Crosswalk bollards that light up now straddle Snell Street
The Public Works Committee meets next week and will discuss "Amherst College placing bollards on Snell Street," in the public way. Safe bet they will support the safety move and then pass on that recommendation to the all powerful Select Board who will then vote to approve the project, which is pretty much completed.
While the more expensive regular full sized pole mounted lighting do a better job illuminating the crosswalk and immediate area, the stubby bolards illuminate just the pedestrian and create a contrast that is more visible to a driver.
Elaborate crosswalk below President's House S. Pleasant Street
A few years ago Amherst College also installed major crosswalks on South Pleasant Street and College Street contiguous to their campus.
Although Amherst College is, like UMass, a tax exempt institution it is also the town's number one taxpayer ( to the tune of $491,364 last year) due to all the houses it owns that are rented to staff, and two businesses that also are on the tax rolls: Lord Jeffery Inn and Amherst Golf Course.
In addition the College donates $90,000 annually for Amherst Fire Department services.
Although Amherst College is, like UMass, a tax exempt institution it is also the town's number one taxpayer ( to the tune of $491,364 last year) due to all the houses it owns that are rented to staff, and two businesses that also are on the tax rolls: Lord Jeffery Inn and Amherst Golf Course.
In addition the College donates $90,000 annually for Amherst Fire Department services.
Meanwhile the Amherst DPW is installing new LED lighting in all town streetlights, a project funded by a $300,000 state energy grant. Town Meeting recently voted $130,000 in capital funds for a new bucket truck that could help speed up the project.
DPW relamping South Pleasant Street
A fresh coat of paint sure would help that crosswalk
ReplyDeleteLarry- are you saying they've already placed the post and NOW are going to the DPW? If that is the case, shouldn't they be fined at the least?
ReplyDeleteI agree -- IF Amherst College did this without getting approval first, they should pay a hefty price.
ReplyDeleteLegally, we should all be equal before the law -- and there should be no difference between Amherst College digging up the public way and YOU digging it up. Or if some UMass student did it.
Would there be issues if your BabeTown friends were to dig up a town street? Whatever would happen to them ought to happen to Amherst College.
Thank you for you leadership at TM, Larry, speaking on the house inspection article. However, watching last Wednesday's meeting, I couldn't help notice that you guys spent an hour "debating" an article, including your announcement that were changing your vote.
ReplyDeleteThis had the effect of killing time, time that was allotted to the next article on the agenda and pushing it to next week. All the people who had arranged their schedule to come this week to address YOUR concerns, for YOU, may or may not be able to attend next week, so that petition was effectively killed.
And the petitions that were scheduled for nest week are also effectively killed. Delay is a very effective tactic for killing petitions that you are against and you have effectively killed two that are very important to people like me.
Last year, two music teachers at the Red Barn became homeless because they could not afford their heating bill and landlords found it easier to evict them than fix it. And, so far, this year three longtime Amherst music teachers have come to me looking for studio space because they have to sell their houses.
The motions you have so effectively delayed will directly affect us and that is not fair. It is too late for them, but future generations will look back at you and ask why you killed zoning that would have given us affordable housing by talking so much.
Feel free to not-post this, but please show some real leadership and moderate your comments in the future. The motion passed handily, and an hour of ‘debate; was completely unnecessary.
Kevin
Democracy is sometimes messy. Get used to it.
ReplyDeleteWell at least they are making Amherst pretty. As for safety the NJ dept of Transportation identified and tested a bollard-based approach. The approach provided the contrast needed to distinguish pedestrians from their surroundings and was less expensive to install, maintain and operate than a typical pole-mounted system.
ReplyDeleteI detest this type of crossing, and actually consider it DANGEROUS.
ReplyDeleteFirst, think about where we put reflectors on cops and DPW guys to make them show up -- not their feet but from pelvis to shoulder because that is what a motorist needs to see. If it were the feet, we'd have cops wearing black raincoats and orange shoes, not the other way around.
All this does is attract driver attention to the pavement of the crosswalk itself -- and driver attention is a finite thing. You don't want the driver looking at the pretty flashing yellow lights in the pavement -- you want the driver looking up three feet higher to see if there is someone IN the crosswalk!
You want the driver watching both curbs for someone about to step into the street -- possibly at the crosswalk, possibly not. You want the driver watching for small children who might do *anything* -- the classic "behind the rolling ball comes the running child."
Furthermore, you neither want pedestrians stepping off the sidewalk with a delay, nor motorists being forced to suddenly come to an unexpected stop. It is dangerous to have traffic come to a sudden stop, that is why school buses and traffic lights have yellow lights to warn of the coming red. Ask any cop directing traffic at a road job -- when they intend to stop traffic, it is 3-4 cars back that they intend to stop it at.
The entitlement attitude of pedestrians -- that drivers will INSTANTLY stop -- is dangerous. Roads get slippery, brakes aren't always working to their fullest potential, drivers not always fully alert or completely sober.
This stuff just makes it worse -- the push-button-traffic-stop myth, again ask any police officer if he/she/it would blindly walk into moving traffic without assuming that the oncoming vehicles might not stop, even though they are supposed to.
Or more often, the vehicle BEHIND the first one might not -- that lead to a fatality at UMass and why they put the full red/yellow/green traffic lights in by the Parking Office. This is the solution.
Pedestrians have to wait 10/20 seconds for traffic to have a chance to stop, motorists get a warning as the light cycles to yellow before red, and additional pedestrians are required to wait for the light to cycle again -- it avoids the continual random person in the road and everyone having to stop without warning.
AC didn't bother getting permission and went cheap -- I say make them pay for the full traffic light that would also help vehicle flow there.
