New Haven Independent

Whalley Redesign Ready To Go

by Paul Bass | June 23, 2008 2:19 PM | Permalink | Comments (16)

Preliminary work is about to start on a 30-year-old state plan to smooth traffic on Upper Whalley Avenue — just as an 11-year-old girl’s (pictured) death has led “traffic-calmers” to ask for a delay.

The $13 million project will reconfigure intersections and in some cases widen eight-tenths of a mile of Whalley between Emerson Street and the Route 63/69 intersection at the far western edge of town. The goal is to make a heavily traveled, accident-heavy stretch safer for drivers and pedestrians alike, according to the state project manager, Richard Zbrozek.

Zbrozek said any day now a crew will start on preliminary work for the project: replacing a power substation at Whalley near Ramsdell Street (pictured). The “obsolete” station will be replaced by “voltage that already exists on poles,” Zbrozek said.

That work has to happen before crews start on the “parent project,” the road-changing project itself. Zbrozek predicted that would start next April, with the replacement of a deteriorated culvert near the 63/69 interchange. He said the entirely redone Whalley Avenue should be done by Dec. 1, 2010.

Assuming no more delays crop up.

Neighbors want such a delay. Especially in light of the June 5 hit-and-run crash near the Davis Street-Whalley intersection that killed 11 year-old Gabrielle Lee.

That crash brought to the fore concerns that had already been building in Westville about speeding cars and unsafe conditions on Whalley. Westville joined a growing “safe streets” movement in neighborhoods across New Haven calling for “calmer” roads geared more to pedestrians and cyclists than to fast-moving cars.

“People could see a death coming,” said Mary Faulkner, chair of the Westville neighborhood management team. Even before Lee’s death, neighbors were regularly asking at management team meetings, “What about that light?”

Faulkner said the state Department of Transportation (DOT) should delay beginning the Whalley project until neighbors can take a better look at it and offer input. She noted that the DOT plans call for the road to be able to carry more cars.

“Is that what we as residents want?” Faulkner asked. “I would like to public to be more educated about it and have more of a say.”

It’ll get that chance in early July. Responding to the outcry, New Haven State Rep. Pat Dillon and State Sen. Toni Harp have organized a public hearing at Edgewood School at which DOT officials and neighbors can discuss the project. (An exact date has not yet been set.)

Dillon said she, too, would like to see a delay in the project’s launch.

“Many people from the community have been weighing in on this. A hearing in New Haven is an exciting opportunity for the community and the city to work together with DOT on practical measures for traffic safety,” Dillon said.

“I did have reservations about the project two years ago, but am reserving judgment
now until we have that conversation. We will be inviting DOT officials to present, and will be working both with the community and city officials. Although I am asking DOT to delay design work, we also need to determine the implications of the utility work they are working on right now… An important question is this: To what extent will that utility work this summer set the design in stone and preclude re-examining other aspects of the design for Whalley?”

Three Decades Already

Zbrozek, the DOT project manager, said in a conversation Monday that he believes the public has already weighed in on the project. He also argued that the design fits in with the concerns of traffic-calmers.

“A lot of people talk like that,” he said when asked about the concerns raised this month in Westville. “They don’t know what we’ve done. We’ve had many public hearings on the subject. We have met with an entourage of officials in the city.

“We do care about traffic-calming. We do care about businesses and on-street parking.”

“I can go back 30 years with the project,” Zbrozek said. Originally planners were less sensitive to the needs of pedestrians and businesses along the road, more concerned about enabling cars to drive faster through a “clear zone.” He argued that has changed as the project was reworked and reworked.

The intersections along this .8-mile stretch of Whalley have an inordinately high number of accidents compared to the rate at typical intersections, according to Zbrozek. “The goal here is to reduce the frequency of accidents.”

His team’s plans for doing that include:

• Eliminating the “S”-shaped intersection (pictured) at Whalley and Ramsdell Street and East Ramsdell (where the old Tommy K’s is), and turning it into a straight-through intersection. Right now cars on either Ramsdell or East Ramsdell have to turn right, then left, to go through the intersection (as opposed to turning onto Whalley). East Ramsdell will be relocated slightly sough in order to face Ramsdell.DOT also plans to put in four crosswalks and a walk signal. For the cars on Whalley, it plans to add a left-turn lane to enable other traffic to keep moving through.

