I believe we have a public official that can attest to the perils of bike vs. train tracks here.
I believe that public official also watches this website.
A little help Mr. Anonymous public official? :-)
I also know another person who was injured here for this very reason.

Not fixed yet. Signage and road markings are really needed before someone dies while crossing this. An astonishing number of people have been injured trying to cross these tracks.

This is a major designated city bicycle route, and the only real viable connection from the East Shore to Downtown New Haven. Consequently, it is used by many first-time cyclists, including many people who are new to the city.

Image of sign

Suggested crossing plan for when bicycle routes cross diagonal tracks. Source: http://www.tfhrc.gov/safety/pedbike/pubs/05085/chapt14.htm

Oregon signage

yes, the railroad tracks need paint markers and signage! and this beautiful bridge is dangerous to cyclists; i ride across on the sidewalk because the cars speed too wildly..

Yes, I agree this needs attention. My boyfriend and I ride over the bridge twice/day and it is a major hazard.

This is the only way into or out of New Haven by bike from East Haven and the Shoreline. It is horribly unfriendly to bikes. Simple fixes can make a huge difference here! Please do it!

please fix this, its BAD

I agree. This is a very dangerous crossing. I know many experienced cyclists who have gone down on these tracks, even after having crossed them many times in the past!

I agree,
Please do something about this.

I've been with 2 riders when they went down there. Yes, fix!

This is an extremely important issue. Safe ways for bikes and pedestrians to move between the center city and the east shore are important now, and will be even more critical when construction of the Q-bridge commences. The demand for alternative transportation modes and pathways will be even greater with construction congestion. This needs to be fixed and protected as a secure route before the Q-Bridge project goes any further.

It's a no-brainer. Although, I've ridden the bridge at many hours, and never felt particularly in danger, I can see where an inexperienced cyclist may feel endangered. Not really much of a fix though, except a seperate path (such as widening the sidewalk). Does anyone have a real fix for that issue?

There are plenty of fixes for the railroad tracks, which have caused any number of accidents....

$1 billion on the Route 1 and I95 (q bridge) and not a dime for cyclists/pedestrians? CRAZY! fix it now

Why not reconfigure the lanes so that there's one travel lane in each direction, a turn-out lane in the middle, and 6-or-7-foot-wide bike lanes on the shoulders. That's what the standard industrial arterial road looks like on the west coast. Multiple lanes in the same direction just allow people to change lanes and cut in front of each other. Minimizing the choices drivers have to make can reduce chaos on the roads, lowering the chance of collision and only moderately decreasing travel speeds.

THis is a very dangerous rail crossing. Many many cyclists have gone down here, both those who didnt know about its reputation and those who did and took precautions.

"THis is a very dangerous rail crossing. Many many cyclists have gone down here, both those who didnt know about its reputation and those who did and took precautions."

I think that says it all. Anyone who minimizes the danger of the track crossing is woefully misguided.

Brian's suggestions RE: the bridge would work, or just narrowing the lanes that are there to create a buffered lane for cyclists (image of a buffered lane at left). The improvements would be best if they at least stretched back to East Street and included intersection treatments there - as bad as the bridge itself and its high speeds are, the East Street/Route 1 intersection is potentially just as bad, for the simple reason that the multi-modal traffic volumes are so high.

These issues represent a huge barrier preventing our neighborhoods from coming together.

Portland, Oregon has great examples of what to do on major bridges, as Brian could point out.

Here is some additional background: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/elmcitycycling/message/9183

To the best of my knowledge, no one has dismissed that the rr crossing is dangerous :)! I think that has been acknolwedged on all levels.

Brian, can you post some of those examples? I think that a buffered bike lane isn't really sufficient for the class of users incapable of riding on this bridge safely. Let's also note that this is state property, so anything that we can think of will have to meet/exceed CT State requirements. I'm a big fan of any of the possibilities for the rr crossing, but not so enthused about the bike lane concept for the bridge. I think widening the sidewalk & making it a mix use is probably a safer device in practical terms: if the problem is a callous disregard for safety/life as has been attested to, I'm not sure that some paint--even with bollards--is going to be the safest or best possible solution. I think it'd be better to continue the "standard" which may be established when the routes from downtown to the park area are established: there may be an opportunity for an off-street (i.e. widened mix-use sidewalk much like by IKEA, and commonly used through Madison WI very, very effectively).

