Sorry, but I’m an infrastructure junkie, and when I see or hear about things that are not quite right, well . . .
Case 1: The City has installed traffic calming improvements on Fuller Street between Commonwealth Avenue and Chestnut Street. These protuberances narrow the street at several places and are designed to slow people down. The concept is sound. But here’s a problem. If you are driving from Comm Ave to Chestnut Street on a dark, rainy night, you can’t see the first protuberance. Yes, there is a sign 50 or 100 feet in advance of it saying “Road Narrows,” but that is not helpful at 30 mph. (At 30 mph, you are going 44 feet per second.) Here’s a daytime picture.
The white painted line on the right side of the road is too faint to be seen at night; the curb is not painted; and there are no warning signs (as there are on the bumps that follow a bit further down the street.) Also, at night, the crosswalk marker is not there, nor is the “bag drop” sign for the golf course. So the new curb is invisible.
I know this because a friend of mine, going the speed limit on a dark rainy night, did not see the extended curb and popped her right front tire as she hit the curb.
Solution: Make the pavement painter line brighter and/or add a warning sign on the extended sidewalk that would be visible to drivers.
Case 2: The city has a policy that, when a street is being repaved, a property owner has the option of asking for a granite curb, the cost of which is added as an improvement fee on your regular tax bill until the cost is paid off. But when a property owner chooses not to do that, the rest of us pay. Water seeps through the berm and erodes the soil, undermining both the sidewalk and the road pavement. Then, we also pay because the city has to come by and rebuild the soil in the berm.
Apparently, the owners of the Paul Street apartments opted out of the curb installation in front of their building when Paul Street was last repaved. I’m guessing the condo association or the building manager said, “Huh, why should we pay for that?” On July 15, I used 311 to report erosion of the berm. I was notified that this kind of work takes place on a regular schedule, and indeed, I noticed a work crew the other day, bringing in heavy equipment, several workers, and several yards of soil.
And, today, the 311 folks sent a note saying the job was done. Here it is:
My point? I think it should be mandatory, not optional, that multi-unit housing owners pay for the granite curbs in front of their buildings when streets are repaved. These buildings tend to have more frontage than a single family house; and when they choose not to have a curb installed, it results in damage to sidewalks and streets, plus extra costs to the city to replace the soil that’s just going to wash away over the coming weeks and months.
I agree with you on the curb improvements, especially in front of multi-family housing.
I wonder how that would work on Paul Street since those are condos, not apartments. Meaning, the owner is the condo association and they’d have to vote on the payment.
As far as the visibility issues, I think that’s not just about that one location but about roads throughout the city. Our lighting here is horrible and it becomes a huge safety issue in the winter when people are dressed in black and it gets dark before 5pm. We need better lighting throughout the city for this reason, but also for pedestrian safety.
On a side note, I’ve been very impressed with the city’s 311 system. I have called in a number of safety issues and they get addressed PDQ.
The lights in Newtonville seemed to have been changed to LEDs which is good. Except, the cone of illumination is quite narrow. Between each light there is a noticeable “blackout” zone. I have to carry a flashlight to walk the dog. And, in some areas I wonder about personal safety, i.e. mugging. The lights appear quite bright, it’s just the focus is too narrow.
I hit an expanded curb out in auburn dale as I made a right turn a few years ago. They had pushed out the corner ( a corner I had driven around for 30 years ) for pedestrians and I ran over it with my car, fortunately going slow enough to not cause damage.
If the curbs are required by law th3 city should pony up for it.
Paul, there is another solution. If a missing curb causes erosion or there is a significant slope, the city can (and is supposed to) install an asphalt berm. It’s nowhere as good as granite and won’t last as long, but it’s good enough.
We need more curb extensions and road diets, but +1 for better lighting and signage. People will have to also pay more attention to the road. That’s what makes the calming work.