• Putting in all new walk signals, not just at that intersection, but along the .8-mile strip. Including at the fatal Davis-Whalley intersection. Right now walkers crossing walk with a walk light still have to contend with cars driving onto Whalley at the cross street. (Zbrozek said he doesn’t know enough about the details of Gabrielle Lee’s death to judge what traffic improvements could have prevented. He said he thinks she might have been struck not at the Davis-Whalley intersection itself, but somewhere nearby.)

• Adding on-street parking through a “cut-out” in front of some apartments on the southbound side of Whalley as cars come near to Dayton. The idea is to create two unquestioned lanes of traffic in each direction from the 63/69 intersection all the way to Dayton, he said. Right now parked cars eliminate one of those lanes in one of those southbound lanes. “A little bit of widening” will occur to make space for the parking cut-out, Zbrozek said.

• Installing street plantings, which produce a “traffic-calming effect.”

Detailed Maps

In advance of the July hearing, Rep. Dillon sent along maps provided by the state DOT detailing plans for the changes. (The management team’s Faulkner, who has seen them, is asking the DOT to provide maps that are easily for laypeople to understand.) To view the maps, click:

• here
• here
• here
• here
• here
• here
• here
• here
• here
• here
• here
• here
• here.

Share this story

Share |

Comments

Posted by: we need safe streets now | June 23, 2008 2:26 PM

The proposed measures may have some positive effect, but they do not go far enough. The goal should be zero fatalities. That means doing a lot more with the intersection design than just putting up a walk light.

We need bump-outs, raised crosswalks, different surface treatments, painting, narrower lanes, and hundreds of other features if the city wishes to be an economically vibrant, livable walkable place.

If the city's neighborhoods just want to turn into another 1950s era strip mall with fading retail districts and declining property values on each side, then by all means go right ahead with the proposed improvements.

Posted by: East Rocker | June 23, 2008 3:02 PM

Despite whatever changes might have been made to this plan over the years, I am immediately skeptical of any traffic plan conceived of 30 years ago. Planners back then had very different values from the pedestrian based values many of us hold today. Every discussion I've heard about this project has always referred to it as a widening. The goal is to improve traffic flow for all of the folks trying to get to work downtown or to school at Southern. That means more cars more quickly, the opposite of what we really need. Widening this part of Whalley seems silly anyway, since you can't widen the bottleneck at Westville Village. We should probably be making Whalley more narrow all the way to 63/69.

Posted by: observer | June 23, 2008 3:23 PM

"Zbrozek, the DOT project manager, said in a conversation Monday .. [that] at the fatal Davis-Whalley intersection . . . walkers crossing with a walk light still have to contend with cars driving onto Whalley at the cross street."

Gag. Gasp. Choke. He makes it sound as if the problem at that intersection is with drivers on Davis Street, rather than Whalley!

He goes on to say "he thinks [Gabrielle Lee] might have been struck not at the Davis-Whalley intersection itself, but somewhere nearby."

Unbelievable! Her family witnessed the killing! The laundromat she was walking to is AT that intersection!

What is the matter with this man??

Does he live in some alternate universe??

This report emphatically does not inspire confidence in the plans that have been developed under this man's supervision.

Posted by: observer | June 23, 2008 3:33 PM

Postscript.

The DOT maps linked to this story are utterly undecipherable. Rep. Dillon and Sen. Harp must DEMAND that the DOT bring understandable illustrations to the public meeting at Edgewood School in July.

State officials work for US. Our taxes pay their salaries.

Posted by: Mary Faulkner | June 23, 2008 3:44 PM

The State DOT has been very open and cooperative with residents on this issue. For example, the timing of the light at Whalley and Davis was brought up to them recently and has since been changed.

As the Westville West Hills Community Management Team chair I have heard many complaints about the Whalley Ave/Davis Street intersection. I have heard many complaints about the Fountain Street/ Davis Street intersection and many, many others. The difference now is that the residents of New Haven have a chance to be proactive in the design of this part of Whalley Avenue instead of reactive. We have all felt a bit powerless when it comes to traffic safety and now we have started to organize and we realize that we are not powerless as a community. Proactive instead of reactive! It is more cost effective to add traffic calming measures during construction than after. This is the time to let the community take one last look to make sure that a plan that has taken 30 years to come to fruition is the right one for this community as well as for commuters.

Posted by: Elfer | June 23, 2008 6:29 PM

Typical, the State (DOT) doing whatever it wants without consulting the community and the City blindly blessing whatever the outcome is to cover for its ignorance and disinterest in really making Whalley Avenue or any other street for that matter a safe street. The community loses out either way unless we take a visible and audible stand to oversee every step of the way.