I think bike lanes are counter to the policy of Complete Streets--they take a class of users off the road/street--but in order to address the very real safety concern here, I think it's probably worth considering an off-road mixed-use path, that allows cyclists to continue to use the road if they so desire, but gives them a safer option off the street. I think when you put in a bike lane--especially a clear, buffered one--you restrict cyclists choices & abilities, and send a mixed message to drivers.

Just as an aside, I rode this bridge 3-4 times a week for several months, at the height of commute time, & did not personally feel in danger. It was part of a mid-week "New Haven to Middlesex valley" Century route I rode once a week throughout the summer, using this bridge every morning between 8 & 9 AM. I had no close calls & no panicked moments here... I would personally feel safer & part of the street scape continuing to ride in the street, & if we remove 2 full traffic lanes for a buffered bike lane, we essentially remove that option from myself & the large number of commuter/recreational cyclists I see clipping along at 20 mph here.

A serious danger--to me--is the RR Crossing which is long over-due for a fix.

The bridge design is obviously a longer discussion, and there would be many needs for transportation planners to assess, including the financial cost of doing things like widening a sidewalk for a mixed-use trail (that may be too expensive as a short-term option). Design isn't a black or white issues - buffered lanes are successfully used in many other places, and not used in others.

The key is to make it possible for everyone to cross safely, even families who are cycling along with young children in tow (like on many of the Arts & Ideas festival tours). The bridge is a small part of a much larger network of hundreds of miles of roads, so if implementing a safer crossing means that you have to slow down drivers or cyclists temporarily to get them safely across, then that might not necessarily be the worst choice.

Anyways, let's get the issues on the table and fixed as soon as possible (preferably before the weather gets nicer and Q-bridge construction starts) - the time for discussing specific design measures would be later!

Hi Mark,
Sorry, I'm not trying to debate you. I'm fully aware of what you're saying, & appreciate your POV. Just sharing mine, also.

I'm saying that I personally do not favor a buffered lane like you propose. That's all! No need to explain design to me, but I appreciate you taking the time.

Thanks.

Last fall I was riding with a group and two people fell, the got cut and brused up. This is a very serious problem thank goodness they were not hit by the cars that were following close behind. Please fix this!

The fact that almost 100 different people have voted on the need to "fix" this issue, not to mention the personal testimonies of so many local citizens who have seen their friends fall here and become injured, is an indication that this problem is probably worse than anyone realized.

And this is just among a small percentage of the population using SeeClickFix!

Mark,
is it a slow work day? :)
No, really, I'm not debating that this is a dangerous RR street crossing! I added myself to the list of people too, and have been pushing for this for years. I don't understand why you keep posting "proofs"? I fully agree. I'm not sure why you seem intent on "establishing" the danger here? as you wrote, it's self-evident. I was going to call you earlier to try to explain because I think you must misunderstand me, but couldn't find your #. I don't think SCF needs to be a debate platform. Give me a call if you still think I'm opposing you on this! 203 843 1866. I'm a little surprised by the volume of your response.

David, I wasn't responding to you - that was just a general comment for "SeeFixers" about the fact that about 100 people have "SeeClicked" the issue in the past 24 hours :) Hopefully this will help spur people to take additional action so that the issue can be addressed before the weather gets warm again! I am calling my legislators and the Governor about the issue. Sorry for any misunderstanding David.

this is by far one of the worst obstacles in the city or anywhere.
it needs to be mended.

I've found that the only way to avoid getting your tire stuck along side the rail is to ride across it which inevitably puts the rider into traffic. SCARY on this bridge, especially since there are large oil tanker trucks coming away from the depot there.

You can contact the DOT about safety concerns here: http://www.dotdata.ct.gov/contacts/contact.aspx

Something should be done to make this intersection safer; I'll leave the 'what' to the experts and the decision-makers but I have seen several experienced cyclists fall crossing those tracks. Riding over them in a group--even a small one--introduces another variable in addition to the volume and speed of local traffic.

