Author |
Message |
   
Andree Laney
Citizen Username: Apl
Post Number: 3 Registered: 5-2005
| Posted on Thursday, July 7, 2005 - 9:59 pm: |    |
Hi there, e-neighbors! For those of you who live near this accident-prone intersection, you know the "Dangerous Intersection" sign and flashing lights aren't cutting it. I've started a petition at http://www.ipetitions.com/campaigns/WestMontroseTrafficLight with the intent of getting a traffic light installed at the corner of West Montrose Avenue and Clark Street in South Orange. Check out the petition and please sign it if this matter concerns you as much as it does me. Does the unified community's voice bring about positive change? I don't know. Let's see! |
   
Moose11217
Citizen Username: Moose11217
Post Number: 56 Registered: 12-2002
| Posted on Thursday, July 7, 2005 - 10:20 pm: |    |
Very Good - Twice in the past year a car on Clark completely ignored the blinking light and drove right out in front of me. Fortunately I drive the speed limit and have learned to approach all intersections with caution. One time there was a SOPD cruiser behind me and the offending car got pulled over. West Montrose is out of control - people drive way too fast. A light on Vose, Meeker or Clark would be a huge improvement. |
   
Sheena Collum SHU
Citizen Username: Sheena_collum
Post Number: 245 Registered: 4-2005

| Posted on Thursday, July 7, 2005 - 10:54 pm: |    |
Very nicely done Andree Laney! Anyone know why there isn't one there to begin with? |
   
Joe Citizen
Citizen Username: Joecitizen07079
Post Number: 33 Registered: 12-2003
| Posted on Thursday, July 7, 2005 - 11:35 pm: |    |
Well it's quite simple why there isn't a traffic light in that area, or on any municiple roadway in South Orange. (They're all at intersections on County Roadways). See somewhere along the way the State D.O.T. (Department of Transportation) decided that if a municipality wanted to erect a traffic light on a municiple roadway, said municipality must have properly trained personel who could maintain said traffic light. Maintaining a traffic light is a lot more than just changing a bulb every now and again. So, besides the actual cost of surveys, and traffic studies, equipment, and installation, there would also be the creation of yet another new job tiitle in South Orange. Maybe before we go and ask the Township to lay out these kinds of funds; maybe the people who are so concerned about the intersections on West Montrose Avenue could ask the residants who live on the corner properties to do a little tree and shrub trimming. Doing this might open up everyones line of sight, allowing for drivers to see a larger portion of an interesction before actually entering it. Hey I'm all for privacy in ones yard but when someone else's privacy infringes on others safety then the priorities of all individuals involved must be weighed and ranked accordingly. It all comes down to the good of the many out weigh the good of the few or the one. |
   
Just The Aunt
Supporter Username: Auntof13
Post Number: 1653 Registered: 1-2004

| Posted on Friday, July 8, 2005 - 12:27 am: |    |
Good Luck getting the light. It's been talked about for around 40 years. Supposedly it can't / won't be done because of the cars coming over the railroad bridge... |
   
Just The Aunt
Supporter Username: Auntof13
Post Number: 1654 Registered: 1-2004

| Posted on Friday, July 8, 2005 - 12:33 am: |    |
Ring the bell of the brown house on the corner with the big hedges and the one right across from it with the bush. Both thosee families have been there about 40 years. They will tell you getting a light there has been tried a couple of times with no luck. Hope this time it works. And I'm curious, what high school is the bus for? Years ago, even the last house in South Orange on Clark (the other side of Meeker), were not far enought for transportantion. Unless you mean the five buses for the Prep. |
   
