Reports (62)

  • Other

    Intersection Of Dartmouth St And Commonwealth Ave, Boston, Ma

    None of the Commonwealth Mall crossings of the alphabet streets (Arlington, Berkeley, Clarendon, Dartmouth, Exeter, Fairfield, Gloucester, Hereford) have crosswalks or indicators when it's safe to cross. Inexplicably, all intersections follow different patterns for who has concurrent green lights -- sometimes Comm in one direction and the sidestreet at the other side are green concurrently (perhaps for turning traffic?), creating a situation where pedestrians think it's safe to cross and it isn't. What's the vision for how pedestrians are supposed to use this as a corridor? Cross to the outside of Comm Ave (where the pedestrian signals are) at every block? This does not seem feasible.

    CLOSED #101002062249

    Case Noted. Pedestrians should cross in marked crosswalks.

  • Traffic Signal Repair

    Intersection Of Berkeley St And Newbury St, Boston, Ma

    In the back bay area. The pedestrians signals should all go at the same time. There are many instances especially during rush hour that vehicles making turns... for example Berkeley and Boylston. The vehicles turning left onto Berkeley only one or two vehicle actually turn per cycle because of pedestrian crossing. Having the pedestrian signals all go at the same time would probably help alleviate some of that traffic in the back bay area. And other areas in the city ass well | Signal problem: [Pedestrian Signal]

    CLOSED #101001880615

    Case Noted. The signal phasing at this location runs a concurrent pedestrian phase. While this phasing may impact turning vehicles it reduces the overall delay for vehicles on all approaches and also for pedestrians. Running an exclusive pedestrian phase at this location would increase the delay to vehicles on all approaches. BTD uses phasing where feasible as it allows for more time for pedestrians to cross and reduces overall delay to motorists.

  • Other

    155 Seaport Blvd, 11, Boston, Ma, 02210

    I walk all over the Seaport District, primarily down Congress Street from Seaport West to downtown. The walk signs come on at intersections where cars have lights telling them they can turn left making it treacherous to cross. There are many intersections where this is true making it necessary for someone to take a walk through the area to see what I mean. Happy to get together with you and show you where some of the problems are -- give me a call at 617-607-5995. |

    CLOSED #101001518790

    Case Noted. These "WALK" signals are concurrent and are what pedestrian advocacy groups such as "WALK BOSTON" prefer since it cuts down delay for pedestrians.

  • Other

    223 231 Berkeley St, Boston, Ma, 02116

    Green light and walk signal occurring simultaneously at corner of Berkeley and Boylston. Accident waiting to happen. People and cars go at the same time.

    CLOSED #101001439518

    Case Noted. Thank you for contacting the Boston Transportation Department (BTD) regarding your request to replace concurrent pedestrian crossing with exclusive pedestrian crossings at Berkeley Street & Boylston Street. Over the years, BTD is developing traffic signal timing and phasing that reduces delays for vehicles, cyclists, and pedestrians. Part of this strategy is to remove exclusive pedestrian phases and replace with concurrent pedestrian phases where engineering reviews show it is safe to do so. While an exclusive pedestrian phase provides pedestrians sole access to an intersection without potential conflicts with turning vehicles, exclusive pedestrian phases can also lead to the following negative issues: 1. Pedestrians will often have to wait a long time for an exclusive pedestrian phase. As a result, many pedestrians will simply choose to ignore the signal and cross if and when a gap in traffic occurs. 2. An exclusive pedestrian phase may increase the overall cycle length of the intersection, thus increasing delay for all users. Since converting many Back Bay traffic signals to concurrent pedestrian crossings, BTD has been able to reduce the cycle lengths by 10 seconds each time of day at most locations. With concurrent signals, pedestrians usually have more crossing opportunities and shorter waits. BTD's criteria to use exclusive pedestrian phases include: 1 Restricted turning sight distance 2 Intersection geometry dictates that concurrent pedestrian crossings may be confusing or dangerous 3 Intersections defined within "safety zones" near elderly housing, schools, playgrounds, health facilities, etc. 4 Vehicle/pedestrian crashes It should also be noted that BTD received requests to replace exclusive pedestrian phases with concurrent crossings in the Back Bay by the community and pedestrian advocate groups to reduce pedestrian wait times. BTD recently conducted a signal retiming study of the Back Bay. As part of the study, BTD conducted an inventory of missing Yield to Peds on Turn Signs at concurrent crossings. BTD will be installing missing signs over the summer months. Whether posted or not, it is required by Mass. General Laws for turning vehicles to yield to pedestrians legally in the crosswalk when they have a Walk/Flashing Don't Walk indication. If you are observing drivers not obeying this law, BTD suggests contacting the Boston Police Department, D4 Station, and request increased enforcement on this issue at specific locations you are encountering this infraction.

