Speeders be warned — traffic calming measures are finally coming to dangerous North Mountain Avenue in Montclair. After pressure from a well organized group of residents, town manager Joe Hartnett came good on his recent promises to become personally involved and get the much delayed plan back on track. Yesterday he sent an email to residents to say the town had approved new signage, striping, installation of elevated speed tables (humps), and enhanced crosswalks near Edgemont school.
The good news for the rest of town is the North Mountain improvements are part of a pilot program addressing what Mayor Ed Remsen says is a town wide problem.
One of our priorities this year is implementing several of the bike and pedestrian safety recommendations that came from the Task Force that was composed of many people and ahgencies including a specialist paid for by the State and the Bike Montclair group; many of us think that it’s also time for this town and the media to help organize a campaign that attacks the speeding and careless driving that seems to be the norm; we can add all the traffic-calming devices, speed bumps, and lights in the world and issue thousands of more tickets but until and unless people decide to drive the speed limit (which is NOT 50 MPH on Grove Street) and really STOP at STOP signs, and maybe even (God forbid!) not talk on their cell phones while they’re driving, we won’t get to a solution.Posted by: Ed Remsen | Jan 15, 2006 9:59:18 AM
I understand that people are concerned about speeding on N Mountain, but speed traps are not the answer. I would also be interested in knowing how many accidents occur on the road if you took away the ones that occur at the Watchung Ave intersection. I’m willing to bet less than 2% occur outside of that intersection. If it’s even that high. I use the road all the time and don’t think that 35 mph is too high. The speed limit on most roads is 25 mph, but the percentage of people who actually drive that is small and please don’t tell me that you drive at that speed because it’s a lie. I’ve tried it and always end up getting honked at or getting beamed from behind. I think a light at the intersection would solve a lot of issues. Just my 2 cents.
Mrs. ROC got a ticket in Livingston for going 45 in a 25. The fine was $380. She was spitting mad. (We had a tiff because we can’t really afford $380 to simply vanish). But now she *never* speeds. Never, ever. (at least when I ride with her).
Punishment does work.
It should be interesting to see what happens. Speed tables, specifically.
They make a lot of noise when you hit them at 30-35 mph, and can bounce you around nicely. That noise may bother the neighbors more than the speeders did.
The county installed grooved pavement and small table risers on Central Avenue in North Caldwell a few years ago. Pulled them out in less than a month due to neighborhood outrage from the noise
I was wondering if anyone beside me thinks that these speed “humps” might make navigating N. Mountain a little more dangerous? I think that while these measures may discourage speeders, they might also send some less cautious drivers careening all over the road and possibly up onto the sidewalk.
I drive North Mountain every morning and do my best to keep the speed under 35mph. It’s doable and I have never been honked or tailgated. However, I don’t think that the speed on North Mountain is the cause of all the accidents (I witnessed another one at Bellevue and N. Mountain yesterday morning!). North Mountain has stop signs at all the major intersections. Ignoring them is suicide. I think the speeders are coming down the hills at Watchung and Bellevue. I seriously doubt that speed humps on N. Mountain will change the accident rate. Lights at those intersections or 4-way stops would be a better bet. But the residents are concerned with speed because backing out of one’s driveway onto North Mountain must be very tricky.
I think the speed humps are ridiculous. I’ve gotten waved down by N. Mtn residents for going… 25 mph.
CLM has a point and I’d like add another: people making right on red turns. More often than not, they ain’t lookin’ out for pedestrians but just whipping around the corner at lightening speed. If you’re a pedestrian trying to cross the street, you really got to not only look to your left but wait a few seconds as well. Don’t know if speed bumps would be a big help here.
MM I almost hit a runner one day turning right. They were running in the street and I stopped at the corner. I looked right and I think they might have been behind a tree trunk at that moment (the trees were big and along the street). I didn’t see them. I looked left. I began my turn and there they were! I slammed on the brake as they hopped on my hood. (uninjured) I don’t even think I was up to 5mph yet.
I don’t think they should run in the road.
