Video program focuses on New Haven Safe Streets Coalition

"Perils For Pedestrians 191: New England" includes an interview with Doug Hausladen, co-coordinator of the New Haven Safe Streets Coalition (and current Director of the City of New Haven's Transportation Department).

Watch the program here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SpuNERhoYlo

New study on "Distracted Walking" overreaches in its conclusions

An interesting and important new study from Ohio State demonstrates the risk of cell phone use of walking. http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/distractwalk.htm.

The study finds that over 1,500 pedestrians were treated in emergency rooms in 2010 due to injuries related to use of a cell phone while walking.  Of particular interest is the concentration of "distracted walking" injuries among the population age 16 to 25.

Unfortunately, the author's conclusion that "the best way to reverse these numbers is to start changing norms for cell phone use in our society" is an overreach, and is not backed up by facts.

Evidence shows that changing driver behavior and road speed, and increasing pedestrian/cycle use, is the only way to create significant reductions in motor vehicle injury.  "Vulnerable user" laws that penalize drivers for careless driving (e.g., running over 14-year old pedestrians even if they are using a cell phone, or chasing a ball) may also help reset behaviors and improve safety, as shown by examples from Western Europe.

Furthermore, we should consider that we have an elderly population that will double over the next 15 years. This population is where injuries are most concentrated. The population over 65 comprises 12% of the population, 22% of the pedestrian fatalities.  We can't "reverse those numbers" by reversing the aging process.

The rate of injury -- and the sense of safety and comfort that directly relates to the economic vibrancy of our cities and towns -- won't improve until risk is physically designed out of the system.  This is the approach that most cities  around the world are taking, recognizing that demographics, behavior, and technology changes with each generation.

Op-Ed: Federal transit grants are key to New Haven jobs access

Expanded transportation options, particularly within our city's core, are critical to creating a more equitable and integrated city. A streetcar is one way to improve the performance of the local bus system and expand access for residents. The Transport Politic published this graphic of a possible New Haven Streetcar line several years ago, showing a route that connects employment centers and neighborhoods right near Downtown (e.g., the Hill), plus lines expanding into surrounding neighborhoods such as Fair Haven and Dixwell.

Below is a slightly edited version of a Safe Streets Coalition op-ed piece that appeared in the New Haven Register this week. Please call your Alderperson and ask them to support the grant.

For additional background on the project itself, please see this link on the Streetcar Plan.

FORUM: Federal transit grants key to New Haven jobs access


Wednesday, March 28, 2012 By Mark Abraham

The new members of the New Haven Board of Aldermen are aware that creating equal access to economic opportunity has never been more important. Recently, they voted to adopt a three-part policy platform calling for New Haven to ensure jobs, youth opportunities and public safety for all residents.

According to Angela Glover Blackwell of PolicyLink, a national research institute, such a focus on expanding opportunity for all is the superior economic growth model — for our city and for the nation as a whole. Research suggests that building an inclusive prosperity advances the well-being of all citizens over time, whereas erecting barriers to opportunity causes a place to wither on the vine.

The aldermen understand that transportation is one of the foremost barriers for our residents. This is especially true in an urban area like Greater New Haven where only 27 percent of jobs are reachable with a 90-minute public transit commute. This represents a lower than average degree of access when compared to the 99 other cities included in the Brookings Institution’s 2011 Missed Opportunity: Transit and Jobs in Metropolitan America report.

Among certain populations, the inequities are even more striking. For example, in the New Haven metropolitan area, 13 percent of black workers rely on public transit to get to work, including 22 percent within New Haven, versus just 2 percent of white non-Hispanic workers.

Over the coming weeks, the Board of Aldermen must consider whether it should accept nearly $1 million in Federal Transit Authority grants to study improved transportation within the central area of New Haven. The grant will be used to conduct an in-depth design analysis of the feasibility of a streetcar system, including alternatives such as improved bus service.

Unfortunately, some have questioned the acceptance of this grant on the grounds that it will not benefit residents.

Even though transportation improvements might initially take place downtown, residents throughout New Haven will benefit from properly planned transit systems that integrate buses and trains with streetcars, even well before they can be expanded into each neighborhood.

This is especially true for residents like myself who make transfers across existing bus lines, which this FTA grant can make more efficient, as well as for those who walk to the city center from adjacent neighborhoods.

Our aldermen do not need local experts to tell them that this grant is important. They should look to the leadership of President Barack Obama. Under Obama’s new initiatives, the administration has made this funding available because it knows that equitable city planning is the only way to sustain our nation’s human development, public health, and national security goals as gasoline prices rise.

Related to this grant, New Haven also recently received Federal Sustainable Communities Initiative funding to allow the local community to prioritize its vision for interconnected mixed-income housing, job centers, and transit improvements.

Streetcars are a tried-and-true way to make existing regional bus systems more efficient and accessible, a step which can improve employment and affordable housing opportunities for lower-income and disabled residents. Over the past year, the aldermen and citizens have raised many excellent questions about our transportation system.

The board should ensure that citizens can provide additional input into the planning process, including on land use decisions and health effects.

New Haven should not become one of the few cities to turn down this grant, and in doing so, close the door on this once-in-a-generation opportunity to promote a more equitable and inclusive city.

Mark Abraham received the Environmental Justice Network’s 2008 award for coordinating the New Haven Safe Streets Coalition. Readers may write him at 129 Church St., Suite 605, New Haven 06510. His email address is newhavensafestreets at / gmail.com.


URL: http://www.nhregister.com/articles/2012/03/28/opinion/doc4f739f5ed437d668093741.prt

New Urban Network: Aldermen Seek Changes to Route 34

Please see today's reporting by Phil Langdon on the New Urban Network for an update on the Route 34 Resolution, which passed a Committee of the Board of Aldermen last month. An excerpt from Phil's report:

Among the changes sought by the aldermen are:
• Equal planning priority for pedestrian, bicycle, mass transit, and automobile traffic in the design;
• A pair of two-lane streets instead of two planned four-lane roads to carry much of the traffic that now uses the expressway;
• A maximum of three lanes where necessary (including turn lanes);
• Travel lanes only 10 feet, along with relatively tight corners, to calm traffic and minimize crossing distances for pedestrians;
• Separated bicycle facilities (cycletracks) adjacent to the two principal streets;
• Road design standards based on a target speed of no more than 25 mph;

Advocates for pedestrians, cyclists, and a less automobile-oriented design have been frustrated by the lack of cooperation from the mayor. The New Haven Safe Streets Coalition, which mobilized city residents to ask their representatives for a more pedestrian-oriented design, sent out a mass e-mail accusing the City of "trying to divide the community by spreading inaccurate information."

The Coalition said one letter from the City "claimed that widening highways like Route 34 can help reduce traffic within cities," when in fact the reverse is true. Another statement from the city claimed that intersections in the redesigned streets will be very similar to most intersections currently found in downtown New Haven, but cites what the Coalition says are "places that we know have been the scene of multiple fatalities and injuries in recent years, and that are not pleasant for young persons or the elderly to cross each day."

Driver Traveling at 60 MPH Hits Yale Residential College, Student Avoids Being Hit by 3 Inches

From the Yale Daily News:

A man driving a Volvo S80 crashed into a pole on Park Street outside Pierson College at around 11:10 p.m. Tuesday. The man was driving at over 60 miles an hour along Edgewood Avenue when the car swerved and came within three inches of hitting Chris Dennen '12 before smashing into the pole, according to three students who said they had heard an account from Dennen . Jeff Fell '12 and Sam Teicher '12, who both live on Edgewood Avenue, said Dennen was "shaken up" but unscathed. Dennen left the scene after the incident, they said. The vehicle's driver was not intoxicated at the time of the accident, police said. A graduate student, who lives on the corner of Park Street and Edgewood Avenue, corroborated the account, adding that the vehicle first hit the curb and lost a tire. The graduate student said two Yale Police Department officers who witnessed the incident both admitted they couldn't believe what they were seeing.

The incident took place just a block from where a speeding SUV careened off the road and into a house full of Yale affiliates in September.

