A speed bump is a much more appropriate solution. This “round-a-bout” that was made is hideous.

The roundabout is dangerous, hard to see at night, and makes an open area busy to the eye and therefore confusing. Also large vehicles will have to hit the curb to avoid driving over the yellow area — even a sedan was too wide for the non bumpy yellow part. I agree fully with the statement above, a large wide speed hump or raised intersection would have been more appropriate. It’s hard to speed past 35 during that small stretch and both intersections 31st and 5th as well as 31st and 9th are accident prone. The city really messed up here. It’s an eyesore and not affective — I wonder how long until someone takes out the barriers...?

SPTO Traffic Ops 1 hat dieses Thema Michael Frederick, Mgr Transportation zugeordnet

This is NOT a roundabout, there are no “yield” signs visible anywhere and side street traffic still has a STOP sign.

This traffic separator was installed expressly at the request and approval of the Historic Kenwood Neighborhood Association, after completion of a petition by the residents along 31st Street. They have been involved in the design of the permanent structure and this temporary measure since the start. Both this temporary and the final separator have been designed by a traffic engineer to meet all City, State and National standards for this traffic control device. https://nacto.org/publication/urban-street-design-guide/ and https://www.fdot.gov/roadway/fdm/default.shtm

We cannot install speed humps or raised intersections on 31st Street since it is designated in the City’s Comprehensive Plan as a “Collector Roadway” and vertical treatments are not allowed since collectors are required to handle a larger vehicle volume and would slow emergency vehicles. Horizontal treatments help control traffic and maintain the posted speed limit throughout the corridor.

The purpose of this traffic separator is to:

• To slow traffic on 31st Street, that had excessive speeds, well above the posted speed limit,
• To discourage heavy trucks, that are currently prohibited from using 31st Street, as a cut-thru,
• To provide a safer crossing for pedestrians and cyclists along 7th Avenue N., which is designated as a Neighborhood Greenway in the City’s Complete Streets Program. Ultimately crosswalks will be installed.
• To be responsive to neighborhood traffic safety concerns in a cost effective and responsive manner.
• To test, through temporarily measures, this new traffic pattern for all roadway users prior to construction of the permanent separator, which will be designed with curbing and landscaping.

We will be monitoring conditions during the test of this facility and should any minor modification be required we can take steps to make adjustments. Once we are all satisfied that the functionality of the design is compatible and meets the goals stated above, we will proceed with construct of the permanent traffic separate. Should for any reason this concept be deemed unsafe or inappropriate for conditions it would be removed immediately and the final construction canceled.

Thank you for your response. I was told by a neighbor on the corner of 31st and 7th it was a roundabout. I thought the yellow "new" signs indicated the same, however, my concern is not what it's called or what it's for, but what it looks like. Many in our neighborhood think what is there now IS NOT in character of our historic neighborhood or architecture. We are in the process of being locally recognized, working with Laura Duvecot and many parts of the neighborhood have already been deemed such. We ARE nationally recognized and would appreciate nothing more than traffic calming with a design in mind to fit into the neighborhood. I have contacted our HOA. I have not heard back today, but have a meeting Wednesday @ Metro Wellness Center 7 p.m.

If signs with arrows are not an indication of a turnabout, I don't know what is....

Good luck in your meeting kp — I agree it doesn’t match the aesthetics of the beautiful neighborhood. I hope someone is able to mention the fact that it eliminates the bike lane in the area, yet claims to be safer for cyclists? Secondly, I stand by the assertion that the narrowness of the lanes in conjunction to the busy yellow lines with reflectors is confusing to motorists and therefore dangerous to motorists, cyclists, and pedestrians in the immediate area.

For questions or feedback about this location, please contact Neighborhood Transportation directly:

http://www.stpete.org/transportation/neighborhood_transportation.php

Issue 5365545 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue.

Okay, first of all, kp, if I were you I wouldn’t post my phone number on a social site. That’s just asking for trouble and I most certainly hope you don’t in the future. Secondly, I’m sorry for you and your neighbors to have to deal with a ‘round about’. Ugh, I hate that juvenile name since I’m used it being called a ‘rotary’. Secondly, I do, however, understand that a ‘hump’ cannot be installed due to it being an emergency route, for ambulances and such, which in cases that involve the fact that seconds count, where does that leave us? No ‘humps’, no ‘rotary’, no thing... My feeling is that you’ve complained and stated you point in doing so but haven’t researched a solution. What do you suggest? Let’s get some answers and not just gripes:)