New Haven Independent

Posted by: norton street | May 4, 2009 5:43 PM

"pfft, this doesnt prove anything. north and south frontage roads are important arterial roads that must be maintained if not widened. they should be repaved every 6 months to ensure that i can fly down the street at 60 mph w/o getting a flat tire from a pothole (even though it costs me more in hidden taxes to repave roads than it would to replace a flat tire) because its not like ill be paying attention to the road or driving slow enough to avoid them. besides, north an south frontage have such a deep connection with the city, their names were derived from important figures in the city's history (NOT!)."

-a big dumb idiot, who drives a big dumb car

generally buses drive on their routes as fast as possible because they often get way behind the schedule due to the amount of traffic (other personal transport automobiles commuting) on the streets of the routes. i hope both victims recover and that our planners stop perpetuating horribly designed streetscapes. people relate north and south frontage roads to places like the boston post road because of the lack of dense development, the linear buildings that have little relation to people and the enormous car infrastructure in the form of parking lots, garages, and driveways. because of this people will drive fast on frontage road even though its in a city's downtown.

Posted by: Streever | May 5, 2009 8:18 AM

Sadly, neighborhood activists seem poised to destroy a development on 34 which, while not perfect, is certainly an improvement.

That's what happens when you let people play urban planner/traffic engineer.

Posted by: anon | May 5, 2009 10:44 AM

I would rather have the neighborhood involved in planning the Route 34 neighborhood, Jane Jacobs style, than have urban planners do it. Urban planners and traffic engineers were the ones who destroyed it in the first place. The people who live there and who will be affected for the next 100 years should be the ones with the final say on what the priorities are.

Posted by: nfjanette | May 5, 2009 10:53 AM

Given that some argue strongly in favor of mass transit, and given that it was mass transit involved in both of these accidents, it's not difficult to understand the motivation to try and shift blame elsewhere. Let the facts be known before offering opinions about responsibility. One thing should be undisputed: there is a dangerous lack of or insufficient pedestrian signaling in the college/frontage area, and vehicles and pedestrians continue to flaunt red/stop signals in general.

Posted by: Streever | May 5, 2009 11:12 AM

and... my sympathy to all of the parties involved. I hope the second individual fares well.

Posted by: norton street | May 5, 2009 12:17 PM

streever,
if you studied city planning you would realize that what the cecil group is doing is not city planning. the proposal has little to no relationship to the city and the only planning theyve done is for cars by adding a 3rd lane to each of the frontage roads. other than that there is some medical space, insufficient amounts of infill housing and vast parking infrastructure. this is not a city plan, it is a generic proposal that could be plopped down anywhere, it could be in orange, or milford, or omaha nebraska. it has no meaning and is therefore not worth caring about and is only worth rejection.

Posted by: anon | May 5, 2009 1:24 PM

Norton Street has a good point. There is a summary online here of what was promised at college and frontage, where the pedestrian was hit yesterday : http://www.designnewhaven.com/2009/05/biotechnologist-critical-after-crossing.html