Route 34: Let us not repeat the mistakes of the past (Testimony)

Public testimony from David Streever at the recent Board of Aldermen hearing on Route 34 public safety. The resolution in question passed the committee by a vote of 4-3, and now heads to the full Board of Aldermen for a vote. Please contact your Aldermen and encourage them to vote for a safer street.

The image shown here is an existing view of College & North Frontage: One of the intersections that the city proposes to significantly widen, even though local residents already consider it to be exceptionally dangerous.

---

Earlier this year, I read a quote in the Independent saying the Route 34 project began almost a decade ago. In reality, the proposal you see celebrated its birthday over one hundred years ago. The city is unaware of the long history of this project, and unaware that they are repeating mistakes first made almost a century ago.

In 1905, George Santayana wrote "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it”. A few short years later, Frederick Law Olmsted and Cass Gilbert released a report on how New Haven should address a growing population and improve the cities basic infrastructure and quality of life.

The recommendations included expanded rail coverage, trolley service, and the purchase and demolition of hundreds of properties along Oak Street to place a city boulevard which would be lined with high-value property.

Over forty years later New Haven built Route 34, demolishing hundreds of homes and displacing almost a thousand families, and leaving out the expanded rail service, trolley service, and other mass transit and walkable elements. The original Route 34 was built entirely with cars in mind, and became purely a means of driving in and out of New Haven.

The project was marred by setbacks and delays, and never reached the final phases. The city was left with a lethal expressway which devalued property and could not be expanded upon, while literally driving residents out of the city. The loss of our tax base coincided with the loss of Federally funded road projects, and we were unable to complete the project.

Our experts in City Hall have forgotten this history. The history touted by the City says that Route 34 began in the 40s. Their omission of the good work of Olmstead and Gilbert is notable--it shows that they do not realize that 30 years of good intentions went into the original Route 34 plan.

The city seems flabbergasted by the wide-spread disagreement with their current plan, citing their good intentions and the economic development aspects of the plan. They claim that this is a phase one plan--and that while it is far from ideal, the issues we’ve identified as being dangerous and out of scope with the proposal will be addressed in later phases. What they do not realize is that this is what happened to Olmstead, Gilbert, and the aldermen--amongst them my neighbor Henry Harrison--when the time came to built the original Route 34.

New Haven is not learning from history. Olmstead, Gilbert, and Harrison had wonderful intentions--every bit as good as our current experts--and the individuals responsible for building Route 34 shared them. Much like our city staff, they naively believed that a Phase II was guaranteed. A mistake which even now, over 70 years later, dogs our city. We pay for this mistake with a high rate of accidents and deaths, pollution, crashed property values, and rising asthma rates. This stretch of road creates a very real barrier between the Hospital, the Hill, and Downtown, encouraging residents to drive when they could walk, and keeping neighborhoods segregated.

The current plan only increases this problem, by widening the road, and widening curb radii--the turning radius of the streets. These changes have been proven to increase speeds in study after study, which will make the street less safe to use. The addition of no less than 3 separate types of bike infrastructure--all within a few blocks of each other--will only cause confusion and frustration. How can a cyclist who is being diverted to a different type of infrastructure every other block behave in a safe, predictable manner?

The city should have followed their own grant proposal and built a street around living, walking, biking, and using mass transit. Despite showing us dozens of photos of other progressive cities where highways have been replaced with parks and light rail, they have proposed a plan that increases the overall speeds, danger, and widths of the roads.

One has to wonder why the final plan is so different from the original proposal the city submitted, and why, despite hundreds of residents attending dozens of public meetings, the plan has remained virtually unchanged since 2008.

The basis of the plan--a car-centric and widened expressway--has remained the same for 3 years. The number one feedback at every single meeting I’ve attended is:

"Build a smaller road--an actual boulevard--consistent with your proposal. Build a road which is safe to walk, bike, and live on. Build a road with civic improvements, not office complexes that will be mostly staffed by Guilford residents who can drive directly to their office on the new expressway you are proposing."

The resolution as submitted echoes the spoken and written words of literally hundreds of our neighbors. I have not attended a single public meeting where a city resident said that they’d like to see the current plan built without changes. The alternate vision for Route 34, as articulated by a broad group of architects, urban planners, and neighbors is a safe, economically strong road which will improve our city and strengthen our communities. The city's current proposal will do neither of these things. It will deliver a large lot to a private developer and cause further danger to pedestrians and residents.

How long will it take to undo the damage that the cities current plan could wreck? It has taken us 60 years to begin talking about how to undo the damage caused by the original plan. I sincerely hope that we don’t have to wait another 60 to have a safe and livable Route 34.

David Streever
Ward 10 Chairman
Board of Directors Elm City Cycling

Coalition Receives Response from Mayor DeStefano on "Progress Report" Letter

Dear New Haven Safe Streets Petition Supporters:

Yesterday, Mayor John DeStefano mailed a written response to a group of elected officials and civic leaders who represent New Haven's 12 Community Management Teams and other associations within the New Haven Safe Streets Coalition.

Following up to our larger-scale Petition drive in 2008, this core group of neighborhood leaders had recently authored a detailed "progress report" on the city's Safe Streets programs, law enforcement activities, and Route 34 designs. Please click here to read the original "progress report" letter, and list of authors: Letter to Mayor DeStefano - August 24 2011

Please click here to read the Mayor's response: Response from Mayor DeStefano - September 22 2011

Regarding these requests, the City has proposed three follow up actions:

1) The Coalition will schedule a meeting with the City's Transportation Director, Jim Travers, in order to review each of requests in our letter. Please contact newhavensafestreets at gmail.com, or call (203) 500-7059, if you would like to attend this meeting. We will share the results of this meeting with this group and on the New Haven Safe Streets website.

2) The City has invited all of us to attend and participate in upcoming public workshops and hearings on major city development projects. In particular, several meetings and public hearings will be held regarding the Route 34 reconstruction project in the fall of this year. We strongly encourage you to attend these hearings, and demand street designs that comply with city regulations by prioritizing the accessibility of walkers, cyclists and public transit users of all ages and abilities.

3) In early 2012, City Hall will make a full report to the Board of Aldermen regarding the Complete Streets program (which has been recognized as one of the nation's best, according to the National Complete Streets Coalition), including a review of all requests submitted to date using the "request form" system. Please contact us if you have any questions about how this works, or if you would like help filling out "request forms" in your neighborhood. The forms are available at http://www.cityofnewhaven.com/Engineering/completestreets.asp. Although we will demand that all streets be considered for improvements (and have requested next year's project schedules to help ensure this), we encourage every neighborhood and elected official to complete the official "request form," because this will help provide a greater degree of transparency.

To view a Sunday, August 28th feature story in the New Haven Register about our original letter, please visit the following article: New Haven Register: Advocates pleased with New Haven safe streets efforts, but say much work remains

Thank you again for your assistance as an author of this letter, and/or as a general supporter of the Safe Streets Coalition. We will continue to monitor New Haven's progress on the Safe Streets Petition, and look forward to additional successes in the coming years. Please feel free to forward this email to your neighbors and friends, or unsubscribe if you no longer wish to hear from us.

Best regards, New Haven Safe Streets Coalition Coordinators & CT Livable Streets Campaign Steering Committee

Stop Pedaling, Start Building Massive Debt: GM College Debt Plan

The source of this parody GM advertisement is unknown (please post here if you have it). See this post at Bike Delaware for background.

Speed Table and Curb Extensions Coming to Edwards Street in New Haven; Will Foster Community

Original Post 12/9/2010: East Rock neighbors are excited about a new traffic calming system that will be built at the corner of Livingston and Edwards Street in New Haven. Speed tables and curb extensions, like the one proposed here by the City of New Haven under its Complete Streets program, have been shown worldwide to be highly effective at reducing speeds, improving driver safety, and increasing pedestrian comfort levels. They are also used in many cities with much snowier climates than New Haven. The Livingston Street system will be located just one block from Whitney Avenue, which one of the neighborhood's elected representatives recently called a "local access highway" that contributes to speeding in the area. The neighborhood's Community Management Team has enthusiastically supported calls for more progressive traffic planning as well.

