It really should be standard procedure to present the maximum safety alternative for all of Newton’s roadway projects, to illustrate the extent to which any other proposed design compromises safety. While absolutely everyone involved — directly or otherwise — claims that safety is the highest priority of the West Newton Square project, it is demonstrably not the case, as the design shows.
If West Newton Square were being designed for maximum safety, there would not be two left-turn lanes for southbound traffic turning left from Cherry St. onto Washington St. The decision to enable left turns from both lanes (or even to have two southbound lanes at all!) leads to other design decisions that measurably reduce safety in the square.
Having two left turn lanes onto the main corridor — Washington St. — is not reflective of a human-scaled village center, intended as a destination. Having two left turn lanes is highway-like stuff, designed solely to promote through traffic, at the expense of the square as a destination.
Backing up, there are three basic intended movements supported by the two-left turn lanes:
- Right lane on Cherry St., left onto Washington St., right onto Highland St. (shown in red)
- Right lane on Cherry St., left onto Washington St., through past Highland St. (shown in blue)
- Left lane on Cherry St., left onto Washington St., through past Highland St. (shown in green)
To support the three movements, there are three eastbound lanes on Washington St. between Cherry St. and Highland St.: two through lanes and a right-turn lane (to Highland St.). The two through lanes continue to Waltham St. and Watertown St., where the left-hand lane becomes a left-turn lane and the right-hand lane continues east out of the square.
This makes some sense, if your main priority is creating capacity to move volumes of cars through the square and you assume that all drivers follow the intended movements. But, it doesn’t make any sense if safety is your goal. Or, a sense of place is your goal.
The most obvious issue is simply space. There are five lanes of traffic between Cherry St. and Highland St. Five lanes. In a village center. You can move traffic or have a nice destination. You cannot do both. Among other things, crossing five lanes of traffic does not encourage pedestrian circulation. Walking next to five lanes of traffic is unpleasant.
The slightly less obvious issue is that drivers don’t always behave the way they are intended to. At last week’s Public Facilities meeting on West Newton Square, one of the councilors (IIRC, Lenny Gentile) stood up at the projected design and described with great concern all the different movements that drivers might take from Cherry St. through the square and how those movements create conflict.
Most notably, a driver (represented in blue) might start in the right lane on Cherry St., go into the right-turn lane on Washington St. at Highland St., move left back into a through lane, and move left again to ultimately turn left at Watertown St. or Waltham St. Another driver (represented in green) might start in the left lane on Cherry St., go into the left through lane on Washington St., and then move right to continue through past Watertown St./Waltham St. to continue on Washington St. east of West Newton Square. And, these are just two of the possible conflicting movements.
These inevitable off-label movements create conflict that has to be negotiated in the area between Cherry St. and Watertown St./Waltham St. — the heart of West Newton Square! The availability of these off-label movements turn that section of eastbound travel into a blending zone. (I discussed blending here.) Those two left-turn lanes on Cherry St. are the direct cause of an unsafe, unfriendly stretch of village center roadway.
And, why? To move more cars.
If the city abandoned the two left-turn lanes on Cherry St., it would not need three lanes just east. The city could eliminate or shorten the right turn lane onto Highland St. The city could have just one through lane between Cherry St. and Highland St. and a short right-turn only slip lane.
The intersections could get narrower. There would be more space for buffer zones, which could be used for pulling over when emergency vehicles need to get through. There would be fewer cars that need to pull over. And, the amount of blending would be dramatically reduced. It would be a much more village center-like design.
There are two left-turn lanes on Cherry St. because a goal of the project is to maintain or increase through-traffic capacity. Folks don’t want traffic backed up to Newton-Wellesley Hospital. Folks don’t want traffic avoiding West Newton Square and cutting through residential neighborhoods.