There are two issues at work; first, the dangerous RR crossing and second, the inhospitable nature of the road. Personally, I've had more than one close encounter with an angry motorist on that bridge, but would be reluctant to be shuttled onto some kind of half-assed segregated bike path. However, I would feel very differently if I was riding across it regularly with children as I have done on several occasions when guiding bicycle tours.

Any chance of a conversation with the relevant state and city officials?

Good idea RE: a conversation

Please fix this. How many people have broken bones here? I can name some.

I submitted this to Conn Dot via their webform but I have never received response from that form. Lets see what happens.

We have been contacted directly by members of the public regarding the
Tomlinson Bridge. We are in fact reviewing the issue, and will be
responding to those who have contacted us, pending the completion of our
review.

Kevin

Kevin, can you post information as to how people can reach you guys on issues like this?
It would be excellent if you would create a watch area on this site with your information or at least post that info here.
There is growing frustration in Greater New Haven from many members of the public that the state is inaccessible and unresponsive.
Please browse this site to see all of the other issues on your properties related to poor maintenance, graffiti, and dangerous areas for cyclists and pedestrians.
Thank You.

If you would keep this post updated as well with what is going to happen you will be alerting all of the people that have clicked they "want this fixed too" and have commented on the issue.
Thanks in advance for your attentiveness to the situation.

Kevin: Thank you for opening a review of the road configurations. Are you looking into the bridge design, or just the railroad crossing (or both)?

We appreciate your attention to these issues as soon as possible.

Thank you again!
Mark

There is a clear need, plenty of money already, and plenty of space to do the right thing here and make this crossing and overall route safer for everyone. Personally, I would never ride with my kids out to Lighthouse Point from the west side because of this specific issue.

Kevin, thank you for looking into this. Please keep everyone here posted on the progress you and your colleagues are making in the coming weeks. Can you share the timeline and process for your review?

Chris

Chris, by "plenty of money" do you mean that you think that a very small portion of the $1 billion used for the two highway bridges should be diverted to creating a truly safe and convenient bicycle/pedestrian infrastructure between Downtown New Haven, East Shore and all of the eastern suburbs of the city?

Do you think the DOT would listen to a proposition like that?

Spending $1 billion on highways to cross a small river, but in the process creating a huge obstacle for the huge proportion of NH residents who don't drive to work every day, seems like something that should be addressed. Particularly if the site is just going to get worse over the next 5 years due to the $750M+ Q bridge project.

Yes, absolutely. Thanks for advancing my thinking. Of course, whether DOT will entertain a proposition like that, I don't know, but the ask ought to be made - perhaps by the city or SCRCOG, with the support of all the folks and more who would like to see these necessary improvements made.

That's a good idea, Chris - the city is probably following this, could they push that question as well?

Commissioner Joe Marie from ConnDOT is presenting at a national "sustainable transit" panel with Chris Dodd this month in Washington -- perhaps he would want to call the Q-bridge project back for a review in order to show that when the government spends nearly $1 billion to get cars across a small harbor, it needs to do a better job incorporating pedestrians and cyclists. 1% of the project budget would be more than enough to create a viable connection here for the majority of NH residents who don't drive to work every day.

I did some investigation and found out that the Waterfront Street crosswalk, the one that continues in the direction of the bridge sidewalk towards the neighborhood and which is seriously faded, is in fact a ConnDOT responsibility. I hope that it will be restriped as soon as the warmer weather hits (April-October is the window for epoxy paint).

Word is that DOT is apparently looking into fixing the railroad crossing (great!), with a report due around April 1st. They are not currently looking into addressing the bridge situation overall. In other words they aren't convinced that the speeding on the bridge, or the lack of attractive ped/bike facilities, is a serious issue.

If you disagree with the DOT and would like to see the bridge situation addressed, please send your comments to http://www.dotdata.ct.gov/contacts/contact.aspx. Yes, DOT actually reads these comments (and if you have time, you can copy them here so that other citizens can refer to them).