In Cambridge, Massachusetts, for example, prior a similar traffic calming improvement, the 85th percentile speed on Berkshire Street was 30 mi/h, and only 41 percent of vehicles surveyed were traveling at or below the 25 mi/h speed limit. After the improvements, the 85th percentile speed was reduced to 21 mi/h at the vertical traffic calming devices and 24 mi/h in between, and 95 percent of vehicles were going at or below the speed limit. Similar results have been found after the installation of speed tables in other cities. The photo shown here is an example of a tabled intersection with curb extensions (or bump outs), taken from an online Bucknell Traffic Calming library.

Interestingly, the New Haven Independent reports that neighbors asked the City of New Haven not to repave the street recently, because they believed that the lumpy pavement served as a traffic calming device. This is not an unusual solution: in many cities and towns throughout the world, local governments trying to curb the extremely deleterious impacts of speeding traffic on neighborhood health have allowed or encouraged dirt pathways (or lumpy asphalt) in the automobile travel lanes, while paving smooth sidewalks and bike lanes for pedestrians and cyclists.

The Indy article mentions that the new device will not only curb speeds, it will help build a sense of community. Furthermore, it sounds like some of the neighbors have ideas for what to build next. Frank Chapman, who has lived a couple doors away from the intersection for more than 30 years, is profiled in the story:

An architect and former deputy head of the City Plan Department, Chapman said he’s wholeheartedly behind the speed table. Edwards Street is about a mile long, with only two non-T intersections between State and Prospect Streets, Chapman said. “The blocks are long,” and drivers take advantage of that to step on the gas, Chapman said. “It’s an invitation for cars to go fast.” From his living room on Edwards Street, where he and his wife have lived since 1978, Chapman called the speed table a “brilliant plan.”

He said he and his neighbors are committed to maintaining flowers or evergreen shrubs planted in the new medians. “We think it will have a very positive effect on slowing traffic,” he said. Next, Chapman has his eye on the intersection of Edwards and Orange Streets, where he said a roundabout should be installed. “I laid it out and I know it would work.”

We hope that Chapman's vision, which sounds similar to neighborhood traffic calming master plans that have been under development in Dwight, Westville and Fair Haven, can be realized as soon as possible!

Update 7/28/2011: The large traffic calming project, which includes medians and a raised intersection, is now under construction. The related SeeClickFix issue has been closed.

Update 8/22/2011: The New Haven Independent has a story on the completion of the traffic calming system (see photo above). According to the Mayor of New Haven, "It’s the 360 State of Edwards Street. It’s a game changer." A neighbor living next to the intersection, who plans to help garden it, told the paper that she’s "delighted and thrilled" about the new intersection (but half-jokingly suggested that the circle in the middle could be a public park and fountain). For information on how successful miniature traffic circles have been in Seattle, both in terms of reducing injuries (virtually by 100%) and promoting community, see this excellent article in the Road Management and Engineering Journal.

Are Speed Limit Signs a Cost-Effective Strategy to Manage Urban Speeds and Implement 20MPH "Living Streets"?

According to the 20's Plenty campaign, 20mph speed limits for all residential areas throughout Europe have emerged as the key recommendation of the EU Transport and Tourism Committee on improving road safety in Europe. This announcement was made by European Parliament on June 21, 2011.

Studies have proven that 20 MPH speed zones have a dramatic impact on reducing the level of pedestrian injury. Slower street speeds are also associated with benefits such as more social connections, a stronger sense of community, reduced noise and stress levels, higher property values, more accessible walking and better conditions for bicycling. Unfortunately, citywide traffic calming projects, such as those created in many European cities over the past 30 years, can take many years or even decades to roll out across an entire city. So how can cities move forward on creating these zones in a more cost-effective way?

A British review suggests that, when combined with community involvement, even just posting lower speed limits can be an effective method to shave a few miles per hour off the speed of local vehicular traffic:

"Where signs-only schemes are used, small speed reductions and accident savings can be achieved if associated publicity and enforcement campaigns are also used."
Source: UK Transport Research Laboratory Report 363 Urban speed management methods

The British study looked at impacts of signs-only schemes on traffic speeds, concluding that there are small reductions of speeds just from signs particularly when they are combined with community awareness, enforcement and/or publicity. Although the decreased speeds resulting from signage efforts pale in comparison to the decreased speeds that communities see on so-called "living streets" with traffic calming (also known as "self-enforcing" speed limits), it is interesting that they did find reductions from signage alone.

Some cities and towns already seem to be aware of this strategy. The 20's Plenty campaign points out that cities in England with a population of 5 million people have adopted 20 MPH zones as their official policy. Locally, many cities and towns in Connecticut post 15 MPH or 20 MPH speed limit signs within residential areas, and even New York City is now cutting speed limits to 20 MPH within 75 different neighborhoods across the city. In Hartford, Connecticut, a 10 MPH speed limit is posted in front of the Legislative Office Building, and helps protect the lives of our state legislators.

Yet, in New Haven, our traffic engineers continue to post speed limit signage of 25 or 30 MPH across the entire city. The high speeds that result contribute to hundreds of severe injuries per year on our city streets.  Slower posted speed limits in residential areas, hospital, university, and school zones are something that the New Haven Safe Streets Coalition has specifically called for on many occasions.

Cities must be realistic when creating a strategy for more livable streets. On one hand, small decreases in speeds may not meet overall community goals for speed management, and probably won't significantly reduce the number of crashes.

But on the other hand, looking at the graph at the European Cyclists Federation website and the Federal Highway Administration data here, it seems that even a small reduction in speed within a given area could have some impact on the severity of injuries and fatalities over time.

Speed limits and local governance

One of the key limitations of the Transport Research Laboratory report, in our opinion, is that it did not address the question of whether lower speed limits in and of themselves can, over time, create additional political will for additional "self-enforcing" (traffic calmed) streets.

Signage for reduced speed limits are an "advertisement" of sorts for more livable streets within a city. Furthermore, it may be easier for neighborhood advocates to argue for concrete changes if they are able to point to even bigger disparities between desired outcomes (livable streets) and the day-to-day realities of vehicles traveling at dangerous speeds through their neighborhood.  Slower speed limits also provide ammunition for local residents to use more informally, when they talk to their neighbors who clearly violate the laws.  The converse principle is also true: treating all roads equally - by posting all of them at 25 or 30MPH - sends the implicit message that little can be accomplished, and discourages residents from taking any action.

Either way, the evidence seems clear that posted signs can translate into slightly lower speeds in the short term.  By catalyzing more effective citizen advocacy, can they also lead to the implementation of more effective, and more widespread, traffic calming strategies in the long term?

Update, 8/31/12: Portland, Oregon will be reducing speed limits to 20 miles per hour on 70 miles of residential streets.  Even a small adjustment in speed limits on this many streets is likely to save lives.  The results of this conversion will hopefully become a "case study" for complete streets advocates in other U.S. cities.

Walkable Westville: What Makes a Neighborhood Great

Bennett Lovett-Graff writes into the New Haven Review to describe the things that make his home of Westville (pictured here, in a photo from a 2008 cover piece in the NYTimes Real Estate Magazine) such a great neighborhood for walking, and living:

"I grew up on Brooklyn and attended all my life the public schools to which I walked nearly every day of the thirteen years I had to go. At the age of 17, I left my family home and never came back.

This is not the same as saying that I didn't return to New York or even Brooklyn. I did. But I didn't return "home" in that most traditional of senses: taking up residence, as my brother did till age 35, in my parents' five-bedroom home on Glenwood Road.

When I left New York for the last time after a two-year stint as an editor to return to New Haven (yes, I lived here twice), my wife and I were not only overjoyed, we even returned to the neighborhood in which we had rented the first time around: that part of Westville between Whalley & Derby on the north and south respectively; and Yale Avenue and Forest Road as far as east and west go. We have had no regrets since in the last 10 years that we have resided here, and we both chalk that up not to New Haven itself, but the neighborhood in which we reside.

I could write electronic ream after ream on the wonderfulness of this neighborhood. My children walk two blocks to school (Edgewood School); my wife walks two blocks to work (Mitchell Library); we walk two blocks to synagogue (Beth-El Keser Israel); we have farmer's market directly across the street in the summers; access to tennis courts in Edgewood Park (across the street) and Yale fields (three blocks) respectively; sledding at the Yale golf course in the winter five blocks away we can walk less than a block to five art galleries, four bars, five restaurants.

