Hello Jim,

Who did you contact at CTDOT? Did they get back to you at all?

I just emailed Katherine Rattan - I found her email on http://www.ct.gov/dot/cwp/view.asp?a=3531&q=259658. Hope she gets back to me! Here's what I sent her:

-----------------------------------------
It sounds like the issue reporter is bicycling on the road, and needs to trigger a left-turn arrow. His bike won't trigger it, so he has to push a button mounted on a pole, but by the time he gets back to his bike, the arrow is almost out.

I was wondering whether it's possible to make the bicycle trigger the turn signal, or if it's not, either make the arrow last longer (when it's triggered from the button), or give the bicyclist some extra time to get back to his bike BEFORE triggering the arrow. Do any of those sound feasible?

Dan:
Thanks for sending this to Kate Rattan. She has already responded to my report on the CTDOT website saying that she referred my complaint to Traffic Operations with a personal comment that she did not know whether the controller could be adjusted to be sensitive to a bike in the loop. My main point in sending this report was to get it fixed (thanks for your clarification of this), but, secondly, to complain that CTDOT could allow a major road construction project to so blatantly overlook cyclists' needs.
I have also involved CCRPA, of which I am a Board member, in this effort, but I'm not holding my breath for any quick response by them or anyone else on this issue.
What is your interest or involvement in this? Thanks for whatever is your motivation.
Jim

Jim:

Kate replied to me, and said much the same. I asked again whether they can extend or delay the arrow, to buy bicyclists more time. Do you think that would help?

I'm a life-long Bristol/Forestville resident, and a frequent walker, so I like to keep my home safe for non-motorists. And I work at SeeClickFix, so I'm always interested in seeing how we can keep the system working. :)

Dan: thanks for the info. So, you work & SCF. I hope you were not personally offended by my negative comment about whether SCF was proper name for this initiative. Yours is the first personal response I received from SCF, although I think Francis Pickering @ CCRPA said he received notice of the issue from SCF. Not sure he has done anything with it.
I note with interest you are from . One of my bike advocacy colleagues is currently serving on a study group (through CCRPA) looking at ways to improve the Center (including bike/ped options). Jim Barnes is his name, and I have copied him in on our exchange. I would welcome some exchange by email, if you would like. You probably already have my address. My phone is 860-302-0596.

Jim: not offended at all. We're a small team, so it's tough to watch everything, but we like to know when things aren't working as well as they could.

More info from Kate:

"The correct way to turn, if you can't actuate the traffic light, would be to use the crosswalk like a pedestrian. This accommodation will work in the short term, as the crosswalk timing is based on a walker therefore a cyclist should be able to clear the intersection in less time. Signal timing will depend on many factors of which, multimodal accommodation is one consideration. Traffic determines those signal timings and calibration."

I have not ridden this intersection recently, but will do so soon and report what I find.

Still not fixed. This must be on the very bottom of CTDOT priority list. Heck, it's just about bikes. DOT is just pro car, not anti bike, so it will take a while.

I

I am sorely tempted to close this issue as nothing noteworthy has ever come from it. In the beginning there was some live help from Dan Bernier, but now all I get is automated inquiries from a faceless machine. I'm no longer impressed enough with SCF to respond to such queries in the future, but I will leave the issue open in the hope that someone will take it seriously before there is a bike-car accident here..

Still no progress. Is anybody there?

This issue remains the same: no signal activation for cyclists traveling east on CT Rte 372, and westbound cyclists must dismount to activate push button in the middle of an island as if they were pedestrians. As a cyclist, one wants to just be able to roll thru the intersection on a green light without resorting to changing transportation mode and becoming a pedestrian pushing a bike. My biggest gripe about this issue, other than the pathetic response it has received from CTDOT, is that these signals were installed not all that long ago. One would hope that CTDOT would have considered how to make the intersection bicycle friendly, especially since CT Rte 372 at this location is part pf CT Bike Route #4. This cyclist, unlike many, prefers to observe road rules in the interest of my own safety, but also to set a good example for both cyclists and motorists.

Unbelievable? No. Quite the contrary. I think SeeClickFix is a great idea, but those to whom these issues are addressed, by lack of meaningful response, denigrate us who raise the issue. Or, in my case,, keep it open. Other than several responses by a SCF employee who happened to be living nearby to the site of the issue, the only other response has been from a CONNDOT staffer who said essentially: "Get over it and accept the cyclist's status as a second class citizen." This cyclist refuses to do that.

Not fixed.
No response from appropriate agencies.
Not giving up. I believe in efforts like SCF!

Does SCF continue to send notices to all with authority here? Town of Plainville? CTDOT? CCRPA? Does SCF offer any hope to resolve this?
Is anybody there?

Issue still open. The silence is deafening. It would be easy to give up, but I won't do that; not today at least.

Still hanging on, hoping for the best.
Now that CCRPA is no longer on the scene, I wonder if CRCOG even knows that this intersection exists, let alone what is the issue that I raised three years ago. Can someone at SCF please send to the appropriate person at CRCOG (Jennifer Carrier, I believe) to see if they can get some action?
Thanks.

It's been 3 years! I'm pretty sure no one from SCF even reads these comments anymore. I'd be embarrassed by such poor customer service. I can understand such poor service from CTDOT; they have bigger problems and few cyclists.
I'll leave the subject open in hope someone from SCF may even contact me.

Wow. 4 years now.
I had a glimmer of hope last year when several members of a consultant engineering firm familiar with the situation and knowledgeable about a solution took up the cause, but nothing ever came of that. I continue to hope for something to come from SCF actions, but I'm guessing those actions are more electronic and routine rather than people talking to people.

Still open.
I just finished submitting my comments in support of SB425 to the CT Legislature with a copy to you. There, I stated my continued support for the work of SCF, even though it does not seem to be working to get CTDOT, CRCOG, or the towns of Plainville and Bristol to take up the cause for improving the signals for cyclists at this busy intersection.
I would also like to point out here something which I have not done before. This roadway, CT372, is also known as CT Bike Route CTB4, considered by CTDOT as a "primary cross state bike route". At the moment, one must consider such a bold proclamation to be empty words without any proof to substantiate the claim. CTDOT may still be looking for someone to replace Kate Rataan (mentioned in one of my first comments) as "Bicycle/Pedestrian Coordinator". Let's hope the new person can make more of a difference than she was able to.
Question to anyone on SCF staff with time o answer: Do these comments still get submitted to a live person after the issue has been open for such a long time?
Thanks.

I'm still hopeful that this can change. One thing I have learned since my last post is that the town of Plainville does not participate is SCF. This would explain why so little happens in that sector to correct let alone improve infrastructure for pedestrians and cyclists. Given that I am in the middle of a planning project for closure of the gap in the Farmington Canal Heritage Trail in Plainville, I think I'll stick with that for the next year, then see what more can be done about this issue.
By the way, does anyone at SCF even read posts on an issue that has been open for 1741 days?
Thanks.

I give up! Plainville must have more pressing issues than hearing from town residents about infrastructure issues.