I'm keeping a database of these concerns. I have indeed heard from many neighbors that folks would like TT&P to study this intersection and the entire neighborhood leading toward implementation of actions and measures in response to residents' concerns and other similar recommendations from initiatives including Safe Streets & Complete Streets.

Indeed, a very dangerous intersection. Cars coming from Fountain down Alden believe this is a race track. A four way stop would be a big help.

Furthermore, the Q bus stops here, so there are even more folks crossing than at a typical neighborhood intersection. Something needs to be done.

As a cheap, temporary measure, I have repeatedly requested TT&P place a yellow in-street pedestrian sign at this intersection (as well as at other, similar intersections in Westville). The intersection is two-way and has no signalization: a perfect candidate for a sign. If you think this is a good idea - at least until a longer-term solution is devised and installed - please contact TT&P directly to request one or add a comment here indicating so.

Long-term, rather than a four-way stop here, I think newer generation traffic-calming measures would be preferable, whether raised crosswalks, an entirely tabled intersection, neckdowns/curb bumpouts, center islands through the crosswalks, or some combination thereof. These measures would be more effective to slow speeds AND increase visibility for cars and people crossing Alden.

4-way stops, while cheap to install, have proven to be very limited in their effectiveness again speeding. Here's a quick run-down of some of the reasons why: http://newtonstreets.blogspot.com/2009/05/stop-signs-as-traffic-calming.html.

I really like what you're saying here, Chris.

TT&P Director and I visited this intersection yesterday. He took photos and noted trees to be trimmed and re-striping to be done.

He will add this intersection to the list to be studied which is the first step before control changes can be implemented.

Prioritizing is always a challenge. This intersection and Alden/Willard are indeed on the list for evaluation.

Thanks so much for your update. This continues to be an intimidating intersection. Recent accident which disabled the mailbox should be a warning to all.

Susan Holahan

This picture says it all

And again

I agree that this really needs to be fixed. Back in the days when I was a distance runner, I remember running though this intersection and seeing cars that had accidents or near-misses quite a few times. The pics above are very helpful. Alderman Dildine, is there any update on the outcome of your visit to this intersection with the TT&P Director?

I called TT&P Dir. today as the stop sign east bound is leaning badly too. I'll post when I hear back.

Here's the latest word on the study for 4-way stop:

The initial results did not support a four-way stop. This was a review based on the volume data only. We [TT&P] will now check crash or other factors which would warrant a stop sign. Yes, we did initiate a project to do the crosswalks. I hope this helps in the interim.

Thanks Greg. Any word on the TTP review of other data?

Based on the NHPD's own statistics, many of which are accessible on the New Haven Independent site, there have been quite a few crashes in this area, which seems to be evidence enough.

Just checking in on this to see if any progress has been made.

One of the difficulties with crossing Alden at Willard is the cars parked right up to the street corners making visibility down Alden in both directions very difficult. Crossing Alden at Willard, and at some additional intersections, remains a scary undertaking. It continues to be a speedway (a comment I made at least a year ago and now reiterate) for those on Alden. How about at least putting speed bumps on Alden if a stop sign is not forthcoming. Lessening the danger of this intersection should be a priority for the neighborhood.

Susan Holahan, a Willard St resident.

I agree that "daylighting" these intersections at the corners would probably help improve safety for pedestrians, although removing the corner parking spots also might increase speeds slightly which might not help drivers here.

Curious what the city's response has been.

In the longer term I agree that speeds along this entire stretch should be addressed through Complete Streets improvements. It is a residential neighborhood and should be treated as a place for people, not a cut through for speeding trucks. Some folks seem to keep saying these are too expensive, but we know from the experiences of thousands of other cities that they do not necessarily have to be.

I too understand the concerns of neighbors regarding this intersection. I've engaged the City and neighbors. The City per my request did have the required 4-Way stop warrant study per national traffic engineering standards. While I too still disagree with not yet doing something here (and elsewhere in the neighborhood), I still need help gathering neighbor support to back our requests.

Also, please link to my blog page where I've posted the "standards" and the results of the warrant study: http://dildine25.blogspot.com/p/westville-complete-streets-project-list.html

Speed humps

Per the City's Complete Streets Manual: "Speed humps are most effective when used in combination with other traffic calming/speed reducing measures, are they are not suitable for all locations. Also, they require strog community support to offset negative impacts such as noise."

I'm learning that better options than speed humps are what we should be requesting and funding.

Manual link:
http://www.cityofnewhaven.com/TrafficParking/pdfs/CS-Manual-04-05-10.pdf

Narrowing this street down at the intersection is probably what would help most.

Look at examples in New Haven such as Temple Street between Chapel and Crown, or Orange Street where it becomes very narrow near Bradley. Both are areas with heavy CT Transit bus, bicycle, and pedestrian traffic and the properties adjacent to them are now worth millions.

Although the city may insist that narrowing a street (e.g., with bumpouts) is costly, experience in other cities shows that it does not have to be. The city just needs to look into solutions that are more creative than what is listed in its manual, and install something that is "semi permanent" which can be removed the next time the street is reconstructed.

We can not afford not to act.

As of 2013 City departments have begun to review, acknowledge and respond to SeeClickFix issues. Since your issue is in the category titled "No Service Request" and was submitted prior to 2013, we are going to close and archive it. If this issue still requires City attention, please report as a new SeeClickFix issue. Thank you.