Springfield considers road humps and traffic calming
When the Springfield supervisors opened the floor on Oct. 22, Karen Bedicks relayed a suggestion from an unnamed township resident that the resident felt township money would better spent on stop signs to control traffic issues rather than on speed humps.
Resident Hans Reiman questioned Chairperson Barb Lindtner as to whether the traffic calming ordinance would be retroactive to include the hump that had been installed on Springhouse Lane, a gravel road with three homes that runs between Township Road where Lindtner lives and Knecht's Bridge Road.
Lindtner's response to Reiman's question was that it was a berm and was fully funded through a grant to preserve road materials and was not installed as a traffic calming device."It may have served to quiet traffic but that was not the intended purpose.
The traffic calming ordinance is the agenda item and this has nothing to do with the ordinance. It's not whether I called it a speed hump or not, it's irrelevant. It is not a traffic calming device," said Lindtner.
The issue was that road signs indicated it was a bump, which is illegal for a township to install, and to classify it as a hump there would need to be an ordinance before installation could take place.
Township Manager Rich Schilling had it removed to prevent possible legal repercussions. It was his understanding at that time that the installation had been precipitated by a speed compliant on Springhouse Lane, which would categorize it as a traffic calming device.Road Master Rich Pursell had installed what was now being called a broad-based dip through a county funded grant and said it worked very well to prevent washouts in that section of the road and he was impressed how well it worked even through hurricane Sandy.
Lindtner asked that the dip either be reinstalled or that the county refund the grant money. The board approved the reinstallation of the dip.
The discussion turned to the traffic calming device draft ordinance and what criteria, such as safety issues, speeding and excessive traffic, the board would require to consider a traffic calming measure request.
The cost for the materials and installation is around $1,500 for per speed hump, however, other costs such as an engineer study, advertising, and solicitor fees will be added to the total cost to the township.
The current ordinance under discussion is a result of excessive traffic due to bridge closures, many discussions about possible solutions to the problem and a request for speed humps on Peppermint Road, where Supervisor John Oehler lives.
The 2014 budget was on the agenda and was tabled near the end of the meeting without discussion or explanation.
Several members of the Springtown Volunteer Fire Company as well as a member of the Upper Bucks Regional EMS were on hand to vie for support from the township and were surprised there would be no discussion of the budget.
An executive session was held before the meeting and at adjournment it was announced that the board would stay for another executive session.
The next meeting is scheduled for Nov. 12.
Copyright ©2013 Bucks County Herald, Inc. All rights reserved.