http://annandaleva.blogspot.com/2013/08/speed-humps-proposed-for-old-columbia.html

I tend not to speed, but it's difficult on that hill, especially since they lowered the limit to 25mph.

Speed humps proposal for Old Columbia Pike not sitting well with Pinecrest HOA
http://annandaleva.blogspot.com/2013/08/speed-humps-proposed-for-old-columbia.html

Some residents of the Pinecrest community feel it is unfair that they they’re being excluded from voting on a proposal to put speed humps on Old Columbia Pike.

A group of people who live close to Old Columbia Pike earlier formed a task force, the first step in requesting traffic calming measures. The Fairfax County Department of Transportation (FCDOT) has agreed come up with a plan for seven speed humps between Little River Turnpike and the intersection at Lincolnia Road and Columbia Pike.

The Pinecrest Community Association has not taken an official position on whether it supports or opposes speed humps but it does want Pinecrest residents to have a say in the matter.

A second public meeting has been scheduled for Aug. 29, 7:30 p.m., at the Mason District Government Center, but residents of the wider community say they have not been officially notified about the meeting or the speed hump proposal.

During the first meeting on the issue on July 18, members of the task force said speed humps are needed for safety reasons: Too many people are speeding, which endangers pedestrians and people trying to back out of driveways. Among the five members of the task force, two live on that road, two live in the new mcmansions on Reserves Hill Court, and one lives on Downing Street.

The speed limit on Old Columbia Pike is 25 miles per hour. A study conducted by the county showed the average speed in a 24-hour period in November 2012 was 36 mph. A police officer at the meeting said he’s given tickets to drivers going as fast as 50 or 60 mph.

FCDOT recommended speed humps after considering and rejecting other options, such as more stop signs.

While some Pinecrest residents feel the speed humps are unnecessary and could lead to more traffic congestion on Braddock Road, their main problem is with the process.

The Pinecrest Community Association is requesting that FCDOT include Pinecrest in the voting. As it stands now, only 143 households along Old Columbia Pike and a few side streets have been determined by FCOT to be in the “ballot area.”

For speed humps to be approved, at least 50 percent of the households in the ballot area must cast a vote and 60 percent must vote in favor of the proposal.

FCDOT’s rationale for excluding Pinecrest from the ballot is area is that there is no direct access from Pinecrest to Old Columbia Pike because the Pinecrest Golf Course serves as a barrier, surrounding the community on three sides.

The Pinecrest board petitioned to be included on the grounds that, normally, a community of this size would have access to the closest connector roads and Pinecrest residents frequently drive on Old Columbia Pike.

Pinecrest resident also say the speed humps proposal isn’t in compliance with Virginia Department of Transportation guidelines for traffic calming. Those rules require least 75 percent of residents of an affected area to agree that there is a problem with speeding before the county develops a proposal. VDOT also requires input from residents of a larger area.

There are also concerns that the speed limit on Old Columbia Pike was reduced to 25 miles per hour about a year ago with no public announcement. Speed humps can’t be implemented on any road with a speed limit greater than 25 mph.
Attachments:

Speed humps/bumps or whatever you call them are illogical for many reasons. One of the major ones is this:

Why do you have to slow down to 15 MPH for them when the speed limit on the road is 30 or 35 MPH?

You are essentially artificially lowering the speed limit to close to the speed hump speed by doing this. Also, speed humps are a major problem for vehicles such as a lowered floor handicap-accessible van. We are much more likely to hit bottom at any speed than any other vehicle.

I was at the first meeting and the main arguement was pedestrian safety yet speed humps do nothing to remove the pedestrians from a narrow road. I brought a number of studies to the discussion that show speed humps are a nuissance and in some cases more dangerous as they are distractions which can take your focus off the road ahead. A simply search of speed hump on wikipedia lists a number of down sides to speed humps or check out http://www.joincrash.com/ for a number of studies in California and Britain as to the downsides (including lowering property value).

Hey, if they don't want the speed humps there, I'll take 'em on my block!

I was at the first meeting also. It is a safety issue for pedestrians and residents. The cars are speeding on Old Columbia Pike, there is a constant stream of them all day long, and cars rarely slow down for the posted crosswalk. What are your recommendations to slow the traffic down to the posted 25 mph? If not traffic calming (speed humps) - what?

Speed humps cannot be good for any vehicles, especially emergency vehicles. Can you imagine a fire truck having to travel over seven on these in such a short distance ? I would not like it if the fire truck was coming to my house. Something is not right here.

