Residents Describe Near Collisions as County Considers Lower Speed Limits on Hooper and Sherman Roads

Commissioners advanced a recommendation for 25 mph limits while weighing additional enforcement, electronic speed signs and the cost of physical traffic-control measures.

CHARLOTTE — Hooper Road residents described close calls with passing vehicles, damaged property and fears of being struck while leaving their driveways as Dickson County commissioners considered how to improve safety on Hooper and Sherman roads.

During the commission’s October 5 work session, Sheriff Tim Eads recommended reducing the speed limit on both roads to 25 mph. Officials identified the existing limits as 30 mph on Hooper Road and 35 mph on Sherman Road.

Commissioners voted to advance that recommendation to the regular commission meeting. They did not approve installing speed bumps, speed humps or other physical traffic-control devices.

The discussion extended beyond posted speeds to questions about enforcement, school traffic, road conditions and whether electronic signs could encourage drivers to slow down.

Residents Describe Difficulty Leaving Their Homes

Two Hooper Road residents spoke during public comments, describing how curves and limited visibility make it difficult to safely enter the road.

A resident at 926 Hooper Road said her home sits near a downhill curve and a blind spot. Although a hidden-driveway sign is posted, she said drivers frequently pass too quickly, particularly during school arrival and dismissal.

She reported that her mailbox had been struck three times and described a motorcycle crash in which the rider went through her yard and damaged a water main.

The resident said she had been communicating with the sheriff about the problem since 2024 and had gathered signatures for a petition seeking action.

Her concerns included student drivers and school buses. She said she had nearly been hit by a bus and had recorded buses passing her home.

“I don’t have a solution, but something has to be done with all the school traffic that’s there,” she told commissioners.

A second resident, who lives at 872 Hooper Road, described similar problems when pulling out of a gravel driveway near a curve. She said approaching vehicles leave her little time to enter the road and reported seeing students using cellphones while driving.

Both speakers emphasized that the problem extends beyond inconvenience. They said they fear a collision as they try to leave home.

Their accounts were presented as resident observations; the meeting did not include findings establishing responsibility for each incident they described.

Sheriff Recommends 25 mph Limits

Eads presented traffic measurements and five years of crash information before recommending the lower speed limits.

He said the combination of residential properties and additional school traffic made 25 mph a more appropriate limit for the two roads.

The presentation included average speeds and other traffic measurements, but residents questioned whether short collection periods fully captured the conditions they encounter.

Eads also discussed examining crash records more closely to determine contributing factors, including speed, driver inattention and weather.

Commissioners raised the possibility of collecting additional speed data after a change to determine whether drivers actually slow down.

The sheriff explained that a lower posted limit would also change the circumstances under which deputies could enforce speeding violations. A driver traveling 35 mph in a 25 mph zone, for example, would be exceeding the limit by 10 mph.

Physical Traffic Controls Could Cost Approximately $50,000

Highway Superintendent Jackie Hodges said he had contacted an engineer after receiving the residents’ petition.

He emphasized that he was open to measures that would help residents, but said physical changes to the roadway would require engineering review and design to protect the county.

Hodges gave a preliminary estimate of approximately $50,000 for a project involving multiple speed humps on a road, including the necessary study and design work. The figure was not presented as a final bid or an approved expenditure.

He also raised maintenance concerns associated with repeated school-bus traffic. Hodges said approximately 16 buses travel to the school each day, creating numerous crossings of any device installed along their route.

Officials discussed potential vehicle damage, liability and the noise generated when vehicles repeatedly cross raised pavement near homes.

Eads distinguished traditional speed bumps from longer speed cushions or tables. He said the longer designs can be easier to negotiate, including for emergency vehicles, but did not recommend installing them as part of his speed-limit proposal.

No physical traffic-control project was approved.

Enforcement and Electronic Signs Among Alternatives

Several commissioners favored trying lower speed limits and additional patrols before committing to more expensive roadway changes.

Hodges said deputies stationed in the area periodically during school arrival and dismissal could help discourage speeding. Officials also discussed holding school-bus drivers to the same traffic rules as other motorists.

Residents, however, said enforcement has sometimes produced only temporary improvements. One speaker described drivers slowing down when officers are present, then returning to previous habits once that presence ends.

Electronic signs displaying a vehicle’s speed emerged as another option.

One commissioner described a positive experience with a temporary speed-display sign on his street in the City of Dickson. He said residents appeared to slow down after the sign made them more aware of their speed.

County officials said the highway department did not currently have those signs. The discussion included the possibility of obtaining assistance through a highway safety grant, but no purchase or grant application was approved.

Commissioners also raised questions about whether school-zone treatment or changes near curves and intersections should be explored.

The immediate action was to advance the proposed 25 mph limits. Additional enforcement, electronic signs and roadway modifications remained subjects for further discussion.

For the residents who addressed commissioners, the request was straightforward: find a response that makes it safer to pull out of their driveways and live along roads carrying substantial school traffic.