New Haven Independent

Posted by: anon | October 28, 2008 2:52 PM

This is really sad.

It's worth pointing out that speeding is a contributing factor in more than twice as many fatal teen crashes as alcohol.

Reduce speeds and you would save tens of thousands of lives annually in this country.

Posted by: Carole | October 28, 2008 3:20 PM

It's also worth pointing out that a huge puddle like that is dangerous, even for experienced drivers who are not speeding. City Hall, about clearing the storm drain or fixing whatever other drainage problem exists there (and elsewhere around New Haven)?

Posted by: Ben | October 28, 2008 4:29 PM

I absolutely agree Carole.
The city has started to take the initiative to fix our failing storm drains(Lake Humphrey and State was fixed a few months ago), but every puddle like this that is unaddressed leaves a tremendous liability.
It sounds like speeding was involved as well(and I'm guessing lack of seat belt) but either way these large puddles need to be addressed right away.

Posted by: Fmr Civic Driver | October 28, 2008 11:54 PM

Ejected=probably not wearing a seat belt. Judging from the damage to the car it looks like this wasn't otherwise a life-threatening accident. And given the NHTSA safety rating of a Civic, that's saying something: http://www.crashtest.com/honda/ie.htm
I don't know why parents let their teenage kids drive cars like this.

Posted by: Josh Smith | October 29, 2008 3:37 AM

There's no way that car hydroplaned, rocketed into a pole, and threw the guy out of his car at 25 mph. No, that gigantic puddle shouldn't have been there, so some of the blame could be put on the city for not noticing/fixing the problem -- but why hadn't everyone else spun out of control if the pool of water was the only contributing factor? This is yet another example of why we need traffic-calming in New Haven. This poor kid might not have been sent to the hospital if some quality traffic-calming measures had been in place here that forced him to drive more slowly and carefully. Mitchell could use some lower traffic speeds, like so many other streets in the city. I urge everyone to support traffic-calming initiatives, Complete Streets legislation, and the city's new "Street Smarts" campaign for safer streets. We all need to work together so terrible accidents like this occur less frequently.

Posted by: anon | October 29, 2008 1:34 PM

Yes, he must have been driving too fast if he lost control of his car. I work at Wilbur Cross and (once I heard about the accident) I knew immediately it was probably due to that large puddle that caused the car accident. It's a sad situation because many things went wrong here (no seatbelt, big puddle, and fast driving), and he is a good kid who now is fighting for his life. I didn't have him as a student but my friend who also teaches here did have him this year, and I met this boy last week and he was a nice kid who seemed to want the best for his future. So I wish him and his family the best, and I will pray for them.

Posted by: anon | October 29, 2008 5:23 PM

You're absolutely right, Josh. Accidents like these go to show why tickets for speeding need to be MUCH higher than they are now. Speeding should result in at least a $1,000 fine, while blatantly reckless driving (e.g. driving 40MPH in a 20MPH zone) should result in a $10,000 fine and confiscation of vehicle, like what some other countries do.

Let's all pray that this child fully recovers with no health problems, but if not, the rest of us are literally all going to be stuck paying health care bills that could potentially reach into the millions of dollars, maybe even tens of millions. Not to mention increased insurance premiums.

Creating safer roads and slowing speeds, as they have done in towns like Greenwich, CT, costs a few thousand dollars per intersection. I think it's more than worth the investment considering the loss of life and massive cost to society caused by ubiquitous speeding.

Unfortunately, as always, municipal governments are expected to pick up that burden even though the state/nation as a whole is the entity which stands the most to lose.

Posted by: Neighbor | October 30, 2008 9:40 AM

To those who insist he must have been reckless or speeding--I drove down that street about a half-hour before the crash and nearly bought the farm myself. The puddle was very deceptive in that it looked shallow but was much deeper than I expected. I was going about 20 in the rain and had to fight for control. (I'm the kind of boring driver that gets called "grandma" by passengers.) Poor kid.

