RESPONSE TO STORIES

Related pages

Myhr and Lichter want to slow county down ... to 35 mph

Response to Myhr and Lichter want to slow county down ... to 35 mph

posted 04/02/2007
The day after I expressed myself regarding the 35 mph speed limit I found a dead doe on one side of San Juan Vallley Road road and a dead fox on the other side. What else is there to say? Let's support and let the responsible and conscious lawmakers do their job and reduce the speed limit.

Vivien Burnett

Dear Editor,

posted 03/28/2007
For the record, I too support the idea of lowering the speed limit in the county. Some who have responded feel supporters are a small group of electric car owners. My guess is that a much wider group of people would support this concept: walkers, cyclists, joggers, electric car owners, horse owners, operators of farm machinery, parents pushing baby carriages, etc.

We aren't tourists; we live here. We just want to get out of our cars to enjoy the amazing scenery, exercise, use alternative transportation to get to work and run errands--and we want to be able to do it safely . We do need more sidewalks and wider and paved road shoulders, but perhaps we can start with a less ferocious speed limit.

Sandy Strehlou
Bailer Hill Road

Dear Editor,

posted 03/28/2007
I wonder what the logic is of reducing the speed limit to 35 mph on the islands? I can identify with "slowing down" just a bit as that is the reason most of us moved here - at whatever timeframe we moved here.

If in fact the push to lower the speed limit is only to be able to sell and/or to buy and drive a particular electric vehicle - I take exception to this idea.

My concern regarding these vehicles are the safety issues involved with them. Even at reduced speeds of 35 MPH (a speed at which these vehicles can supposedly be driven legally) - a head on impact of a dump truck going 35 and an electric vehicle going 35 would be the equivalent of 70 mph which I believe would be most catastrophic for the driver of the electric vehicle.

The same would most likely be true if the electric vehicle had a head on meeting with an SUV, a large pickup truck, a delivery truck, etc. You get the point.

They really need to be driven in areas specifically designed for such vehicles from a safety standpoint - areas where large scale vehicles and these commuter vehicles are unlikely to meet. Yes, they are basically commuter vehicles.

To artificially reduce a speed limit to allow a vehicle that would not be safe in such a scenario as referenced above would be totally irresponsible from a governance standpoint. Lets think this through carefully before acting.

There are many small vehicles being sold that meet strict government safety requirements that get good gas mileage as well as include electric/battery power options.

Just a final thought - it would be good for everyone just to "slow down a little" and enjoy the smells of spring - but don't slow things down for a special interest business.

Kerwin Johnson

Dear Editor,

posted 03/25/2007
A great idea to lower the speed to 35mph. Let's slow down, be conscious where we are. We live in paradise. Let's enjoy the ride to and from our destinations. If it makes the roads safer for bikers and walkers all the better. Maybe I wouldn't have to dive in the ditch along San Juan Valley Road when vehicles speed by me on my morning walk.

One of the reasons I moved here was that I thought I could ride my bike to and from work. It's only 3-1/2 miles. I found out with my first trek to town that it was unsafe for me to ride on San Juan Valley Road because the vehicles were speeding past me too fast for my comfort. I'm not alone feeling unsafe riding on the island because of speeding vehicles. Bike lanes are coming but not too soon.

Vivien Burnett

Editor's note: a reader sent in this note: Put this link on your site with a note that instead of making everyone drive at a slower speed limit electric vehicle owners could drive faster cars such as the Xebra available here. http://www.greencarco.com/

Dear Editor,

posted 03/19/2006
I welcome a 35 mph speed limit. It is hard enough as it is to drive the posted speed limit without some speed demon bearing down on you. If we would all just slow down we would live longer and be happier. Those who demand speed might consider moving to a place with freeways, or Montana. Island pace is suppose to be slower.

