Intersection of Sunderland (left) & Montague Road in front of N. Amherst Library
One idea for the somewhat complicated intersection of Montague and Sunderland roads in North Amherst that has been completely ruled out by the DPW as an action plan is adding a stop sign to Sunderland Road for vehicles traveling north.
DPW Chief Guilford Mooring told the Public Works Committee on Thursday that it's a bad idea and would be strongly opposed by his department.
Mooring said the close intersection of five streets in the North Amherst Village Center really needs to be seen as two distinct intersections (Montague & Sunderland Road and Pine/Meadow/North Pleasant) and the overall rule is if you can't make a workable 5-way intersection then you need to push the two intersections farther apart.
Most of the plans presented at the town's most recent public forum last month do that, but would require a significant purchase of land behind the North Amherst Library.
The fix, according to Mooring, for Pine/Meadow/North Pleasant in the heart of North Amherst center is simple: Install new traffic control system and set the cycle to allow a left turn from Meadow Street onto North Pleasant.
Even better the town should purchase some property (from controversial student rental czar Jamie Cherewatti) to allow the installation of a left turn lane.
The town is planning yet another Public Forum in October for the tricky intersection(s). Although town officials seem to want to focus on the upper intersection of Montague and Sunderland Roads, the plans presented will probably include tweaks to the main intersection just south of it in North Amherst Center.
7 comments:
These intersections being brought up all over never really seemed to be problems. Given the massive expense of changing them and the extreme lack of money among the citizens....isn't the best solution simply to maintain the paving and let people focus on the real problems they have no choice but solving every day, like having a home and eating well?
People that make this stuff up or blow it out of proportion justifying massive financial taking should be ashamed at the damage they are doing to peoples' living by taking the money they need to live and throwing it at these pet projects.
This effort certainly seems to have the support of stakeholders who will, for the most part, finance it.
Still behind option 3.
In other places in town we have seen significant traffic improvements from
replacing traffic lights with roundabouts. We probably can't have a roundabout
replacing the Pine/Meadow light without encroaching on the church on the NE
corner and the house on the NW corner. But what about centering a roundabout
slightly further south? And/or putting a single traffic cycle around this roundabout
and around the back of the library, making a traffic pattern sort of like the center
of Easthampton?
This happens to be a dangerous intersection. Since many don't follow laws, drive offensively rather than defensively, and allow others to have the right of way when they should not, this intersection breeds accidents and near misses. I travel it every day and it is one of the worst I've ever experienced.
A roundabout would be awesome there, they work far better than any thing and save time and money.
As much as I am for building things, I am surprised that there was no "setback" requirement, that they were permitted to build right to the property line, leaving only what I presume was/is a town sidewalk.
I'd liked to have seen some setback requirement, particularly above the first/second story. Otherwise, if everyone builds like this, you get canyons and wind tunnels and sidewalks that no one wants to walk on.
Post a Comment