Wednesday, October 2, 2002

City council, Letter writers conveniently ignore the facts on Golfview.

There have been many letters written in the past several weeks by the 30 or so residents of Golfview that favor the speed humps and stop signs. These letters all ignore the facts.

The fact is that 66 percent of Golfview residents are opposed to the measures taken on Golfview. I am not including any streets outside the Golfview loop in this statistic. The city requirement was for a 2/3 majority to be in favor. Since this criterion was not met, the question that begs to be asked is, "How did traffic calming get started?"

The fact is that more than 97 percent of drivers were clocked at 34 mph or slower on Golfview by police studies. This was not a small sample. It included 10 days and over 5,700 separate readings. City requirements are that at least 15 percent of drivers be clocked at 40 mph or faster for traffic calming. Since this criterion was not met, the question begs to be asked, "How did traffic calming get started?"

The fact is that there have only been three accidents on Golfview in the past three years that were in areas not already controlled by stop signs. City criteria require at least five accidents per year. Since this criterion was not met, the question that again begs to be asked is, "How did traffic calming get started?"

I readily acknowledge that the people on one stretch of Golfview are affected by the poor visibility of the hill. However, the solution is to improve visibility, not to put 37 signs, four speed humps, and a speed limit of 20 mph on a one-mile stretch of road. By the way, a speed limit of 20 mph is actually illegal in Georgia (OCGA 40-6-183). Another fact conveniently ignored.

What might improve visibility? How about parabolic mirrors on top of the hill? There are also systems that cause a light to flash when a car is approaching. Both of these options would give those residents the enhanced visibility they desire without constricting the flow of traffic, increasing pollution and slowing down emergency vehicle response times. As an aside, most studies suggest that slower emergency vehicle response times kill about 37 times as many people as do car-pedestrian accidents.

Lets look at the facts: The city was wrong to institute illegal speed limits and to introduce unwarranted traffic calming. They didn't even meet their own criteria! Since the city's own criteria were not met, the question is why did it ever even come up for a vote?

John Henahan

Peachtree City