Posted by: observer | June 23, 2008 9:36 PM

Mary Faulkner,

You've made an interesting comment. Could you be more specific? When you say the DOT has changed the timing of the light at Whalley and Davis, do you mean, perhaps, that the yellow light on Whalley now lasts longer? Shorter? Is there now a longer delay between red on Whalley and green on Davis? Or something else?

(A longer yellow light might only teach Whalley drivers they have even more time to keep blasting through the intersection; likewise a longer delay between red on Whalley and green on Davis. A shorter yellow light on Whalley would mean Davis drivers would have to be even more cautious venturing into the intersection after they receive a green light. I have trouble understanding how changing the timing of the light can change the behavior of Whalley drivers who have become accustomed to, think nothing of, charging through that red light.)

And when you speak of having heard about many, many other intersections, I hope that includes Fountain Street at Dayton Street and Forest Road (?). For some reason, drivers on Fountain seem to have few problems respecting a red light there, while the drivers on Dayton and Forest, in both directions, are utterly out of control. It seems less dangerous for cars there than at Whalley and Davis, because of the spacing of the respective streets from one another, but for a pedestrian trying to cross either Dayton or Forest, it is a nightmare.

You are absolutely right about wanting to focus on design, especially beforehand. But after-the-fact design elements could also work: newly-painted zebra-striped cross walks; pedestrian signal buttons to stop traffic; prominently visible signs and/or stanchions (like on Orange Center Road in the middle of Orange) announcing clearly that state law requires cars to yield to pedestrians in legal crosswalks.

Posted by: GreenMeansGo | June 24, 2008 6:58 AM

What is included in this DOT plan, or the City Safe Streets plan, to STOP JAYWALKERS!?

Posted by: julijan | June 24, 2008 8:02 AM

["A little bit of widening" will occur, Zbrozek said.]

we do not need to cling to an outdated concept of street design that suggests wider streets equals better. studies show this only increases speeds of vehicles, which will in turn increase the number of incidents with fatalities.

i am sick of having to navigate roads where people travel on them much like highways through neighborhoods where pedestrians should be a priority.

community members deserve to be more involved with tangible solutions in their own city. lets make this happen.

Posted by: Mary Faulkner | June 24, 2008 9:33 AM

Dear Observer,
We had a member of our CMT look into the timing of the light at Whalley and Davis and it was set to be red for 30 seconds on each street. I am not sure how long the yellow was on for either. So every 30 seconds traffic was being stopped on Whalley whether or not there was traffic coming from Davis Street. There is a trip switch (this maybe the wrong wording, sorry) on Davis that was broken when the road was repaved so the light had reverted back to the 30 second default for each street. (The city would be responsible for fixing the trip switch on Davis so that the light is not set to the auto default.) From what I understand this default setting is not widely used and the State DOT sent out someone to check it and the timing was changed last week. I am not sure what the new times are for reds or yellows now, but it is not the 30 seconds for each street. I think it is a good step to have the State DOT respond to resident's concerns so quickly and it gives me hope that the community's concerns about this entire widening project will be heard and acted upon.

Posted by: downtown | June 24, 2008 11:10 AM

Dear GreenMeansGo:

Please take a look at the New Haven Safe Streets petition for Safer Streets. It's important to realize that when the petition calls for increased education on traffic laws - motorist, bicyclists, and pedestrian - and the enforcement of these laws. I think it is important to remember that there is no silver bullet with any traffic calming measures. There are many tools at the city's disposal (traffic radars, paint, signage, street design, on-street parking, etc) that can be used in conjunction with increased education/awareness and enforcement. The overall goal of the petition and the Safe Streets Coalition is to reduce and eliminate the countless and preventable deaths and injuries that are plaguing our city as a result of poor planning and lack of accountability on motorists.

For ways to be involved in the Safe Streets Coalition, please follow the link: NewHavenSafeStreets.org. The website is updated frequently with important updates and articles pertaining to the Coalition's efforts.

Posted by: nfjanette | June 24, 2008 7:11 PM

The DOT's plans are clear and rational to anyone familiar with the area. In particular:

East Ramsdell will be relocated slightly sough in order to face Ramsdell.DOT also plans to put in four crosswalks and a walk signal. For the cars on Whalley, it plans to add a left-turn lane to enable other traffic to keep moving through.

