A Backgrounder . . .

Speed Humps for Traffic Calming in NJ
A basis for their use on South Franklin Street, Lambertville, NJ.

We have come across a copy of a lengthy, and somewhat dusty Report entitled:

Concept Report
December 2003

Development of a traffic calming plan for the City of Lambertville

The Report contains a series of recommendations for the employment of traffic calming measures, including "neck downs" and "speed humps" in a variety of locations within the City. It did not include a discussion of the situation on South Franklin Street, although there were recommended measures proposed for surrounding areas of Cottage Hill.

Yet, in the cost estimates in "Attachment E" at the end, there were general estimates for the inclusion of "speed humps" on South Franklin Street. We cannot explain that discrepancy.

In the interim, as the expression goes, a lot of water has passed under the bridge, including a 2005 clarification of state law on the subject of employing speed humps.

So what follows is a bit of a primer on the background to employment of speed humps and other traffic calming measures, as would apply to our situation here on South Franklin Street.

Very recently, the Mayor touted his plans for employing "traffic calming" measures on North Franklin Street, but no mention was made of South Franklin, though we petitioned the City on the subject quite some time ago. See also this.


The discussion below is probably best understood in conjunction with the photos and discussion contained in this prior post.

New Jersey Law:

The State of New Jersey recently (2005) adopted a statute at N.J.S.A. 39:4-8.9 et seq., regarding the permissive use of speed humps on New Jersey municipal roadways, entitled appropriately enough, the "Speed Hump Law', which provides general policy guidance for the New Jersey Department of Transportation (NJDOT) on the use and implementation of speed humps on certain municipal and private roads in New Jersey.

N.J.S.A. 39:4-8.9 defines speed hump:

"Speed hump" means a physical alteration to the horizontal and vertical alignment of a road surface used as a traffic calming measure and conforming to the technical standards established by the Department of Transportation."

N.J.S.A. 39:4-8.10a. specifies that

"a municipality may construct a speed hump on totally self-contained two-lane residential streets and on totally self-contained one-way residential streets under municipal jurisdiction which have no direct connection with any street in any other municipality, have fewer than 3,000 vehicles per day, with a posted speed of 30 mph or less, and on one-way streets connecting to county roads."

We believe that is precisely the situation on South Franklin Street here in Lambertville. The speed limit is 25 mph, there are no direct connections with other municipalities, and there are certainly fewer than 3,000 vehicles per day traveling on this street.

The law is permissive and allows municipalities to construct speed humps in such circumstances as "traffic calming measures" so long, as is provided at N.J.S.A. 39:4-8.11 :

"Any speed hump constructed by a municipality or a board of directors or trustees shall conform in design and construction to the technical standards established by the Department of Transportation."

and, having met all applicable notice requirements for construction in advance of placement, that:

"The signing and pavement markings for a speed hump shall conform to the current standards prescribed in the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways as adopted by the Commissioner of Transportation."

NJDOT:

According to the website for NJDOT,

"NJDOT has adopted the engineering practices recommended for speed humps by ITE as the applicable design standard and practice for speed humps on municipal roads. Transportation engineers should refer to the relevant ITE document for guidance."

The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) is an industry-standard document which is frequently referenced by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and which also references ITE guidance when it comes to the use of speed humps. In addition the manual specifies recommended signage where they are employed, including use of an advisory speed plaque.

The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Guidance:

The ITE website links to a series of studies, e.g., this early study (’93) from Modesto, CA outlining the many potential benefits (and cautions) regarding the use of speed humps. We have been in touch with ITE (see Appendix:) and they have referred us to these studies. In addition they have published their "Guidelines for the Design and Application of Speed Humps" which was initially prepared by the ITE Technical Council Speed Humps Task Force in 1995.

Here is the access link to their large manual, "Traffic Calming: State of the Practice, ITE/FHWA, August 1999."

And here is their summary document published in their Journal specifically on the use of speed humps.

Found here is an ITE example of a Traffic Hump, with a full list of potential benefits that can be derived.

And in a general policy guideline they also publish, ITE points out that speed humps can be quite beneficial in the following ways.

In general, ITE positively notes that speed humps can:

1. Reduce traffic speeds in the immediate vicinity of the speed humps,
2. Decrease traffic volume, and
3. Reduce accidents in some areas.

