New Haven Independent

Posted by: Shaggy | October 13, 2006 11:40 AM

It is difficult to say that the accident referred to in the article was caused by a problem with the traffic situation (the driver of the car apparently was elderly and had a seizure and drove onto the sidewalk), but there is definitely a traffic problem here. There is rarely a time in the morning when the signal at this intersection changes to red and a driver doesn't run the light. I hope the city and the University (this is practically a part of the Yale Medical campus) can fix this problem.

Posted by: TrueBlueCT | October 13, 2006 8:41 PM

You fail to mention the intersections of York Street and North and South Frontage roads. If you are a pedestrian, you are risking your life when crossing there as cars speed along at 50MPH plus, and frequently run the lights.

Rumble strips ought to be installed, even though I know they are hell on the plows. Anything to slow cars down from highway speeds to pedestrian safe levels.

Posted by: jonathan | October 14, 2006 11:37 PM

I've written to the city about this intersection and tried to get the medical school and hospital to lean on the city to do something about the unsafe conditions since 1999, when I started having to walk across North Frontage Road on College Street.

Unlike every other intersection along North and South Frontage Roads at Church, College, and York Streets, the intersection at North Frontage Road lacks any pedestrian safety features other than white stripes on the road to help guide pedestrians across.

Approaching the intersection when the traffic is with you, there's no indication of how long a signal is likely to remain green (no flashing hand or non-flashing hand). There are frequently people who run the light coming off the highway at terrific rates of speed, and their vision of pedestrians on the bridge side of the intersection is hindered by high bushes that obscure the presence of said pedestrians. Their desire to take the left turn rapidly onto College Street makes every step off the curb fraught with danger. They will roll-turn onto College Street, too, on a red light, without looking at whether or not a pedestrian may have stepped in front of their car from the south side. Trust me, it's happened to me more than once. They don't like it either, when you pound on their hood to make them wake up and hit the brakes!

The city is full of baloney, claiming that this intersection is beyond their ability to fix. It is clear that they lack the will to do this. Trust me, you boneheads, it'll be cheaper to fix the intersection now (and not wait for the Yale Cancer Center to be built) than to pay out hundreds of thousands to defense lawyers and millions to the victims of traffic accidents caused by your deliberate negligence of pedestrian safety in this hazardous intersection.

There is probably no more dangerous intersection for pedestrians in the city of New Haven. If there is, I'd like to know about that intersection, just so I can stay away from it. I don't have a choice about this intersection.

Posted by: nfjanette | October 15, 2006 8:53 PM

Mr. Fischer needs to start finding ways to solve the myriad of poorly engineered intersections in the city rather than offering reasons for keeping the status quo. Perhaps he can also offer reasons for the general lack of left-turn signals and lanes and many major intersections, but he would be wrong - they were needed yesterday. He, and the mayor's administration, and the state as well should be embarrassed at condition of these dangerous areas. They need to fix these problems on their watch, or someone else needs to step up. It's time to put some real engineering into the traffic engineering people at the city and state levels - engineering that creates good results, not excuses.

Posted by: cindy miller | October 16, 2006 9:51 AM

It is unfortunate that a serious accident is required as a "wake up call." And it is equally unfortunate that consideration of such things as traffic flow have to be included in decisions about safety.

I am quite sure that Lubna Shamsi had other areas of interest within Health Policy, but the reality is that ensuring traffic patterns that are safe for pedestrians, some of whom are able to walk faster than others, is a public health issue of the first order and needs to be addressed.

Posted by: Robert | October 16, 2006 12:25 PM

The city traffic engineer said the light systems are currently timed? I have never seen a more disjointed light timing system, ever. You leave one intersection only to find that the next one is just turning red. All the more reason to plow through, because having to wait at one red light after another is ridiculous.(?) Oh, and saving someone's life isn't worth the cost. Nice way to think about it "city engineer."

Posted by: Jacki Fitz | October 17, 2006 1:44 PM

The intersections aren't safe for drivers either. I park in the infamous Air Rights Garage, and exit onto Frontage heading toward Boulevard. At least 6 cars coming off the connector go through the red light each time. I can't tell you how many times I've almost been hit in my car! In 17 years of parking in the Garage, I've never seen an officer handling 5:00 traffic on that side of the Garage.

Posted by: matt | October 18, 2006 9:22 AM

Is it the intersection or the drivers?
Perhaps a more effective method of alleviating traffic accidents in New Haven would simply be to call for enforcement of existing traffic laws. The close calls I have had at this intersection have always been the fault of drivers, not the design of the intersection itself. If folk (including numerous yale and NHPD vehicles I have seen violating traffic laws at this very intersection - don't they provide a good example to other motorists) were simply to obey the yield coming off 34, rules regarding pedestrians, as well as the directional arrows clearly visible on the pavement entering the intersection from frontage, things might proceed in a much more orderly fashion.

Every morning there are two to three lanes forming coming off 34, where there should only be one, and there are two lanes making the left onto college, where there, likewise, should only be one. These have become accepted practices that could easily be amended with minimal effort by the NHPD to existing laws. I have to agree with the city engineer to the extent that measure taken that result in greater problems with traffic flow will only worsen the problem until people in New Haven learn/are reminded how to drive in accordance with the law.

Posted by: nfjanette | October 18, 2006 8:24 PM

I agree that there seems to be very little enforcement of existing traffic laws, and that many drivers in New Haven drive dangerously. We need to get the "local tax" added onto the motor vehicle ticket fees so that local towns and cities have "incentive" to increase enforcement.

However, the gripe about double-turning lanes I don't agree with; we need more of them, not less, but they should be more clearly marked with signs and brightly painted pavement arrows. New Haven had far too many faded pavement arrows - if they, and lane markers, exist at all. How about the single entrance lane onto the connector highway at the Air Rights garage? That stupidity results in wild driving maneuvers from ALL THREE lanes as people try to make last-minute lane changes to get onto the connector.

Posted by: frank | October 23, 2006 1:45 PM

The corner of Frotage Road and College Streets in New Haven is very dangerous. Absolutely no one pays any attention to the yield sign at the foot of the exit, therefore, everyone coming off the highway at 40-50 mph makes for an extremely hazerdous situation.

Posted by: lynne bonnett | October 30, 2006 8:28 PM

Traffic in this area has increased at least 20 % over the last 6 years mostly due to increased parking in the route 34 corridor. Commuters working at Yale (80% of the employees come from out of town) access this parking from the connector end (I 91 and I 95 interchange). Community groups have asked Yale New Haven Hospital and the city of New Haven to please reduce the parking demand in this area through traffic demand management because the high density traffic is harmful to us both from breathing the exhaust fumes and endangering pedestrians. It diminishes the quality of life of New Haven residents that live along the corridor. Many vulnerable populations along the connector and corridor (young and elderly, and those with illnesses) are harmed by air pollution from traffic: fine particulate matter, benzene and other volatile organic compounds from vehicle exhaust permeate the buildings and harms the health of all those that live and work in the area. Traffic demand management would reduce commuter traffic significantly leading to better pedestrian safety and cleaner air. Since our plea before the city and Yale we have learned that they plan additional parking expansion in this area: 1900 spaces along Legion Avenue, 845 spaces for the cancer center and 1200 spaces for Gateway College. Yale currently has a parking surplus until 2009. They don't need this additional parking. Traffic demand management lowers parking demand 10 to 20 % during the first year of operation. Surely we can do better than plan more parking in this already highly congested area.