Some of you won’t agree, but I’m just glad to hear that they are moving forward with traffic-calming measures. The city has underfunded improvements for a while. I live on Florence Street and have been trying to get them on this street for years. We not only have a lot of traffic (which I knew when I moved in) but also have people driving like they are still on Route 9 (which I did not know at the time). People only slow down (usually) when they hit the speed bumps in Brookline…and sometimes not even then. My husband was slowing down for one of speed bumps and a driver, angry that my husband was going the speed limit, crossed the double yellow, passed him and sped up, essentially causing their car to vault over the very large speed bump/crosswalk.
Well, first of all, the default speed limit in Newton is 25 mph. So slow your roll. That being said, one of my kids did blow out a tire hitting one of these on the carriage road a few weeks back. It was dark, he knew it was there someplace, but it was hard to see it. It seems to me some reflective paint would be a low cost solution to that problem.
Why, as a first step, don’t they just paint the curb areas with a fluorescent compound? I’ve whacked these so-called “bumpouts” on two occasions. Both times, it was dark and raining. There was absolutely nothing to warn me that I was on a collision course with these objects. Neither incident took place in the Highlands service area where I’m an area councilor, but it’s my error that I didn’t share this suggestion with one of my City Councilors. It seems pretty obvious to me that this would address at least part of the problem.
Thanks for posting this Paul. In one sense I’m relieved that folks considerably younger than me are hitting these protuberances. I’ve read more articles and taken more tests directed at octogenarians like me that are designed to let us know if it’s still safe for us to drive. I’ve passed every one of them, but the thought did cross my mind, particularly after the second incident, that maybe my age had something to do with what happened. Believe me I know that this thought is in the back of the mind to most people my age who still drive.
I was going to point out what Adam said about the city installing asphalt curbs when they repair the berms – when homeowners or multi-resident committees don’t approve the granite. I just found out about having to pay for curbs when my street was recently repaved. I would think the city would be responsible for putting in the best curb available to keep from having to repair berms endlessly.
I second or third painting bump outs with fluorescent paint when they are built, along with repainting the white lines on the road and painting crosswalks a bright solid color as they do in many places. It seems like common sense but doing so would keep the city from having to come back again.
Lighting is definitely a problem. Kids walking to and from schools have to use flashlights depending on the time of year. Drivers can’t see if a kid or bike darts out in front of them. My neighborhood gets pitch black and it’s on an elementary school walking route.
Paint wears off, and all the reflective paint in the world won’t help on a dark winter night with snowfall. If the geometry is that awkward, there should be something vertical to go with the bumpout to increase visibility and add to the calming effect (objects closer to the field of vision will appear to move more quickly, making the speed seem faster to the driver). A sign. A bollard. Something. We need more bumpouts. They just may need more investment than the city has given in some cases.
In the case shown, the intersection ought to have ped crossing signs on each side of the road anyway. Every crosswalk should have them. That would probably go a long way to solving the problem. The investment there is a few hundred dollars.
The city also needs to repaint a lot of crosswalks. There’s one on Florence St. that’s virtually invisible, even in daylight going under 25 mph.
I’ll be a minority of one on this one, but I hate the granite curbs. They look great at first but once the pieces become misaligned, they lose their appeal and are very unforgiving when bumped.
@Adam
If the geometry is that awkward, there shouldn’t be a bumpout built there in the first place.
Having lived on Fuller St until recently I’m aware of the bump out issue, and I’ve always wondered, why if the intent is to reduce speed on this wide street, why bump outs at just the corners? Why not just narrow the roadway, or provide additional bumpouts mid Block to allow for all the parking that doesn’t exist there.
1. Bump outs
You’re right Adam. The signage needs to be high enough to see when snow has been piled there – preferably a sign that can be seen in the dark or with a blinking light on it.
I meant that the bump outs should be painted with fluorescent paint in addition to what Paul said – as part of creating the bump out – but I guess you couldn’t see what I was thinking.
In several places, in the EU and in the States, crosswalks are not just white lines criss crossed, they are painted bold solid colors. They are much easier to see at night and when there’s snow – even in the daylight. I hoping for all new crosswalks and all repainted ones to be painted that way as Newton is helping to make streets safer for all users – not just cars. Washington Street, Walnut Street and Needham Street are going to be reconfigured in the near future so why not start there.
