I appreciate the coverage the State Journal is giving the discussion of traffic islands. However, it seems clear from the interview with traffic engineer David Dryer that any amount of citizen concern will not affect his view of what the city needs.

What makes this unfortunate is that there are some cities and some streets where traffic islands may be appropriate. I realize engineers feel the need to build something, but the city needs to use appropriate tools in appropriate places.

Traffic islands have been installed on many streets that are too narrow to allow safe passage of cars and buses and bikes, which is bad enough in the summer, but becomes a huge hazard in the winter. Parking is a problem on many Madison streets, but with the islands, it simply sets your vehicle up to be hit by other vehicles attempting to avoid the islands.

In winter, snow plows don't want to get anywhere near the islands -- I wonder if there are any data on the cost to fix snow plows that hit them? -- so the challenge of getting past them multiplies considerably.

As a pedestrian crossing the street, would you stand next to one of these islands? Have you noticed how much ice and snow stays in the street next to the islands, because of problems getting plows and salt near them, and because the snow on top of them contributes to the winter-long freeze and thaw on the street?

Traffic islands may work better in states without snow, but they still must be used only where they're appropriate. I suspect data may show traffic islands result in more accidents than before they were installed.

Unfortunately, it appears some in the city traffic engineering department may not be interested in facts.

What is their interest? First they say they are to slow traffic, but now they admit they don't slow traffic, they get limited pedestrian use in summer and almost none in winter, they eliminate parking spaces and they create added hazards for vehicles, including bicycles.

And all of this with your tax money!

My advice to neighborhoods that don't yet have the islands: When the city has a meeting in your neighborhood and tries to convince you of their merits, just say no.

Just like the rest of us who got stuck with them, you'll end up with all the problems they create and no offsetting benefits.

-- Larry Larson, Madison

Why disregard views of commuters?

With regard to traffic islands in Madison, the city's traffic engineer and parking manager David Dryer remarked, "Mainly we hear from people who don't live in the neighborhoods, who don't like them." Those who do not live in the neighborhoods are called commuters.

-- Gary Thornton, Madison

Traffic circles costly, ineffective solution

Your recent "SOS" on traffic islands illuminates the problems that are being imposed by the construction of the traffic circles throughout the city. We in Wexford Village subdivision on the city's West Side are burdened with a massive circle at the intersection of North Westfield and Sawmill, at Wexford Park.

The intersection was originally controlled by stop signs on Sawmill. Complaints of speeding by subdivision residents resulted in the city's telling residents that a four-way stop was out of the question. It was a traffic circle or nothing.

When driving past the circle, the vehicles enter the crosswalk, so that any walker must be wary of cars traveling parallel to the walkway. This is one safety hazard. Another is that the subdivision residents are responsible for the maintenance of the circle. Should a resident be injured by a flying sign or a vehicle during the course of this maintenance, the city denies all responsibility.

The mayor has touted these devices as "traffic calming," yet when I asked the traffic engineering department for data that showed these circles actually calm traffic, they said that there was no data and there is no plan to seek any. All the hype of the budget problems faced by the city turns to so much hot air when you realize that the city has spent $250,000 per year in the past without any solution to the problem they are intended to address.

-- Richard H. Pelkey, Madison