It's the neighborhood thus that has made New Haven home for us (and our children) and not "New Haven" itself. The spatial proximity of creature comforts, leisure activities, the necessities of food and culture have created a latitude and lassitude in time: it moves more slowly, more relaxedly, more satisfactorily, with less alienating effects as I wave at friends going north along my block to synagogue or walking their children south along it to school or heading in either direction with dogs in tow or on bikes or in jogging suits.

Were I to leave New Haven, what I would miss is not its individual places or events but entire gestalt of a community created in a small corner of the city."

As reported recently in the New Haven Independent, neighbors are working on numerous Complete Streets submissions to make this neighborhood even better. If you live in Westville and want to get involved in making your streets even more able to foster a sense of community and local pride, please contact the Westville Village Renaissance Alliance (WVRA) or your local Alderperson.

Outside the historic core, not all of Westville is so walkable. Phil Langdon writes in the New Urban News about how Whalley Avenue, a main thoroughfare through the area, is an example of the Connecticut Department of Transportation's failure to address traffic safety issues. After an 11 year old was killed in a hit and run, the City of New Haven actually approved ConnDOT's widening of the road from two lanes to four lanes, which will make speeds even higher.

NHPD Chief Limon Wonders: When Will ConnDOT Stop Designing Roads That Kill People?

This March, the state's first Traffic Safety Conference was held at Yale-New Haven Hospital. According to attendees, the meeting addressed a broad scope of injury prevention factors -- examining motorcycle safety, the use of child car seats, impaired (cell phone distraction, substance abuse) driving, safety for new and old drivers, and enhanced police enforcement.

To read a complete round-up of the event, please see "When will transportation departments start making roads safe for all?", by Phil Langdon of the New Urban News. Mr. Langdon writes that while traffic deaths have fallen dramatically, safety advocates and officials still pay far too little attention to the potential of better street design. Public comments at the bottom of Langdon's piece are also helpful to illustrate current conditions in New Haven.

Though its focus was on other injury prevention factors, the Traffic Safety Conference also highlighted CT DOT's inadequate application of proper street design for cities in our cities. New Haven Police Chief Frank Limon showed two very striking maps, one of vehicular accidents, the other of vehicular violations. In Limon's maps, the traffic violations (like running red lights) were focused on typical New Haven streets, which are sometimes patrolled by traffic enforcement officers particularly within pedestrian-heavy retail districts. But fatal accidents were concentrated along the state roads (which also serve as city arterials) that have been recently rebuilt to DOT standards -- roads with wide and multiple turn lanes in car oriented environments like Foxon Road and Ella Grasso Boulevard.

Limon spoke at length about the intersection of Derby Avenue and Ella Grasso Boulevard, a spot that has seen dozens of severe crashes. In this location, ConnDOT installed multiple turn lanes, and broad expanses of pavement, within the past five years. Chief Limon advised: "Don't go near it."

Limon's data presented a clear case of what New Urban planners and traffic safety advocates have long argued -- that the wider lanes and higher speeds in single use zones create congestion and fatal accidents.

It is of great concern to many citizens that the current planning for the rebuilding of the Route 34 Connector and Route 34 West around the hospital zone is focused, as these failed DOT projects are, on maximizing high-speed travel lanes (aided and abetted by underground service roads). Dozens of public meetings and workshops have been held over the past year, in which hundreds of New Haven residents have demanded walkable and bikeable streets, traffic demand management and transit development rather than yet another at-grade urban highway.

Mr. Langdon's article argues that ConnDOT has largely failed the city over the past few years, not just because of deadly road projects like Ella Grasso Boulevard and Foxon Road, but also due to its negligent designs within smaller neighborhood districts like Westville and Whalley/Edgewood (shown in the photo here). Mr. Langdon notes:

Even today, DOT continues to carry out pedestrian-hostile projects in New Haven. Mark Abraham, leader of the New Haven Safe Streets Coalition, points to the current widening of Whalley Avenue, a thoroughfare that carries commuter traffic between downtown New Haven and suburban Woodbridge.

Says Abraham: "Whalley Avenue, in a densely settled area of New Haven, along a site that has been the scene of hundreds of crashes, including one that killed an 11-year-old girl in a hit-and-run, was unfortunately converted from a 2-lane road into a 4-lane road with no pedestrian medians, raised intersections, or other measures typically used to make streets in urban areas safer to pedestrians. In addition, there are long sections with no crosswalks whatsoever...." "Hundreds of neighbors and elected officials pressed for reasonable design changes, but the DOT, working in tandem with city government, was simply unwilling or unable to take significant steps that would have made the area safer but also supported retail activity along the street. Recent studies have shown that walkable streets have far fewer retail vacancies and 50 percent higher retail rents."

Alderman Dildine said that in his view,” a road diet is the only solution for residential neighborhoods.” DOT, he said, often seems to drag its heels on initiatives and policies that would make places function better for people who are not behind the wheel.

NHTSA has consistently found that three of every 10 fatal motor vehicle crashes involve speeding. In 2000, 30 percent of fatal crashes involved speeding. In 2009, despite progress in other respects, 31 percent of fatal crashes involved speeding. And as research has shown, the speed of a motor vehicle is what’s lethal for a pedestrian. Bring down the speed and a person who’s hit by a car has a far greater likelihood of surviving.

What all of this tells me is that community design, and particularly street design, are crucial ingredients in traffic safety. Communities are not going to be able to control driver behavior adequately through ticketing, red-light cameras, distracted-driver campaigns, and other measures of those sorts. Street design has to be an important element in the government response. Street design must be on the agenda of any conference looking for comprehensive solutions to the reduced, but still grievous, plague of traffic deaths.

At the very least, Langdon concludes, it is time for state transportation departments to stop the lip service and to start making real changes.

Anstress Farwell contributed a portion of the text within this online post.

Petition and Discussion to Stop the Violence in New Haven

As part of our efforts to advocate for streets that are safe, comfortable and attractive for residents of all ages and abilities, the New Haven Safe Streets Coalition maintains a strong focus on policies such as "complete streets" and lower speeds, which have been proven to lead to a reduction in the hundreds of traffic injuries and fatalities that plague our community each year.

However, our efforts have also focused on the crucial links between physical activity, community cohesion, safe streets and community violence. These relationships are well documented on the Prevention Institute page, Connecting Safety to Chronic Disease, and elsewhere. An example application of this knowledge is San Francisco's Pedestrian Environmental Quality Index, which is used to plan walkable neighborhoods and which takes perceived public safety (like graffiti and lighting) into account. Safer streets and safe neighborhoods can lead to increased rates of walking and cycling, which are directly linked to reductions in overall injuries and fatalities as well as other gains in community well-being.

The tragic killing of Mitchell Dubey, a well-loved Downtown New Haven bicycle mechanic and musician, and other recent homicides within a few of New Haven's neighborhoods have spurred an increased level of attention to safety issues in the city.

If you would like to join in this discussion, the link and petition below may be of interest. Feel free to comment, add relevant documents or stories, discuss suggested violence prevent strategies, or recommend other items that should be on the page.

Petition: Stop the Violence in New Haven: http://www.seeclickfix.com/issues/90790

Addressing issues of public safety often requires persistence and collaboration across the civic sector. As one example, the image here shows the dark ceiling of the Chapel Street arcade at 900 Chapel Street last year, which had long-neglected, burned-out lights before it was "fixed" (and re-lit) through a combination of SeeClickFix issues, numerous calls to the property owner by local elected officials, citizens, and officials at the Town Green District, and several of Mary O'Leary's newspaper stories in the New Haven Register. Poorly-lit or abandoned public spaces cause a feeling of insecurity, and can discourage local residents from walking.

In addition to civic collaboration, individual relationships and community cohesion (which a new research brief shows can be severely undermined by income inequality) are critical as well. As local organizer Kevin Ewing points out on the SeeClickFix thread above, "The only people who are going to be able to stop the violence and crime happening in our communities are the people who are committing the acts of violence and crime in our communities. The rest of us have to convince them to stop. It's not going to happen unless we directly engage them... build relationships with them... understand what they want and push them to go after it. I don't think we need more programs. I think we need to fund the ones that make real impact. More importantly I think we need to fund the PEOPLE who are on the ground making direct differences."

