That quote in the headline comes from this comment on a prior thread. But the “notion” that narrowing a street can improve traffic flow was also a hot topic last night at the very well-attended opening Washington Street Corridor vision event at the Second Church.
This “notion” comes from the video (below) made by by Jeff Speck, a renowned expert on this topic (with transit experts Nelson/Nygaard) who has documented where similar techniques have been successfully employed to improve traffic elsewhere.
I understand why this idea of putting a road on “a diet” sounds “ludicrous.” But before you rush to dismiss it, please take the time to watch this video. And then share your thoughts.
The Washington Street Corridor Proposal from Elkus Manfredi on Vimeo.
Sorry to say, Greg, that I watched the video, tried hard — really hard! — to be open-minded, but when I watched the animation of how the 3-lane system would work, to me it looked like another Needham Street disaster in the offing, with one lane going in each direction and that horrible turning lane in between. Why we would want to transform Washington Street into the second coming of Needham Street is beyond me. I’m all for development. I’m all for walkability and bike lanes. Given that this video emphasizes how much wider each of the current 4 lanes are than is currently standard, it seems to me that the lanes could be narrowed somewhat to allow for bike lanes — there are already sidewalks in place — so that we can have walking and biking and still maintain 4 lanes. Perhaps this is an appropriate concept that works elsewhere, but it’s certainly not appropriate for Washington Street as far as I’m concerned. Keep 4 lanes!!
Look again. It’s not Needham Street. For starters, the main stretch where most of the road diet would take place is along the pike. That means zero demand for left turns westbound between bridges and no two-way left turn madness like on Needham Street. A turn lane would appear where it’s needed and be much more focused, such as major intersections, like Walnut or Lowell, where you’re used to seeing congestion. Part of that backup is because cars are in the wrong lane. The rest of the road is empty by comparison, far under capacity. Do you ever see congestion between Chestnut and Lowell? Four lanes aren’t needed there. The extra lanes only add conflict points and contribute to speeding.
The road diet needs to be implemented yesterday. It’s a complete no-brainer. I’ve lived it, too, when I was out in San Diego. Our neighborhood – Bird Rock – had a 4 lane thoroughfare connecting running through it. After installing medians, rotaries and bump-outs, street, it’s an incredible success. Here’s a link to a recent study about it:
https://www.cnu.org/publicsquare/2018/01/10/road-diet-bridges-barrier-boosts-safety
Here’s the TL;DR summary: “The traffic count remained approximately the same (23,000 vehicles per day before, 22,000 after), but walking, bicycling, transit use, on-street parking and retail sales all climbed to much higher levels, the city reports. Retail sales rose 30 percent and noise levels dropped 77 percent. Because traffic moves slower, businesses report higher visibility.
As a result of the roundabouts and traffic calming, speeds were reduced from 40–45 mph to 19 mph, according to city transportation engineers. “The once busy boulevard has been transformed into a slow-paced street with roundabouts, landscaped street dividers and diagonal parking,” notes the LaJolla Light.
Traffic crashes fell by 90 pecent. The project has helped revitalize La Jolla Boulevard, acting as a catalyst to several new mixed-use developments, a 139-unit condominium development, and a major drugstore.”
Let’s get this done.
Adam, I understand your point about the stretch along the Pike, but don’t forget that this is the area where Kempton Place, site of a proposed development on the current Barn property that would bring in lots more cars, is located. And yes, between Chestnut and Lowell there is often backup through the Harvard St & Crafts St intersections where Cabot’s, Village Cafe, Garden Remedies, Marty’s, and Whole Foods can all be destination locations. What are you saying, that heading eastbound through the Harvard St intersection that I would get into a left turn lane to go to Marty’s and/or Whole Foods and/or take a left on Crafts? And drivers heading westbound would get into their own left turn lane somewhere along that same stretch to enter the gas station across the street from Whole Foods? Sorry but that turning lane in the middle seems a lot like Needham St to me, just prettier, with plantings designating areas between turns rather than striped yellow lines. It’s going to be confusing, and make traffic worse. Keep 4 lanes.
Gerry., except for that gas station, the bank, and the convenience store (and that small vet/office building), there is not much else bordering the Pike from Sullivan Tire all the way to Newton Corner. Adam’s point in my view is correct for 90% of the area.
