Hey, there! Log in / Register
Citizen complaint of the day: A shame the city wasted all that money painting crisscrosses at intersections
By adamg on Sat, 10/03/2015 - 10:23am
A concerned citizen complains:
When will Boston PD enforce the do not block the box law? It is constant around the south station roads making very difficult for first responders to get through.
Ed. note: Washington and South streets in front of Forest Hills in the morning is similar.
Neighborhoods:
Topics:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
comm and Berkeley too
Most weekday nights.
They can't keep people off
They can't keep people off the solid blue box in front of the police station in Dudley Square, so it seem unlikely it will work anyplace.....
Ditto the solid blue box at
Ditto the solid blue box at the police station in Cleary Square.
They can't?
Or they refuse to do it?
When it comes to the painted bike lane on Congress Street, the number of complaints and the bizarre responses (checked area - cars no longer "parked" at 10pm) imply "don't give a rats ass" and "aren't interested in enforcement of any traffic laws".
Yeah, without
enforcement, it's just a different pattern in the road.
This is a huge problem at
This is a huge problem at Mass Ave and Albany St (Boston Medical Center).
Atlantic/Essex
The intersection shown is terrible for box blocking. I work in the immediate area and walk through there daily, and it's very rare that no one is in the intersection during a red light.
I will say, the light sequence doesn't help one bit. The green light on Atlantic is timed to stop some 10-15 seconds after the light at Atlantic/Summer turns red, so the traffic on Atlantic fills up the space between Essex and Summer, Traffic turning from Essex onto Atlantic then has nowhere to go, and would get stuck for hours if they don't block the box.
Also baffling is that on the other end of the sequence, the light on Atlantic at Essex turns green BEFORE the light at Summer turns green. So basically the light combo at those two intersections is exactly backwards from what it should be. It's like the light timing is designed to maximize gridlock.
Print it in ENGLISH
DON'T BLOCK THE BOX. (or INTERSECTION)
Because more people will understand that than random looking lines.
Yeah,
Because the sign (in English) shown in the picture above works so well, right?
The issue here is the lack of fucks given.
Wrong place for a sign
People are not looking up while not trying to smash into the bumper in front of them.
They would have a better chance of seeing writing in big letters painted on the pavement.
How do people see the lights then?
Man, you obviously never drive in Boston proper.
The lights are lit in multiple colors, making them easier to see
Little signs up there are harder to see, also only relate to the signals like delayed green or right turn on turn arrow only. Even no turn on red is rarely way up there, but lower on the signal post closer to the normal field of view.
They would have a better
How are they going to see the big letters on the pavement if people are blocking the box?
Take all the time you need.
Three (3) signs
There are 3 signs in that picture above in English (ENGLISH!!!1!). Which means there is probably more signs for the entirety of the intersection.
It's also probably worth
It's also probably worth noting that the "Don't block the intersection" signs have been around for as long as I can remember (I started working in downtown Boston in the late 80s). The only new thing is the striping on the pavement.
As for the signs, without enforcement, they hold exactly as much weight as the rest of the signs around Boston saying things like "No Parking", "No Turn on Red", "Stop", etc., which is to say, they're purely decorative.
There are several
There are several standardized options for box-blocking markings, but Boston seems to have chosen the laziest/easiest one to paint, which is also the least clear. There's a tighter cross-hatch option, which looks more like the already-well-known exclusion zones you see in parking lots (e.g., fire lane, handicap van access area), and a couple "Do not block" options like you suggest.
Everyone wants more police
Everyone wants more police action and increased traffic enforcement!!!! Until they are the ones getting the ticket and then they bitch on UHub about aggressive police harassment.
You can search archives
If you are at all interested in investigating the veracity of this claim of yours.
What does that even mean?
What does that even mean? Search what archives? Ive already made a point, so I believe it is now on you to search the Swirrly archives and then refute the veracity of MY point. Thank you.
Didn't really make a point so much as a blatant assertion
I think the it's the UHub archives Swirrly is referencing.
And it wasn't a point so much as an opinion stated as fact, which [I think] you do a lot.
Did you just make a blatant
Did you just make a blatant accusation, point or opinion stated as fact in reference to my perceived blatant accusation stated as fact?
Opinion
I edited my comment to make it clearer.
Not surprised
Actually, I think few are surprised that you aren't aware of how to research these sorts of questions.
As a registered user, you can search threads on UHub and count the times that people have said that traffic stops are police harassment versus times people have called for more enforcement.
No, I'm aware that the search
No, I'm aware that the search function exists. I just don't have time to dig through the "archives" of UHub. I rely upon your apparent abundance of free time to correct me when I'm wrong.
