Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Traffic Calming topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Cheverly council deadlocks on Lake Avenue speed humps; directs staff to schedule fresh public hearing
Summary
After months of outreach, council tied 2–2 on a motion to install permanent speed humps on Lake Avenue; the motion failed and the council directed staff to advertise a new, specific public hearing for Lake Avenue and Forest Road to meet statutory notice requirements.
The Cheverly Town Council spent much of its Oct. 10 session debating permanent speed humps on Lake Avenue and on the 5700 block of Forest Road, a discussion that drew public comment, technical briefings and legal concerns about prior public notices.
Director Raymond summarized the technical distinction used by staff: temporary speed "bumps" are shorter and sharper; permanent speed "humps" are longer and more gradual, typically designed to allow vehicles to traverse at or near the speed limit when driven carefully. Raymond and the traffic engineer told council the temporary devices placed in the spring were more aggressive than the permanent humps staff would install.
Residents and council members described a multi‑year petition and community engagement on Lake Avenue. A resident who spoke during public comment said a 100‑year‑old family member would have difficulty traversing aggressive temporary devices; council members and staff replied that permanent humps are generally less jarring.
Council Member Wade moved to install permanent speed humps on Lake Avenue; after discussion the motion produced a 2–2 tie with one abstention and failed because the town attorney advised a simple majority is required. Vice Mayor Frey explained his no vote as a procedural concern: he said he supported calming devices in principle but was uncomfortable proceeding without clear records of prior notice and votes.
Town Attorney Deloach said the notice for the prior public hearing—published as a general hearing on the town code governing traffic control devices—did not specifically describe the proposed permanent speed‑hump installations and therefore was “deficient” for the council’s purpose of approving a particular installation. Deloach recommended and council accepted a pause to verify the record.
After debate council directed staff and the town attorney to prepare a properly worded, advertised public hearing and to hold that hearing in early November to solicit specific resident input on the proposed installations (the motion covered the 6100 block of Lake Avenue and the 5700 block of Forest Road). Staff was instructed to ensure statutory advertisement requirements (including the town newsletter) were met before any subsequent vote.
The council also discussed weather and construction timing: public works staff said permanent humps are weather‑sensitive and are usually tied to asphalt work windows; if installation is delayed by cold weather, staff would consider scheduling them in spring.
The council did not adopt permanent humps that night and instead set a process path to re‑notice and re‑hear the matter with clearer, specific descriptions of the proposed devices and locations.