Also, I think we might have different ideas of back-ups. I’m on the road a lot, and I’m on this road a lot. At least 4 times most days. I rarely see a back-up of more than a few cars, even at rush hour, until very close to West Newton and until the YMCA turnoff in Newton Corner. I might need to wait one turn at the light, mostly because I’m in the wrong lane when someone is making a left turn.
I think this could really work. Maybe not for the whole road, but certain from Sullivan Tire until the YMCA. And that La Jolla example looks amazing.
Btw, this also solves one of the biggest problems for me along this stretch. It is super dangerous for pedestrians. Especially near Cabot’s ice cream and the Village Cafe. I’ve seen many near accidents as kids and parents cross over from the parking near the pike. That’s a long way to cross.
And for the record, I’d be fine with folks driving the speed limit on this stretch. Traffic calming and slower roads would also convince fewer folks to take a cut through off the Pike. I’m willing to sacrifice a minute or two for increased livability.
Look, if we are going to build density of any sort here, we also need to improve the livability and the walkability. I don’t want this to become Needham street, but the Pike is actually an advantage in some ways, since it is a pretty blank slate on one side.
The video is educational. I watched through snippets rather than the whole thing end-to-end. There’s a “Veterans Memorial Park” issue here. As in, to turn this area into an attractive cycling and pedestrian avenue where people want to go, something must be done about the noise and view of the commuter rail and Mass. Pike canyon. If we can think of solutions that would make Veterans Memorial Park a place that people would actually visit and be in, then we’re on the right track to solving this issue. A big concrete wall might help block some noise, but it doesn’t make the park (or Washington Street) a more attractive place that I’d want to spend my leisure time walking or cycling…
The “road diet” approach was recently applied to Trapelo Rd. in Belmont and to Greenough Blvd in Cambridge. Take a drive down both – they work well with a much improved flow over their earlier multi lane versions. It seemed counterintuitive to me at first, but as a commuter I saw first hand the benefits of controlled traffic flow. This would be great for Washington St.
Over the past 5 to 10 years millions of dollars have been spent
to control the traffic flow along Washington St. between
Newton Corner and Lowell Ave. The Harvard intersection
has a new system so that people can cross safely. The Pike
is not an attractive area to draw walkers. People more easily
seek out the Charles River walkway nearby.
There is little to gain from narrowing the corridor. Perhaps a better solution is to add less costly and more efficient methods
to slow traffic. However, this could divert traffic to Watertown St.
“…but it doesn’t make the park (or Washington Street) a more attractive place that I’d want to spend my leisure time walking or cycling”
There’s a thought in that sentence that may be worth teasing out. There is a difference between cycling to get somewhere and leisure cycling. For example, when I’m cycling with my wife or children for fun, I’ll often take the river path between the Blue Heron Bridge and Watertown Square. It’s pretty, the path meanders and it’s a pleasant ride. But if I’m commuting, I stay on California Street right to Watertown Square. It’s fast and efficient.
This idea is in car commuting as well. When I still had a kid who napped, I remember riding along the Emerald Necklace while he slept in the car and realizing why these parkways existed. These were pleasure rides created for a time when the journey was the purpose. But when the destination is the purpose, these meandering parkways just became annoying and inefficient. Still a nice ride, but the Pike and Expressway are faster.
We’re really dealing with the same thing here. Yes, the ride should be nice, but this isn’t about a leisure ride on the weekend, it’s cycling transportation.
Most of the thought about the traffic seems to be about the now. But what about after all the new increased density? Will it still be effective? Also, the video is sponsored by the developer.
I’m not saying there will or won’t be improvement. But you can’t look at current traffic as if will be the same as post development traffic.
Let’s all note that these traffic calming techniques have been proven to not limit the # of cars/hour that can pass through. In my La Jolla example, the # of cars increased and speed decreased from an average of 45 MPH to 19 MPH! That area is an already dense residential area and the road is the only thoroughfare between two busy San Diego neighborhoods (Pacific Beach and downtown La Jolla). In other words, it’s VERY similar to Newton.
The speed decrease sounds like a good thing. 80% of pedestrians hit by a car going 40 mph are killed versus 5% of pedestrians hit by a car going 20 mph.
