Granite Street will get two speed humps between Chestnut and Garnett streets on a trial basis, but only after the City Council nearly postponed action for further details about costs Monday night.
The council voted two weeks earlier to accept a petition from Granite residents, led by Beth and Marty Gister, to lower the speed limit to 25 mph and to install speed bumps or humps. The latter “traffic-calming” measure awaited a recommendation from City Engineer Frank Frazier on the type and number.
Frazier showed that he conducted a 24-hour speed check of traffic on Granite on March 15, a week after the speed limit was lowered and 2 1/2 months after he conducted a similar electronic survey. Although the traffic count was nearly 50 percent higher, the pattern was the same: Cars traveled at an average of 26 mph, and the 85th-percentile speed was about 32.5 mph.
Frazier also found information that indicated a single speed hump is sufficient if a block is no longer than 500 feet. The block of Granite is about 600 feet, so Frazier recommended using two humps, one about 200 feet from each intersection.
(Information he provided from the Tucson, Ariz., Department of Transportation defined the differences between a speed hump and a speed bump. A bump is 2 to 3 feet wide and 4 to 6 inches high; a bump is wider and lower.)
The council received three options from Frazier, listed in order of preference and excluding labor costs: two 3-foot-wide portable speed humps from Barco for $2,560; two 6-foot-wide city-created asphalt humps for $444; or one 14-foot-wide speed table, typically used in areas of heavy pedestrian traffic and on secondary emergency streets where the Fire Department doesn’t want regular humps, for $8,341.
The money for any option would come from the $500,000 in Powell Bill funds the state gives the city each year for road projects.
The last option was meant as a demonstration of the many choices available for measures to slow traffic, and the council gave it no serious consideration.
Frazier said the portable speed humps were first on the list because they could be installed and removed more quickly and because the city Public Works Department has never built a speed hump, “at least not purposely,” and thus can’t be sure how long the work will take.
Mayor Clem Seifert and council member Elissa Yount said the choice was a no-brainer: The second option was too cheap to pass up. Yount made a motion to install two asphalt speed humps.
That was when the discussion turned messy.
Council members started talking about the uncertainty of the labor costs, even though all of the labor will come from city employees and the only additional “cost” is the delay in other work they could do. The audience in the council chambers, which included the Gisters, grew restless, and several people tried to join the council discussion.
It took two minutes for council member Lonnie Davis to provide the second to Yount’s motion, but that was merely a speed bump in the path of the conversation.
Council member John Wester asked for an estimate of the labor to provide an accurate assessment of the relative expenses of the two options.
Frazier said he couldn’t be specific, but based on the estimates of Public Works Director James Morgan, he guessed the total would be $750 to $1,000. If that’s accurate, the asphalt option would be at least $1,000 cheaper than the portable option.
City Manager Eric Williams, advocating the asphalt humps, noted that although they wouldn’t be portable, they would be easy to remove with a front-end loader if the trial proved unsuccessful.
“You’re not making any decision here that’s going to be set for the next 500 years,” Seifert said. “You’re talking about getting some speed bumps in place that we debated to the end last time.”
Council member Mike Rainey wanted to cap the amount of labor the city could spend on the speed hump installation, but Seifert asked what would happen if the city crews hit that cap and weren’t finished.
Council member Bernard Alston said the point was to get more exact labor estimates before starting the project. “If we find out we’re going to spend as much money on Option 2 as on Option 1, then that makes 1 a more attractive option.”
Seifert said the council was slipping toward asking for another staff report on the humps, delaying action for at least three weeks until the next council meeting April 11. “I don’t think that’s what we want to do.”
Davis decided to add a further complication. He said he supports the speed humps on Granite Street if the city will build a sidewalk on either side of Boddie Street near the Beacon Light Apartments.
“I am sick and tired of these speed bumps on Granite Street. We’re either going to put them in, or we’re not,” Seifert said. If they cost too much, he said, the city will learn its lesson and try something different next time.
Williams emphasized that the prices of the two options are not comparable unless the labor costs top $2,000, a substantial amount at the hourly rates Public Works Department employees earn.
After 15 minutes of discussion, the council voted 7-0 to install the asphalt speed humps.