For signs - I would specifically suggest 'Bikes may use entire lane'
Those are proven to be much more effective than 'Share the road'

I was told that there was going to be a dedicated bike lane on Olive by I don't know if it's really going to happen

@Frank, I was wondering about this as well and was wondering if Doug Hausladen might chime in on that front.

Sorry to hear that this happened.
But this is an opportunity for action. Logical step would be a bike lane, since it was already planned (but then delayed).
At the same time, might as well make a bike lane along Grand Ave (and maybe Water St?), connecting to downtown as well.
I could see there being some pushback to the stop sign @ Olive & Wooster, since it can get a bit congested over there. But a combination of bike lane and better lighting may be sufficient. Wooster St is a "destination" street anyway, so it would make sense to illuminate that intersection a bit better.

Last May there was discussion about a month long pop-up bike lane. I don't think there are current plans for a protected bike lane.

First of all I'm sorry to hear this; Elizabeth is a friend of mine too and I'm very grateful she's okay. Next as someone who also commutes by bike and sometimes at night, this is terrifying! You know New Haven is touted for the progress it has made in being such a bike friendly city, but it's even's like this that remind us we still have lots of work to do.

The easiest fix would be lighting because this is a destination street and the city would do well to highlight it. But please PLEASE put in protected bike lanes and extend them to Grand Ave and while you're at it bring them to Whalley too. Please don't let a fatality be the catalyst for change as happened down Olive.

Unfortunately the roadway here is only 28' curb to curb, probably inadequate for a bike lane, though it is being studied by Utile as part of a Wooster Square TOD study. Sharrows are planned for this stretch of roadway as part of Farmington Canal Phase IV, which has been delayed due to the city's failure to obtain construction easements from property owners adjoining the below-grade portion of Phase IV.

Could do 2x9' driving lanes, 2' buffer, 2x4' two way bike lane. Or at least a one way protected bike lane.

There should absolutely be a protected bike lane on this street. If you are a New Haven resident, please consider a call to your alder and the Mayor's office.

I think the way to go on this should definitely be a campaign to the mayor and the alders for this area.

Several thoughts come to me at once:

First and foremost, I'm glad Elizabeth is doing ok and was not more seriously injured.

Was the driver apprehended and were they given a ticket? If they weren't given a ticket because of their speed, were they given a ticket for violating CT's "3 Foot Law," which requires a driver to yield three feet to bike riders when passing (CT CGS 14-232)? Was the "Vulnerable User Law" invoked (CT PA 14-31)? If the answer to any or all of these questions is no, I'd like to know "why not"? I encourage everyone to contact Roland Lemar and their other state representatives and ask them why these laws are not being used. What's the point of passing all this legislation if it's not going to keep us safer? It is obvious that many in the law enforcement community don't know about these laws. We keep having the same discussions year in and year out but things aren't actually changing for the better as far as the enforcement piece of the puzzle goes.

As for Olive Street specifically, that's not a road I ride on regularly and so will leave it to others to recommend what infrastructure improvements are physically possible. I will say, however, as someone who's been part of Elm City Cycling from the beginning, that progress is coming too slowly. Go down to New York City and have a look at what they've been able to accomplish in the same amount of time despite strong, well-funded (and well-publicized) opposition to projects like the Prospect Park protected bike lane. Mayor Harp promised us two protected bike lanes (aka "cycletracks") in her first term which has now come and gone, and despite all our talk about "what's coming" (think the Edgewood Avenue cycletrack), we still don't have any protected bike lanes in our built environment to show for all our collective hard work. That's just not acceptable. We have great partnerships between the city (Doug Hausladen from Transportation, Traffic and Parking in particular deserves a shout out!) and groups like Elm City Cycling. Those relationships are healthier than they've ever been, but that doesn't mean we should be complacent with the slow pace of change. All of us need to work together to make more, better, and faster progress, especially on protected bike lanes. We're all ready to live and work in the city we imagine. I don't know about you, but I'm sick of waiting.

First off, I am definitely voting for this issue, as it is clear that bicycle infrastructure in this city needs improvement. I also was hit by a car a few years back. I ended up lucky (without any serious injuries) but it frightened the heck out of me. Olive Street is pretty narrow and the city did attempt to install a lane there this summer but it didn't pan out. I don't think that Olive St. is the correct street for the continuation of the Farmington Canal Trail either. there are other options available. (there is a big median strip running down the length of State St for starters) In any case, I guess what I'm trying to get at is this; the city has had fits and starts over the years in support (or not in support, depending upon how you look at it) of bicycles. The Mayor was a bit premature in stating that a protected bike lane would be installed during her first term but you can look at that statement in another way. You can take the "he said/she said" approach or you can assume that her making that statement implied she believed it was possible. Edgewood Ave is happening, it's just taking longer than expected to see it through, but when it is installed, it will be pretty awesome. But while we've been waiting for Edgewood, we've had some pretty cool stuff happen in the meantime. We've got a counter-flow bike lane on High St - never thought I'd see one of those in New Haven. We have more publicly accessible bike racks in the city than we've ever had before. We have publicly accessible bike repairs stations as well. Complete Streets projects like Audubon and Whitney were accomplished. That road diet is being installed right now on Whalley Ave in Westville. The bike lane on Elm St is quite nice (they could have added protection between college and church though) And then the icing on the cake - and this is where Mr. Rob Rocke should take note, we have a protected two-way cycle track being installed on Long Wharf Dr. right now. You can ride your bike down there and take a look if you don't believe me and there are already bike racks installed along the harbor side. So yes, NH needs to do more but don't overlook what it has accomplished within the last couple of years.