I spit out my metaphorical beer when I saw the stop sign at 6:36 in the video. Come on guys, I’m all for road diet and traffic calming, but stop signs are the ultimate obliterators of throughput.
Okay. I’ve been holding off with a positive comment because I cringe when the term “road diet” is employed. But I looked at the video, read all the comments and I have to conclude that it just may work as presented. And I’m all for any measure that will reduce speeding on some of our major thoroughfares that motorists treat like a super highway. We’ve been dealing with a terrible speeding problem in the Highlands on Center Street between Walnut and Beacon Streets, and there are many other examples I could point to. I may have other problems with the Washington Street design, but I don’t think this is one of them.
@Chuck Tanowitz — thank you and right on target! Yes I see solid benefit for a straight shot cycle commute corridor down Washington Street. Especially because there are few intersections on the commuter rail/Mass Pike side. I’m strongly in favor. But that idea doesn’t mesh with the promenade vision of the video.
If we bike-enable Washington Street, what’s desperately needed is a connector to get bikes safely across to the Charles River bike paths. The Circle of Death, Galen Street and Charlesbank Road are not viable options for cyclists today.
Colleen,
The Harvard/Washington intersection was designed with anticipation of improvements to Washington St. It won’t need to be fully redone. Not that it’s perfect, but I consider it one of Newton’s best designed major intersections, and example of what every crossing should look and feel like on Washington St.
I’m surprised by your comments about walking on Washington St vs the river. We wouldn’t say, “Washington St is for buildings, we don’t need trees because we have them by the river”. Every street should have trees, and every street should be walkable. Why they should be walkable might be different from street to street. On a future Washington St, markets and convenience stores and bakeries and restaurants and doctor’s offices are destinations that, if you live a couple blocks away, are easiest to get to by walking.
And people won’t be walking just along Washington St. They’ll be walking to it from the neighborhoods just behind (and people who live there will be in easy walk of Albermarle Field. We’ll need to make sure there are good neighborhood connections.
Which brings us to Dulles’ point about connecting to the river. Such a connection would be possible on Albermarle, possibly from some of the connecting side streets to Washington. These streets will need to be looked at anyway to avoid undue traffic impacts from individual development. Traffic calming them to make them suitable for biking and walking might have benefits for everyone.
I have long felt that Albermarle Rd. and the Cheesecake Brook corridor are a huge missed opportunity for recreation, conservation, and low impact transportation.
And Jeremy, I agree, that stop sign is not what I would expect at that location. I suspect it’s meant to be a placeholder for some type of “yield to pedestrians” at an unsignalized crossing. Main St at Kendall Square is an example.
Mike Halle
Albemarle/Cheesecake corridor is definitely a missed opportunity, it could be a really beautiful path but has issues
– intersected by really busy roads, watertown, crafts and North
– cars really drive quite fast along it up until it reaches Charles river
– There was a project to enhance/beautify it but lack of funds?
If they could somehow make it continuous path all to way to Charles river by:
– bridges over the busy roads. not sure if this is even possible
– alter traffic patterns so crossing along the brook is not a hazard
– speed bumps to stop cars speeding
– dedicated bike lane all the way to Charles river… really beautiful if possible
– surprised its not already considered as so many children walk that area for elementary/middle schools
Would be a great nature destination for folks visiting the new Washington corridor.
No offense to Will Havemeyer, but come on, LaJolla is in CA where the weather is always good. No snow. No potholes. A population just over half the size of Newton. Sorry, but LaJolla is not very similar to Newton at all!
Since when was this road diet supposed to be a traffic calming measure? There’s very little speeding along the Washington Street corridor because there’s too much traffic to get up to anywhere near 45 MPH, at least while it’s still light out. Traffic calming isn’t needed. What’s needed is the recognition that we’re a community that already has traffic congestion problems that we don’t need to make any worse. This video was made by an architect/developer promoting his/her own interests. It has very little if anything to do with traffic calming or reducing traffic backups.