Concern about congestion kills any hope of a plan that will actually revitalize West Newton Square. Who cares about congestion? People in cars care about congestion. But, we want fewer people in cars. So, why make it easier to drive? Let the cars back up to Wellesley Center! Then, people will start to confront the need to shift travel modes.
And, avoiding cut-through traffic around the square is a bad design tradeoff. Some of my favorite Newtonians live on Webster St., parallel to Washington St. Sorry to them. If, by good design, traffic capacity through the square is reduced, volume will increase on Webster St. Inevitable. The city should do everything it can to make sure that increased volume proceeds at a safe (20 MPH) pace. Traffic calming. Speed humps. Chicanes. Speed cameras (not yet legal, but before the state legislature). But, the city shouldn’t try to prevent increased volume.
If the city continues down this path of maintaining throughput at the expense of safety, at the very least it should restore the protected bike lane from a previous version of the design. If West Newton Square has to be a thruway, don’t put cyclists right next to the vehicular craziness.
Sean, you clearly illustrate the dilemma of increased traffic vs. pedestrian and bike flow. Now that West Newton is a target for future dense housing growth the problem will only intensify. People need to drive their vehicles somewhere. However, your problem solving design simply does not solve the increased population problem. West Newton is a tiny village center, let’s try to keep it that way.
I will disagree with my friend Sean on both specifics and on a broad view of the plan itself. I live in West Newton, I walk and bike and drive through West Newton Square, and I’ve been to every public meeting about the redesign. I understand the plan and I see how traffic moves through the square now. I thank the many people who have doggedly fought to make the square better over thirty years, those who comment on the plan today, and those who will make West Newton a great place to live tomorrow.
This plan is the most progressive traffic plan Newton has ever designed, even under the constraints of moving state route traffic and knitting West Newton (and Newton itself) together over the scar of the Pike. It has received a broadly positive reaction in every public meeting. Following national standards and best practices for roadway and streetscape design, it will move West Newton from the bottom of the pile to the top.
And it will do it by making traffic flow more efficient, but not with the goal of increasing capacity. The efficiency gives us cycle time for the other things we want, such as less wait and more time for people to walk cross the street.
Specifically, the two lane turn on Cherry St to Washington were not added to “move more cars” in total. It was added to increasing queuing capacity on Cherry (translation: more cars can wait at the light). WNSq is very difficult to design because there are so many intersections and public uses very close together. On the first short block of Cherry, there’s a driveway, the Chinese Cultural Association, a public parking lot and the police driveway. The next street back, Webster, is residential with sharrows and often gets gridlocked because of the Cherry St. light.
With two turn lanes, a few more cars wait to turn left onto Washington, we can choose to “unblock the boxes” for Cherry St public uses, we move those waiting cars in less time, and we can use that time to the main pedestrian crossing better.
Yes, there will be lane switching coming out of Cherry. Signs will help (Cherry to Highland should be right lane). Regulars will quickly learn this move. There will be mixing, but there’s a lot of mixing right now. Most of it is inherent in the street layout and how close the intersections are. There is no straight-across-the-pike road that would make this easier.
I agree with Sean that we should tune the details and light timings to make the square and surrounding streets (Webster, Davis, Eden) safer and friendlier: that will need an ongoing a city commitment. We shouldn’t claim that this plan is the safest we can make it. And we should beware of unintended traffic and safety consequences of moving bike lanes next to traffic (double parking, illegal travel in bike lanes, etc).
But there is not anything close to a perfect plan possible here, now, and this is a good one. West Newton needs this. Newton needs this.
Mike is right. If you want to travel east on Washington St, Cherry St is your only option because Waltham and Elm are right turn only. Southbound traffic on Cherry St can back up almost to River St, and almost all the cars are waiting to turn left (because if you wanted to turn right, you’d use Waltham or Elm.) Right now, that right hand lane is usually empty; allowing it to be used for left turns will help to lessen the gridlock on Cherry, which also increases safety.
