Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Valdosta council directs reinstallation of traffic calming on Tyndall Drive after petition, warrant discussion
Summary
After discussing past unapproved installations and a failed warrant in a speed study, council voted to reinstall traffic-calming humps on Tyndall Drive (Option 2) and then briefly entered executive session; council discussion clarified petition thresholds and differences between removable bumps and asphalt humps.
Valdosta city council voted to proceed with Option 2 to reinstall traffic-calming humps on Tyndall Drive after staff outlined the history and policy for traffic-calming installations.
City Manager Richard Hardy said the existing temporary devices had been installed before or during 2021 without documented council approval and that many lacked a formal warrant analysis. He reported staff's recommendation that the engineering department proceed according to standard operating procedures and that any reinstatement follow petition and speed-study rules.
Council members and staff clarified distinctions discussed in the meeting: "speed bumps" versus "speed humps," removable devices versus asphalt humps intended to reduce speeds to about 25 mph, and the petition-threshold debate (members referenced both 60% and 70% as the required citizen-signature threshold during discussion). Richard Hardy and staff said a speed study had been performed and "it did not pass warrant."
Following discussion, a councilmember moved to choose Option 2 (reinstall traffic calming/humps), the motion was seconded and the council approved it. Council then voted to enter executive session to discuss real estate; upon reconvening staff announced action would be taken on a different agenda item.
Why it matters: Reinstalling traffic-calming humps affects neighborhood traffic speeds, emergency services access, street maintenance and resident input via petition thresholds; the decision also clarifies that prior temporary installations were not formally approved.
What to watch: Implementation details (exact locations, timing and whether the petition process will be reopened) and whether the city will require a new petition or rely on staff recommendation.
