Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Speed Humps Spark Debate in MoCo

The Washington Post's Ann E. Marimow reports today on the always vexing issue of speed humps in Montgomery County. Montgomery has has nearly 1,200 humps, compared with 200 in Fairfax County. But not all MoCo residents like them, and the debate has flared again in a Bethesda neighborhood. What do you think? The article and poll question are here.

By Anne Bartlett  |  June 16, 2009; 8:01 AM ET
Categories:  Ann Marimow , Bethesda , Montgomery County  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: O'Malley Launches Campaign for Electricity Rate Relief
Next: Md. House Committee to Consider Re-regulating Utilities

Comments

I don't know about MoCo, but they're terrible in DC. They're not used for the legitimate purpose of slowing people on broad, wide roads but rather to shift traffic from one neighborhood street to another, based presumably on the political power of residents of the first street.

Prime examples are streets with plenty of stop signs (every short block) that still have speed humps. If you have to stop every 300 feet, why have a hump after the first 150 feet? It makes no sense.

Posted by: ah___ | June 16, 2009 10:13 AM | Report abuse

I have a road near my house that could use a speed bump, lots of school bus stops and crossings, but folks seem to speed through.

I must not have a political clout, but we could use a speed bump or perhaps a speed camera! I'd consider either a great use of my tax dollars.

Posted by: free-donny | June 16, 2009 3:19 PM | Report abuse

The streets in question have not had a pedestrian accident in anyone's memory. we know. We live there. The County has only a snapshot of speeding and has no idea whether speeding has gotten worse, better or remained the same over time. Arrayed against this, however, is a MoCo study showing speed humps do slow emergency response time when seconds can be the difference between life and death, and also cause wear and tear to emergency vehicles. We balance the likelihood of delay, perhaps fatal, against the lack of evidence of a problem requiring humps and come out against them.

Posted by: foozler | June 19, 2009 9:10 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company