Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident petition and speed study spur council debate over reinstating South Oak speed humps
Summary
A South Oak Avenue resident presented a petition asking the council to reinstall speed humps. Staff speed study showed 270 vehicles per day and an 85th‑percentile speed of 29 mph, below the city policy thresholds; residents argued safety concerns and urged reinstallation.
Get email alerts on the Transportation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
A resident appealed to the council to reinstall speed humps on South Oak Avenue, saying a petition and past experience show the devices reduced speeding and improved safety.
Traffic staff told the council the city’s traffic‑calming policy allows speed humps only if the roadway carries more than 500 vehicles per day or the 85th‑percentile speed is 30 mph or higher. A July 7 speed study at the site recorded about 270 vehicles per day and an 85th‑percentile speed of 29 mph — below those thresholds, staff said — but the applicant filed an appeal accompanied by a petition and a letter from the HOA.
Casey Moyer, a resident of South Oak, told the council she collected the signature petition (75% of affected addresses) and described frequent near‑misses, an S‑curve with limited sightlines, and how the previous speed humps (installed about 2011, removed in 2017 during repaving) had slowed traffic. Council members questioned whether targeted police enforcement had been tried and whether the four neighbors who opposed aspects of the petition were renters or homeowners.
Council discussion centered on the policy thresholds, the history of previously installed humps, and the neighborhood safety argument. Multiple councilors said the prior presence of the humps and the petition weighed in favor of reinstalling them; one councilor urged following the appeal process. A motion was made and seconded to approve reinstalling the speed humps; the transcript records the motion and second but does not include the final roll‑call tally in the provided excerpt.

