communicating this. I requested more details of the plan from the city, but was only provided the traffic speed and volume data that is not yet available here. My other questions were ignored. While trying to understand City of Columbia policy for traffic calming I found this on the city website: https://www.como.gov/Council/Commissions/downloadfile.php?id=12886 While this may not be the officially adopted policy for traffic calming, I believe it should be. It requires a more detailed preliminary report than what we've been given and provides a formal policy for studying and documenting the problem prior to plan development. As a plan that will impact so many people and is deemed a matter of public safety, this plan needs to be more thorough and detailed. Request for public comment should not have been considered without much more information, and reasonable questions from impacted citizens shouldn't be ignored.

I have lived very near the Martin/Rollins intersection for 10 years. For the majority of those years I have walked with my children down Rollins Rd. to Fairview Elementary daily. My children routinely cross the intersection of Martin/Rollins in order to play football on the grassy field of the Lutheran Church. 1.) I do like the idea of a lighted cross-walk at Martin/Rollins, although, think it would be ineffective without a flashing light when kids need to cross (otherwise everyone will just drive through the crosswalk and not stop). 2.) I think speed humps are a completely ineffective way to reduce traffic speeds - most people do what I do when encountering speed humps - slow over the hump and gun it inbetween. And, honestly, having two speed humps that close will make driving down that road completely miserable for residents. Rollins road has two giant "S" curves at Fairview Lake that are the absolute best traffic calming/slowing tools possible. It does not need speed humps. Please, just leave Rollins Road alone and solve the REAL problem and that is the round-about at Rollins and Fairview. I cross this round-about routinely with my children as a pedestrian and it is the only place along that stretch that I truly feel unsafe, and have almost been hit by a car multiple times. The East end of Rollins is just fine, it's the West end and round-about that needs work. Thank you for your consideration and for working to make our city/neighborhoods better.

I'd like to see rollins get narrower, and I'd like to see safe places to cross the street at martin and hulen.

Add to the fact that the intersection is rather blind, the fact that SO many people traveling east on Rollins seem to believe that the speed limit does not apply to them and it makes it dangerous. Since there has been no police presence to enforce the speed limit, it MIGHT help if the intersection of Rollins and Hulen was a four way stop. I KNOW that there are a lot of the speeders who will ignore the stop signs, but it would seem to be a relatively low cost thing to try.