CageyD
Citizen Username: Cageyd
Post Number: 347 Registered: 6-2003
| Posted on Friday, July 8, 2005 - 10:08 am: |    |
Andree, as someone who lives in this area I too am concerned and have made many 911 calls due to accidents. I have also heard that the traffic light is all but impossible for various reasons. I have wondered about suggesting a traffic calming measure in the form of converting Clark Street into a One Way rd heading away from the park. I think that if traffic coming to the intersection was confronted by a DO NOT ENTER sign at Clark Street it would slow traffic down dramatically since oncoming traffic would need to turn left or right to proceed. This would also stop the high speed traffic that heads down Clark towards the park. Does any one know what would be involved in pursuing such an action, is that too a petition type of item or is there another way to approach this issue? |
   
mrosner
Citizen Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 2069 Registered: 4-2002
| Posted on Friday, July 8, 2005 - 10:18 am: |    |
One of the residents from that area has met with the village to discuss different options. The next planning and zoning committee meeting is on July 18th at 6:30pm. That would be the appropiate starting point. I am not really sure a petition is needed at this point but you might want one when all the options are considered. There is a whole process that is required to get a traffic light (takes several years). In the end, I don't think the intersection would meet the DOT's requirements (state, not the village). |
   
Just The Aunt
Supporter Username: Auntof13
Post Number: 1659 Registered: 1-2004

| Posted on Friday, July 8, 2005 - 10:26 am: |    |
Cagey- The one way for Clark sounds like a GREAT idea!The only problem is it would increase traffic on Meeker, and the people who live there might not be too happy. When my sister was around 10 she went around and had almost every one on Meeker, Mountainhouse, Clark, Page, Montrose and E Clark sign a petition for a light. Finally after years of people complaining a blinker was put on Vose and Montrose. Maybe what we need are 4 way stops on Vose, Meeker and Clark? I don't buy the excuse abouta traffic light being dangerous because of the railroad bridge (like they told us years ago) because there's a ligh on both sides of the bridge by on Wyoming near Millburn Ave. At least the family in the one house took down all the bushes, which makes it a little easier to see. I think the problem, like a lot of us who live think, is people who are driving South on Clark, who blow through the stop sign. Supposedly, they 'don't see it.' DUH, how can they miss it? If you do try to get the street one way, let's us know. I;m sure my family would be willing to help. I think we would have more of a chance doing that then getting a traffic light.
|
   
Daniel M. Jacobs, PP, AICP
Supporter Username: Conrail
Post Number: 45 Registered: 1-2004
| Posted on Friday, July 8, 2005 - 10:31 am: |    |
Traffic signals do not prevent speeding. This is counterintuitive (I know), but it is true. Traffic signals serve one purpose: to ration capacity within an intersection between opposing flows of traffic. In order to get a traffic signal, an intersection must meet at least one of eleven warrants. These warrants (criteria, really) measure vehicle and pedestrian flows in the intersection. If opposing flows in the intersection are high enough, a signal is installed to ration capacity -- if not (that is, if gaps in traffic are long) a stop sign is sufficient. I suspect that the vehicle volumes on Clark/Valley are too low to "warrant" a signal (I live on Clark). It is also a myth that traffic signals prevent accidents. They change the types of accidents at intersections -- from side impacts to rear-ends. Ironically, if a signal is installed on flat open roadway, a signal can increase traffic speeds, as vehicles race to "beat" the signal when the "don't walk" signal begins to flash (which is why many DOTs have experimented with blinders that hide the signal aspect or color until the vehicle is close to the intersection). There are many ways to slow traffic and better ration capacity -- enforcement is the best one -- rotaries are another. |
   
Nonymous Reingold
Supporter Username: Noglider
Post Number: 8213 Registered: 1-2003

| Posted on Friday, July 8, 2005 - 11:37 am: |    |
Interesting, Daniel! Do stop signs help in situations like this? Given how poorly NJ drivers handle rotaries and how poorly the laws for them are written, I am surprised that you count it among the tools for slowing traffic. I suppose they might slow traffic, but what is the effect on accident rate?
|
   