My friend Mike raises some legitimate issues with my argument. I yield to Mike in his general technical knowledge and and his specific knowledge of the West Newton Square project. And, I acknowledge his process argument that this design has been sweat over, presented, discussed, and tweaked. It might be too late to realistically suggest as substantive change as reconsidering the two right-turn lanes (though I suspect not).
I’m going to stick to my guns, at least a little bit, on the two left-turn lanes. Adding a second left-turn lane increases capacity over a single left-turn lane. The question is whether it makes sense. Undoubtedly the second left-turn lane adds movements and conflicts in the blending area compared to a single left-turn lane. And, while the issue of access to the public parking lot, NPD, and other driveways along Cherry St. makes Cherry St. a less than ideal feeder into Washington St., you don’t need to add a turning lane to solve that problem. You just can’t solve the problem without backing traffic up.
That’s where, ultimately, we part company (on this relatively narrow issue). I don’t think long back ups are something we should be trying to solve. Certainly not at the expense of other objectives, like safety, place-making, and mode shift.
One solution that it is definitely too late to consider, but illustrates what could be done to address that Cherry St. carries too much of the burden in the square: make it possible to turn left from Elm St. onto Washington.
Also worth noting that Mike implies that I’m an idiot without actually calling me an idiot. It’s that kind of civility that’s in short supply here on V14! 😉
I find Mike’s explanation convincing.
Terrific summary Mike, I agree with many of your points. My main thought is that after spending millions to modify the traffic flow patterns and provide dedicated bike lanes will anything really change? Or will there be a new series of unintended consequences develop ones that are not easy to detect now? Will safety for all forms of movement actually take place?
@Mike. Thank you for the great response to what has been a long methodical public process run by the Planning Department. The complexities of the square made this entire project a give/take proposition to come to the final stages.
@Sean gets credit for highlighting all of the dynamics in play here, and then @Mike has clarified the logic behind the planning.
Now we all must work to ensure that our West Newton businesses continue to thrive during construction.
@Greg’s Chamber can play a big role in business continuation.
Sean, yes Cherry is an imperfect feeder. And looking at the plans from the last public meeting, I believe Elm St will allow left turns. It can’t replace Cherry completely because Cherry goes through to the Waltham line, but it might help take some cars (and bikes) coming from Auburndale.
When MassDOT has to reconstruct the most western Washington St. bridge in a few years, that would be the time to revisit the Elm St area further.
Colleen, honestly, the traffic patterns isn’t radically changing (two turns from Cherry, lefts from Elm, no right hand turn from Washington westbound to Watertown).
But forget the traffic for a second and talk about broader worth.
How much is it worth to you to have a replanted village center designed for healthy, long-lived trees chosen specifically for the space? One where you can cross the street easily and safely to get from CVS to the movie theater to Paper Mouse to the post office? With pleasant sidewalks accessible to all regardless of their physical abilities? Where families can ride there bikes, get some ice cream, and eat it at a table on the sidewalk? With a new outdoor community space next to Sweet Tomatoes? With good pedestrian lighting for safe walking and evening enjoyment? Where small businesses have a better chance to thrive?
Those things will happen if the plan is built — there’s very little uncertainty. I think many people would agree that those kinds of improvements throughout the square are worth some millions of dollars every couple decades (thirty+ years for West Newton).
The roadway changes either make those change possible (greater efficiency to give more time for pedestrian crossings, more parking down by the restaurants to the west), fix longstanding problems (e.g., the mess at Chestnut/Washington/Watertown/Waltham), or implement best practices (reduce excessive lane width, match lanes to traffic demand).
Those roadways will be controlled by traffic signals all connected together that can be adjusted and synchronized as a group if things don’t work right (no extra costs). Everything else is paint and signs, which can be changed.
Change scares people. But that fear shouldn’t keep us from doing great things, things that help build the community of Newton and its individual villages. This is a sound plan.
