1 Nitollama, Philip
From:
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2025 6:14 PM
To: Fuller, Dawna; Nitollama, Philip
Cc: Falcone, Philip; Luke Lopez; Amy Lopez; Steve Pennington; Maldonado, Matthew; Mustafa, Nathan; Crawford, Bryan
Subject: [EXTERNAL] First St. between Main and Mulberry-request Appeal for Speed Humps CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Report Suspicious
Ms. Fuller, thank you for your recent call and follow-up email on November 10, copied below for reference. As we pointed out on the phone, the placement of the recorders was an issue. The fact that one was very close to an alley where drivers cross traffic and the other was right before a stop sign would skew results. Your email stated per the count company, “The combined 85th% speeds showed as 31 mph and 30 mph respectively neither of which meet the established speed criteria for speed humps of 37 mph.” Since a driver isn’t likely to be going 30MPH so close to a stop sign, I don’t understand how that data was assessed, likewise for the other placement at the alley. While it was somewhat midway between Mulberry and Orange, it was placed at an alley intersection where drivers would slow to turn in to make three-point turns and other drivers, hopefully, watch for oncoming traffic. Here again, we cannot figure out how that would have accounted for 30/31MPH speed. If all the speeds were averaged, these low speed points where the counts were taken would bring down the average and not accurately reflect the high rate of speed we experience on the street in general. Furthermore, the speed limit on the street is 25MPH; the speed hump criteria is 37MPH, which is 12MPH over the posted speed limit. If all of those lower speed instances with drivers near stopping points are bringing down the average, then it is highly probable that the average traffic speed is closer, and likely even higher, to that 37MPH speed. It is reprehensible to have traffic that high over the speed limit every day in our historic neighborhood.
We respectively request to appeal to the City Traffic Engineer. As we are sending it before Friday November 14, please make every effort to include this on the agenda for the upcoming December 3, 2025 Transportation Board meeting.
Sincerely,
Steve and Christal Pennington
Hello, Mr. and Mrs. Pennington,
Mrs. Pennington, thank you for speaking with me earlier today to review resulting data from the counts conducted (two 24-hour speed / volume counts) on First Street between Lemon Street and Lime Street just east of the alley on the south side of the street as part of the assessment performed in response to the petition submitted by residents within the segment of First Street between Mulberry and Main requesting consideration of installation of speed humps. Due to a resident concern raised regarding the location where the counts were taken on First Street being too close to an existing stop sign, we reached out to the count company who performs the City’s traffic counts and
2 today we received confirmation from the company that the counts were taken just east of the alley described above as requested by the City Traffic Engineer. As discussed, the count data reflected 24-hour combined vehicular volumes of 1,279 and 1,240 respectively both of which meet established traffic volume criteria for speed humps, however, the combined 85th% speeds showed as 31 MPH and 30 MPH respectively neither of which meet the established speed criteria for speed humps of 37 MPH.
Per your request I am sending this e-
mail advising in writing that you have the option to submit a written request for appeal asking that the Transportation Board consider your neighborhood’s request for speed humps despite not meeting all established criteria. Should you wish to appeal please either respond to this e-mail stating your request to appeal and providing any relevant information you wish to share or send a separate e-mail or written request. As we briefly discussed, to try to expedite your request per our City Traffic Engineer should you submit a written appeal no later than Friday, November 14, 2025, we will make every effort to include your appeal on the agenda for the upcoming December 3, 2025,Transportation Board meeting which is being finalized at this time. If you are unable to submit a written appeal by November 14, 2025, you may submit a request for appeal at any time and we will gladly schedule the appeal request for a future Transportation Board meeting agenda.
Thank you for your interest in community traffic safety. Please let me know if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Dawna Fuller
City of Riverside
Public Works Department, Traffic Engineering Division
Main: (951) 826-5366
Direct: (951) 826-5907
RiversideCA.gov