Andree Laney
Citizen Username: Apl
Post Number: 4 Registered: 5-2005
| Posted on Friday, July 8, 2005 - 11:47 am: |    |
Thank you all for taking an interest in this! A "traffic calming device," as someone put it, of greater effectiveness than the existing items is precisely what we need! It may be impossible to install a traffic light but, in my lay opinion, that's the best alternative and, barring that, speed bumps or some sort of redirecting of traffic (although the latter may just shift the problem). However, I think it best to be specific, ask for the most you can get and then work toward getting the best available option. The present situation isn't it. The objective: to generate discussion on the feasibility of a traffic light, but also to spark action toward improving this bad situation. I, too, have heard this has been explored before. Perhaps we can speak to/learn from our predecessors to find ways around the roadblocks (Forgive the allegory) they had put before them. Most importantly, if we persist in this effort the Board then understands that, despite the obstacles, we want progress and won't give up from sheer frustration. (Will we?) Yes, the Board's Planning and Zoning Committee meets on 6/18, and the entire Board has its regular meeting on 6/25. It would be great to have something tangible to put before them to reignite the process toward change. |
   
Dave
Supporter Username: Dave
Post Number: 6817 Registered: 4-1997

| Posted on Friday, July 8, 2005 - 11:55 am: |    |
Speed bumps were used in Maplewood by the golf course. |
   
mrosner
Citizen Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 2072 Registered: 4-2002
| Posted on Friday, July 8, 2005 - 12:04 pm: |    |
Speed bumps are not permitted on public roads. Speed humps, speed tables, and speed strips are allowed. Speed strips are noisy (Well the cars going over them are ) and nobody wants one in front of their home. As Mr. Jacobs pointed out, lights do not slow traffic and sometimes cause other problems (people go faster when the light turns yellow). By the way, bumps (or humps) create problems in the winter for the DPW and clearing snow. In my opinion, a rotary or a speed table are the two best alternatives. Currently we are looking at both. No question that enforcement is the best method for slowing traffic, but the village has many intersections where increased enforcement is needed so we basically rotate.
|
   
Two Sense
Citizen Username: Twosense
Post Number: 316 Registered: 7-2004
| Posted on Friday, July 8, 2005 - 12:04 pm: |    |
Aren't there statutes/ordinances prohibiting shrubs/fencing/obstacles -- not to mention parked vehicles -- from being within x feet of an intersection? Beyond brazen, reckless drivers, this is the largest contributing factor to dangerous intersections in our neighborhoods. Drivers simply cannot see oncoming traffic as they approach an obscured intersection. If the intersection in question suffers from this problem, why not start by petitioning your neighbors to pull-out any visual obstructions. |
   
Dave
Supporter Username: Dave
Post Number: 6818 Registered: 4-1997

| Posted on Friday, July 8, 2005 - 12:19 pm: |    |
Some studies in Europe have shown that removing ALL signage and signals causes everyone to proceed with the most caution.
quote:Monderman and I are tooling around the rural two-lane roads of northern Holland, where he works as a road designer. He wants to show me a favorite intersection he designed. It's a busy junction that doesn't contain a single traffic signal, road sign, or directional marker, an approach that turns eight decades of traditional traffic thinking on its head. Wearing a striped tie and crisp blue blazer with shiny gold buttons, Monderman looks like the sort of stout, reliable fellow you'd see on a package of pipe tobacco. He's worked as a civil engineer and traffic specialist for more than 30 years and, for a time, ran his own driving school. Droll and reserved, he's easy to underestimate - but his ideas on road design, safety, and city planning are being adopted from Scandinavia to the Sunshine State. Riding in his green Saab, we glide into Drachten, a 17th-century village that has grown into a bustling town of more than 40,000. We pass by the performing arts center, and suddenly, there it is: the Intersection. It's the confluence of two busy two-lane roads that handle 20,000 cars a day, plus thousands of bicyclists and pedestrians. Several years ago, Monderman ripped out all the traditional instruments used by traffic engineers to influence driver behavior - traffic lights, road markings, and some pedestrian crossings - and in their place created a roundabout, or traffic circle. The circle is remarkable for what it doesn't contain: signs or signals telling drivers how fast to go, who has the right-of-way, or how to behave. There are no lane markers or curbs separating street and sidewalk, so it's unclear exactly where the car zone ends and the pedestrian zone begins. To an approaching driver, the intersection is utterly ambiguous - and that's the point.
And, by the way, the accident rate dropped. http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.12/traffic.html |
   
Nonymous Reingold
Supporter Username: Noglider
Post Number: 8220 Registered: 1-2003

| Posted on Friday, July 8, 2005 - 12:25 pm: |    |
Dave, are you suggesting that Americans and Europeans drive similarly?
|
   