And at the same time they note that some potential drawbacks are:

1. Divert traffic to other neighborhood streets thereby moving the problem rather than solving it,
2. Increase noise level due to vehicle brakes, tires and engine,
3. Increase vehicle emissions due to deceleration and acceleration,
4. Increase response time of emergency vehicles,
5. Conflict with school and transit bus operation,
6. Present a potential hazard to bicyclists and motorcyclists.

In each instance, we believe the potential drawbacks are either inapposite to our situation, or are heavily outweighed by the benefits to residents that would be derived from the intelligent employment of speed humps in at least a few locations on South Franklin Street.

Potential minor infrastructure issues simply do not outweigh realistic risks to children, pedestrians, joggers, pets or property from speeders or other unsafe traffic conditions. And those risks will not go away or diminish until the City finally addresses the problem.

The Traffic Problem:

What has occurred on South Franklin Street in the past few years (since the resurfacing of the roadway) is the unwelcome diversion of traffic from other roadways to our street.

Slowing the traffic down a bit would likely redress that unwelcome diversion and help re-balance the situation.

In addition, several years ago a resident of the City and a former Commissioner of Transportation, actually secured a state funding grant for the removal the anchor fences that had surrounding the cemeteries. The resulting appearance of openness, contributed as well to the tendency of traffic to "cut through" on the roadway between St. Johns and Mt. Hope.

One unfortunate result is that an increasing number of drivers from various locations on the hill and beyond have tended to use South Franklin as a "by-pass" of sorts, which, in the case of the many speeders, has caused a few safety-related threats to arise on this street.

There are numerous stretches in the approximately 1/3 mile of the roadway that have no sidewalks; there are several blind spots and blind corners, on both the paves and unpaved portions; there are small children residing in homes along the roadway; there are a considerable number of people who use the street as a pedestrian walkway, or as a jogging route; there are several pet owners who frequently walk their pets on the roadway, including in the late evening; and there have been a few recent instances of crashes along the street, including two parked vehicles being totaled as a result of unsafe driving, no doubt going too fast for the circumstances.

The so-called issues with respect to "emissions" and noise are not applicable here. The fact is that the higher speeds result in increased emissions and in greater noise, as such drivers accelerate on their way up or down the street. We hear them and see them now!

There is also no issue here at all with respect to transit or other bus operations.

Differing Kinds of Speed Humps:

There are a variety of different kinds of speed humps, such as "speed tables," or "cushions" such as those that are in place on Ferry Street here in town, or just across the river in New Hope, which would alleviate concerns about potential concerns regarding emergency vehicles, bicycles, or motorcycles.

And with regard to the latter (bicycle safety), there are ITE studies that note that in spite of concerns about the placement of speed humps above a certain degree grade or more, result from theoretical concerns about cyclists traveling at speeds in excess of 25 mph, there are ways to ameliorate or eliminate any such potential risk. It should also be noted that the maximum speed limit on South Franklin Street is 25 mph. Therefore, anyone traveling in excess of that speed would be in violation of the speed limit, which is exactly the point!

Secondly, the study above notes that:

"Fortunately, properly designed speed humps, with gentle approach and exit gradients, flush leading edges, and smooth surfaces, do not seem to pose a significant hazard to bicyclists. British government research found that 92 percent of users of two-wheeled vehicles had no trouble crossing O.l-meter (4-inch) humps."

With proper warning signage, and/or smoothed down edges, we believe the potential for hazard can be easily eliminated. Likewise concerns regarding emergency vehicles can be eliminated as well, owing to the significantly wider wheel base of such vehicles.

In particular, there is a relatively flat stretch of the South Franklin Street roadway, beginning just above the entrance ramp to St. John’s Cemetery and ending at the turn onto Highland Avenue. It is also one of the most dangerous points along the roadway, as small children reside there, pedestrians frequently walk there, and both the approach coming up the hill, and the turn off of Highland Avenue constitute dangerous blind spots. One of the two parked cars recently totaled on South Franklin Street, was properly parked on that strip.

Costs of Implementation:

The cost of speed humps is relatively modest when measured against other traffic calming techniques, and the City could apply for pass-through federal aid for funding in conjunction with the municipal aid program or other local aid programs as a “safety project.” There are at least two federal sources – money for “Local Safety Grants, and perhaps even funding under the ”Better Roads” provisions of the High Risk Rural Roads HRRR) funding that could be explored to cover the costs of any such improvements. The key would be getting the proposal on the MPO plan for our region.

