The Traffic Council has scheduled a discussion tonight at City Hall about putting a traffic light at the corner Centre Street and Allerton Road on the agenda:
ALD. DANBERG, BLAZAR & SHAPIRO, requesting 1) Installation of a pedestrian activated crossing signal on Centre Street in the vicinity of Allerton Road to make crossing Centre Street safer for pedestrians, including the many who cross to and from Crystal Lake and the elementary school bus stops on Centre Street. 2) A discussion of speeding and possible traffic calming in this area of Centre Street. (Ward 6)
Given how much discussion we’ve had here about parking on Walnut Street, I thought I’d open discussion on this as well.
UPDATE: Letter from neighbors.
Here’s a letter sent to sent to the Traffic Council from neighbors who are opposed to the light.
In the letter, some of the reasons given against installing a pedestrian traffic light seem a bit odd:
” A light is likely to attract larger numbers of commuters who park on
the streets for hours or even days where permitted.” – ?????
” pedestrian-activated crossing signals are not designed for use at or near intersections”
“a signal will merely encourage a false sense of security for pedestrians, particularly children.”
I’m guessing that the issue is not so much that the neighbors would rather have the status quo rather than a pedestrian light. I’m guessing that they’re against the traffic light vs their preferred solution – (1) lower speed limits; (2) curb bump-outs; (3) lane striping; (4) better signage and (5) truck restrictions.
It’s not even clear that there is funding for a pedestrian signal or that this intersection meets the warrants, but the residents’ letter does not seem to examine the different types of signals that might be available, including some recently approved devices which are far more effective than those deployed in the past. (light and noise issues can also be addressed) Just the same, a pedestrian signal isn’t traffic calming, and it’s not a comprehensive approach to setting conditions on their street to bring the kind of change they seek. A pedestrian signal would be good for serving… pedestrians, should there be sufficient demand.
Unfortunately, most of the remedies sought are not indicated for Centre Street. Speed limits are not arbitrarily set, but are established based on 85th percentile speeds with rare exception Similarly, there are requirements for truck restrictions which are likely not met. Information on state and federal requirements should be made more readily available to residents so that they can make informed decisions. Hopefully pedestrian improvements being made elsewhere in the city will help promote more tolerance and acceptance of these measures.
In a recent conversation with Jim Danila (Asst. Traffic Engineer), I learned that according to their study there were not enough people crossing the street at that location to meet the warrants for a light. He agreed with the suggestions of DPW Commissioner Turocy in a recent conversation I had with him on this issue that we need to look at the entire Centre St. corridor for safety and that when the Needham St. portion of Centre St. is re-done, we can look at adding several bump-outs along the Walnut to Beacon St. stretch which would serve to slow traffic and make for safer pedestrian crossing of Centre St.
This letter to the TAB, written about an incident that just happened three blocks down from Allerton on Centre, helps make Vicky’s point about the entire Centre Street corridor needing to be reassessed for safety.
This is the exact intersection I commented on several months ago in a thread [on The Tab blog] about pedestrian safety. It does not require a traffic light to make it safer. Better street lighting and a larger [barrel type] crossing sign placed directly in the road would significantly enhance pedestrian safety at this crosswalk.
Conditions are horrible for pedestrians in the daytime (concerns included lake and school foot traffic); street lighting is clearly going to help only at night. Barrels and signage won’t change behavior. Drivers will do what’s best for them based on roadway conditions, and that’s a wide stretch of road. Striping, curb geometry changes, or even a median pedestrian refuge could offer some real help here, as part of a comprehensive engineering effort, as Vicki suggests.
Adam– I don’t disagree with any of the things you said. So if you want to wait a decade or so for those other solutions, that’s up to you. Think about how long these elected officials have been talking about “fixing” Needham Street.
Meanwhile, the quickest fix is better lighting and signage. The sign specifically could be put in place tomorrow. In the past there has been a flimsy crosswalk sign there. I would suggest making that more visible with a barrel type sign.
Can someone tell us what happened at the meeting Thursday?
The Traffic Council voted NAN (No Action Needed). The people in attendance to speak on the issue were not in favor of having a light. It was explained by Vicky Danberg, that NAN removes the item from further consideration but does allow for a similar item to be reintroduced. Had the Traffic Council voted against the light, it would be two years before a similar item could be added to the agenda.