Street view image courtesy design new haven

Article about this in today's NH Register
http://www.nhregister.com/articles/2009/03/29/news/ctbikes.txt

I took some photos of bike/ped bridge accommodations while I was back home in Portland over spring break. I forgot about them until I saw the Register article. Here's the first (click to enlarge).

[2nd photo of Portland bike/ped bridge accommodations] This is the lower deck of the Steel Bridge in Portland, OR. As you can see--like the Tomilson Bridge--the Steel Bridge carries railway tracks. It is the oldest bridge in Portland and one of the oldest operating drawbridges in the West. On the top deck, it accommodates light rail, buses, cars, and trucks in a total of four lanes.

[3rd photo of Portland bike/ped bridge accommodations] I chose to focus on the Steel Bridge because the bike/ped path where I'm standing was recently added as a retrofit. In this photo you can see how they attached the new pathway to the 97-year-old structure.

In Vancouver, WA, USA--the suburb of Portland where I grew up--we have an angled railroad crossing in an industrial area where they direct bicycles up onto the sidewalk in exactly the manner shown in the Federal Highway Administration diagram included above (see Mar 4th post or top of clicket). I'll ask my mom to take a photo of it next time she has a chance.

Oh wait...never mind. I just took a look at the google maps street view and I guess this is an example of a false memory. I always used ride up onto the sidewalk and then back down into the bike lane in order to come at the tracks at a more perpendicular angle. I could have sworn there was a sign telling bicyclists to do that, but I don't see one in the photo.

At any rate, as you can probably guess from this photo, it is a lot less scary to ride on this street than Forbes Ave, even though the traffic is essentially the same (lots of huge trucks driving 55 mph).

This is this sign, though, which must be what I was remembering as prompting me to go up onto the sidewalk, even though it's hard to see how I interpreted it that way in retrospect.

PS. In response to snow/ice issue raised in the Register article, I'm pretty sure the steel/concrete plating visible in the photo above is safe for trains in all weather conditions.

Also, here are side-by-side aerials of the two crossings. I'll let you decide what conclusions to draw from them.

Here's what they did in North Portland where the bike lane had to cross the light rail tracks (path of cyclist shown in red in bottom aerial).

In case it wasn't clear from the aerials, the bike lane actually transitions into a bike path (sidewalk for bikes), which then comes to a right-angle turn just before the tracks. The sharp curve forces cyclists to slow down (so they don't get run over by the light rail trains) and brings the path to a right angle with the tracks.

In the comment about the sign in Vancouver WA, I meant to say "There is this sign," not "This is this sign." I appologize for any confusion that may have created.

Great photos Brian. The Register article said that the DOT would be putting up a small plaque below the RR Xing sign. Given all of the distractions in this area, that seems insufficient.

Photo of current condition of sidewalk. Too narrow for any meaningful use, littered with slippery glass and debris, ending abruptly at the cross street. Small poles stick out from the concrete and are tripping hazards. Trucks and cars whiz inches by at 60MPH, threatening to decapitate passerbys with their mirrors.

There should be a law against sidewalks that narrow on a busy street like this.

I agree with Brian. Can someone file an issue with the DOT on their web form and ask that they look into widening this sidewalk? It is a serious issue here.

file complaints here
http://www.dotdata.ct.gov/contacts/contact.aspx

At the suggestion of the previous commenter I submitted a complaint. I would encourage everyone else to do the same. Feel free to copy my entry if you want.

-------------- Report to CT DOT --------------------
Location: Westbound Route-1 / Forbes Ave on the east side of the Tomlenson bridge / Quinnipiac river. (http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=41.296284,-72.902294&spn=0.00109,0.002071&t=h&z=19)

This intersection is extremely dangerous for cyclists. The rail road tracks for the port cut across the roadway at an angle that makes riding treacherous and hazardous for bicyclists.

I have commuted by bike in three different cities around the country. I am also an avid recreational road cyclist. This is by far the most dangerous intersection I've encountered.

Thank you for your attention. I await your swift reply.
-Kam

Is the promised DOT report on the rail road delayed?

also is the dot going to do anything about that ridiculous sidewalk?