The Mayor has now also informed us, through the City's engineer that Delaware River Joint Toll Bridge Authority money may be more quickly available:

At the next Council meeting the City will be authorizing a grant application to the Delaware River Joint Toll Bridge Commission which will include costs for a traffic calming study at South Franklin Street, Boozer and Highland. If approved, the grant will include construction costs for traffic control devices determined when the study is complete.

This will be a good development if it results in a more timely response, but applications in each program area could be pursued simultaneously.

If the federal-related applications were processed more slowly, then they would eventually become the "plan B" approach, or supplemental to the DRJTBC application. But there is no reason for not making those applications now. The City should pursue all avenues.

These are clearly safety-related projects, with risks being substantially reduced if a proper approach is taken. Given the fact of the petition that was submitted to the City quite some time ago, it is obvious this issue has been on the City's plate for far too long for them to ignore the potential for all funding sources. In the mean time, the risks to children, pedestrians, joggers, pets and property have been ignored.

Other "Issues":

One other issue has been raised from time to time with respect to the employment of speed humps -- the potential for legal issues arising of their use. This, however, has proved to be more of a tempest in a teapot. Here is the opening paragraph from Chapter 6 of the ITE study, entitled "Legal Authority and Liability" where it states:

The issue of government liability always surfaces in discussions of traffic calming. "What if we close a street and a fire rages on?" "What if we install speed humps and a motorcyclist goes flying?" Lawsuits and damage claims are not nearly the problem commonly assumed. In legal research in the literature, only two lawsuits against traffic calming programs have been successful, and one of those is currently under appeal. Close to 50 cities and counties were surveyed for this report, including every major program in the United States. Many have had no legal problems at all, and the remainder have experienced more threats than legal actions. The legal maneuvering has more often involved city attorneys concerned about potential liability than private attorneys claiming actual damages.

Conclusion:

We have concluded that the City certainly has the authority under State law -- and we believe the obligation -- to employ traffic calming devices on South Franklin Street, to protect the current risk to children, pedestrians, pets and property from speeders on our street.

This would include, where appropriate, the use of speed humps. We further believe that the vast majority of the street’s residents support the employment of traffic calming measures to effectively reduce the risks associated with the speeders. And, of course, we also believe that the local government can and should take whatever necessary steps, including posting warning signage and striping to minimize if not completely eliminate any possible risk to travelers that might arise from the installation of such "calming" measures.

Finally, we note that there have been a few stories in the paper specifically addressing, including this one in the Beacon, and this earlier story in the Trenton Times.

They have helped frame what has become for the residents of South Franklin Street a real concern over speeding that is a danger to everyone. Several of our neighbors have expressed their full and continuing support for our efforts to help rectify this situation.

Local Speed Humps & Traffic Calming

Local Speed Humps Applications
Their Use in Lambertville, NJ & the Surrounding Area

In urging the City of Lambertville to implement an overall plan to resolve the problem of dangerous speeding on South Franklin Street, the residents have promoted the employment of traffic calming strategies, including where appropriate, the installation of speed humps.

As the Mayor himself indicated in a February 25th meeting with our group, the employment of speed humps on South Union Street downtown, has proven to be a successful venture. He told the assembled residents that the single most persistent complaint he receives as Mayor, from nearly every area of town, is about speeding.

But, he said that there has been a very dramatic reduction in such complaints from the South Union Street area since the City employed a series of speed humps there several years ago. At the time, the Mayor was a resident at Raritan Point, just around the corner, and he supported the idea.

And, the Mayor also noted that some of the then big critics of putting in speed humps down on South Union Street, have since become avid supporters, having apparently come to appreciate the benefits of such traffic calming measures.

More recently, the City employed the use of speed humps when they resurfaced Ferry Street, between South Union and Main Street.

According to Ferry Street resident, John Woods, Ferry Street had become a "short cut" for some drivers to avoid traffic on Bridge Street, increasing the traffic flow there. He said a block association on Ferry Street had advocated for the employment of speed humps to slow their traffic down.

Diamond-shaped speed humps, or "cushions" were eventually placed on Ferry Street, ones that do not bridge across the entire street width (see photo).

According to Mr. Woods, some held reservations at the time that drivers would simply try to "game" or try to drive around the diamond-shaped humps. That concern proved to be largely unfounded with respect to the vast majority of vehicles that drive on Ferry Street.

"They work," Woods said about the speed humps.

One other type of speed hump is what is called a "speed table," which is flatter on the top than the standard traffic speed hump.