@Road-2-Ruin, as a resident who lives right off of Whalley Avenue in the lower Beaver Hills neighborhood, I can't tell you how happy it makes me to see the road diet (which was explained to us at a recent Whalley Avenue Main Street Committee meeting)being applied on Whalley Avenue! Now I would really love to see this come all the way down the Avenue to at least Sperry or Dwight Street as traffic calming is needed ALL THE WAY DOWN the Avenue to encourage safer conditions for cyclists, pedestrians, and cars!

Your post gives me new perspective on how much has been done in the city to make it safer for cyclists, but agree with Rob that the city needs to stop dragging its feet with installing more protected bike lanes throughout the city.

I personally can't wait to try out the new protected bike lane on Long Wharf and would be happy to take a ride with any of the posters here :)

I agree with the above that this should happen (and quickly!). It's been an agenda item for many years, since before the current Mayor took office, and the lack of a solution is disheartening.

Maybe Olive Street starting at William could be designated a pedestrian/cyclist way with 5 mph car access? That might be wild, but I think the city should propose several options, including pie-in-the-sky ones.

Sorry to hear about this. It isn't clear whether the car was heading south on Olive Street and turned left onto Wooster or overtook Elizabeth as they both headed north and then turned across her path. The former is more likely, I believe the most common form of car-bicycle accident, and not at all helped by having a bike lane on Olive Street. For that matter, the other possibility isn't helped by having a bike lane, either. A stop sign might be effective.

Glad to hear a cyclist was not severely injured. Sorry this happened.
As a cyclist in New Haven, biking East Rock - YNHH most days, I feel incredibly unsafe most of the time. New Haven has publicly boasted of being a bicycle friendly city but I have not found this to be the case at all.
For example, the Orange Street bike lanes are threatened from both sides - moving traffic on one, opening doors on the other. The bike lane on College Street going to YNHH disappears - what to do? Merge with traffic or merge with pedestrians? That same bike lane only goes one way. Going home, I must use the sidewalks.
With so much of the history of biking rooted in New Haven, this mode of traveling should be supported no less than walking or driving. It should also be supported because biking is healthy, cheap, doesn't pollute, and doesn't wear the streets down.
If I have the numbers right, it costs as much to revamp an entire city's bicycle infrastructure as it costs to build ONE mile of highway (including physically separated bike lanes and specific traffic lights for bikers).

Olive is a shortcut to avoid State Street for people trying to zip onto 95 or 91. Another shortcut is from Grand, down Jefferson, Chestnut, Greene, and Academy to Chapel and then on toward the interstate to avoid the mess of State Street. No pedestrian or cyclist is safe as long as people are allowed to double the speed limit through residential neighborhoods. If Jefferson or Chestnut were reoriented into one-way heading north, this problem would substantially be solved.

I can't understand why the entrance for 95N is still at the end of Wooster St. This makes Wooster St into a long on-ramp and brings more traffic onto Olive., and causes a backup at Chapel and Franklin. In my opinion, that entrance should be accessed from Water St which is not a residential St and can be accessed directly from State St. or East St This would take some of the traffic away from Olive, Chapel and Franklin.
I know that this is after the fact, but that entrance could still be relocated to Water St.

A few random thoughts:

- A fundamental re-imagining of Olive Street into a bike corridor, with extremely-slow car traffic only, is probably not possible due to Fire HQ at the corner of Olive and Grand. They need an open corridor.

- Yes, a bike lane (protected or not) would not guarantee 100% prevention of this type of accident. However, the presence of a bright-green bike lane, combined with the better lighting I mentioned earlier, could serve to raise driver awareness - thus reducing risk.

- Speed humps on Olive and Wooster? Maybe make the pedestrian crossings raised?

- Overall note to the city: As you can see by the comments here, there are a many reasonable (and sorely needed) ideas presented by residents. Some of it can be seen as an upgrade to Wooster St and the surrounding area, which is a "destination." This is sorely needed. If we're honest, the city relied on Wooster St as one of its rare "bright spots" for so many years - but now that good things are happening elsewhere in the city, Wooster seems a bit forgotten. Bike, pedestrian, safety, and business-friendly upgrades to Olive, Wooster, and Grand (especially Grand...what an embarrassment) could serve to bring this area into the 21st century.

Well said @NHVCyclist!

We are closing this request due to its historic nature. If this concern still requires attention and you still believe SeeClickFix is a viable tool for its resolution the best way for it to be addressed is for you to create a new request including a current description of what is occurring and what solution you hope to see regarding this matter, citing/linking this request in the details. Thank you for your dedication to improving the quality of life in our community.