Several years ago, I don’t remember exactly when, when these traffic calming measures were first being discussed on V14, I mentioned that bump outs can be dangerous at a dark intersection because even driving slowly, drivers cannot see them and that when cross walks start and end at a bump out, drivers cannot see the pedestrians stepping into the cross walk.
I was roundly dismissed.
2. Curbs
I don’t like the super high granite curbs. The are too high for getting out of the passenger side of a car when parking parallel and for car bumpers to go over in straight in parking.
Curbs are an interesting phenomenon. In each of the many places I have lived, they are treated differently. In Glastonbury, CT, where I last lived, different curbs were used in different places and were installed and paid for by the town.
It has a large land area and when it was incorporated in 1638 it was mostly forest, farmland, orchards and gorgeous homes along its Main Street. As it was built out over the years, in the outer edges of the hilly forest area (where we lived) where homes had wells and septic systems, most streets were basically where the paths were and have no curbs or have asphalt curbs that just look like part of nature. In places that were built out, more substantial curbs were used.
My point is that the city, along with the community, made the decisions and curbs were just another part of paving a street.
In looking at the Google Map of this area there was a vertical warning sign in place in 2011. What happened to it? It should be replaced. It is up to property owners to keep up on this.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3385071,-71.2338085,3a,75y,96.78h,78.96t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sL6pj4kWTSOjeimhKhgyiMQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Totally agree on the need for curbs. I wrote a paper in college 33 years ago on the business case for investing in curbing as it saved money on sewer cleanup, maintaining sidewalks and ensured safer passage for people with disabilities. I guess I was a transportation nerd then too.
As for crosswalk design there are a few key things.
1. Speed matters. Drivers see less of the road the faster they are driving. the less they can see. It is called Cone of vision.
https://nacto.org/publication/urban-street-design-guide/design-controls/design-speed/
2. Shorted crossing distance. Pedestrian risk is greatly reduced the less time they need to be in the road.
3. Daylight. Set back parking and other obstructions to make certain drivers and pedestrians can see each other.
4. Eliminate double threat. This is like the crosswalk by CVS in Newton Centre.
Two travel lanes going same direction and pedestrians need to cross it without a light. One car yields but car in other lane isn’t able to see the pedestrian and passes the stopped car hitting the pedestrian. This is also true of wide roads like Fuller where a driver stops for a pedestrian but car behind swings around the stopped car.
5. Crosswalk design. Colored crosswalks aren’t nearly as visible to drivers and pedestrians as the continental design that is now the Newton standard. That is why the city has adopted it. There is also something to say about consistency. https://nacto.org/publication/urban-street-design-guide/intersection-design-elements/crosswalks-and-crossings/conventional-crosswalks/
@Blueprintbill, good question. My guess, funding. Redesigning the entire street and dealing with drainage issues is not cheap, but it would be the right thing to do.
@Marti, if the driver can’t see when driving, it’s not the bumpout we should be concerned about. If our streets are suited for people who can’t see where they’re going and/or aren’t paying attention (I think that’s often the case nowadays) then that’s a big problem.
All signs should be made of reflective material, but I’m a ‘no’ on making things flash to get people’s attention. Needham is doing this everywhere, including where there was a fatal crash by the high school. It’s a terrible band-aid fix, and not a substitute for fixing the underlying problem. They now have stop signs that flash that mean “this really means stop” …as opposed to the others? When everything is flashing, then what will they do for emphasis?
As I was driven around Prague last week, I was thinking of Washington St: the road we were using had been renovated: one lane for cars in each direction; in the middle a tramway; sidewalks were wide and had both a bike lane and a lane for walkers. Same pattern in many places. In another area, where the Communists/Socialists built many housing buildings, those buildings are connected by paths so that students could go to the Music center or Sports center (free) without crossing a street; also, between those buildings there were grassy and treed areas.
In Paris, a few days ago, the whole city has been converted to bike paths: they are separated with low one foot and a half wide concrete little sidewalk (for lack of a better word) from parked cars and then one lane of traffic. Drivers say the traffic is better, although cyclists create problems with their behavior!!! (and I only saw 50% wearing helmets but that is another topic).