Daniel M. Jacobs, PP, AICP
Supporter Username: Conrail
Post Number: 46 Registered: 1-2004
| Posted on Friday, July 8, 2005 - 1:09 pm: |    |
Janine Bauer, who is on the planning board and lives in the neighborhood, is a great resource on issues like these and should be consulted. BTW, traditional traffic circles give priority to traffic entering the circle and do not properly discourage counter-clockwise movements. A modern rotary gives priority to vehicles already in the rotary and dicourages counter-clockwise movements. Also, speed humps have been shown to slow emergency response (ambulances) in many communities. |
   
Brett Weir
Citizen Username: Brett_weir
Post Number: 751 Registered: 4-2004
| Posted on Friday, July 8, 2005 - 3:30 pm: |    |
Perhaps a 4-way stop in lieu of a traffic light. Less time and paperwork, and it seems to have worked on Tichenor Ave. Trimming some tree branches might help in the meantime, as the stop signs and blinking lights may be partially obstructed. |
   
Joe Citizen
Citizen Username: Joecitizen07079
Post Number: 34 Registered: 12-2003
| Posted on Friday, July 8, 2005 - 3:53 pm: |    |
Hey, just about anything that is used to slow drivers and change the routes of traffic will slow emergency responce. Funny thing about rotaries, most of the rest of the country is taking them out and South Orange is putting them in. Personally I like the idea of speed humps. They have a more gradual yet higher rise than spped bumps not to mention they are accompanied by more signage and markings on the street. |
   
Laracy
Citizen Username: Laracy
Post Number: 24 Registered: 3-2004
| Posted on Friday, July 8, 2005 - 4:00 pm: |    |
My mother lives on Clark and we have definitely been bothered by the high number of accidents there (just saw one last week). I agree that the 4-way stop is the best idea if a light isn't possible. I've driven there many times and don't think low visibility is the problem - although maybe I'm just extra careful b/c I know how dangerous the intersection is. |
   
Just The Aunt
Supporter Username: Auntof13
Post Number: 1672 Registered: 1-2004

| Posted on Friday, July 8, 2005 - 7:56 pm: |    |
Brett- I thought the same thing about the 4 way stops. Have them on Montrose at Vose, Meeker and Clark. There are a number of streets that have a successon of four way stops in other towns and it seems to work well. |
   
Matt Foley
Citizen Username: Mattfoley
Post Number: 329 Registered: 6-2004

| Posted on Saturday, July 9, 2005 - 11:21 am: |    |
A guy I knew died in a car accident at that intersection in 1983. He was a student at CHS at the time.
|
   
Brett Weir
Citizen Username: Brett_weir
Post Number: 752 Registered: 4-2004
| Posted on Saturday, July 9, 2005 - 5:03 pm: |    |
JTA- I don't think stop signs at Vose or Meeker would be viable due to the close proximity to the overpass and the necessary clearance needed. I don't think the NJDOT would want stop traffic on the bridge and they would also require free passage within a certain distance. Perhaps 3-way stops at those locations might be permitted' with traffic coming off the bridge given right-of-way. |
   
dOd
Citizen Username: Dod
Post Number: 27 Registered: 5-2004
| Posted on Sunday, July 10, 2005 - 8:43 am: |    |
Slightly off-topic, but how does one go about changing the traffic patterns of a residential street? Radel Terr./Garfield Place has now become a shortcut thruway between Irvington and Prospect. During rush hour there is easily a car every 5 seconds and since Garfield has no stop signs, the cars race down the street. When you consider that Garfield is the main walking route for kids from the high school to Underhill Field, it's only a matter of time before some kid is mowed down. Who is the best person to approach with this or do I simply dig a moat across the street? Thanks, dOd |
   
Tracey Randinelli
Citizen Username: Traceyr
Post Number: 7 Registered: 4-2005
| Posted on Sunday, July 10, 2005 - 9:01 am: |    |
dOd: Have you brought the subject up at a BOT or public safety meeting? We're having a big problem with speeding on Fairview, and most of the residents signed a petition which we brought to the BOT. We'll be at the next public safety meeting, which is on July 25 (just before the BOT meeting). In any case, it wouldn't hurt to get as many of your neighbors together as you can and make some noise about it! |
   