Posted by: anon | October 30, 2008 2:59 PM

If that's true, neighbor (which I doubt since most drivers, even CT transit buses, are typically going 40 miles per hour down that street), then shouldn't the city immediately re-post the area as a 15 mile per hour zone before it suffers a lawsuit?

Posted by: LastStraw | October 30, 2008 8:49 PM

Yeah, because a sign with a "one" and a "five" on it will slow people down...
Although at 15, the police would be able to ticket cyclists there!

Posted by: John Tulin | October 30, 2008 8:57 PM

Latest Anon -

You have no idea what you are talking about - no drives 40 MPH down that street during the day. There are lights ever few hundred feet, cars pulling out, and people walking.

Posted by: anon | October 31, 2008 2:08 AM

John, read the thread - I'm talking about Mitchell Drive, not Willow.

Mitchell is similar to many other wide streets in New Haven in that it often sees highway-like speeds of between 50 and 60, but I'd say the average is around 40. I drive at a strict top speed of 22-24 miles per hour and it is very easy to tell when drivers (sometimes after they've pulled up, honked for a while, then passed me illegally...) are accelerating to twice my speed. Also, I've actually used a radar gun to measure the averages.

Based on my measurements, taxi drivers are consistently the worst offenders - can we ask the taxi company to install GPS speed monitors and crack down on this? You can put them in an iphone now, so it's easy. I can't see why MetroTaxi wouldn't want its drivers to follow the law.

Willow is much narrower, so people generally go about 30 or 35 there on average, sometimes a bit higher at night. Certainly better than other New Haven roads with that volume of traffic, and people actually walk there, but it is still far less than ideal especially for a neighborhood with such an intimate, human-scaled streetscape. I know all the SUV owners out there will complain, but all the research out there proves that we really must shoot for 20 miles per hour maximum for a street like that if we want it to be a place where people will want to invest in real estate, walk at night (improving safety), run a business or raise a family. Do you ever see people hanging out on their stoops on Willow and socializing with neighbors? If not, there's a problem.

Laststraw, I agree that you need more than signage to modify speeds to an ideal level, but it's all part of the puzzle. I was hinting that the city might want to start by posting it lower before we see more people hydroplaning and crashing in the puddle, even to prevent a lawsuit if nothing else.

Posted by: Josh Smith | November 1, 2008 2:46 AM

Laststraw and Anon,

You're both absolutely correct. A speed limit sign alone will not deter the dangerous drivers from speeding. Much more is needed to slow people down and keep them from speeding around town. Things like (but not limited to) speed humps/bumps, curb extensions and bump-outs, traffic circles, chicanes, bike lanes, painted crosswalks with different textures, raised crosswalks and intersections -- all these things can be used at different locations, often in conjunction with one another. Once these traffic-calming methods are put into place, the culture will change and people will grow to accept that they must leave early and not ever expect to get to their destination in five to ten minutes. Also, once a lot more bicycle infrastructure is put into place, perhaps people will be more apt to leave their cars at home. It won't happen overnight, but then again, nothing worth the effort ever does.

Posted by: anon | November 2, 2008 7:49 PM

Good post, Josh. However, slower speeds often don't result in any time loss at all - in fact, this can make the system much more efficient. For example, cars that are going slightly slower can travel closer together, meaning that more people can get through an intersection in a certain period of time. Going slow and steady at a safe, 15mph pace, instead of racing up to 35mph and having to stop at every stop sign, can actually be faster --- especially if you consider the extra hours you have to work at your job to pay for the additional fuel consumption caused by that kind of driving.

At most, slowing down from 30mph (deadly pace) to 20mph (safe pace) in your trip across the entire city typically only adds 2-3 minutes to your travel time. Try it out if you don't believe me.

Posted by: Josh Smith | November 3, 2008 1:07 AM

Anon,

I always drive the speed limit or lower on local roads, so I believe you. I see it firsthand every day. People race their cars past me and they slam on their brakes at the light, as I slow gently to a stop next to them or behind them. I was just referring to the "gotta get there in five minutes" mentality that needs to get wiped out in our culture.