The letter reflects the sentiments of the attendees who spoke during the public hearing.
DPW will be adding better signage at the various crosswalks along this section of Centre street.This was not believed to solve the problems of pedestrian safety but could offer some help.
Groot, I spoke, and I found several elements of the letter troubling. I agreed that a pedestrian signal was not warranted and alone would not make the crossing safer, but I thought that excuses given in the letter such as light and noise pollution from a signal were unjustified, and that speed limit and truck exclusion suggestions would not meet state requirements. I agreed with suggestions for curb realignment and narrowing of the road, as did the entire traffic council, but some in attendance did not.
Also, several members of the traffic council said they were shocked that the neighborhood generally seemed to be so strongly against pedestrian accommodations. The fact that the warrants were not met may have never come up. Perhaps there is greater need at Centre & Hyde?
The most important aspect for pedestrian safety is visibility. Many “crosswalks” are poorly lit and many have severely worn pavement markings. Signage helps, including the mid-street pylon-type signs, but I think that the blinking light are ineffective. There is one at the Vernon/Waverley intersection near Bigelow M.S. Maybe the timing is off, but I frequently experience the blinking light and can see that pedestrians have already crossed the intersection. It is also important that pedestrians as well as motorists honor crosswalks. This is most egregious in Village centers, most notably Beacon Street in Newton Centre where pedestrians leaving the municipal lot just cross wherever it’s closest to/from where they have parked their cars. There are marked crosswalks at the Herrick St. and at the Langley Rd. intersections. Maybe signs in the lot urging use of crosswalks? Maybe jaywalking stings in addition to crosswalk stings? I’ll never forget my jaywalking ticket in Los Angeles for merely stepping off the curb before the light had changed.
Max cited worn pavement markings, and that is an important issue. As they fade, it’s easy enough fro drivers to not notice it’s a crosswalk until almost too late. I’d be in favor of a program of scheduled repaintings of crosswalks so they don’t get worn down.
I second Dan’s idea. Pedestrians can use all the help they can get and there are a lot of faded crosswalk markings around the city.
If only they could spread some of that magic paint on the people, too, so drivers notice them!
It would help if at night, people wouldn’t wear dark clothes and walk into the street without looking for traffic.
Crosswalk technology aint rocket science. And it’s clear from the comments on this thread alone, that the city is not doing all it can. So it’s while the Traffic Commission’s bigger vision is laudable, it’s better visibility that we need right now. We don’t have to tear up the roadway and install new traffic signals to start making things safer. We need to improve the basic things that enhance visibility. Painted crosswalks with good signage and lighting.
I agree with Mike and Max. I also think folks should spend more time talking to the people who live in the area. They understand why they put together the petition and what might work and won’t work. From my point of view, the pedestrians have some responsibility for their own safety and they have to make it look like they want to cross. Not just milling about the sidewalk and not just stepping out wherever they’d like. When I’ve crossed Center St., it’s not simple, but only about 2 or 3 cars go by, then one driver will stop on one side, and the drivers on the other side will see the other car stop and stop as well. It’s not all that difficult. Same thing seems to happen along Beacon St. by B.C. It would certainly help if drivers could see the crosswalk better. I wouldn’t necessarily want younger kids to be aggressively entering the street, but even with a light, they’d have to wait for the cars to see them and stop. And the main problem is that the kids don’t look, and don’t use the light. The lights sound like a good idea, but I drive along Langley by the light at Langley Path twice each morning around when the middle or high schoolers are headed for the school bus stop. I’ve NEVER seen the pedestrian signal activated. I’m starting to wonder if it even works. The kids going for the school bus cross wherever they are, sometimes only about 20 feet away from the light. I know where they are going, so I watch out for them, and I’ve even seen 3 of them walking together step into the street and walk diagonally across (meaning they’re in the street even longer) without even a glance for traffic. And this is around dawn for some times during the year. The crossing guard (for Bowen) doesn’t need and doesn’t use the light either. Better lighting and some parental instruction on crossing at the crosswalk would help all concerned. Even if the paint won’t last as long, it seems like an inexpensive and immediate first step towards safety if they were repainted when needed rather than just in “painting season”.