Just The Aunt
Supporter Username: Auntof13
Post Number: 1682 Registered: 1-2004

| Posted on Sunday, July 10, 2005 - 7:34 pm: |    |
Brett- Hopefully, because there is a somewhat similar set up on Wyoming, it can be done here. If you go on Wyoming towad Millburn Ave, right before Millburn is a very steep bridge over the tracks. Steeper then the one between Meeker and Vose. There are traffic lights on both sides of the bridge. Coming over the bridge from Millburn Ave on Wyoming you can not make a left onto Glen (I think that's the name of the street). I wonder if we check with the DOT or police, if they'd tell us if the lights increased or decreased accidents. I like the idea of making Clark a one way out of the park. Maybe even extend it to the other side of Montrose. But that would forvr more cars onto East Clark, and the people living there might not like it. |
   
Just The Aunt
Supporter Username: Auntof13
Post Number: 1683 Registered: 1-2004

| Posted on Sunday, July 10, 2005 - 7:38 pm: |    |
Matt- Who was it who was killed there? I just asked my sister if she remembers and she said 'No.' Do you remember when the girl from Meadowbrook got broadsided and her van flipped? Thank God she was able to walk away. It wasn't her fault eithre. |
   
Andree Laney
Citizen Username: Apl
Post Number: 5 Registered: 5-2005
| Posted on Monday, July 11, 2005 - 3:48 pm: |    |
Someone died there? Gosh, I didn't know that. How horrible; although I certainly fear that every time I hear screeching tires there. I remember the flipping van, though (although I thought it was an SUV). My husband and I hadn't lived in the neighborhood long at that point. It was a frightening welcome. As for what to do about this (and other traffic nightmares), we should definitely attend public safety meetings, planning and zoning meetings, start community organizations, sign petitions, etc. Or else we run the risk of "analysis paralysis." In this instance, I have started this petition at http://www.ipetitions.com/campaigns/WestMontroseTrafficLight to demonstrate community concern with this problem and support for doing something about it. Please consider signing it among your options. |
   
dgm
Citizen Username: Dgm
Post Number: 250 Registered: 5-2001
| Posted on Tuesday, July 12, 2005 - 9:25 am: |    |
Good luck with the petition. It did not work on Prospect, and when the town fixed the Garfield- Prospect-Tichenor intersection, it actually got a little worse in some respects if you were a pedestrian or you lived on it. |
   
mrosner
Citizen Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 2075 Registered: 4-2002
| Posted on Tuesday, July 12, 2005 - 10:07 am: |    |
dgm: Just a clarification. There was a car count done and it did not justify a traffic light according to the DOT (state, not S. Orange). The changes at the intersection were done with input from residents from the neighborhood. Some of the residents have stated that they see the situtaion as being better than it was previously.
|
   
Just The Aunt
Supporter Username: Auntof13
Post Number: 1701 Registered: 1-2004

| Posted on Tuesday, July 12, 2005 - 12:44 pm: |    |
Mark- I'm sure car counts have been done on Montrose as well. How can we get something done? I know for a fact people who live in this neighborhood have been trying for years. Matt mentioned someone was even killed at Clark and Montrose. |
   
mrosner
Citizen Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 2078 Registered: 4-2002
| Posted on Tuesday, July 12, 2005 - 2:02 pm: |    |
JTA: Car counts and a traffic study are part of the state's requirements for a traffic light. I am pretty sure that intersection will not qualify. We have been discussing other options at the Public Safety meeting and will be discussing at the Planning and Zoning meeting next week. Part of the process is to try and do something that will help solve the problem and not create other ones.
|
   
mrosner
Citizen Username: Mrosner
Post Number: 2084 Registered: 4-2002
| Posted on Tuesday, July 12, 2005 - 4:44 pm: |    |
dgm: I got your pl but my reply to you keeps bouncing back. Please let me have your new email, thanks |