Last year, two music teachers at the Red Barn became homeless because they could not afford their heating bill and landlords found it easier to evict them than fix it
ReplyDeleteSomeone ought to have told them about the six-month-presumption rule -- that the Housing Court *PRESUMES* that *ANY* eviction within 6 months of complaining about something such as undone repairs is retaliatory and/or so that the landlord doesn't have to do the repairs.
I think this is a clear case of why the stuff I advocated ought to have been included in the ordinance.
This had the effect of killing time, time that was allotted to the next article on the agenda and pushing it to next week. All the people who had arranged their schedule to come this week to address YOUR concerns, for YOU, may or may not be able to attend next week, so that petition was effectively killed.
ReplyDeleteWAS THIS INTENTIONAL?
Hey Kevin, too bad they didn't bail you out like they did the typewriter guy last year. I guess in Amherst it's more important for them to support minority-owned yet obsolete shops over yours, which actually teaches children.
ReplyDeleteI also do not like LED streetlights -- as a conservative, I am all for the green reason of saving money but I consider these things dangerous.
ReplyDeleteBecause of the way most of them are designed, with lenses to focus light in a concise area without overlap, they create shadows.
Worse, a diode only lets electricity go in one direction while AC power is moving in both -- and a LED either is at full brilliance or off -- truly instant on and off.
If they put two diodes in each one -- one for each side of the AC sine curve, or have electronic switching to send both sides of the sine curve through in the same direction -- the light still is flashing on and off 120 times a second.
If they take the cheaper approach and just have a diode (or several wired in series) that are on when a trigger voltage is reached in one direction and off the rest of the time, then the entire light is actually off slightly more than half the time.
Think of a child on a swing and the light only being on when the child is off the ground going forward, but not backwards -- one part of the sine curve but not the rest.
This all happens very fast -- 60 cycles per second -- and way too fast for people to really see, which is why television and movies work.
But it does mess up your depth perception and ability to estimate things like speed and distance of other objects when you are moving as well. Other vehicles have independent light sources on them but pedestrians don't, and they are going to get hit.
It's all cumulative --- accidents are caused by the combination of lots of little things. Even with OUI, it rarely is the only thing that caused an accident, while a sober driver might have gotten out of the mess (or maybe not), there still was a mess...
We're going to blame the drivers -- and it is the point that Ralph Nader made -- it really isn't the driver's fault. These lights are dangerous.
Anon 2:17
ReplyDeleteI actually have no idea what the Hell he is talking about. So many articles have been rearranged that I had no idea what article was coming up next. Still don't.
Even so, my answer would still be the same.
Wow Ed you really are out there.
ReplyDeleteYour attempt as knowledge on the subject and your nonsensical assertion is quite funny actually.
Walter, when you put your hand into a moving saw blade because you (a) didn't hear it because of background noise and (b) didn't see it because of florescent lighting, I will have but five words to say: "do you believe me now?"
ReplyDelete"The motions you have so effectively delayed will directly affect us and that is not fair. It is too late for them, but future generations will look back at you and ask why you killed zoning that would have given us affordable housing by talking so much. "
ReplyDeleteKevin??????? What are you talking about. Also, whatever anyone thinks of Larry, ...I would speak to the likes of Vince O'Connell about wasting time, soave and energy at Town Meeting.
And Kevin your posting MAKES NO SENSE.
Ed,
ReplyDeleteI guess all the people making those dimmable LED bulbs should quit there jobs now that you say it's impossible.
Larry, can you clarify: did the college have the town's OK to install the bollards? They are a good idea but even so I don't like the idea of the town being presented with a fait accompli, however well intentioned.
ReplyDeleteProbably had unofficial okay, but the Select Board is the final authority and I believe they have not weighed in.
ReplyDeleteAlthough SB member Aaron Hayden is an Amherst College employee.
How can one man have so many opinions?
ReplyDeleteWhat is this the anti-safety blog? What are all you crazies complaining about now? Not enough students getting hit by cars at night for your tastes?
ReplyDeleteCyclist was hit by car College Street (Rt9) Dickinson about 25 minutes ago. Amherst College PD called it in. Sounds very, very serious.
ReplyDeleteAlthough SB member Aaron Hayden is an Amherst College employee
ReplyDeleteAnd as such is required to recuse himself from all matters that would benefit his employer per State Ethics Commission rules.
This doesn't benefit his employer. This benefits everyone that crosses Snell Street.
ReplyDeleteLet me rephrase it: INVOLVE his employer -- although on reflection, I do believe that "benefit" was the right word to use here.
ReplyDeleteThe "benefit" that Amherst College enjoyed was in being able to (a) build something (b) on Town land without first getting all the necessary approvals and permissions.
The fact that the public may benefit from what AC did is irrelevant, they were able to bypass the Byzantine Amherst Bureaucracy and then get retroactive approval for what they had already done.
268A MGL 19 is relevant here, if the employer of a Select is seeking approval from the Town to do something, it is a "Conflict of Interest" for the Select to even be involved in the discussion. Furthermore, there is no disclosure exemption because elected officials "have no appointing authority."
See http://www.mass.gov/ethics/education-and-training-resources/implementation-procedures/municipal-employee-summary.html
IF Amherst College was able to bypass prior approval obligations because of Aaron Hayden, as Larry implies but does not state, then there is an Ethics Law violation...
I never implied that in the least.
ReplyDeleteAaron has always been good about recusing himself both on the Amherst Redevelopment Authority and Select Board.
I'm actually kind of amused at all the controversy this rather benign post seems to have stirred. Yikes!