New Haven Independent

Posted by: Jon-Jay Tilsen | November 4, 2005 1:16 PM

To correct a factual statement: Cars traveling east on Fountain (toward downtown) opposite the school do not have to stop for the busses with their stop signs out. It is a "divided" road thanks to the concrete barrier.
That said, the idea presented by Ina Silverman seems very sensible, and if the state won't do it, maybe someone will just get a bag of concrete mix and take care of it during the night. Go, People.

Posted by: Christy | November 4, 2005 7:50 PM

I'm pretty sure that it's not a good idea to encourage more traffic through the Westville area. As far as I'm concerned, the more inconvenient commuting is down Fountain street, the better. Traffic through Westville already hurts local businesses by making stopping along Whalley difficult, and furthermore, it discourages foot traffic (which also hurts local businesses). Beside, studies show that the more you widen roads, and the more efficent you make highways, the more cars come to fill the space and the cars travel no faster than they did before. We need to encourage density, foot traffic, and public transportation -- and discourage the use of private cars. To the extent that cars are getting off of the Wilbur Cross and cutting through Westville, we need to discourage (or at least not encourage) that too.

Posted by: nfjanette | November 5, 2005 7:14 PM

Sounds like the architect is too focused on building a pretty building and has dropped the ball on the real engineering problem - the over-sized building footprint on the land plot helps create the traffic disaster caused by the busses. If thinking "outside the box" is to be encouraged, then more radical ideas may need consideration such as removing the existing west-wing building and building a driveway that circles the building, or removing the existing buildings to build a driveway next to the road. I hate to lose well-built old structures, but the fact is the buildings are oversized on the south (Whalley) face and poorly located much to close to the street, with the only access to the current parking lot via that tiny paved old cow path called Emerson Street.

As for encouraging traffic through Westville, no doubt the residents would prefer to avoid it, but Whalley and Fountain are major connecting roads between the city downtown and westward areas. Whalley Avenue scaled up badly over the 150 years it was "built up" from a farmers path; what modern planned secondary highway would take a trip through the densely-populated "Village"? The dream of the Route 34 connector, which would have been a partial solution to this issue, and for which entire neighborhoods were flattened in the 50's, was put to rest by Mayor DeStefano when he allowed Pfizer sink their foundation pilings directly blocking the path from underneath the Air Rights Garage. Obviously Mayor DeStefano doesn't need to enter or exit the city at rush hour from that area, or he would know better about the traffic disaster caused by the intersection of local and "through" traffic. He might then have encouraged Pfizer to built at least one more block more west, preserving the possibility of the planned traffic flow under the garage - avoiding the local traffic - and then up ramps to merge onto Frontage road(s). That is why, after all, the garage was built "in the air".

Posted by: Chrsity | November 5, 2005 8:00 PM

Actually, buildings close to the street and taking up the entire available footprint are conducive to foot traffic, something that is good land-use, therefore eco-friendly and should be encouraged.

There are other ways to get to downtown from points west (including busses), and we shouldn't be encouraging people to drive down Fountain, which is still residential.

People will move to public transportation in direct proportion to how much of a hassle it is to drive. It's better for the worldwide political landscape, better for the environment, and better for the community for people to move toward public transportation. We should not be making it easier for people to do something as environmentally harmful as ride alone in their cars for miles to work every day.

Regarding the 34 connector, etc., see above. Also, studies show that it's much more efficient to have no "through-traffic" routes, rather to have cities laid out in such a way that there are many alternate routes and no single one. In such cases, traffic naturally distributes itself around instead of trying to follow a single road. The 34 connector was based on false assumptions about traffic control. We should make Chapel Street two-ways instead of one way for a couple blocks; that would ease up a lot of West-East traffic.

Posted by: nfjanette | November 8, 2005 11:02 PM

I'm all for better pedestrian routes, but foot traffic by the school isn't the issue that was being discussed, but rather how to best facilitate school busses standing, so the footprint is indeed a potential issue. The short distance from buildings to street prevents making a "cutout lane" for the busses as was built at Hill Regional Career High School.

Fountain street is, of course, residential, but it's also significant enough a road to have been assigned a state route number (Rt. 243).

As for the claim that the Rt. 34 connector was based upon false assumptions, I can only reply: how can we know? If only it had been extended one or two blocks further under the garage it would have provided a seamless bypass of most of the local traffic interaction that clogs that area. Now, all we have are back-filled theories that fail to address the clear reality of poor traffic planning in that area.

The Mayor's idea is to further integrate the connector several blocks before the garage, to which I can only hope to one day score a hit of the stuff that his advisors were smoking when coming up with that idea. Until then, I am sadly locked into the clear reality that traffic planning in New Haven is curious at best. One only needs to try to figure out when and if certain wide roads without lane markers are one, two, or one and a half lanes, or to try to make a left turn at one of the many city main road intersections that lack a left-turn signal (sometimes on one direction, sometimes both) to experience the aggravation and danger of the current "planning" of the city streets.

Posted by: Christy | November 9, 2005 11:08 AM

I'm all for better pedestrian routes, but foot traffic by the school isn't the issue that was being discussed, but rather how to best facilitate school busses standing, so the footprint is indeed a potential issue.

Hm, I really don't understand this comment. The reason people want to "facilitate busses standing" is to facilitate cars driving (quickly down Fountain). Lots of traffic and fast driving discourages people from walking. All over the country, city planners are finding that in order to create a walkable neighborhood, they have to narrow (not widen) the streets and slow down (not speed up) auto traffic and increase residential and business density.

As for the state deciding to label Fountain a state route, yes, they decided that. But whoever decided that didn't have the good of New Haven in mind, and that still does not obligate New Haven to facilitate commuting from Woodbridge at a cost to its own citizens (unless the state forces it).

I actually live on a street that bears a high price for the traffic on Fountain, since people cut through my neighborhood to avoid it, so it's not that I have a personal stake in reducing traffic on Fountain per se. It's just that I have a stake in our neighborhood, and I am increasingly worried about our desire to make driving through faster and easier when that hurts us.

BTW, I did not mean any of this to be critical of Ina's idea and she's a great Alderwoman (and congrats to her on the election!). It's a very good idea -- if you really do want to facilitate traffic on Fountain. I'm just questioning that assumption.