  • General Traffic Engineering Request

    84 Commonwealth Ave, Boston, Ma, 02116

    caller notes that about two years ago pedestrian crossing signals were altered to concur with the parallel traffic signals instead of keeping cars staionary while people crossed. Now there is a conflict w/ turning vehicles "at almost every intersection in the Back Bay" since drivers are too agressive to let pedestrians with the WALK signals cross legally and safety. Would like to see the signals returned to an "all stop" configuration |

    CLOSED #101001417733

    Case Noted. Dear Ms. Levendis, Thank you for contacting the Boston Transportation Department (BTD) regarding your request to replace concurrent pedestrian crossing with exclusive pedestrian crossings in the Back Bay neighborhood. Over the years, BTD is developing traffic signal timing and phasing that reduces delays for vehicles, cyclists, and pedestrians. Part of this strategy is to remove exclusive pedestrian phases and replace with concurrent pedestrian phases where engineering reviews show it is safe to do so. While an exclusive pedestrian phase provides pedestrians sole access to an intersection without potential conflicts with turning vehicles, exclusive pedestrian phases can also lead to the following negative issues: 1. Pedestrians will often have to wait a long time for an exclusive pedestrian phase. As a result, many pedestrians will simply choose to ignore the signal and cross if and when a gap in traffic occurs. 2. An exclusive pedestrian phase may increase the overall cycle length of the intersection, thus increasing delay for all users. Since converting many Back Bay traffic signals to concurrent pedestrian crossings, BTD has been able to reduce the cycle lengths by 10 seconds each time of day at most locations. With concurrent signals, pedestrians usually have more crossing opportunities and shorter waits. BTD's criteria to use exclusive pedestrian phases include: 1 Restricted turning sight distance 2 Intersection geometry dictates that concurrent pedestrian crossings may be confusing or dangerous 3 Intersections defined within "safety zones" near elderly housing, schools, playgrounds, health facilities, etc. 4 Vehicle/pedestrian crashes It should also be noted that BTD received requests to replace exclusive pedestrian phases with concurrent crossings in the Back Bay by the community and pedestrian advocate groups to reduce pedestrian wait times. BTD recently conducted a signal retiming study of the Back Bay. As part of the study, BTD conducted an inventory of missing Yield to Peds on Turn Signs at concurrent crossings. BTD will be installing missing signs over the summer months. Whether posted or not, it is required by Mass. General Laws for turning vehicles to yield to pedestrians legally in the crosswalk when they have a Walk/Flashing Don't Walk indication. If you are observing drivers not obeying this law, BTD suggests contacting the Boston Police Department, D4 Station, and request increased enforcement on this issue at specific locations you are encountering this infraction.

  • Other

    Intersection Of Beacon St And Massachusetts Ave, Boston, Ma

    Could you please make the walk signals to cross Mass Ave (at Beacon St) automatic at all times of the day. The signals are concurrent but seem to require you to press the button, at least some of the time, which is very confusing and inconvenient. I observed people try to cross at 8:15 pm and they seemed confused as to why they didn't have a walk signal even though Beacon St had a green light. Thank you.

