Description
every road leading into the rotary is causing a problem. There are 2 cars entering the rotary from 3 different locations. The intersection is being blocked. It is a constant from 6:30 in the morning until 10:00 a.m. Something needs to be done.
also asked...
Q. Please describe the traffic issue (i.e., speeding, traffic lights, etc.)
A. Rotary blocked by traffic causing traffic jams.
A. Rotary blocked by traffic causing traffic jams.
38 Comments
City of Medford (Verified Official)
Captain Clemente - Medford Police Department (Verified Official)
R Carle (Registered User)
Linda (Registered User)
R Carle (Registered User)
Acknowledged Captain Clemente - Medford Police Department (Verified Official)
KevinCuddeback (Registered User)
Diego Fells (Registered User)
R Carle (Registered User)
Captain Clemente - Medford Police Department (Verified Official)
R Carle (Registered User)
Captain Clemente - Medford Police Department (Verified Official)
R Carle (Registered User)
A.P. (Registered User)
KevinCuddeback (Registered User)
A.P., could you be more specific about access & Rural Ave? Are you looking to preserve all movements into and out from Rural during non-rush? I think for safety (to eliminate Rural-bound traffic from crossing westbound High, it may need a "no access into Rural (ever, for anybody)" / "no access FROM Rotary TO Rural. OR How about "Access to Rural by Right Turn from High Only" (obviously, we'd have to reduce that to an icon ;-)? Then we could ask for those plastic reflective posts to show that traffic can't make that movement from northbound Winthrop or the Rotary?
Diego Fells: Paint and recessed pavement reflectors are very often enough (right now we've got nothing). Next step up is usually to re-pave inside the "islands" with cobblestones or ribbed concrete (still flush with the asphalt so plows don't snag and tractor-trailers / firetrucks can still "violate" the islands when they need to). Another option is usually small splitter island (the size of a truck tire) with a "keep right" sign placed about 75' back from the rotary itself.
KevinCuddeback (Registered User)
A.P. (Registered User)
KevinCuddeback (Registered User)
KevinCuddeback (Registered User)
A.P. (Registered User)
Ken M (Registered User)
KevinCuddeback (Registered User)
KevinCuddeback (Registered User)
R Carle (Registered User)
Captain Clemente - Medford Police Department (Verified Official)
R Carle, Ye of little faith LOL. Give me a shot at this. If I am taking the time to read everything and respond, (and actually agreeing with you about the Circle) , I am also going to go to bat for it. Like I mentioned before, there is a process that has to occur. Here is the update.
As far as Winthrop Street Rotary, It is being placed on the Agenda for the Next Traffic Commission Meeting. It is moving in the right direction. I will update everyone as this proceeds. I have been told we can do it. Keep forwarding the suggestions.
Captain Clemente - Medford Police Department (Verified Official)
Diego Fells (Registered User)
Wow, Kevin Cuddeback, your contributions are incredible! Are you a paid consultant or something? If not, you should be.
Thank you a thousand times for your analysis of traffic flow, "unexplained asphalt," complexity vs simplicity, and your posted link to the experience of Poynton, U.K.
This approach makes sense for the Winthrop rotary as well as Medford Square itself, which suffers from the same gridlock, "chopped-up-ness," and malaise that Poynton did before their experiment with such a cutting-edge approach.
I'm excited to think of the possibilities for Medford in such constructive thinking and writing -- I thank you so very much for it.
Diego Fells (Registered User)
Diego Fells (Registered User)
A.P.> "Resident on rural ave here, please do not close off our access to the traffic circle, please do start policing our street to verify that the only drivers are residents only, as the "do not enter" signage instructs."
A.P., does that seem fair? Expecting unimpeded access for yourself while denying it to others?
How is that equitable?
I live on Hall Avenue, a street that sees a tremendous amount of traffic that is obviously not from our street (perhaps some of it diverted from Rural Avenue's sign prohibiting non-residents from going that route). But on principle, I do not expect a similar sign prohibiting "non-residents" from driving within 9 yd of my kitchen. It's part of my civic responsibility as a citizen here to work with the traffic that needs to flow where it does.
I disagree with this "Residents Only" approach on principle, as uncivic, NIMBY, and legally ambiguous.
Who =exactly= are the "residents" who are allowed through this sign with apparent legal force? Am I, as a =Medford= resident, allowed to pass through such a sign on a Medford street other than my own, or is it only residents living on that exact street, only Rural Avenue? What about Traincroft St.? Crocker Rd.? Lincoln Rd.? Luther Rd.? Badger Rd.? Damon Rd.? Powder House Rd Ext.? What about Lincoln Rd north of Lawrence Rd.? Damon Rd north of Lawrence Rd.? What =exactly= is it that you want the police to enforce?
Where does this special privilege end?
Do we need to get special decals on our license plates or windshields, so that police will be able to enforce such an ambiguous rule? Good law should be understood by all and enforceable -- otherwise it puts unfair burden on law enforcement and dilutes the enforcement of all law.
What if a person -- in order to honor this special privilege -- needs to drive an absurdly long way around -- creating yet more unnecessary traffic on several other streets, whose affected residents then decide they also want such a privileged sign?
What if another person's "Residents Only" sign diverts traffic onto my street? Do I then need to assert the same "right," resulting in an ever-further degradation of our infrastructure?
Where does this uncivic approach end?
Have "violations" of these ambiguous signs ever been enforced? Do they in fact have the force of law? Have they ever been challenged in court? Were they ever discussed by the Traffic Commission? If so, I believe we need to revisit this issue, and have asked for it to be on the agenda of the next meeting.
KevinCuddeback (Registered User)
To Diego Fells' point: Police demanding "show me your papers!" as A.P.'s preferred way to enforce "Residents Only" is absurd in a free country, and a big waste of prime-time police resources, and a game, which if all blocks played, would result in no city streets being open at rush hour. Instead of demanding that the police staff the gates as we turn each block into a gated community, how about we demand better street design to civilize traffic everywhere, and spread the burden gently and universally?
"During Rush Hours" fine print is also bad design. We all take an eye test as part of our driver's license, but not even 20-20 vision allows people to see, read, time-check, compute, and comply while they are doing ordinary safe driving, such as, you know, looking out for unexpected movements or a kid chasing a ball into the street. "During rush hours" is clearly squeaky-wheel-grease pandering, not a real engineering or public safety solution.
KevinCuddeback (Registered User)
R Carle (Registered User)
KevinCuddeback (Registered User)
Jeff B (Registered User)
I'm glad this issue is getting some serious discussion. Better channelization of traffic is key here. Basically, we need to turn an outdated Massachusetts rotary into a modern roundabout, used successfully all over the world. I'm not convinced that paint alone will work here, however, but starting a process to redesign and reconstruct this intersection is in order.
Captain Clemente -- I cannot find the schedule for the Traffic Commission on the City's website. Can you please post here when this issue will be handled? Thanks.
Jeff B (Registered User)
Captain Clemente - Medford Police Department (Verified Official)
TexAustin (Registered User)
Closed Captain Clemente - Medford Police Department (Verified Official)