BWright Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I was at the first meeting also. It is a safety
> issue for pedestrians and residents. The cars are
> speeding on Old Columbia Pike, there is a constant
> stream of them all day long, and cars rarely slow
> down for the posted crosswalk. What are your
> recommendations to slow the traffic down to the
> posted 25 mph? If not traffic calming (speed
> humps) - what?

I think Pedestrian safety is an issue along this section of Columbia Pike as well. The appropriate answer would be a sidewalk. It would be an asset to the community. It would also be a good solution to the section of the Golf Course along Elmdale rd.

anymoose Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Speed humps cannot be good for any vehicles,
> especially emergency vehicles. Can you imagine a
> fire truck having to travel over seven on these in
> such a short distance ? I would not like it if the
> fire truck was coming to my house. Something is
> not right here.

I think that fire trucks have enough height and large enough tires that they can pretty much roll over speed humps without slowing to the speeds that a passenger car would have to.

BWright Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I was at the first meeting also. It is a safety
> issue for pedestrians and residents. The cars are
> speeding on Old Columbia Pike, there is a constant
> stream of them all day long, and cars rarely slow
> down for the posted crosswalk. What are your
> recommendations to slow the traffic down to the
> posted 25 mph? If not traffic calming (speed
> humps) - what?

Many communities use stop signs, and other non-physical measures.

golfer69 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think that fire trucks have enough height and
> large enough tires that they can pretty much roll
> over speed humps without slowing to the speeds
> that a passenger car would have to.

It is actually quite the opposite, fire trucks have to come to almost a complete stop to drive over speed humps. See this article

http://articles.latimes.com/1998/oct/07/news/mn-30093

Wouldn't those humps encourage speeders to go faster to get some air, Dukes of Hazzard style?

yeehaw Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Wouldn't those humps encourage speeders to go
> faster to get some air, Dukes of Hazzard style?

I would think that the speed bump would damage the undercarriage of the car going over it right? A 4x4 truck would probably have no problem though.

pauline Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> BWright Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I was at the first meeting also. It is a safety
> > issue for pedestrians and residents. The cars
> are
> > speeding on Old Columbia Pike, there is a
> constant
> > stream of them all day long, and cars rarely
> slow
> > down for the posted crosswalk. What are your
> > recommendations to slow the traffic down to the
> > posted 25 mph? If not traffic calming (speed
> > humps) - what?
>
> I think Pedestrian safety is an issue along this
> section of Columbia Pike as well. The appropriate
> answer would be a sidewalk. It would be an asset
> to the community. It would also be a good solution
> to the section of the Golf Course along Elmdale
> rd.

Easy solution:

Don't walk on the road.

Where you're not supposed to be anyway.

I drive that road at least twice a day every day, typically more, and rarely see any pedesttians.

Like most every other call for speed bumps, this seems mostly like an attempt by some to minimize use of the road as a cut-through. Sorry, welcome to NoVA. It's been lucky that road has not been improved to date.

More Info Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Some residents of the Pinecrest community feel it
> is unfair that they they’re being excluded from
> voting on a proposal to put speed humps on Old
> Columbia Pike.
>

The manipulation of who is permitted to have a say in speed humps is a huge problem with the process. Some friends of mine lived in a neighborhood where they were proposing this. Supporters were those who lived on the middle portion of the main street. Opponents were those who lived on the ends of the street and those who lived on side streets that fed into the main street. To get the required amount of support for speed humps the supporters worked with VDoT to limit the pool of those required to approve it to those who lived on the middle portion of the main street.

Only the trolley will be exempt from the speed bumps, motivating people to take instead of driving. How clever.

Golly Duhs, Pedestrians are not supposed to walk on the road?

So do you also think 2000 years ago Roman engineers developed their famous roads for their descendents' Alfa Romeos and Ferraris and Fiats and Lamborghinis; not for their soldiers to march on and for their merchants and carts to travel on?

Once upon a time, in Rome, and even in the United States, it used to be that roads were for people and things to move on, not just automobile drivers. In fact, if you look at Virginia law, pedestrians have exactly the same right to the road as you do, since for the bulk of Old Columbia there is no sidewalk or sidepath. Yes, indeed, pedestrians must walk on the side of the road facing traffic, but they have just as much right to use the road as any automobile driver.

Virginia Code § 46.2-928: "Pedestrians not to use roadway except when necessary; keeping to left.

Pedestrians shall not use the roadways for travel, except when necessary to do so because of the absence of sidewalks which are reasonably suitable and passable for their use. If they walk on the hard surface, or the main travelled portion of the roadway, they shall keep to the extreme left side or edge thereof, or where the shoulders of the highway are of sufficient width to permit, they may walk on either shoulder thereof."