    CLOSED #101001337049
  • Other

    Intersection Of Beach St And Washington St, Boston, Ma

    The traffic signal at Washington St/Lagrange St/Beach St needs to have some protected/concurrent walk phases added. The walk signals to cross Lagrange St and Beach St rest in "walk" when Washington St has a green light. However, when Lagrange St or Beach St has a green light, most of the signals say "don't walk" when there is no vehicle conflict and they should say "walk". Can you please add/change the following? 1. When Lagrange St has a green light, the southern crosswalk to cross Washington St should say "walk" and the crosswalk to cross Beach St should say "walk". 2. When Beach St has a green light, both crosswalks to cross Washington St should say "walk" and the crosswalk to cross Lagrange St should say "walk". Thank you.

    CLOSED #101001216482
  • Other

    Intersection Of Washington St And Lagrange St, Boston, Ma

    Two issues with the ped signals to cross Lagrange St and Beach St. (1) During the exclusive walk phase, the walk signals do not come on. (2) During the concurrent walk phase (when Washington St has a green), the walk signals end too early.

    CLOSED #101001195168
  • Other

    Intersection Of Northern Ave And Ramp St And Boston Fish Pier, Boston, Ma

    Can you please make all the walk signals at Northern Ave and D St/Fish Pier concurrent? The wait to cross any of the crossings currently is quite long. Thank you. | Case (SR) Type: [Aircraft Noise/Massport] Referred To: [MASSPORT]

    OPEN #101001189339
  • Other

    Intersection Of Chestnut Hill Ave And Commonwealth Ave, Brighton, Ma

    My fiancée and I are pleased that Commonwealth Ave and its intersection with Chestnut Hill Ave will be repaved, repainted and receive new street lights. However, we feel it would be a truly lost opportunity not to re tune the pedestrian signals. Since we do not own a car, something common in our neighborhood, we pass through this intersection on foot very often on our way to Cleveland Circle, or the two other branches of the Green Line (the C and D lines) in the area. Having lived in the neighborhood for several years now, we could recite the signal sequence in our sleep. Unfortunately this does not stop not only ourselves from having close calls in the intersection but particularly people who are not familiar with the intersection. As it stands now, if someone were to cross diagonally across the intersection (say, from the south-east side to the north-west side) ONLY when the pedestrian signals shows WALK, we feel it would take that person somewhere in the time frame of 3 to 4 minutes. All this just to cross an intersection! To say this intersection is auto-mobile centric and hostile to area residents on foot is an understatement. We feel that one of the best ways to remedy this would be to enable concurrent pedestrian signalization. In other words, for example, when the signal is green for traffic heading north and south on Chestnut Hill Ave, the pedestrian signals going north/south should display a walk sign. Also, drivers turning right off of Chestnut Hill to go east on Commonwealth, for example, would have to yield to pedestrians before making their turn, something they rarely do at this time because they think they have the right of way due to the DO NOT WALK signal that is almost always there. This could have helped me avoid a particularly irate young woman who was honking and flailing her arms at me and mouthing "Get out of the road!" while she was attempting to make a similar right turn. Not surprisingly, she believed she had complete right of way as it was not explicitly stated otherwise anywhere else. I certainly wasn’t going to wait another 90 seconds for the only time that particular WALK signal lights, which is when the left turn arrows for turning off of Commonwealth go green. Even then, that particular walk signal rarely changes. It is frustrating at minimum. In countless other cities across the world, concurrent pedestrian signalization would have been implemented at this intersection to better accommodate, inform and protect pedestrians all while not impacting traffic flow in any meaningful way. I would be more than happy to speak further about this to give you more information. Thank you! (this is showing without lines between paragraphs!) |

    CLOSED #101000071677

Filters

Search

Status