On the same thread, Barbara Tinney suggests citizens take action around issues of gun control: "When the quality of life and public safety everywhere in our city becomes everyones concern then we can stop gun violence. When everyone asks the question - how do guns find there way into the streets of New Haven and demand an answer then we can stop gun violence. When we decide that no -one has the answer and that the solution will only result from true collective action then we can stop gun violence. When tragedy isn't the trigger for collective outrage, but is replaced with the genuine belief that we as citizens are better off when everyone is safe and we act accordingly then we can stop gun violence. We, the collective we that crosses neighborhood boundaries, racial lines, socio-economic differences and all the other things that keep us in our silos decide that will not not stand for gun violence in our city then we will witness its elimination. If we muster the will to take a stand as full participants in community life we can stop gun violence."

The New York Times recently highlighted this issue, pointing out that guns that fire 33 bullets before re-loading are now legal again thanks to the expiration of the ban on assault weapons. The Connecticut Against Gun Violence organization maintains a useful page with facts about this issue locally. For example, in Connecticut, one study showed that 23% of small-city 9th and 10th graders and 15% of affluent suburban 9th and 10th graders said that it would be sort of easy or very easy to get a gun. New Haven is a member of Mayors Against Illegal Guns, a national group devoted to this issue.

Although Connecticut and New Haven are, in general, very safe places, this issue indirectly or directly affects all of us, and it must be addressed if we want to have healthier, more vibrant streets.

More Information

For information about public safety related to New Haven, one place to begin is the New Haven Health Department's briefing reports:

Creating a Healthy and Safe City: The Impact of Violence in New Haven (2011)

Executive Summary (Short Version)
http://healthmattersnh.net/community/creating-a-healthy-and-safe-city

Full Report (with Maps, Charts etc.)
http://ctdatahaven.org/know/index.php/File:Creating_a_Healthy_and_Safe_City_2011_sml.pdf

Additionally, Community Mediation and the New Haven Police Department have been holding a series of discussions on the topic of community and police partnerships. Please see the schedule of events and a summary of the discussions at this page.

SB706 Intersection Safety Camera Legislation Passes CGA Committee (Again)

A new bill allowing cities to install intersection safety cameras, which issue tickets to vehicles that do not obey red light signals, has passed the Transportation Committee by a vote of 25 to 11. Text and other information about the bill, currently labeled S.B. 706, may be found here on the Connecticut General Assembly's website. There are many supporters of the bill this year, including Toni Walker and Roland Lemar, state representatives from New Haven. The bill is also supported by Bike Walk Connecticut, the state's largest bicycle and pedestrian advocacy organization.

The Hartford Courant reports at http://www.courant.com/news/politics/hc-red-light-cameras-0319-20110318,0,594323.story, and links to an online poll (shown here) which, with 1,072 votes recorded, indicates support for the devices. An excerpt from the Courant's coverage:

The legislature's transportation committee voted Friday to approve a bill that would enable any Connecticut municipality with a population of more than 60,000 to install cameras to take pictures of red-light violators at intersections, and to impose a fine of $124 for each violation.

The 25-11 committee vote sends the bill to the floor of the state Senate for debate and action. Approval also would be required in the House before the bill could be sent to the governor, who then would decide whether to sign it into law. Legislative approval isn't guaranteed. At least one such bill has cleared the committee in recent years, but none has been approved in the full House and Senate.

According to the Courant, the towns of more than 60,000 people in Connecticut are Bridgeport, New Haven, Hartford, Stamford, Waterbury, Norwalk, Danbury, New Britain, West Hartford, Greenwich, Hamden, Meriden and Bristol.

Click here for our coverage of previous years' legislation, and here for an earlier summary from the Tri State Transportation Campaign.

A group called CT Safe Roads has launched a website to help advocate for the devices. If you support the use of intersection safety cameras, which are currently deployed in more than 400 U.S. cities and have been shown to be extremely effective at reducing deaths caused by red light running, please visit the website and email, call or set up a visit with your state representatives. Several well-written op-eds supporting the cameras can be found in Connecticut's newspapers, including the Courant, Bristol Press, and New Haven Register.

City Point Neighborhood Association Requests Traffic Improvements

The City Point Neighborhood Association, after meeting with the City of New Haven and volunteers from the New Haven Safe Streets Coalition, has decided to request temporary and permanent traffic calming measures through the City's Complete Streets program.

City Point is a beautiful area at the southern end of the "Hill" neighborhood, bordering Long Island Sound. Designated as an official historic district by the City of New Haven, the area is known for its small oysterman's houses, marina, parks, and well-preserved 19th- and early 20th-century homes along Howard Avenue (such as the one shown here). Despite the area's beauty, community cohesiveness and high quality of life, traffic has been identified as a major concern. In the 2010 Neighborhood Quality of Life Survey, the several dozen City Point residents who responded clearly indicated that the control of traffic speeding and enforcement in the area was not acceptable.

The measures the group who was present has decided to request are as follows (these are excerpted directly from emails to the neighborhood association):

Temporary Measures

Seasonal crosswalk signs--these are temporary structures that are placed in the middle street that alert drivers to watch for pedestrians. These are seasonal in that they can't be placed in the streets in the winter (because of snow, plowing, etc) but they have been used and proven to be effective on State Street. We are going to request these for various spots on Howard Avenue.

Removable Speed Bumps--these are temporary because they are placed on the street and removable, not cemented into the road. These will be placed on Sea Street because and possibly other small streets that experience heavy traffic at times (Sea Street does because of the Sound School). These are not as effective on wide roads and are not a good option for Howard Avenue.

If you would like to sign onto the application we will submit requesting these temporary measures from the city, please contact the Safe Streets Coalition via email at newhavensafestreets [a/t] gmail.com to sign on (replace the "[a/t]" with an "@" sign).

Options for Permanent Traffic Calming

These were discussed in detail at last week's meeting. I will only provide a brief overview of each here as these options will be discussed again in detail in April when we reconvene. (However, please feel free to send any questions you may have in the meantime). Whatever options we do choose, city and Safe Streets staff did stress that these are not truly effective unless they are used in multiple locations (for example, one traffic circle or one bump out alone will not serve to slow traffic, but a series of them will).

Traffic circles--These are "roundabout" structures, that traffic has to go around. These have proven to be extremely effective is dramatically reducing speed and accidents on streets that are long, straight and wide (like Howard Avenue). These have been installed on Woodward Avenue in the East Shore area.

Medians- these can consist of "temporary" ones that are huge potted plants down the length of the road or permanent, cement ones. To be effective, a cement/asphalt median needs to have plantings.

Bump outs- this is where the sidewalk extends out into the street more than usual at intersections. It serves to slow cars down since it narrows the road, but also gives pedestrians a little extra safety as it increases both their view of traffic and traffic's view of them.

Textured pavement-used in conjunction with bump outs, textured pavement can be concrete that is "stamped" to look like stone (or a plastic based covering that looks like brick) and is bumpy which slows traffic.

Bike lanes- bike lanes also help slow traffic as they visually narrow the road to drivers. However, these have already been planned for Howard Avenue and used alone, will not likely slow traffic significantly on an avenue as wide as Howard.

Other Resources

The City of New Haven's Complete Streets manual includes more detailed information and photos of various traffic calming measures. It can be found here: http://www.cityofnewhaven.com/TrafficParking/pdfs/CS-Manual-04-05-10.pdf Beginning on page 47, there are descriptions and photos of both temporary and permanent traffic calming measures. At the end of the manual is the application. Anyone can fill one out and submit it at any time, but especially for larger, permanent traffic calming plans, the city is not very likely to approve an application unless it has support from a large amount of residents in the given area.

More information on the Safe Streets group: http://www.newhavensafestreets.org/

Friends on the Way: Approval for Quinnipiac Avenue Repaving, Roundabouts and Livable Street Designs

Original Post, 3/20/09: With the release of stimulus package funding, the reconstruction of the heart of Quinnipiac Avenue is now scheduled to begin as early as this fall.