Peggy Sue McRae
Friday Harbor

Dear Editor,

posted 03/19/2006
I sincerely hope in his argument for lowering the speed limit on San Juan County roads to allow electric vehicles, Mr. Lichter did not use the warrant that SUV drivers are speeders. It is a non sequitor and as such weakens his case. It is one thing to push for lowering the speed limit to help curb greenhouse gases by allowing alternative- powered motor vehicles on our roads. It is a incorrect to use it as a platform to attack SUVs as speeders. Drivers of many sizes and types of vehicles from sub-compacts to large construction vehicles are guilty of speeding.

Judith L. Chovan

Dear Editor,

posted 03/15/2007
In reading your article on the proposal by two Council members to lower our county road speed limits to 35, several things struck me right off the bat. First, only 40 or so people are asking for this lowering of the speed limit to accommodate their electric cars. I think electric cars are a great idea, but for the vast majority of us, are impractical right now. I have yet to see the electric truck that can haul a family of 3 or 4 along with a load of ready mix concrete or a huge stack of 2x4's up a hill (say Cady Mountain or Mount Dallas). So a county-wide proposal to lower the speed limit to suit not even 1% of our population seems a bit drastic. We need to look at the impact this would have on the vast majority of people. Delivery drivers would be on the road longer. School buses would need to leave even earlier than they already do to pick up the kids for school (my niece has to be at the bus stop at 7:10 AM to be delivered to school by 8:20). Gas powered cars are not as efficient at 35 MPH as they are at 45. The sheriff's department would need to hire more deputies just to enforce the new speed limits. All signs would have to be changed. And what about how this affects volunteer fire department members, and other support staff?

And once again Alan Lichter shows how out of touch he is with the residents of our island by singling out owners of SUV's a some sort of speeding culprits. As if lowering the speed limit will really "be a good lesson for people driving fast in large SUVs." Why make an inane comment like this, Alan? Are you really that obtuse? The worst near misses I've encountered during the last 10 years didn't involve an SUV at all (a Mercedes passing at the Land Bank doing 80, and a pickup at Lime Kiln driving in the wrong lane to pass me at a stop sign of all places).

You want to make our roads safer, then pave them properly, put shoulders on the roads wide enough for pedestrians, bicyclists, mopeds, and NEV's. Don't punish those of us who live and work and drive by imprudently lowering the speed limit. There are electric cars that can do over 50 mph on the market. They are great for those just needing to go to and from town. Buy one of those and don't worry about speed limit reductions!

Dear Editor,

posted 03/15/2007
This appears to me to be the desire of a small group of people who believe that by lowering the speed limit and driving their politically correct electric cars at 35 mph will benefit all those who live on the islands, particularly San Juan Island who has a speed limit of 45 on most of the county roads. They fail to take into account that most people will not be buying these electric cars, as most people can not afford them, nor are they able to purchase then another car for driving off island when necessary. They fail to take into account that there are those who work and go to school that do need to get to places and don't have time to stop to look at the alpacas and mosy down the road or attend Chamber of Commerce meetings. They have families to feed and provide for and hopefully be able to spend time with.

There is also that opinioned comment directed at particular drivers by Lichter that is uncalled for: Councilmember Alan Lichter said, "This would be a good time for the council to take a leadership role in slowing things down in San Juan County. It would be a good lesson for people driving fast in large SUVs."

This is statement that says that the people who drive fast all are driving large SUV's, which is not supported statistically but is of his opinion about the people who choose to buy large SUV's. On top of that is the perspective that the council should take a leadership role in slowing things down in San Juan County. I would love for my life to slow down. However in order to afford to live here, I, like many others who live here, often must put on many hats, to do so, such as several jobs, both paying and volunteer. Instead of focusing on electric cars and the need for them, we should focus attention on using less energy period, maybe by all getting horses and carriages again. But then again "scientists around the world have known for years that animal wind could be a problem. What they can't agree on is how much of a problem. It's very difficult to measure just how much methane an animal is burping and farting out." Methane gas, especially that trapped in the tundra, could be worse than carbon dioxide in causing the rising of temperatures around the world.