Almost every day I see near accidents at this intersection as drivers speed in both lanes to compete for the (effectively) one lane eastbound after this intersection. This proposed work will dramatically improve both the flow of traffic and reduce the hazard potential.

There should also be a clearly marked right-turn-only lane for eastbound traffic at the Dayton Street intersection. For that matter, Fountain Street needs the same lane markings at its intersection with Dayton and Forest Road. Letting drivers make up their own interpretation at such intersections is a real problem that leads to speeding - something that increases the potential hazard to pedestrians.

Posted by: nfjanette | June 24, 2008 7:14 PM

Anecdotally, I find the yellow light cycle timing quite short in New Haven; it makes for sudden stops even when traveling (approximately) the speed limit. I'd like to see about two seconds longer a cycle for most intersections. That, combined with traffic light cameras for ticketing, would do wonders to stop red light runners.

Posted by: Josh Smith | June 26, 2008 12:08 AM

Certainly, anything is safer than what we have right now. Today, it's a guessing game for drivers who don't frequent the area, as the irresponsible drivers (and/or the ones not brave enough to do what's right) form two lanes where there's only one lane. "Why does this happen?", you might ask. Well, some turn right on to Ramsdell, and some turn left on to East Ramsdell. The people turning left on to East Ramsdell pull over all the way to the left and you can't see their left turn signal, if they use it in the first place. The people who turn right on to Ramsdell pull all the way to the right. This makes two lanes, and the rest of the herd behind them follows suit, instead of doing the right thing and staying dead center.

Now, I thought the best solution would have been to widen the west/northbound lanes themselves and shrink the east/southbound lane. This way, there wouldn't be room for people to line up side-by-side or pass each other illegally. But I did some research, and it seems to me that wider lanes only encourage faster speeds. Maybe the widening project as it stands calls for narrower lanes, so as to slow the cars down? I looked at all of the plan PDFs, and I really can't tell how wide the lanes are now and how wide they will be in the future. That's something I'd like to see in the "layman's maps" requested by Ms. Faulkner. Anyway, with narrower lanes (and other traffic-calming measures), the volume could increase, but the speed could come down as well. With two lanes, more cars get through the lights at a time, even though they're moving more slowly.

Therefore, using my amateur opinions and holding them to be somewhat truthful (at least in theory), I'd be willing to support the city and state in their quest to widen the street -- however, if and only if, cyclists and pedestrians are both taken into account, and they are put on equal (or better) footing than the drivers/cars. There also must be feasible plans in place to keep cars from speeding through the neighborhood. Planters on each side have been noted, and I believe those would be effective, but we need more than trees to slow down the wanna-be Mach 5s flying up and down upper Whalley. Trust me, I LIVE on this street! :P

P.S.: Can't wait for the traffic-calming meetings in the future, as well as the proposed "early July public hearing" about the widening of Whalley Ave.

Posted by: Mary Faulkner | July 19, 2008 4:43 PM

A community workshop to develop ideas and support for making Whalley Avenue safer, calmer and more vibrant will take place at BEKI (Congregation Beth El-Keser Israel on the corner of Whalley and Harrison) on Thursday, July 24, at 6 p.m. This workshop precedes a public meeting with the State Department of Transportation about DOT's plans to widen and reconstruct a section of upper Whalley, which is scheduled for July 31st from 5 to 8 p.m. at the Edgewood School Cafeteria. For information, contact Carole Bass at bass.carole@gmail.com or Mary Faulkner at westvillewesthillsCMT@gmail.com

Posted by: Sadie Lambert | July 21, 2008 9:14 AM

I'm not holding my breath on this one. They can't even get the light coming down Fountain onto Whalley working after more than 3 years. It still blinks and the pedestrian sign has been covered with a black, plastic bag for over 3 years. I was almost hit by a car turning from Whalley onto W Rock Ave by some jerk driving a the speed of light down fountain and not yielding to cars on Whalley. If they can't get the police involved in this city's traffic enforcement and get lights working after more than 3 years, the DOT could create a utopia and it wouldn't make a damn difference. Where are the police catching speeders anyways!? I'm growing more and more frustrated with this city every day. No wonder people are selling their homes and leaving for the burbs. High taxes and no service are not a great combination.

Whalley Redesign Ready To Go

Comments

Sorry, Comments are closed for this entry

Special Sections

Legal Notices

Some Favorite Sites

Government/ Community Links

Flyerboard

Sponsors

N.H.I. Site Design & Development

NHI Store

News Feed