City Spokesman Ray Weaver remained underwhelmed:
The city generally frowns on do-it-yourself road improvements. We
recognized it wasn't, shall we say, a professional job.
Wouldn't you know, Debbie Rosen McKerrow (DRM) is the Vice President of some organization that is qualified to talk about such things, and offered:
I was thrilled when (my neighbor) called to say it had arrived. We have a
serious speeding problem. It does give us a jumping off point to talk
about it.
Citing no evidence, and based entirely on a desire for a conspiracy that would serve to further popularize these highly-read pages, I am prepared to conclude that DRM installed the speed bump herself to create a publicity opportunity.
Anyway, I am concerned about the city's speed prevention strategy:
Mr. Weaver said the city prefers not to install speed bumps, calling them "the
means of last resort," instead the city favors other traffic-calming devices to
rein in speeders.
What other traffic-calming devices are there??!! The only other permanent non-speed-bump attempts to resist velocity that I know of exist on Bay Ridge Ave. (after Rockfish/BB&T heading away from downtown), where the road itself obnoxiously and inexplicably swerves to the right, twice, as if to avoid a herd of wandering buffalo.
What else is there? The radar/visual display that merely tells you how fast you are going? First of all, isn't the county council trying to make signs like this illegal? And second of all, you can't convince me that they are more effective or cheaper than a big hump of asphalt.
On my street, there are 4 speed bumps over a .3 mile stretch. If you speed, you will mess up your car. Why is this strategy a last resort?