Let's compare fossil fuels to electriciyt that electric cars are dependent on. To produce electricity one must have another power source. In Washington, that power source is mainly water power. More electricity means the need for more water power, which means more dams, which of course effects the watershed, and the wildlife that depend on it. Not sure that increasing our dependency on electricity is the solution.

Instead of focusing on this little problem, maybe our council should focus on the bigger issues, like how to build and maintain safer roads. I appreciate the guard rails that went up outside of town on Beaverton Valley Road, and I agree to the slowing to 35 mph right outside of town, preparing one to slow down through the urbanized area. This made driving safer. Prove to me that driving slower will produce safer roads, then I might agree with the Council members, especially if it proves to be cost efficient as well as energy efficient, instead of increasing the burden on our already overstretched Sheriff's department: "Sheriff Bill Cumming said a 35 mph limit would require increased and regular enforcement." Figure out, Council members, a way to financially and physically maintain and make safe our county roads after a huge storm has left windfall everywhere and huge potholes because of the water damage and flooding; or maybe this is the way "mother nature" slows down our lives and our vehicles and we should just leave them alone.

Shannon Bailey
San Juan Island

I read that there is once again an effort to reduce speed limits in the County for everybody to accommodate the few people who want to drive vehicles which are illegal to drive in areas with speed limits over 35 mph. The rationale given is that this is ecologically friendly.

In fact, this “green” proposal is a black proposal.

Gasoline powered vehicles are designed to operate at maximum fuel efficiency at approximately 55 mph. This varies by vehicle, but my research shows that about 55 is the “sweet spot” for most modern vehicles.

Driving slower than that decreases fuel efficiency. The slower you drive, the lower the fuel efficiency.

Thus, it takes more gas – and produces more pollution – to drive ten miles at 35 mph than to drive the same 10 miles at 45 mph. (In addition reduced fuel efficiency, the vehicle must be on the road longer, so the result is a double whammy.) Given the number of automobile trips in San Juan County now legally made at 45 mph, the increase in pollution from reducing the speed limit will be considerable. Far from being ecologically sound, this proposal is ecologically negative, increases local pollution, and makes it more difficult for the county and state to reduce harmful vehicle emissions.

Reducing fuel efficiency will also increase the cost of driving for island residents (other than the handful who purchase electric vehicles, which must be “fueled” by power which may itself be generated from the burning of fossil fuels).

Commissioner Lichter was quoted as saying that this would be a good lesson for people driving fast in SUVs. Ironically, though, the increase in pollution from driving at slowing, less fuel efficient speeds is greater for large vehicles than for small vehicles. So by trying to punish the drivers of SUVs, Commissioner Lichter would in fact be punishing the environment even more drastically. And the increased pollution from trucks and other heavy vehicles would be even greater.

If the intent of this proposed legislation is to punish local families who need larger vehicles to carry their children, or to penalize farmers, construction workers, boaters, or retirees who need larger vehicles to haul livestock or construction equipment, boats, or recreational trailers, then the proposal may make sense.

If the intent is to impose on the citizenry of the County the prejudice of certain commissioners against gasoline vehicles without worrying about the increased cost to the citizenry or the harm to the environment such legislation will impose, it may make sense.

If the intent is to provide a boon to local gasoline merchants, who will sell more fuel if the proposal is adopted, it may make sense.

But if the intent of the proposal is to do something that will be friendly to the local environment and reduce local air pollution, the legislation will do precisely the opposite. It will increase pollution and harm the health of our residents and visitors.

What happens to this proposal will help us determine whether the Commissioners are environmentalists in fact, or only in name. It will help us know whether the Commissioners prefer to actually keep our air cleaner, or prefer the gesture which they can claim is eco-friendly but in fact which results in more harm to our environment and more pollution in our air.

Christopher Hodgkin
San Juan Island

SAN JUAN ISLANDER © 2008

news @sanjuanislander.com

ABOUT US | ADVERTISING INFO | CONTACT INFORMATION |