This appears to be similar to the type of speed hump that was employed on West Ferry Street in downtown New Hope Boro, just across the Delaware River in Pennsylvania.

This particular speed hump (see photo) is located on the slope, just short of where West Ferry Street intersects with Route 179 as it heads into Solebury Township. The top of the hump is fairly flat, although as you can see, it does not reach all the way to the curb, as with most speed tables.

(Upcoming:)

The next post will include a brief examination and analysis of the New Jersey state statute governing the use of speed humps, the New Jersey Department of Transportation policy declaration regarding the same, references to the industry-standard Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), and the relevant Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) guidance on their use, each as they apply in general and to the safety situation here on South Franklin.

Speeding: An Issue on South Franklin St.

Several residents living along South Franklin Street in Lambertville, New Jersey, have decided to establish this website as an effective way to openly share and communicate neighborly information regarding safety issues and other matters of mutual concern with all of those living along our street, and any other interested party.

From time to time, we will focus on proposing solutions to these serious safety issues. Where appropriate, we will continue to bring our perspective to the attention of the City Council of Lambertville for resolution.

A few years ago, many of our residents signed and forwarded a petition to the Mayor and the City Council, asking them to address a problem involving speeding and other unsafe driving conditions which had emerged, and that we believed were partially attributable to the resurfacing of our roadway several years ago.

South Franklin Street runs up a hill, beginning from an intersection with Swan Street, just a few feet from where the latter intersects with the state Highway, Route 165.

The roadway proceeds past historic Mt. Hope Cemetery on the left, and several residences on the right, including both single unit homes and townhouses as well.

There are several entrances along the roadway from which pedestrian and other traffic enter, including two roadway ramps and a stairway coming from Mount Hope Cemetery, and a roadway ramp coming from the southern end of St. Johns Cemetery. The two roadway ramps from Mount Hope are closed to thru vehicular traffic.

As these photos demonstrate, there are some steep portions along the way, but the roadway levels out considerably near the top, where it ultimately intersects at an acute angle with the lower end of Highland Avenue.

That intersection is at a sharp and relatively blind left turn. Over all, the currently paved portion of the roadway spans about 1/3 mile from Swan Street up to Highland Avenue.

At that point, South Franklin Street continues on straight ahead as a dirt road extension, where several additional homes are situated. It is a "dead end" extension, with no thru traffic.

As a residential street, the speed limit on South Franklin is set at 25 mph. Because of the speeding and other unsafe conditions on the street, we have identified specific risks that our efforts are intended to reduce.

We believe these are the four primary safety risks:

1) There are small children living on our hill, and speeding coupled with a few blind spots along the roadway, absolutely require that that risk be adequately addressed;

2) South Franklin has become a commonly used walkway for pedestrians and joggers, even though there are a few stretches without sidewalks;

3) Several folks along the street have pets, including dogs that they walk along the roadway at a variety of times, including late in the evening, and;

4) Finally, there is a very real risk to property arising out of the combination of speeding and blind spots. Within the very recent past two parked vehicles owned by residents have been totaled following crashes that occurred as a result of driving too quickly for the conditions along the roadway.

Following the street resurfacing, South Franklin became a tempting "by-pass" of sorts for some, allowing short-cut access to other areas of Cottage Hill, the Woodcrest condominiums, as well as a number of homes on the upper "dirt road" extension of South Franklin Street itself. The problem is the recently repaved surface has become an enticement to those in a hurry, and speeding along our roadway has become a serious issue.

Thus, while that road resurfacing work did successfully address several issues, including smoothing out the roadway for travel back and forth, and solved some of the drainage, or storm water runoff problems so often associated with life on a hillside, there was a consequential downside.

The repair had actually changed traffic patterns here on Cottage Hill by attracting significant additional traffic to our roadway. The newly resurfaced South Franklin Street became the pathway of choice for many other residents living elsewhere on Cottage Hill, the Northfield Court area, as well as in the Woodcrest condominium complex, and beyond, some speeders included.

But in response to our petition -- which was signed by the vast majority of our residents -- no action was taken by the City, other than a minor amount of law enforcement monitoring, and a claim that the City's engineer had determined that no traffic calming devices (such as the employment of speed humps) were permitted on the roadway, as a result of the slope of the hill. Nothing, however, was ever presented to us in writing. As recently as February of this year we were told by a city official that because of the slope of the hill, "regulations" prohibited the use of speed humps on South Franklin. However, our research quite clearly showed otherwise, and we have used that research to challenge City officials.