I haven’t been down Trapelo Road to see what’s been done there but I’ve certainly been on Greenough Boulevard, an underutilized road running between the Charles and Mt. Auburn Cemetery with very little development where a terrific project cut it to one lane in each direction to promote biking and access to the river. Sorry but I know Greenough Boulevard and Greenough Boulevard is no Washington Street. Check out the link below, or better yet, check out the road itself.
https://sustainableinfrastructure.org/envision/project-awards/greenough-greenway/
@Gerry Chervinsky – How about Nonantum Rd? I was very dubious when I heard about the “road diet” plans down there. It carries a lot of traffic and I was nearly certain it was going to make traffic a lot worse. From what I see, it seems to have been a big success – traffic flows very smoothly and it’s quite a bit safer.
Can you support this statement re: Washington St. “Traffic calming isn’t needed.”
Between October 2017 and February 2018 there were 2 pedestrians and 1 bicyclist hit by cars on Washington St. 3 out of the 22 ped/bike and car crashes citywide during that time period.
Bob Burke writes:
If ever there was a road diet opportunity in Newton, it’s the part of Centre between Clark and Paul Streets. It’s only one lane of traffic in each direction, but each lane is wide enough for at least two cars. Instead of a landscaped median to cut those lanes down to a normal width, the neighborhood council fought for and finally received tiny bumpouts at Allerton which have had no real impact that I can tell. As long as the road has these dimensions, it’s no surprise people drive that way.
Gerry Chervinsky, no offense taken, and your point about the weather is spot on. (Why did I move back???). Regarding population, La Jolla is actually part of the City of San Diego (but like Chestnut Hill, folks in LJ are pretty particular about what it’s called. I live in CH, so I guess I, ahem, shouldn’t talk…) Also, the quality of roads there is not markedly better than those here. I’d take MassDOT and Newton DPW any day over SDDOT and CalDOT. Our guys here know how to do it. As for traffic calming, it’s not about slowing people down – although that would be a benefit in that bike and pedestrian safety would be enhanced. What I’m saying, and others too, is that this evolution would not add to congestion. Rather it would make the same traffic count flow more smoothly and efficiently, plus have the added benefit of enhancing economic development opportunities, making bike and pedestrian access more appealing and feasible, and help grow our economic and tax base in Newton. If today, XXX number of cars whiz through, after this road diet is implemented, the same number of cars will be able to pass but we’ll enhance the environs around the roadway. Think of the Newtonville stretch from Whole Foods to Dunkin @ Walnut: that stretch will be able to be a true walkable retail zone, complementing Walnut across the Pike and expanding the economic development opportunities there. Ditto for the stretch leading into West Newton from around the Barn/Trader Joe’s.
I’ll be the first to admit to going well over the speed limit on Washington Street sometimes in the daylight. (We’ve all done things we regret). It is way over capacity. Build it!
We definitely need more trees between the neighborhood and the Pike. Build it!
When I see those nice medians though, I immediately think of all the grass sidewalk berms that are completely destroyed right now, because of all the plows and other commercial vehicles driving up on them all winter up here North of the Wall. Village 14, you could probably get a few cheap clicks by writing an article about that.
Honestly, as a local it’s hard to jump on the bandwagon with this plan in West Newton given the ongoing debacle in Auburndale Square. I know, I know – bad process, designed by different firm, new people in that department at City Hall now, won’t happen again, etc. But apparently to make a “road diet” work with signalized intersections, you have the get the light timing right, and the city continues to fail miserably at that in Auburndale. If the new regime that handles this at City Hall still can’t get the timing right in Auburndale Square after almost 2 years of working on it, why should we be confident that they can make it work in West Newton?
Tricia, do you think there is anything the city can really do to reduce Auburndale Square gridlock? It was horrible for cars before; we knew it was going to continue to be horrible after (see induced demand); and no amount of signal tweaking will make more than minor impacts. The fault is simply too many cars.
Adding a big new surface parking lot at Starbucks has invited even more people to drive.
Meanwhile, due to the fortuitous event of a councilor being almost hit in the crosswalk during a site visit, the exclusive pedestrian crossing phase has been restored, by council fiat. Not at all a public process but I’ll take it.
The wider sidewalks are better, too.
The video makes Washington Street look very pretty, but I don’t buy the traffic flow improvement bit.
The announcer (and his firm) is engaging in jiggery-pokery and strains credulity when he states (at: 5:02) that a study of North American streets that went from four lanes to three lanes “found a net gain in capacity”. The on-screen table at 5:02 clearly indicates that there was more traffic VOLUME, not capacity. There probably was more volume due to new stores and restaurants and attractions!