The project had been in the works for about ten years. Due to extensive citizen input, over that time it progressed from a standard high-speed ConnDOT design into a more livable street with roundabouts, wider sidewalks and chicanes. The road passes through the heart of the Quinnipiac River District of Fair Haven Heights, one of New Haven's most important historic areas, with homes still dating from the 1760s. See this post for previous articles on Quinnipiac Avenue.

These "livable streets" measures will serve to reduce traffic speeds, which will have the direct effect of raising property values, improving safety, and encouraging people to make more friends (a study from England recently re-confirmed Appleyard's 1969 research on that subject). They will hopefully prevent the types of traffic-related injuries that have been fairly common on this section of road.

Yet questions within the community still abound about when other sections of the avenue -- which is rife with speeding (see photo, courtesy of the NH Independent) -- will be improved. Excerpts from local coverage below:

Public gives thumbs-up to redesign, NH Register, 3/25/09

It took eight years of planning, but dozens of Quinnipiac Avenue residents this week expressed satisfaction with the final version of a city redesign of a portion of the major thoroughfare. The $7.1 million project will extend from Lenox Avenue to Clifton Street and add safety features that will convert it from a straightaway, while providing for protected on-street parking and other features, to the delight of homeowners.

“We’re so looking forward to being able to walk him up the street with usable sidewalks,” said Quinnipiac Avenue resident Ian Christmann, referring to his 11-month-old son, Sawyer, who joined his parents at the community meeting at the Pilgrim Church in Fair Haven Heights.

Miller said the project changes Quinnipiac from Lenox to East Grand avenues by adding roundabouts, bump-outs for parking and chicains, which are curb extensions that alternate from one side of the street to the other, forming S-shaped curves.

Chris Ozyck, another Quinnipiac Avenue resident, congratulated the city on the project and also for traffic enforcement there and on Front Street, which has slowed down vehicles.

Q Ave Residents Ask For More “Redo”, NH Independent, 3/24/09

Bekhrad was one of dozens of local residents who turned out to hear an update from city officials on the status of the Quinnipiac Avenue “re-do."

The city’s plan features a number of traffic calming measures — including a roundabout, chicanes, and bumpouts — designed to discourage cars from flooring it on the straightaway. The project also includes reconstruction of the retaining wall and sidewalks along the avenue.

Dismayed at the state of the avenue, and looking for a public partner for her private investment, Bekhrad went right to the top with a recent request to fix her road. Last month she sent President Obama a letter, asking for his cooperation and financial support on her project. She copied the letter to Mayor DeStefano.

“We haven’t begun to think about the rest of the road,” the mayor replied. “So it could be at least another eight to ten years?” Bekhrad asked. The mayor agreed that yes, it could be as long eight or ten years, but promised to take up the matter. “Between now and whenever we next get together we’ll take a look at areas north and south of Phase One and Two,” he said.

“It’s very difficult to attract people,” Bekhrad said. She’s trying to fill seven of her $800,000 condos. “People came today, they said, ‘Your units are beautiful, but the street stinks,’” Bekhrad said. She didn’t close the deal with the prospective tenants.

Christmann was encouraged by the meeting, and looks forward to a transformation of his street. “We have one of the most walkable areas in town,” he said, describing a local riverside walking route. “But we’re stuck with a stretch of Quinnipiac Avenue that is treacherous — four wheel drive treacherous.”

Update 1/5/2011: Phase One of the project nears completion. According to reporting in the New Haven Independent, many neighbors are cheering the progress:

Traffic-calming techniques, meant to improve safety, are a vital part of the Quinnipiac reconstruction. Read about their significance here and here . Roundabouts and separators have been installed, but there’s work in this area left still.

State Office of Legislative Research (OLR) Report on Traffic Calming Initiatives in Connecticut

TRAFFIC CALMING INITIATIVES IN CONNECTICUT
By: Kevin E. McCarthy, Principal Analyst, January 2010

You asked for an update of OLR report 2005-R-0692 to discuss traffic calming initiatives in Connecticut that have been implemented more recently.

SUMMARY

This memo defines traffic calming and identifies commonly used measures. It describes recent traffic calming initiatives in New Canaan, New Haven, Newtown, Stamford, Wallingford, and Windsor. These initiatives include (1) procedures for receiving and acting on requests from residents and other interested parties to adopt and install traffic calming measures (New Canaan and Newtown); (2) measures to develop “complete streets” that ensure that all transportation users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users, can travel safely and conveniently on city streets and sidewalks (New Haven); (3) the process for developing a city-wide traffic calming plan (Stamford); and (4) the process used by two municipalities (Wallingford and Windsor) to address traffic concerns along specific roads in residential neighborhoods. The report also discusses other initiatives in the state to promote traffic calming.

TRAFFIC CALMING

As noted in our earlier report, traffic calming refers to a wide range of measures designed to reduce traffic speed, discourage motorists from cutting through residential areas, and reduce the number of accidents. These measures can include physical changes to streets, such as erecting speed humps (segments where the street is raised by several inches for a length of several feet), bump-outs (extensions of the sidewalk to narrow the traffic lanes, particularly at crosswalks), and chicanes (changes in the alignment of lanes). Other measures affect how drivers perceive the roadway, e. g. , painting lines on the road to make lanes appear narrower and planting trees or shrubs along roads. Traffic calming can also involve education and speed limit enforcement, programs.

The Institute of Transportation Engineers has a traffic calming library, available on line at http://www.ite.org/traffic/. The library contains a searchable database of reports, articles and other documents related to traffic calming.

MUNICIPAL INITIATIVES

New Canaan

The town's Police Commission, which serves as the local traffic authority, has adopted a process to receive requests from residents and other interested parties for the adoption and installation of traffic calming measures. Requests may be submitted by letter or e-mail.

In response to such requests, the commission will seek the opinions of other town departments and traffic engineers through a Traffic Calming Working Group. The commission will use a report prepared by the Southwestern Regional Planning Agency (SWRPA) on the application of various traffic calming measures and recommended standards. Traffic calming measures must comply with the standards and practices of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials and the Connecticut Department of Transportation. Traffic calming devices must conform to the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices as well as the ITE “Guideline for the Design and Application of Speed Humps. ”
Traffic calming measures may not inappropriately delay emergency responses to fires, medical, or other emergencies. The commission has identified certain streets and roads as emergency response routes where traffic calming devices that increase response times will not be considered.

Under the procedures, traffic calming must be neighborhood driven. Residents of an area proposed for installation of traffic calming measures must be given the opportunity to participate in the discussions leading to the implementation of such proposals. Informational meetings will be held with residents to present and discuss individual projects as the commission deems necessary.

New Haven

In October 2008, the city's Board of Aldermen adopted an order to establish a steering committee to develop a “complete streets” policy for the city, implement a complete streets program, and propose a complete streets ordinance. Specifically, the order seeks to establish a complete streets policy to ensure that all users of the transportation system, including pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users can travel safely and conveniently on city streets and sidewalks. Under the policy, the needs of vulnerable users (children, the elderly, and persons with disabilities) would be given priority so that they can travel safely within the public right of way.

Under the order, the city will develop a manual to provide specific design guidelines for the construction of complete streets. The manual will include design standards to (1) establish a street classification system; (2) increase the safety and walk ability of city streets through tools that slow vehicle speeds; (3) create high visibility pedestrian crosswalks; (4) create safe, connected bike facilities for cyclists; (5) narrow travel lanes; and (6) address on-street parking policies.

Under the order, the city will:

1. establish a process for including community members in the planning and design process for streets in their neighborhoods;

2. give affected communities an opportunity to advocate for changes that will best serve their interests, including the opportunity to obtain input from landscape architects and economic development professionals;

3. coordinate educational campaigns targeting all users of the public right-of-way on their rights and responsibilities, with the goal of increasing the safety and civility of the streets; and

4. support the Police Department's traffic enforcement efforts and work with it to develop benchmarks for evaluating and measuring progress.

The city has also installed traffic calming measures in several neighborhoods. For example, it has installed four speed humps on River Street in Fair Haven to address drag racing that commonly took place there. It is installing a roundabout to slow north- and southbound traffic at West Park Avenue and Elm Street in Westville.