Finally, a "traffic calming" plan had been prepared for the City of Lambertville back in 2003, with specific recommendations for several areas of the City. But South Franklin Street was not included in that plan.


View Larger Map

Those changing traffic patterns on our street were further enhanced by the removal of the fences around both cemeteries a few years ago -- Mount Hope and St. Johns -- in effect, opening up the area and inviting vehicle traffic to the parallel roadways of a resurfaced Highland Avenue at the north end, and the also newly-surfaced private roadway running between the two cemeteries from Boozer Street to South Franklin Street.

That private drive (not marked on the embedded map, above) had more recently became a popular two-way access road, to and from town. It intersects Boozer Street between Lincoln and Douglas Streets on the eastern side of the cemeteries, via a steep ramp emptying onto a sharply sloping location of South Franklin Street.

Owing to the landscaping of an adjacent property, there is also a "blind spot" there with respect to traffic coming down South Franklin Street at that location.

Especially during inclement weather conditions, such as when it is snow or ice covered (see photo below), that sharp ramp has exacerbated safety conditions here on the South Franklin Street side.

On the Boozer Street side, however, the landscape is relatively flat at the intersection with the St. John's roadway, and on approaching the intersection, the view in unimpeded in all directions where it intersects Boozer Street at a "T" in between Lincoln and Douglas streets.

The risk is not theoretical. Recently, for example, a vehicle traveling from Boozer Street toward South Franklin, lost control on that ramp and crashed into and totaled a car parked in the owner's driveway here on the South Franklin Street side. Had the resident's car not been parked there, the moving vehicle might well have crashed into a house.

The private roadway is owned by St. Johns Church here in Lambertville, and was originally intended to provide vehicular access for funeral processions, and for people visiting the gravesites of their loved ones. It is also used by the Lambertville Fire Company, as the member memorial monument for all of the City's various fire companies, located on a knoll on the Mount Hope side of the roadway. Occasionally memorial events are held at the monument by the firefighters.

In addition, a designated and marked emergency vehicle access to the Woodcrest condominium complex in the Liberty View Court section of the complex, intersects Highland Avenue at the top of Boozer Street. (It is shown as a narrow-necked connector on the embedded map.) "Click" on photo to see enlarged version.

Though marked as an emergency way only, it has not been enforced as such. In fact, it has become an entrance and/or exit of choice for some of the residents of the complex even though it is officially designated as an emergency connector. The sign posted at the entrance specifically reads "Emergency Vehicle Access Only." The entrance to Woodcrest is located on Studdiford Street opposite Northfield Court, where it becomes Goat Hill Road heading into West Amwell Township.

Recently, a group of residents of South Franklin Street voiced their concerns to the City Council over incidents of vehicle speeding and other dangerous conditions here on the hill. Though the City had initially opposed designating the St. John's roadway as "One-Way", that has changed. On Wednesday evening, February 25th, during a meeting with a larger group of South Franklin Street residents held to address their safety concerns, the Mayor indicated that the City would approach St. Johns about designating it as a "One-Way." Having not heard anything from City officials, one member of our group stopped by the Church on the afternoon of Friday the 27th and met briefly with Reverend Robert Kolakowski. He said that the Church had met with City officials, and had agreed to designate the roadway one way going in the direction of Boozer Street.

According to Father Kolakowski, the "One-Way" signs could go up as early as the the next week -- the first week of March.

During that meeting on the 25th, Mayor DelVecchio also committed to enforcing the official designation of the "emergency access only" means of egress to Woodcrest as well, which should also relieve some of the unintended vehicular traffic on South Franklin Street. Specifically, the access roadway will be chained across. He reiterated that the initial approved plan for the complex from the start had that access point designated for emergency vehicle access only.

Additionally, the City's consulting engineer, Christine Ballard, P.E., of T&E Engineering, will examine the other portions of the roadway for the employment of traffic calming devices, including, among others, speed humps, speed tables, speed cushions, and/or possible raised crosswalks using non-skid granular material, and roadway "narrowing" markings, each intended to contribute to an overall strategy for slowing down or reducing the pace of the traffic on our residential roadway, and ameliorating the serious safety risks we have brought to the attention of the City.

No one element will solve the overall problem, but we are hopeful if the city addresses each of the issues, our quality of life will be significantly improved, and the current risks to our safety greatly diminished.