Yes,that would take an abundance of time
Given the sheer volume of opinions extracted from your toilet paper on a daily basis, yes.
Up to you to cite your sources
Just like those evil liberal college professors made you do - they were just so mean to you! So elitist to expect that you furnish proof of what you spewed! Such bad liberals! It has to be up to their mean limousine chardonnay swilling lazy selves to prove you wrong? So nasty to expect that!
I can't tell if you're
I can't tell if you're attacking me or Swirrrly. If you're going after her, then I totally agree. If you're attacking me then I'm very upset by what you said.
I hate to be defending a JP Hipster
And I was ready to jump down throats, but then I remembered when that Emerson prof got that BS ticket, and there was an anon who was going all police state because, and I am doing it from memory, he drove off while getting a parking ticket and was ticked off when he got it in the mail. There were another few tickets he also referenced, but he basically equated his poor driving and parking with the Newton situation.
Technically, if there is one example, Hipster's claim is true. Yes, most of us are pro parking enforcement, but anons abound.
Verrry few have voiced issues with selective traffic enforcement
There's me, and then there's...
...no one else really.
And my kvetching was not so much for less traffic enforcement overall, but rather for doing it where (I think) it would make the most sense - I complained about police spending so much time stopping cars doing 30mph(!) in a mostly-uninhabited zone next to the Arboreteum, when unchecked drivers speed even faster through nearby streets filled with elderly and kids (Ftr, lots of people told me they saw things differently).
More full disclosure - I've never actually gotten a fine (just a warning) for 'speeding' up the Walter Street hill at the Arb at more than the posted 20mph limit, but I do regularly get honked/yelled at by other drivers when I refuse to pull into the intersection on a yellow - often at Forest Hills, or at Fernwood and Washington in Brighams Circle.
But I'd gladly grind up the Walter Street hill in first gear for the remainder of my days if it meant that other drivers would not gridlock in the rest of the city. (ok, maybe not 'gladly', but still...)
Is that what the criss-cross means?
I thought it was a special kind of crosswalk that enabled crossing either straight or diagonally.
Nice try
I'm reading your comment as you're joking about what other people think. But just in case, you can't sit in the crosswalk either. All stripey=no goey
Driver education?
I know it seems obvious to everybody here, but when I was taught to drive (not in the city), nobody ever taught me anything about blocking the box. I only learned what those words meant later -- and it's kind of ridiculous how much later. Considering how many people move to Boston from other places, or drive into the city from outside, is it crazy to speculate that maybe people really don't know? It seems to me that large, bold-print signs -- maybe even with some kind of graphic illustrating the problem -- might be helpful. Or, you know, maybe PSAs on local stations? Increased law enforcement might help to raise awareness.
I won't be surprised if I get laughed at for saying this. And yeah, I know, people who learned to drive in Hicksville have no business driving in the city if they don't know our ways here, blah blah blah. But seriously -- if this really is as significant an issue as I suspect it is, it might be good to make sure that people actually understand the problem.
I think this is an excellent point
Retention requires repetition. The current policy of expecting drivers to remember a whole rulebook they haven't read since age 16 isn't realistic. This is especially true if where you typically drive (like Whurly and myself) is very different from where you grew up. While I don't want to spend any more time at the RMV than I have to, we really should require re-testing periodically.
OTOH, this particular problem is exacerbated because everyone knows the Boston PD can't be bothered to enforce traffic rules.
Massachusetts License
This is what happens when you have a non-comprehensive test with 10 questions on it, followed by a joke of a road test.
I got my license elsewhere, as did many of my college peers, and nearly all who were NOT from the area knew not to block intersections. My husband, a local, was stunned that I didn't do it, because he was never taught that.
It may not have been a state law until the 1990s or 2000s, which would explain the omission. When my husband got his license, you needed permission from a sign to take a right on red, and three cars could proceed for every car that stopped at a stop sign! (he got pulled over in another state for that, of course). MA has a lot of drivers out there who learned certain "rules" years ago and never got the memo that the laws have changed. Rotary rights of way took a long time to seep through.
btw
it is ludicrously obvious that you shouldnt block an intersection, the people doing that arent 'locals' they're just fucking dumb. hope that helps!
(they are more than likely local idiots, tho)
They're not dumb
They're selfish and angry. Welcome to Boston.
When my husband got his
"Three on a Stop sign" was never actually the law, and the rotary right-of-way law hasn't changed in my lifetime.
Three on a stop sign
WAS the law until
(IIRC)1977.This is just another example of why we need periodic testing of all drivers - because laws and traffic control devices change over time.