Why is there a delay on the DOT's report? Can someone please post it if it becomes available? This needs to be fixed ASAP. It is not something to sit on.

Still nothing from them? Why does it take so long to look at such a dangerous road situation?

what's the deal with conndot? i heard they had promised a report on this by the end of march. they'r just s itting there waiting for someone to die before fixing it no?

please fix this soon!

I called the DOT to check in on the status of the report that they had been working on. Will post when I hear more about this.

This is very dangerous. I have been a part of bike accidents at this crossing.

Please remember to put in comments to http://www.dotdata.ct.gov/contacts/contact.aspx if you haven't already.

Comments related to the entire bridge/sidewalk issues, not just the rail crossing (which DOT has already acknowledge is an issue) would be helpful.

Thanks Kam for copying everyone here on the comments.

It sounds like the DOT will be installing a little bit of new signage here, but not addressing any of the other issues that the community has raised. The next course of action may be to call state representatives and Governor Rell about the DOT's inability to address this major problem. Anyone else have thoughts about what to do next?

On low-speed, lightly traveled railroad tracks, commercially available flange way fillers can eliminate the gap next to the rail. The filler normally fills the gap between the inside railbed and the rail. When a train wheel rolls over it, the flange way filler compresses. This solution, however, is not acceptable for high-speed rail lines, as the filler will not compress fast enough and the train may derail. -ConnDOT Bicycle Design Guidelines, Page 42

I don't believe that this is a high speed, heavily traveled rail line. In fact I have never seen a single train use it in over 10 years of living here.

Still haven't seen any signage here.

This is a tragedy (or two or three) waiting to happen.

I have heard that signage similar to the one pictured above in the 03/04/2009 at 05:44PM post should be installed in the near future.

Also, last time I talked with them, some folks from Elm City Cycling were looking into other possible next steps.

On 6/26 I noticed that there was a Caution sign [see Oregon sign picture] installed, however, I was driving when I saw it. I think it may be mounted too high for a cyclist to see it.
I remember a few years back that caution warnings were painted in the roadway on the approach, this is where most cyclists would see it.
I have not fallen at this spot, but I personally know some that have. The alternate rout is the Ferry St bridge, but that has an open steel deck with nubbies.

I feel like ConnDOT and the city transportation department should be legally required to provide accommodations for bicyclists and pedestrians of all ages and abilities on urban streets the same way that business owners are legally required to provide accommodations for the disabled though the Americans with Disabilities Act. I feel like this was the intent of the Complete Streets bill unanimously passed by the Board of Aldermen. Judging by the Whitney Ave fiasco, the Complete Streets policy might not be as legally binding as we thought it was.

My question for the RR crossing is whether the state might be liable for injuries or damage to bicycles resulting from inadequate bicycle accommodations on Forbes Ave at the railroad crossing. After all, if the entrance to a business or public builing is accessible only by stairs (i.e. no wheelchair ramp is provided) I am pretty sure they are not allowed to just post a sign saying "CAUTION: Stairs not recommended for disabled persons" and call it good; they have to actually provide a safe alternative.

My guess is that the State would point to the sidewalk as the "safe" alternative, claiming that bicyclists should dismount and walk their bikes the mile or so across the river. I find this a rather weak legal arguement and suspect it wouldn't hold up in a civil suit. Who knows? Are there any lawyers in the house? Is this a sound legal arguement?

I'm pretty sure that if a cyclist were serious injured on that crossing they would not have too much trouble suing the State and/or DOT for the cost of their medical expenses and any lost wages. With the state DOT's deep pockets there are probably plenty of lawyers that would take the case in a second.

Yet another cyclist went down there--a very experienced cyclist--because the cyclist in front of her crashed.

Broke her wrist. Off the bike for 6 weeks.

Thanks DOT. Thanks City of New Haven.

There's an article on this in the Register today

http://www.nhregister.com/articles/2009/07/06/news/new_haven/a1_mon_necycling_art.txt

One of many, many dozens of serious and even near fatal accidents at this site

The road is a mess. It should be closed immediately. if there were this volume of car accidents within 3 square feet of road, that's what DOT would do. but apparently they don't think cyclists lives are worth a shit.