Newtown

In the spring of 2009, Newtown established procedures for the town's Police Commission to implement a traffic calming program. Under these procedures, the commission may use measures to reduce speed, enhance pedestrian safety, and reduce traffic diversion in residential neighborhoods. The procedures are intended to make efficient, cost- effective use of town resources by screening and prioritizing requests for traffic calming.

If a neighborhood requests traffic calming measures, the commission will request that the police chief or his designee research the request and determine a prudent course of action based on the Police Department's available resources and report these findings to the commission within 60 days.

After the chief reports his findings, he will be asked if the issue can be resolved using the resources that are available to the department. If the chief feels that the issue can be resolved within the department's resources, the chief will be asked to implement his plan for 120 days and report his findings to the commission.

After completing this process, the commission will decide if the department has satisfactorily addressed the issue. If the commission decides that the issue has been addressed properly, the chief will be asked to monitor the area, when resources are available, to ensure traffic compliance in the area of impact.

If neighbors in the area still feel that the town needs to put additional traffic calming measures into an area, they must submit a detailed written description of their traffic concerns with the signatures of at least 20 voters living in the area. This petition to request additional traffic calming measures must be presented to the commission at a regularly scheduled meeting.

After verifying the signatures and addresses, the commission must hold a hearing. Before it recommends installing neighborhood traffic control devices or traffic calming measures, it must request funds for a traffic study by a professional engineer to identify how best to address the concern for reduced speed, enhanced pedestrian safety, and reduced traffic diversion in the neighborhoods. The study may consider traffic and intersection volumes, traffic speed, and the extent of bicycle and pedestrian activity, among other things.

When completed, the study must be submitted to the commission for review. The commission will decide on a course of action, establish the plan's priority, and advise the Department of Public Works to request the appropriate amount of funding for materials and labor based on the most recent available cost estimates in its next budget. It may request funding sooner if such improvements are deemed desirable and consistent with the commission's plan. The commission may authorize a temporary course of action before moving forward with a permanent traffic calming solution.

The commission may request a demonstration of interest and support from neighborhood residents in the form of a petition signed by more than 60% of the residents on the affected streets. The petition must specify the area under consideration, the nature of the problem (speed, traffic volume, through traffic) and the traffic calming solutions being recommended to the commission.

The Police Department will monitor the effectiveness of any traffic calming measures that are installed. After one year, the commission will review the installation and decide if the measures were effective. The commission reserves the right to remove any traffic calming installations at any time that have not produced a desired or intended result, or are deemed dangerous.

Stamford

The city is developing a traffic calming master plan for all of its residential neighborhoods. Once developed, the plan will show street improvements that can help slow speeds through neighborhoods, reduce cut-through traffic, and better manage traffic. The plan will create an environment where pedestrians, vehicles, and bicycles can coexist.

The master plan is being developed through a process in which residents engage in a series of workshops (charrettes) where they discuss the values they wish their neighborhood to exemplify, the traffic-related problems that they wish to resolve, and the possible solutions for these problems. The input obtained from the residents provides the framework for the project team, led by Urban Engineers, Inc. , to complete the master plan.

The city's comprehensive approach towards traffic calming seeks to avoid moving problems such as speeding and cut-through traffic from one neighborhood to another in order to ensure safer, friendlier, and quieter roads throughout the city.

The Master Plan is being developed based on the comments received during the charrettes, phone calls, and e-mails. Further information about the city's planning process, including the final draft plan, is available at http://www.stamfordtrafficcalming.com.

Wallingford

In 2008, the South Central Regional Council of Governments (SCRCOG) conducted a pilot traffic calming study in Wallingford. The purpose of this pilot was to highlight the traffic calming study process developed as part of SCRCOG's Traffic Calming Tools Resource Guide (described below). Wallingford requested assistance with a traffic calming study on North Elm Street between Curtis Avenue and Christian Street. Adjacent land use in the study area includes housing and Choate Rosemary Hall School. Choate was building a new dorm on North Elm Street across from Curtis Avenue. As a result of this project Choate requested the town to install stop signs on North Elm Street at Curtis Avenue. The town responded that they would like to consider other options to slow down traffic and improve pedestrian crossings in the vicinity. The resulting traffic calming study sought to provide a “complete” street that accommodates traffic flow and provides pedestrian crossings in a safe environment.

The consultant team began the study by meeting with the town to gather input and information. The town supplied accident history and traffic count information. Initial field observations and meetings were conducted with the town Engineering and Police departments as well as Choate. To better understand traffic and pedestrian operations in the study area, information was collected on traffic volumes (daily, peak hour, and intersection turning movement counts), pedestrian volumes (at key cross walks), traffic speeds, and accident data. Existing roadway signing, pavement markings, and pedestrian activity were also observed. Information was also collected on the adjacent land uses.

An initial community meeting was held at Wallingford Town Hall. The consulting team gave a brief presentation that described the study team, study purpose, existing conditions, and traffic calming toolbox. It was also explained that the purpose of this meeting was to solicit input on issues and concerns in the study area and to identify opportunities to address the problems. The attendees were divided into small groups to discuss the issues and ideas for addressing them. After the discussion each group summarized its findings. The project team, including members from the town, met with members of the Choate Student Council. A brief presentation and work group session similar to the first community meeting was conducted as part of one of the regular student council meetings.

Additional meetings were held with the town staff (Engineering, Police, Public Works, Electrical Division and the mayor) and Choate to solicit feedback on preliminary options. A second community meeting was conducted at Town Hall to discuss the progress on the study and to present the study options. The consultant team gave a brief presentation outlining the issues and options. Following the presentation, a discussion was held on the options the community liked and other items to consider.

The consultant team prepared a final report for the town to consider as it moves forward with funding, approvals, and design. The options were presented for short-term and long-term considerations. Options for Choate to consider, such as pedestrian education programs, were also included.

Windsor

Windsor has considered a variety of traffic calming options for Rainbow Road, a collector (medium traffic) street that connects a residential area with a commercial area. Over an 18-month period in 2007 and 2008, the Health and Safety Committee of the Town Council considered such options as installing stop signs, installing medians to discourage truck traffic, and restriping the road. Town staff recommended against installing stop signs or speed humps on the road, arguing that they would be ineffective. In addition, they argued that speed humps would significantly delay emergency vehicles when they respond to calls from the several hundred households and businesses along the road.

The committee's July 27, 2009 meeting included an extensive discussion of its deliberations on traffic calming. The discussion is summarized at http://www.townofwindsorct.com/pages/government/towncouncil/documents/meetings/2009-07-27_1830_HS_agenda.pdf.

The town ultimately installed three small medians and several other traffic calming measures. As a pilot, it installed barriers to make the road one-way for part of its length. The latter measures prompted approximately 400 comments from motorists, overwhelmingly negative. The town took down the barriers to permit snow plows to pass, and town staff have recommended that the barriers not be re-installed in the spring. The council is continuing to address traffic issues in the affected area.

OTHER INITIATIVES

In 2008, SCRCOG developed a regional traffic calming resource guide. The guide (1) develops a systematic approach to traffic calming, (2) identifies key locations throughout the region, (3) describes how to engage the community in designing traffic calming measures, and (4) identifies and develops cost effective solutions and preliminary design concepts which could be permitted and constructed. The guide is available at http://www.scrcog.org/toc_files/TrafficCalming_ResourceGuide_Final.pdf.

In July 2009, the Connecticut chapter of the American Planning Association offered a course to help municipalities establish traffic calming programs for their roads. The course described various traffic calming devices, outlined potential positive and negative impacts on a neighborhood, and reviewed a sample traffic calming program. It also investigated related issues, such as impacts of traffic calming devices on liability, roadway maintenance, and emergency services. Participants performed case studies applying traffic calming measures to address traffic concerns. The course was offered to public works directors, highway superintendents, road foremen, town engineers, and town planners.

Dozens of Injured at Treacherous Rail Crossing: Providence and Worcester Railroad (PWX) Facing Potential Liability and National Media Exposure

Original Post, 7/13/10: The Providence and Worcester Railroad is directly responsible for the treacherous stretch of road (i.e., the tracks themselves) at the Tomlinson Bridge, which we have previously reported on here.