And having a test that focuses on more than the current teen driver restrictions in force at the time would help as well.
Edit - I have verified the law was changed in 1977 - see my other posting below
Until someone can provide a
Until someone can provide a copy of the law, as written, that allowed three on a stop sign, I'm going to continue to assume that this was just the common practice. It's hard to see how such a custom could be codified into law (i.e., how the fuck could the third car even see whether the way was clear?).
Is there a website that tracks historical changes to MGL?
Chapter 225 of the Acts of 1962
is the earliest reference I can find to the "three on a stop sign" law:
http://archives.lib.state.ma.us/actsResolves/1962/1962acts0227.pdf
The relevant language is thus:
In the case of a line of two or more vehicles approaching such stop sign
or flashing red signal indication, the drivers of the second and third
vehicles in line in any group shall not be required to stop more than once
before proceeding through the intersection.
Chapter 838 of he Acts of 1977 repealed the "three on a stop sign law" - the revised language of Chapter 89, Section 9 contained therein has basically remained unchanged since that time:
http://archives.lib.state.ma.us/actsResolves/1977/1977acts0838.pdf
PDF files of most of the state Acts and Resolves can be found on the state archives site. However, it's difficult to find specific information unless you have the chapter and/or year of the specific act (note that I had the relevant information thanks to date references in WestLaw Massachusetts Motor Vehicle and Traffic Laws).
Huh
Well, you learn something new every day.
Sidebar
I took driver's ed in early 1978, just after "three on a stop sign" was repealed. Our classroom instructor made a point more than once of reminding us during those sessions that "three on a stop" sign was no longer legal, nor was it good driving practice. I suspect one of the reasons for this was that we took 1960s era learner's permit tests, which referenced the "three on a stop sign" rule in one of the test questions, for practice (which was irrlevant in my case, as I already had my learner's permit).
Yeah, I was aghast when I
Yeah, I was aghast when I learned (very recently, from UHub comments) about the three on a stop sign rule. Of course, that was changed darn near 40 years ago, but I still see two and three cars following through an all-way stop LITERALLY EVERY F%$KING MORNING on my way to work.
why does it require training.
Why is it something that needs to be taught? An intersection has lights that go from green to red to allow traffic to safely move through it. If I sit myself in the middle because there isn't enough room to make it all the way across, i then cause a ripple effect that propagates exponentially. Because my 10 feet of space prevents an entire road from passing through.
This has nothing to do with drivers from Hicksville or drivers from thebigcity. An intersection is not an incredibly complex concept to grasp. Or maybe it is.
Hicksville!
There really IS a town called Hicksville, on Long Island: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hicksville,_New_York
I took my road test at the DMV there, so one could say I learned to drive in Hicksville. And yes, we learned Do Not Block the Box. It's something of a religion in NYC.
Coming from Long Island, I
Coming from Long Island, I never understood why people from other places thought Hicksville was a funny place name.
It's like saying Massapequa Park and Islip are funny. They're just normal town names.
Sure, just like Athol
In any case, the best LI name is Ronkonkama, especially as announced at Penn Station: "... and RONNN-KAHHHHNK-A-MA, now boarding, track 17!"
Long Island Sound
I could echo all of this craziness, but I would rather point everyone to the song Long Island Sound by The Neighbourhood, which is something of a (mocking) listing of Long Island's greatest hits, but with a sweet tune reminiscent of Shootyz Groove.
No time for links, but you can find it on iTunes. Please pay particular attention to the hilarious line about guidos. Thanks.
Indeed, I've been well aware
Indeed, I've been well aware about blocking intersections being prohibited, due to the signage I see all over the place, but I never knew what the expression "block the box" meant until I heard it sometime this past year - on uHub I think - and went to look it up. The first couple results from StartPage are all from far-flung areas (first two are Austin and San Francisco), so perhaps this is a term that is only finally gaining currency in the northeast?
MassDOT and the city DPWs could do a PSA campaign using these signs, especially the permanent ones overhanging the highways coming into Boston.
Sounds like a job for Ildo Rosario!
Or can he only give out tickets for parking violations?
BPD failing to enforce a traffic law??!!
Inconceivable!
How about Don't Block the Moving Traffic?
Gotta love the drivers who feel entitled to block moving tracking when they want to pull across busy roads like Washington Street in Eggleston Square, or Spring Street in West Roxbury - after they get their morning Joe and a cruller from Dunkin' D.
Who are these idiots?
Dunk's doesn't sell crullers.
Dunk's doesn't sell crullers. They sell something called "sticks".
You'd have to go to a better grade of doughnut shop if you want an actual cruller.
Not anymore, that is
It was a horrible scene.