" 'James Newman, acting engineering administrator at the state Department of Transportation, in an e-mail to an Elm City Cycling member, said “it was not possible to improve the rail crossing geometry given the constraints of the location.'

When the DOT says something is "not possible" it's their way of saying that even though it's been done successfully elsewhere, they haven't done it themselves and have no interest in learning how.

Given the fact that they are one of the least respected DOTs in the country, their arrogance is astounding.

You'd think an agency with a track record as blemished as theirs might consider being open to new ideas rather than clinging to failed policies of the past. "

I recently broke my arm crossing these tracks. Please fix it.

The Chinese can build a huge highway bridge in a few months but we can't immediately fix a tiny strip of pavement? I don't believe that.

the two scars on my shoulder are healing nicely; a year after the fact. Yet the problem is not fixed! Does anyone have a contact at the Register or WTNH so a story can be done? this is ridiculous that nothing has been done (no sign, no colored pavement denoting a hazardous feature, etc)

if you've been injured here, PLEASE file an intent to sue the state.

you don't actually have to sue, and it lets them know that we are serious.

According to the DOT, the new signage (similar to the first photo on this thread) will be installed by the end of the day tomorrow.

To the injured person above -- there have already been two recent pieces in the Register on this. I'd encourage you to call WTNH and other stations, though, as they might do a TV piece too. If you aren't willing to be in the piece, I'm sure they could talk to some of the same people who were quoted in the Register feature piece - see http://www.nhregister.com/articles/2009/03/29/news/ctbikes.txt. There are plenty of people who are willing to speak out about this!

You should also mention that the Governor signed the "Complete Streets" bill into law last weekend, which requires bicycle and pedestrian accommodations on all roads (with few exceptions, certainly a road like the Tomlinson that is the only connection between New Haven and the east side of the city would not be excluded).

Please continue to post information and more details on this thread so that we have good documentation.

It's great the signs are going in, and hopefully we'll see even more progress very quickly. I know that the Tomlinson Bridge has become an issue of concern to the city, too, and that they're looking into longer term solutions.

This has even been highlighted nationally: http://dc.streetsblog.org/2009/07/07/clicking-to-connect-with-government-and-get-things-fixed/

that foto of the current condition of the sidewalk is incredable.

[drawing of bike signal with "dinner plate" advisory bicycle pavement markings]

thoughts?

Interesting drawing.

the signal head visible on the left side of the drawing (with the sign adjacent to it saying "BIKE SIGNAL") is a bike signal similar to the one pictured in this photo (included with this comment).

I'm missing how this addresses the challenge of crossing the track?

What's with the DOT? The public has demonstrated the need to fix the safety hazards at the bridge, and offered great, commonsensical, and economic suggestions for how to do it. Should concerned citizens call for a public hearing? A friend of mine was very badly injured here. Why is the state willing to leave a hazard in place?

The bike signal push button would trigger the all-red ped phase at the intersection of Waterfront and Forbes (just behind the viewer in the drawing). The bike signal would then change from red to green and the bicyclist would have an empty road on which to follow the white dots safely over the train tracks, into the left-hand lane, and then back into the right-hand lane. After an appropriate length of time, the bike signal would change to yellow, then red, and the overhead signal at the intersection would change back to green for automotive traffic.

[revised drawing] A second bike signal on the right might help to alert bicyclists coming toward the tracks that they need to pull over, push the button, and wait for the bike signal to turn green.

could a route from waterfront street turning onto forbes be incorporated? that's the main bike route to lighthouse pt etc (though rt 1 itself is also widely used)

Are the "dinner plates" in the lane of traffic, or off on the shoulder somewhere?

I printed out the drawing, colored in the travel lanes, and then remembered that I only have a black and white scanner. I hope this is helpful.

Here's a photo of a "dinner plate" that I spotted on a sidewalk/bike path near the Brooklyn Bridge in New York City.

Very cool. I like when they are made out of inlaid brass, but I suppose that could make them vulnerable to theft and more expensive.