According to ConnDOT, which has been working on the problem for over a year, the Railroad refuses to take or allow the state to take any meaningful action regarding their tracks. This despite the large number of documented crashes and injuries – including several in recent weeks – on Forbes Avenue on the PWRR's unused and unmaintained track. The crossing has caused dozens of serious injuries since opening in 2002.

Local citizens have guaranteed that every minor or major injury caused by the tracks will be communicated to the local, regional and national press as well as to a number of attorneys' offices throughout the Northeast. These include those recently causing New Haven police officers, professors at Yale University, and several citizens to fall, including one very severely breaking his leg on the track two weekends ago.

The location, heavily documented with information about injuries at SeeClickFix, Design New Haven, and Wikipedia, among other online websites, was the focus of a recent citizen protest that brought light to the unacceptable situation. The New Haven Independent covered the protest:

“This is unacceptable,” said Juli Stupakevich. So she and other angry and worried cyclists Monday evening bestrode the dangerous rails curving bumpily crossing Route One at the entrance to the port just west of Waterfront Street. After years of documented accidents at the spot due to protruding and curving tracks that topple riders, the tracks’ owners, Providence & Worcester Railroad, came up with a graphic response. It put up signs urging riders to dismount and walk.

The City of New Haven's economic development administration also weighed in, in an email message to the Independent's reporter:

We agree that the warning signs are not acceptable,” Piscitelli wrote in an email message after the rally. “A constructed physical improvement is necessary. As you know, this is a state road. At our request ConnDOT convened a working group in 2009, but there has been no follow-up to date."

Widely referred to by citizens as a "death trap," the location has also inspired literally dozens of open public letters over the past weeks from local advocates. The bridge is designated as the primary "recommended cross-state" bicycle route by the State of Connecticut, and is also the city's recommended route as a route that "connects New Haven's neighborhoods while enjoying as many calm, wide, and scenic streets as possible."

Excerpts from a few of the more recent letters, responding to the potentially even greater level of danger at the location (caused by the narrowing of the road for a construction project), are posted below:

Alycia Santilli: "I also find Providence and Worcester Railroad's 'solution' and the lack of adequate response to this issue extremely troublesome. Like many others in the surrounding area, my husband and I cross this bridge two times per day during our bicycle commute to downtown New Haven. The signage -- besides being poorly placed -- is an outrageously insufficient and inappropriate solution. As Mr. Kurtz points out, it is impossible to dismount to cross the tracks. Dismounting would be just as hazardous -- if not more so -- as crossing the tracks."

William Kurtz: "I know you have been made aware of the many serious crashes that have taken place at your railroad crossing, and that you have so far failed to take any meaningful action about this treacherous situation, despite more-than-adequate knowledge of the hazard you have created and allowed to exist. Just two weeks ago, there was yet another crash there and yet another experienced cyclist was seriously injured and now we are told that according to Russ St. John, who is P&W's representative on the Connecticut Public Transportation Commission that a "cyclists-dismount-and-walk" sign is the solution that is "acceptable" to Providence and Worcester. Please hear me clearly when I state that your sign is not an acceptable solution to the many residents of greater New Haven who cycle across that bridge regularly. For one thing, there is nowhere to dismount. The west-bound side is currently reduced to one lane because of the Q-Bridge construction. There is neither a sidewalk nor a shoulder and traffic on that stretch regularly reaches and exceeds 50 mph. It should be clear why any so-called "solution" which calls for a streets user with all the rights of any other vehicle operator to stop moving in the middle of 50 mph traffic is unacceptable.... I eagerly await your reply outlining your rationale for this clear disregard for human life and safety."

David Streever: "I have almost crashed there--I met a police officer tonight who crashed there due to the tracks--New Havens CAO crashed there--and dozens upon dozens of cyclists have crashed there. This is quickly turning into a huge liability for you as the crashes mount up and people are talking about civil suits & lawyers. To continue to callously ignore the crashes is your option, but I think you know that you have a responsibility to make this right."

Elaine Lewinnek: "Here is the U.S. Dept of Transportation's Federal Highway Administration plan for bicycles crossing slanted railway tracks: http://www.tfhrc.gov/safety/pedbike/pubs/05085/images/fig1416.gif. It is the best solution I know of to this basic and well-known challenge of traffic engineering. Here is the full website from which I pulled that illustration, figure 14-16: http://www.tfhrc.gov/safety/pedbike/pubs/05085/chapt14.htm. I believe the reconstructed Tomlinson bridge cost $120 million. The percentage of Americans who bike to work is 0.5%. Far more Americans bicycle for exercise and pleasure and occasional commuting, but, even leaving all those other bicyclists out, if you simply spend 0.5% of your budget on bicyclist concerns, that means $60,000 for bicyclists. It is only fair."

Joe Jeffery: "Two weeks ago, I was somewhere around my 96th mile of a 100 mile ride in and around New Haven. To return to my New Haven destination from Connecticut's beautiful shoreline, my only direct route was to cross the Tomlinson Bridge. Among the many hazards on this bridge is a set or railroad tracks that cross at an angle dangerous to cylists and motorcyclists. Angled rail crossings catch thinner tires and throw cyclists. Negotiating that angled rail in summer weekend traffic was one of the most dangerous things I've done on a bike-- and I bike commute daily from New Haven to Bridgeport in all weather."

Commenters on the New Haven Indy story point out the level of danger and the need to do more to make the Tomlinson a "Complete Bridge". Though the Tomlinson, like its neighboring Q-bridge, is part of ConnDOT's billion-dollar New Haven Harbor crossing mega-project, it has very little in the way of usable bicycle or pedestrian infrastructure:

In no way am I absolving the P&W Railroad from their responsibility to implement acceptable safety measure on this crossing, but I want to point out that the miserable design of this roadway is a contributing factor. ConnDOT also has a responsibility to respond with funding to complete this street by designing and rebuilding it to include safe and accessible options for all users: pedestrians, cyclists and motor vehicles.

It is grossly unjust to spend billions of dollars on a bridge expansion project that is legally limited to motor vehicles, while leaving other users to risk their lives for access to downtown New Haven. P&W must come up with a short term solution, but in the end, the buck stops with ConnDOT.

Unfortunately [especially with the narrowing of the road from 4 lanes to 2], this isn’t just a problem for cyclists—if a cyclist flips on the tracks (highly likely, in fact has happened again just in the past week), they are likely to hit an oncoming car. That car may swerve in avoidance or surprise, striking several oncoming cars or trucks. We’re talking about the possibility of a half dozen driver deaths here, to happen in the very near future, not just the death of one or two cyclists.

Update 7/14/10: The issue of the bridge is covered in the New Haven Register. Excerpt:

Cyclists are “gravely concerned” about the area where the Providence and Worcester rail line crosses the road just before the bridge, going west toward downtown, Connecticut Bicycle-Pedestrian Advisory Board member Jason Stockman said. Bike tires are routinely stuck in the angled rail grooves and riders are injured; Stockman, who lives in New Haven, said he saw a cyclist break his thigh bone there two weeks ago. "The conventional wisdom is, there are two types of (riders): The ones who have fallen (there), and the ones who are going to,” said William Kurtz of West Haven.

Update 07/15/10: Channel 3 TV news covers the large number of protestors out today, some holding large placards reading "ConnDOT Cares Not." Despite the ongoing number of injuries, no actions have yet been taken.

Update 7/21/10: The New Haven Register continues to cover the story, highlighting yet more recent injuries at the tracks, including a report of a woman breaking her pelvis. A reply on Elm City Cycling focuses on the comments made by ConnDOT's spokesperson in the article, and the lack of progress on the issue:

The latest critics to weigh in on a strip of Route 1 where cyclists have been tripped up by an angled rail line are a surgeon who has treated more than one person hurt there and a Yale professor. Dr. Connor Telles, the orthopaedic surgery chief resident at Yale-New Haven Hospital, warned: “This is a lawsuit waiting to happen,” in a letter to state and rail line officials.

Update 10/27/10: Despite a number of meetings involving literally hundreds of hours of volunteer citizen time and the time of city and state officials, no real progress has been made on improving safety in the area.