Typical reactionary nonsense. Speed humps aren’t going to solve the ACTUAL problem. People’s perception of the problem has now motivated the governing body to ignore logic and initate measures that appease the masses yet solve nothing.
Your tax dollars will be spent when the road dept has to go out and shave the speed bumps back down in 4 months.
Let me answer, as a runner. Sometimes we have no choice but to run in the road being that said roads have no shoulder or sidewalks or non-existent or unsafe. (Ridgewood Ave. in Glen Ridge is an exception to this rule–nice broad steet and ample shoulders on both sides).
That being said, runners should always run against the traffic, wear reflective clothing at night, obey light signals, and just use common sense.
Perhaps runners shouldn’t run on roads which “have no shoulder or sidewalks or non-existent or unsafe.”
This happened to me on Ridgewood Ave. as a matter of fact. There are lots of pretty large trees. This was on a bright, sunlit morning. It could easily have been a serious accident.
Was this person running “in the road” or close to the curb? If they were “in the road,” then I agree with you.
I’m with Miss M. Runners are often going to be in the road, so please and thank you for sharing the road with us. Even if there are sidewalks, it can be an dangerous, ankle-breaking experience to run on them. And if, like me, you are pushing 1 or 2 kids in a jog stroller, the sidewalks are definitely not an option.
I also agree with her on all of the safety points, too. I’m more of a runner than a driver, frankly. But the other night I was incensed to see two runners who were running with traffic, after dark, in dark clothing, with not a single reflector or light on them. What a pair of boneheads!
If to someone else’s point, most of the accidents are at Watchung, why not just install a light there?
Speed humps cost money. Stop maintaining the road for double benefits: less cost and potholes will slow traffic (plus all the N. Mountain folks could start hubcap collections).
In this case running with the traffic would have been better. When turning right the driver spends much more time looking left than right and the tree on the curb (blocking view) is 20 feet from my bumper rather than 4 feet.
We runners have a saying: It’s better to look at what’s going to hit you head on than to be surprised from behind.
I feel much more secure facing the traffic and am able to get out of the way in time should need be.
“In this case running with the traffic would have been better.”
When running or walking in the street, one must be aware of cars. This is easier done when one runs against traffic.
BTW, what effect do speed bumps have on bicycles?
I dunno. Bikes ride with traffic when in the street.
Accident #10 (scroll to the bottom) is what happend to me (or rather the runner)
ROC: Why don’t you just come out with me & BF for a run one morning and test both our points?
Another hot spot is Valley Road between Cooper and Valley! I’ve been nearly picked off crossing the street on many mornings.
Meant Cooper and Bellevue on Valley.
speed bumps usually terminate before the side of the road (otherwise the speed bump is a dam when it rains), so a bike could get around while a car would still have one side traversing the bump.
I’d like a poll of how many accidents or near misses involved a driver (or two, or three…) talking on a cell phone. My favorite is a ‘mom’ at the wheel of a huge SUV or not-so-mini van talking on a cell phone and driving down the middle of the road — not the middle of their side — just the middle. I bet some of the protestors on N. Mountain could be guilty of this. I’m astonished that no one complains about the utter lack of policing the anti-cell phone law instead of this other crap. Driving at 25 mph while completely distracted is far more dangerous than an alert driver going 35mph.
I think the law states that if you have an SUV then you must talk on a handheld phone all the time or hold a cup of joe.
you forgot reading the paper.
ROC, I agree. I ran for many years (until a knee injury sent me off to the land of elliptical machines) and it sounds like the runner in question wasn’t paying attention. I always kept in mind that it was much easier for me to see a car than for a car to see me. I’m not condoning careless driving, but I think that a runner needs to remain alert and realistic when running on the road.
Regarding the N. Mountain speed whatevers, I’m curious to see how all of this plays out.
I dunno about the rest of you but I’ll just detour more quickly to Upper Mt in the morning when I go that way.
check out this speed bump video
http://stadium.weblogsinc.com/autoblog/videos/autoblog_speedbump.mov