I've lived on a road with speedbumps in Annandale and seen plenty of pedestrians walking dogs along my road. Maybe if you slowed down the cars enough on Old Columbia Pike, you would see more people out walking their dogs there too. So heck yeah, I’d be in favor of speedbumps to slow traffic and make streets in Annandale safer for kids, pedestrians, dogs, bicycle riders, and other drivers.

In the early days of neighborhood speed bumps, they plastered our street with them. Is there a procedure we can use to get FCDOT to remove them? We are ready for them to go away.

speed bumps good Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Golly Duhs, Pedestrians are not supposed to walk
> on the road?
>
> So do you also think 2000 years ago Roman
> engineers developed their famous roads for their
> descendents' Alfa Romeos and Ferraris and Fiats
> and Lamborghinis; not for their soldiers to march
> on and for their merchants and carts to travel
> on?
>
> Once upon a time, in Rome, and even in the United
> States, it used to be that roads were for people
> and things to move on, not just automobile
> drivers. In fact, if you look at Virginia law,
> pedestrians have exactly the same right to the
> road as you do, since for the bulk of Old Columbia
> there is no sidewalk or sidepath. Yes, indeed,
> pedestrians must walk on the side of the road
> facing traffic, but they have just as much right
> to use the road as any automobile driver.
>
> href="http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?
> 000+cod+46.2-928">Virginia Code § 46.2-928:
> "Pedestrians not to use roadway except when
> necessary; keeping to left.
>
> Pedestrians shall not use the roadways for travel,
> except when necessary to do so because of the
> absence of sidewalks which are reasonably suitable
> and passable for their use. If they walk on the
> hard surface, or the main travelled portion of the
> roadway, they shall keep to the extreme left side
> or edge thereof, or where the shoulders of the
> highway are of sufficient width to permit, they
> may walk on either shoulder thereof."
>


Beyond your own long and winding road to say nothing (The Romans? Really? lol), the point was the pedestrian excuse is bs. Nobody is out walking down Old Columbia Pike. In the 20+ years I've lived in the neighborhood I could count on both hands (maybe one) how many people I've seen walking down that road. There's no reason to. For one, because there's a steady stream of cars (duh) and it's a relatively narrow road and not the most safe to walk to begin with even off of the road and there are plenty of other streets and paths to walk otherwise if you're out just walking around for exercise or pleasure.


> I've lived on a road with speedbumps in Annandale
> and seen plenty of pedestrians walking dogs along
> my road. Maybe if you slowed down the cars enough
> on Old Columbia Pike, you would see more people
> out walking their dogs there too. So heck yeah,
> I’d be in favor of speedbumps to slow traffic
> and make streets in Annandale safer for kids,
> pedestrians, dogs, bicycle riders, and other
> drivers.


That may work where you lived but, sorry, you're not going to turn Old Columbia Pike into some walking path. lol There are plenty of people out walking, they just have enough sense not to do it on a main busy road. Which btw was there before the neighborhood was. It's about like suggesting putting speed bumps on Ravensworth.

There are a few who want to try to limit traffic through the area thinking that they'll make it something that it isn't especially now that you have some McMansions going up along it. That's what it's all about.

What would really be awesome is a speed hump that pops up every time an SUV, Minivan, or pick-up that isn't being used for business purposes is driving down the road.

Hey it's going to be as close as those asshole helicopter parents in their SUV's ever get to actually doing something off road. Unless you count backing up into the flowerbed.


Say No to Humps Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> http://annandaleva.blogspot.com/2013/08/speed-hump
> s-proposed-for-old-columbia.html

katiesmith Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What would really be awesome is a speed hump that
> pops up every time an SUV, Minivan, or pick-up
> that isn't being used for business purposes is
> driving down the road.
>
> Hey it's going to be as close as those asshole
> helicopter parents in their SUV's ever get to
> actually doing something off road. Unless you
> count backing up into the flowerbed.
>
>
> Say No to Humps Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> >
> http://annandaleva.blogspot.com/2013/08/speed-hump
>
> > s-proposed-for-old-columbia.html

I asked my aunt why she bought a SUV.
She said when you're not getting big dick,you buy a big truck.
She was 72.

anymoose Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> golfer69 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I think that fire trucks have enough height and
> > large enough tires that they can pretty much
> roll
> > over speed humps without slowing to the speeds
> > that a passenger car would have to.
>
> It is actually quite the opposite, fire trucks
> have to come to almost a complete stop to drive
> over speed humps. See this article
>
> http://articles.latimes.com/1998/oct/07/news/mn-30
> 093


The article makes a great point, for trucks carrying 500+ gallons of water. However, in Fairfax, with a department of 100+ apparatus, only 5 of them are tankers, the trucks that have the capacity to carry such volume. Look around, there are fire hydrants fricking everywhere, eliminating the need for many tanker trucks...

