dangerous intersection
Mar. 16th, 2009 10:37 amSo, there was Yet Another bad car accident on the corner of Powder House Blvd and Packard Ave yesterday. Including a baby in a carseat in the car that ended up on the lawn of 125 Powder House. This intersection, I believe, is too dangerous to have a blinky light any longer. People routinely cruise down Powder House at 45 mph or more and cannot stop for pedestrians or turning cars.
To whom does one write a letter about this? I really feel that a real, three light traffic light is finally called for there, at least so that one can push the button for a walk. Even a blinky light like they have on Rt. 16 so that you *can* push the button for a walk would be an improvement, but wouldn't solve the issue of people turning off or onto Packard, which people do pretty frequently.
Thoughts, dslj?
To whom does one write a letter about this? I really feel that a real, three light traffic light is finally called for there, at least so that one can push the button for a walk. Even a blinky light like they have on Rt. 16 so that you *can* push the button for a walk would be an improvement, but wouldn't solve the issue of people turning off or onto Packard, which people do pretty frequently.
Thoughts, dslj?
no subject
Date: 2009-03-16 03:48 pm (UTC)(And it's not a blinking light intersection, but a routine safety failure: when people try to turn left onto Somerville Ave from Mossland - the cars headed southeast on Somerville Ave routinely misinterpret the two sets of lights they can see. When I have the green light coming from Mossland, the "near" light on Somerville Ave SE is red, but the "far" light at the corner of Somerville and Beacon is green. I've almost been T-boned *twice* in the last month at that intersection because Somerville Ave drivers think that far-green means they can go, and the nearby-red light must be broken. Or they didn't *see* the nearby-red light, or at the very least didn't understand that *that* was the light that applied to them.)
Um. I should probably take the advice of this post and figure out who my alderman is and get some attention directed that way, right? *grin*
no subject
Date: 2009-03-16 04:32 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-16 05:09 pm (UTC)I'm not really sure what can be done about that intersection, aside from a complete re-routing of the streets or turning Mossland into a permanent stop (which would back up everything all the way past the Cedar/Elm intersection). Blah.
If only the city planners had played enough Sim City to realize that two adjacent intersections makes for a lot of crappy traffic...
no subject
Date: 2009-03-16 05:36 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-16 06:55 pm (UTC)I think the biggest problem here is that Powder House Boulevard AND Packard Street are just entirely too wide and un-cluttered for the amount of traffic they carry. This induces people to drive far too fast on them. Want to make people drive more slowly? Narrow the lanes, in this case I'd say by about HALF. Maybe we could use some stimulus money on it! :-)
no subject
Date: 2009-03-16 06:56 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-16 07:35 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-16 05:28 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-16 07:30 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-17 01:20 am (UTC)If you're in the rotary, there are directions that you have a flashing yellow to exit the rotary onto a street, and directions that you don't. Again, if someone presses a walk button, these turn solid red for some appropriate set of crosswalks.
but I know that because I've lived right off it for 10+ years; I constantly watch people do stupid things in that rotary. My own personal pet peeve is that when the crosswalk lights have just changed back from solid red and I'm in the rotary, the state reverts to me having a flashing yellow and the traffic entering from the road having a flashing red/stop sign. Thus "yield to traffic in rotary" applies to them, but they never do.
no subject
Date: 2009-03-17 05:43 pm (UTC)Blah blah blah. Like I said, just agreeing.