I like Puzzled's idea of a public hearing. Would anyone like to set one up?

To ask for a Board of Aldermen hearing, write to its President, Carl Goldfield. He could assign it to either the Public Safety Committee or the City Services and Environmental Policy Committee.

Carl Goldfield:
Ward29@newhavenct.net

Would planting street trees help slow people down?

This is as dangerous as ever. It's very sad that it's impossible for our government to take quick action even when lives are so clearly at stake.

it really does take a considerable amount of time to establish yourself in the center of the road and slow the traffic behind you so that you can take these tracks at the right angle. it is honestly a leap of faith. when placing these signs on the road, there has to be significant warning WAY before the tracks so that bicyclists can take the lane before it is too late. not a solution, but something to help in the meantime...

The warning signs are incomplete; they forgot the MUTCD placard that's supposed to go beneath that says "abandon all hope, all ye who dare cross these tracks."

Juli, I suggested exactly that to the DOT when I heard they were planning signs. Despite the fact that I ride this road regularly and my extensive pleas for them to reconsider their position, they were simply not willing to listen.

Hopefully, continued pressure from the city and residents will create new opportunities for improvements.

please fix!

Crossed over the tracks last night.
The situatuation has gotten much worse.
There are orange barricades that force you right into line with the tracks.

Can these be adjusted better...more people are going to get hurt.

Also, the signs are not noticeable to cyclists who are focusing on a high traffic high speed road.

What are the barricades for?

I agree the signs are pretty much useless. Can't ConnDOT come up with a better solution? Don't they get that this is a main route where dozens have been seriously injured?

Would the DOT be open to adding more signs?

If you are concerned about the issue of cars parked on the bridge and blocking the sidewalks (or just want to report cars parked there), which is a frequent occurrence, someone has opened a separate issue. Head over and vote.

http://www.seeclickfix.com/issues/7750

Another cyclist was recently injured on the bridge, according to http://www.seeclickfix.com/issues/7750 - ironically a week after reporting the issue.

"Hit cyclist joins Tomlinson Bridge Club"

http://www.newhavenindependent.org/archives/2009/09/bridge_claims_a.php

Because bridge roadways are often especially dangerous, it is not at all uncommon for bikes to be routed onto the sidewalk (i.e. transitioning from a bike lane to a sidewalk-level bike path—a.k.a. “cycle track”). In fact, I had never seen it done any other way before moving to the east coast.

In doing this, the important thing is to make it 100% clear where bikes are supposed to be. For example, the street markings on the Broadway Bridge in Portland, OR direct bikes directly from the bike lane up onto the sidewalk (see aerial photo from bing.com/maps: http://bit.ly/lHAk1). The Morrison Bridge in Portland is currently being retrofitted to widen the sidewalk on one side from 5 ft to 15 ft by eliminating one travel lane. (shortened link to project website: http://bit.ly/1pDrea). This 15-ft sidewalk will serve bi-directional bike traffic and I think it would probably be the closest model for the Tomlinson Bridge.

Bike riders are not required (nor intended) to dismount while riding on cycle tracks, as they are basically considered bike lanes that just happen to be located at the sidewalk level as opposed to the roadway level.

There are two major engineering obstacles to accommodating bi-directional (non-dismounted) bike traffic on the Tomlinson Bridge sidewalk:

First there is the problem of safely getting bicyclists traveling toward downtown on the East Shore side of the bridge from the right-hand side of the road to the left-hand side where the sidewalk/shared-use path is located. I recommend that this be accomplished using a bike signal at the RR crossing that would halt all traffic and permit bikes to cross Forbes Ave at a diagonal, riding from the right side up to the sidewalk on the left-hand side. Conveniently, this would also solve the problem of the awkward geometry of the RR crossing.

