AgdaPkt 2000-08-28 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

/OA~ humps were installed, as shown in the comparison of data in the left two columns of Figure 8. However, the change in percentage of traffic emitting loud sounds is small, and as observers, may associate any loud traffic sounds with the humps while forgetting the experience of loud sounds of speeding traffic prior to the humps, residents may have a perception contrary to the data. It is also possible that in periods of time other than when the acoustic measures were taken (the data were collected between 4 and 6 P.M.), deliberate sound provocations, such as late night and early morning honking and peel-outs, may create a situation where there are actually more loud sporadic traffic noises at the humps than before the humps were in place. Figure 8 also shows a comparison of the percent of vehicles causing very loud sounds at the stop sign on Edgewood at Blandford versus sounds at midblock on Edgewood before hump installation and with the humps in place. The data on the figure shows that the same vehicle population causes far fewer loud sounds near the humps than at the traffic control device most often requested as an alternative to humps (the stop sign). Average sound levels were significantly less near the humps than near the stop sign on Edgewood at Blandford. Despite the indications of the limited acoustic measurements, it is fact that some residents find traffic sounds related to the humps are more disturbing than sounds of previous fast traffic. Those concerned about sound disturbance identify these principal elements: >- Sounds of vehicles with loose loads shifting as they cross the hump. >- Sounds of vehicles accelerating briskly after they cross the hump. >- Sounds of vehicles whose drivers deliberately cause sound disturbances by doing peel- outs or honking at the humps. Residents expressing concern about sound effects have suggested the following sound mitigation, which are concurred-in by staff, as follows: 1. Remove excess pavement placed by the contractor, which causes the humps to be higher than the standard hump profile. This should reduce some of the noise produced by passage of vehicles with shifting loose loads and possibly reduce some of the driver resentment that leads to heavy accelerations and to deliberate peel-out and honking sound disturbances. 2. Place an additional hump between each of the two most widely-spaced pairs of humps. This should limit the propensity of drivers to accelerate after crossing humps and thus cut down on acceleration sounds. 3. Report to police the license numbers and/or descriptions and day/time of day information about drivers creating repeated deliberate sound disturbances at the humps. There is a broadly held belief that the honking and peel-out disturbances are being created as a repeated behavior by a small number of drivers and that, if concerned residents can help identify the perpetrators, police will be able to manage this problem. Other Resident Input Committee members met with Edgewood/Blandford residents at two informal coffee gatherings, and at a formal public meeting held July 20, 2000, to receive input on resident perceptions regarding the traffic control trial. (Meeting notes recorded by the Peninsula Conflict Resolution Center (PCRC), who facilitated the meeting, are attached to this report). In addition to the -5-