Of course, the meaningful statistic that matters to you and me when discussing traffic (and the one they don’t want you to know) is DURATION- with more volume and fewer lanes, what will be the new DURATION of a trip along Washington Street? Can they answer please?
Indeed, if the announcer’s logic is to be trusted, let’s reduce the lanes on the entire length of the Mass Pike by 25% in order to have “more capacity”.
Oh, and then there is the one billion dollars of unfunded liabilities.
But what do I know.
I don’t see how “induced demand” applies – road capacity was decreased, not increased. Is there any evidence that the number of cars passing through the Square each day has increased dramatically since this re-do? Yes, gridlock happened before the “improvements”, but the fact that it’s so much worse after, without any significant increase in residential or commercial density, makes it clear that the design itself is flawed. (Yes, Starbucks adds to the mix, but the gridlock has been happening since the beginning, long before Starbucks opened.) For example, cars heading westbound on Comm Ave used to be able to get into a left turn lane well before the entrance to Star Market, which meant that cars wanting to turn left into Star, Regans, or onto Lexington St were out of the main traffic lane. Now the left turn lane doesn’t open up until just before the intersection, so you have cars trying to sneak up to the left turns in the opposite travel lane – really dangerous. You also have cars jumping into the carriage lane at Rowe St to try to sneak up to get into the right turn lane, which is really dangerous as well. Same thing approaching Comm Ave on Lex heading south – the turn lanes are now so close to the intersection that all cars have to wait in a single line no matter which direction you want to go, which backs up traffic well past the Auburndale Ave intersection, causing gridlock there. The city made a mess here, and they can’t just throw up their hands and say the people *they hired* screwed up – they need to figure this out if they expect residents to be onboard with traffic “improvements” in other village centers.
Wll Havenmeyer writes: ‘Think of the Newtonville stretch from Whole Foods to Dunkin @ Walnut: that stretch will be able to be a true walkable retail zone’.
As someone who has lived here for almost 40 years, I will tell you it already is walkable. But increased density will certainly make this less true. How will a massive increase in people (and cars and bikes) make my neighborhood more walkable?
@Bob I think we have a different definition of “walkable.” Having sidewalks alone doesn’t make walkable. You want that walk to be pleasant, interesting and safe. You can’t cross the street without running, the road noise means you can barely have a conversation, and I know few people who would walk or bike from Whole foods to Newtonville. Most will take advantage of the big parking lots and just drive.
All that said we need to realize where we are in the development process. We are trying to upgrade a transportation NETWORK to carry more people efficiently. Bike lanes, specifically PROTECTED bike lanes, should be a key part of that mix. So should separated or priority bus lanes, fixed-track systems, etc. To do a piece and then throw up our hands and yell “see! it doesn’t work!” doesn’t help us make the transition. We need a vision and then we can work toward that. There will be bumps, but the goal is a better future.
I think the term “walkable” in terms of planning means:
The businesses and attractions cater more to people who can ‘walk’ or bike to the area. i.e. the city stops designing the area to cater ‘mostly’ to people who have to ‘drive in’ to get their.
Unfortunately, its impossible to do this without density of housing. The area should have enough people living their such that we don’t need to create ‘enough’ parking, widen the roads.. even have roads which are pedestrian only…
Wonder if anyone has created a study to show density per 100ft which can support such a ‘non car’ model.
On the other hand, retail is in such bad state that this way of thinking may already be outdated! Maybe the new trend is that people just want to be able to walk to schools and work and pick up amazon packages from whole foods when grocery shopping…
I am very unclear on why some folks refuse to believe that our neighborhood is already ‘walkable’. As I stated earlier, we have lived here for almost 40 years in what is now the epicenter of development. I think this provides me with a deeper understanding of this area then those who are professional planners or who need to drive to Newtonville from other parts of Newton. My wife and I can walk to 4 different supermarkets, walk to our barber and hairdresser, to CVS, to liquor and beer stores, to procure medical marijuana, to church and for breakfast at either of 2 locations. There are also 2 ice cream shops if we want that. All we are missing is a funeral home but I won’t be walking to that type of business. So please, how are professional planners and the other good people going to improve on this? More people won’t make it more walkable. It will bring more cars for sure no matter how bike friendly it is made.