More Info Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A police officer at the meeting
> said he’s given tickets to drivers going as fast
> as 50 or 60 mph.
>

I call bullshit, that road is so torn up nobody can be driving 50 or 60 mph.

facepalm Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
>
> The article makes a great point, for trucks
> carrying 500+ gallons of water. However, in
> Fairfax, with a department of 100+ apparatus, only
> 5 of them are tankers, the trucks that have the
> capacity to carry such volume. Look around, there
> are fire hydrants fricking everywhere, eliminating
> the need for many tanker trucks...


Pumpers ("Engines") carry water too. Probably about 500 gallons. The tankers carry more like 2000 gallons

So true! It's not just overcompensation for the lack of penis size, it's also the lack of being able to get penis. This also goes for the fat married helicopter mom's who's husband don't want to do them.

Cranky old women Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> katiesmith Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > What would really be awesome is a speed hump
> that
> > pops up every time an SUV, Minivan, or pick-up
> > that isn't being used for business purposes is
> > driving down the road.
> >
> > Hey it's going to be as close as those asshole
> > helicopter parents in their SUV's ever get to
> > actually doing something off road. Unless you
> > count backing up into the flowerbed.
> >
> >
> > Say No to Humps Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > >
> >
> http://annandaleva.blogspot.com/2013/08/speed-hump
>
> >
> > > s-proposed-for-old-columbia.html
>
> I asked my aunt why she bought a SUV.
> She said when you're not getting big dick,you buy
> a big truck.
> She was 72.

I've ridden a bicycle on Old Columbia many dozen times between Little River Turnpike and the intersection with Columbia Pike. Others have said they are too scared to ride a bicycle on that road because drivers are too aggressive, but Old Columbia is far less daunting than Columbia Pike itself up to that point. From Old Columbia, there are sidepaths and sidewalks that make Columbia Pike a viable route up to Bailey's Crossroads.

My preference for Old Columbia would be a continuation of the short, but nice sidepath, which runs for several hundred yards northeast from Little River Turnpike. An extended sidepath would take out a bunch of trees, but it would certainly increase walking and bike riding by the greatest measure.

Otherwise, I'd like anything like speedbumps to slow down overaggressive motorists, particularly at the crosswalk-marked entrance to the sidepath near the Forest Hollow Swim Club. Motorists have passed me on multiple occasions as I was heading southwest along Old Columbia. These aggressive drivers didn't care that I was signalling a left turn onto the sidepath by sticking my left arm out or just didn't know what that signal meant.

I live on the corner of OCP and a side street and watch the traffic regularly on OCP. I have lived here 37 years. It is not unusual at all to see cars speeding at 50 Mph + on this road. And, unless you are doing 45 plus, you run a very good chance of being passed by an idiot on a road that was never intended for such foolish moves. Pedestrian traffic has increased substantially over the years. As of today, you would never catch me trying to walk the short walk to Harris Teeter, as that would be a death wish. We need the calmers!

If the AVERAGE speed is 36, why not make the speed limit 35 ?
L
O
G
I
C
A
L
Plus how does the average speed compare to the number of crashes or injuries on OCP? I travel this street daily and have never seen any crashes.
Also, I might add that several sections near the big hill have soooooo many bumps and potholes that they make you slow down anyway....

Corner of Old Columbia and ? Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I live on the corner of OCP and a side street and
> watch the traffic regularly on OCP. I have lived
> here 37 years. It is not unusual at all to see
> cars speeding at 50 Mph + on this road. And,
> unless you are doing 45 plus, you run a very good
> chance of being passed by an idiot on a road that
> was never intended for such foolish moves.
> Pedestrian traffic has increased substantially
> over the years. As of today, you would never catch
> me trying to walk the short walk to Harris Teeter,
> as that would be a death wish. We need the
> calmers!


you need SIDEWALKS!

Just drove down Old Columbia Pike and they've put in the speed humps.

The pot holes are far more treacherous then the speed bumps these days.

cannot change limit to 15 mph unless near a playground / other present danger

this would be an attack on people who were abiding by the law

----------------------------
you'd be forgetting

the hood can up a sign or flashing lights for 25mpg adherence

a speed bump can be for 15, 25, 35. there's not just one kind

---------------------------
speed bumps require mainentance and let me guess mexicans and blacks install them. ohhhh swammy am i right ?

anyone have a crystal ball ?