I’m with Mike on this. He and I have been to every public meeting concerning the planning for this project, and he has offered valuable insights and advice, along with many others, that have led to improvements in the overall design. The two left turns on Cherry Street do not “kill” the project, and if adequate wayfinding signage, could vastly improve the congestion and backups associated with “blocking the box” that currently occur between Cherry and Highland Streets.
Is the plan perfect? No, particularly not the unprotected bike lanes on Washington Street. But is it a vast improvement for all three modes of transportation, in terms of safety, and making the square more inviting to pedestrians and patrons of our many and various local businesses? You betcha.
You nailed it, Mike.
I believe there will still be no left out of Elm. It was determined that the left wasn’t possible given the pedestrian crossing. Maybe this is something that can be revisited when the city looks to redesign the area west of Elm.
The two lefts from Cherry I assume are there to compensate for the no left out of Elm. As someone who drove sometimes as many as 4 times a week to West Newton for various children’s dance for 14 years and needed to come back to Newton Centre, Cherry to Highland was the best choice. I never had to wait more than one light cycle, even at the height of rush hour. So I agree with Sean this is likely to increase capacity.
We will see if there are crashes here given the short blending area. If it is a problem, it could always be removed.
@mike love your comments (as always) but families riding their bikes is less likely to happen if the protected bike lanes on the theatre side are not maintained. I hope the residents of WN and others continue to advocate for designing the safest roads for all users.
Ted,
What really struck me at the meeting the other night, besides that other thing and Lenny’s description of the blending issues, was your proposed sign language: “Hey, dummy …”
With road design, if your explaining or proscribing, you’re not winning. The very need for a sign indicates a design flaw.
Sean, for a counterpoint to your blanket statement, at many intersections there is no way to know if a lane has turn prohibitions without signs or road symbols. And how many one-way streets and “do not enter” streets wouldn’t work without signs?
We aren’t starting from a blank slate here. We have a suboptimal roadway layout gifted to us by history. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with a hinting sign routing the right side Cherry lane towards Highland. Google maps will do it automatically after a while. None of these moves are going to be high speed. The worst that will happen is a late lane change or a driver goes through the square and turns on Chestnut. Maybe stops for pizza. World doesn’t end, and there is no increased bike/ped risk that I can see.
@Sean, I sometimes forget that I have a colorful way of explaining things.
I don’t think having good signage means poor design. It is just common sense, particularly when the longstanding configuration of lanes has been changed. I think that a sign on Cherry Street which tells people to get in the right hand left turn lane to go to Highland Street and to get in the left hand left turn to go to Washington Street would eliminate a lot of the weaving. Now, I am the first to admit that you can’t fix stupid. But anything that tells people which lane to get in seems like a good idea. But what do I know? I am just a city councilor, not a traffic engineer.
@Alicia and Mike, there is no left turn out of Elm, because of the topography there. If you are familiar with the area, you can see that the eastbound lane is higher than the westbound lane of Washington Street, which was also why we could not eliminate that island entirely and square up the intersection of Elm and Washington Street and the overpass. That is too bad, because a lot of people who participated in the planning meeting wanted to see that happen.
Ted, yes, I see that was a change to remove the Elm St. left between the June public meeting and the City Council presentation in November.
When MassDOT rebuilds the westernly Washington Street overpass, perhaps we can revisit this issue.
Cherry St is (and it looks like it will continue to be) the only left turn onto Washington. While it does back up at various times of day, the truly horrific backups occur during the morning commute – I could not even guess the number of light cycles from River to Washington, but it would definitely be a crooked number.
Maybe this has to do with where I start my trip, but if I’m cutting through W. Newton to Highland by car (which I do on some mornings) I’m more likely to take the right from Waltham to Washington and then the left on Highland. The only time I find myself taking a left from Cherry to Washington is if I’m coming from public parking.
Ted, you make it sound like the door zone bike lanes are a done deal but I’m with Alicia. Parking protected bike lanes are much safer and should be retained.