The second problem is that the Forbes Ave right-of-way narrows down substantially between the RR crossing and the bridge itself, perhaps to as narrow as 40–50 ft (don’t quote me on this, as I’m just eyeballing it from aerial photos). I honestly have no idea how to overcome this problem, seeing as how there are huge gas tanks preventing CTDOT from having any realistic prospects of widening the right-of-way. The only think I can think to do would be to eliminate at least one travel lane to widen the sidewalk. This would unfortunately leave us with a 60 ft roadway on the bridge itself and only two or three lanes to fill it. Perhaps the extra space on the bridge itself could be used for on-street parking for the fishermen? This seems unlikely, as you wouldn’t want to have a situation where you need to lift the bridge and there’s a car parked on it.

I, for one, am stumped. It’s too bad the ROW narrows down so substantially at the gas tanks on the east side of the bridge/the roadway widens so substantially on the bridge itself and on the west side of the bridge. Any ideas?

Just saw a guy crash his bicycle Sunday morning 09-13-09 on those tracks due to his tires getting stuck in the ruts.

News today that ConnDOT is conducting some investigation into the issue: http://www.newhavenindependent.org/archives/2009/09/field_tested_bi.php

The note refers to the problem "taking a long time." I think everyone should contact their elected officials and see if they can get ConnDOT to fix the situation sooner, before more people are injured.

People are falling here on a weekly if not daily basis and it's only a matter of time before something very serious happens again.

ConnDOT has reported that they believe they have solved this problem. With the signage they put up 3 months ago.

The steady accidents that have not leveled off seem to disprove this?

Maybe it's time to get in touch with your legislators and ask them to push on this.

Hey David Good Call.
Who is the state rep for this area?
Bob Megna?

i would call every legislator in new haven about this. especially pat dillon, marty looney and toni harp.

• Move
• Close

A cyclist took a spill while approaching the tracks from the east during the Critical Mass ride on 09/25/09. If 125 random riders crossed the tracks and 1 fell, you could infer that there is about a 1% chance of an accident each time a bicycle crosses the tracks. As accident rates go, that's astronomical.

That's a scary video, Jason.

Note from a friend, 9/26/09: "on the yale ride today, two riders went down here."

jason I think there were 185 cyclists--still a good chance of getting hurt, but a testament to how many people feel strongly about this that 185 riders showed up to ride it.

Saw black car going about 95 miles per hour in the westbound lane this weekend, continuing down Water street. Literally. That proves more than just about anything that the design of the bridge is horribly inadequate. Please narrow the lanes so they don't look like a superhighway and add speed restrictions. Thanks.

NH Independent's captioned version of the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I203BujG6XQ

In 10 years of daily commute by bike, both in new haven and San Francisco, this is the only place I have gone down on my bike - excluding being hit by a car. This is an exceptionaly dangerous crossing and it is shocking that it remains unfixed after all the efforts being made by the many concerned folk here and elsewhere.

General question for those that commute or regularly travel the Tomlinson Bridge: if improvements were made to the nearest alternate route (Chapel Street - Ferry Street - Quinnipiac/Fairmont Aves - Woodward or Townsend - Forbes) would you use that as an alternative?

No question that this extremely hazardous bridge needs to be corrected, but I'm wondering whether this issue can also be used as leverage to push for the city or DOT to invest in a complete street through Wooster Square, Fair Haven, and the East Shore. Something many of us would like to see anyway.

i wouldnt use the alternate route because it is far less direct.

I fell on these tracks in aug of 07. My Left shoulder is still not right. Did some damage to my rotator cuff that was told will probably require surgery to repair. A MUST FIX for cyclists coming in and out of New Haven.

TP, would you be interested in a class action lawsuit?

There are certainly a few dozen people who have suffered similar injuries and would join you.

The neglect of the state and city in pushing for safe infrastructure here is absolutely astounding.

Has anyone heard back from their legislators on this? I know that a number (from New Haven and elsewhere) were contacted and had committed to look into the issue.

No progress on this. Amazing how DOT can ignore these types of safety hazards.

City just got $1,100,000 to improve "security" at the port, can some of it be used to address the bridge too?

I hear the city is getting dozens of millions of dollars for the port stuff... why not take 0.01% of that to make the city's east side and eastern suburbs accessible to pedestrians and bikers?

why does everything have to go towards terrorism?

Anyone have details on the construction taking place in this area?

Acknowledged By Transportation, Traffic and Parking Department.