BTW, I use the crosswalk buttons when crossing Washington so I disagree that walking is difficult. Whenever I hear folks touting ‘visions’, I have to think it could be an hallucination. Remember, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Or as Yogi Berra once pointed out ‘That place is so popular no one goes there anymore’.
So we have one comment up near top showing how a “road diet” in San Diego “worked”. It slowed average traffic to <20 MPH. That perpetual traffic jam makes it less dangerous for cyclists, in that near-perfect climate (San Diego is as different from New England as you can get — if you don't like the weather there, move, 'cause it's gonna be nice 360 days a year). But slowing our own access to the highways will waste a lot more of our time. Right now we can drive on Washington at maybe 30 MPH most of the time, with a fairly bad perpetual jam at West Newton Square (the Triangle of Death?). Sometimes we are actually trying to go some place! And there aren't real alternatives, especially with only a half-exit on I90 at West Newton.
I like walkable places, not suburban sprawl. But if you don't live in one, you need a place to park there. That's why those newfangled faux-village shopping centers are displacing the old malls. They still have parking on the edges. Nobody is going to ride a bike to get their groceries, even in good weather.
I ride my bike to get groceries, even in the winter.
Chuck, is the bike rack crowded in winter?
Bob, in places with good bike infrastructure people use facilities year round. In the Netherlands, there’s a saying along the lines of “we’re not made of sugar” meaning we don’t dissolve riding in inclement weather. It might not be for you, but the numbers don’t lie: if you build it users will come. And that takes cars off the road, making it better for all users.
If there is insufficient parking or car access, there would have to be a significant (several hundred) of housing units within 5 mins walk of any commercial stores. No commercial landlord would a lease otherwise..
Worse scenario would be scores of empty retail stores, absolute disaster… we’ve designed an area with both insufficient housing and insufficient parking
@bob given the inadequacy of the bike infrastructure here in Newton, the racks are about equally used in winter and summer.
In Somerville the bike racks tend to be crowded all year. Unless the folks at Greentown Labs have managed to build some kind of city-wide dome, the weather there is just like it is here.
@ Fred -The speed limit in Newton is 25 mph “Right now we can drive on Washington at maybe 30 MPH most of the time”
Also, I use my bike to get groceries.
A few observations from Washington Street this weekend. I happened to be driving on it in the right lane headed west toward W. Newton Square. I was on my way to get gas. A car blew by me on the left and it felt like it was going at least 50mph. Evidence would suggest that the wide open roadway leads to comfort at this speed.
After getting gas and upon leaving the station, I saw a family of four on bikes riding the sidewalk on the northern side of the road, headed east. I wasn’t able to stay and see where they ended up, but that sidewalk runs out right after the Sullivan Tire store, so I’m not sure where they ended up.
It’s unfair for us not to give them a safe place to be.
As a long time Newton walker, particularly in the Newton Highlands village area, I’m enjoying this conversation. The only comment from my own walking history is that I think Bob Kavanagh’s concept and description of “walkability” is every bit as credible as the others noted here.
Isn’t the West Newton to Newtonville stretch an island of lovely biking all by itself if you can’t get to it safely? From the West, is the worst stretch of road for bikes in Newton- the Western stretch of Washington st (rt 16) from the Wellesley border to West Newton. And then you have Chestnut street. Any plans for these roads?
Terry, the W Newton – N’ville stretch eastbound is a speedway, cars are looking to hit the green at lowell and will move into the right lane as necessary to make the light. I usually feel pressured there. I have been subjected to one bad road rage incident there because i kept my right of way.
I agree with you between wellesley & w newton washington is positively hostile. It should be reduced to a single lane in each direction with protected bike lanes and widened sidewalks.
My synagogue is on the Wellesley to W. Newton stretch of Washington Street and it’s among the only roads in Newton that truly scares me.
I’ve biked on it occasionally because I have no choice, but try to stay on the sidewalk (which I really don’t like to do as it’s not fair to pedestrians). Also, on weekend mornings leading up to the marathon, it’s crowded with runners all vying for space on a rather narrow sidewalk. Some run on the street instead, often facing traffic. It’s unsafe all around.