Hey, there! Log in / Register
Driver turns left on red on Beacon Street, right into the path of an outbound trolley, police say
By adamg on Mon, 09/25/2023 - 8:57pm
Photo by Transit Police.
Transit Police report two people suffered minor injuries when a drive heading towards Cleveland Circle turned left against a red light and hit an outbound C Line trolley that had the right of way at Beacon and St. Paul streets around 6:50 p.m.
The driver was cited for running a red light, police say.
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
The driver was cited for
Must be Brookline thing
The driver should get a ten
The driver should get a ten thousand dollar ticket for this. People would STOP DOING IT.
Stupid nanny town, amirite?
Stupid nanny town, amirite?
I'll keep posting here …
… but no one will listen …
But … I sincerely believe that a lot of these car-into-train crashes, while mostly the fault of bad/distracted/idiot car drivers, are also caused by an equally stupid MBTA policy.
For whatever reason, someone (the T? DPU?) requires Green Line trains to slow to 10 mph whenever they cross an intersection, even if they have a clear signal aspect (green light). No one else in the world does this with streetcar/light rail trains.
Presumably this is because "safety" but what it means is that car drivers see trains behind them and see the train slowing down. They assume the train is coming to a stop, because why else would the train be slowing down at an intersection, and then make a turn in front of it, but then the train, instead of slowing down, maintains its speed and the car goes crunch.
Whereas if the train was operating at a steady speed, the driver wouldn't try to cut in front of it. Oh, and the trains would use less power, the brakes would last longer and the passengers would have a better ride.
St. Paul outbound is a
St. Paul outbound is a nearside stop before the intersection, so even if only going 10 MPH, the streetcar would still have been accelerating from the stop.
But safety.
So if the idea is to preserve speed, then sure that will work great for all the reasons you said.
However, in the event of a collision, a train moving at 10 mph both does a lot less damage to whatever vehicle it hits, and the passengers are subjected to less G-forces. Even in a non-vehicle collision, speed is always the biggest factor for vehicles killing pedestrians and cyclists. So since the train is entering an intersection where other modes of transport/pedestrians and cyclists are also utilizing the road, it increases the survivability if they are struck.
It's a recipe for disaster
Still, I would argue the big bright red light ought to be enough for anyone allowed to operate a motor vehicle. It's hard to feel safe around cars when even the most basic and obvious safety rules are inevitably broken on a regular basis. If everyone can act reasonably and we still get collisions, maybe we shouldn't have them in human-dense areas.
Train Horns
The T for years had, and may still have a policy, that you do not blow the train horns in Brookline and Newton.
Too many complaints of people living near train lines which have been in place since the 1800's of not wanted to be reminded that they live near transit.
Same people complaining when the T cuts trees so branches don't fall onto tracks or wires and knock out service. They don't want to be reminded that there is a transit line in their backyard.
Therefore instead of barreling through the intersection with my Kinki like I would, the trolleys slow down and ding the little bell which can't be heard in the car, and thus crash.
Besides, the car drive ran a red like so many vehicles (and bikes) do. They are at fault.
If they do, get rid of it
But I'm pretty sure that the bells are in use regularly and that there's no rule against using horns. Some cities and towns have quiet zones which restrict train horn use but that's for Commuter Rail and they are (generally) required to have quad gates closing off the grade crossing, and trains can still use the horn in case of an emergency.
Other cities have a variety of approaches for median-running light rail. But no one requires trains to slow down to 10 mph.
Disagree
The train operator already uses the horn to warn someone who looks like they are imminently about to step/drive onto the tracks.
There's no reason to annoy everyone by blowing the horn every few blocks 10x an hour, 18 hours a day. The train is going slow enough that it's unlikely any passengers are hurt when a train hits a car. There was never a time when a trolley sounded the horn before every crossing. (Heavy rail trains do when there isn't a gate.)
No sympathy for people in the car (or foot, bike, etc) for crossing onto a train track without looking. These aren't high speed trains.
That's not my experience
That's not my experience. I live in Brookline.
When there's enough of a close call that the operator throws sand on the track to aid in slowing down, they hit the horn.
I've seen it 3 times in the past 10-12 years, once getting ready to get out the front door of the front trolley, so I saw it nearly from the drivers' view.
Same here
As someone that also actually lives on/near those above grade Green Line sections, I've only ever heard the horns on the B+C lines during close calls.
Always thought it strange
I too feel like something could be improved on roads like Beacon St where the Green Line goes down the middle. Driving on Beacon it feels like one could make a turn across the tracks at some intersections (e.g. Kent St a few blocks east from this accident). You see a green light, there is an acceptable-looking two-way road to turn onto, and just “do not turn” signs suggest otherwise without saying why. (Maybe a simple solution is adding text below them: (do not turn) — “TROLLEY CROSSING”) Also I know that GPS apps have made the suggestions of illegal turns as well, not that that’s an acceptable excuse. But it’s confusing, is what I’m saying.
But also in this particular case, the car was in an actual turning lane, so the above would not apply. Unfortunately, they allegedly turned on a red light instead of green.
It's ok in Brighton, but not in Brookline
The B Line has intersections all over the place where you're allowed to turn across the path of a trolley without the protection of a traffic light. Sometimes there's a cryptic, nonstandard "Yield To Trolley" sign, and sometimes it fell down 10 years ago and wasn't replaced.
The C Line does not allow this. All crossings either have red arrows that only turn green when the trolley has a red light, or signs banning turns entirely. I'm not sure if there used to be any unprotected crossings before Beacon Street was rebuilt around 2008.
I'm the first to blame bad road designs for accidents, but No Left Turn signs do not need any explanation. As long as they're placed properly, using the standard sign, and don't have any other signs or traffic lights providing conflicting instructions, the road designers did their job. Beacon Street eastbound at Kent/Powell looks fine to me, and they even took the extra step of having the traffic light show a straight arrow instead of a green circle.
I seriously doubt that any GPS app would tell you to turn where there's a No Left Turn sign posted. If you have an example, please provide it.
Huh?
I thought it was left on Spitbrook, right on Daniel Webster.
guess that trolley should have been painted red
Gotta paint stuff with red paint so drivers know not to hit it
why did transit PD censor the plate?
why did transit PD censor the plate?
Why do people keep doing this?
Is the latest internet craze "crash your car into a train¨?
September?
Lot of new kids in town with cars that they don't have much experience driving at all, let alone in very confusing city traffic. Just guessing.
Yeah, I guess it's this year's freshpeople.
(sigh)
keep doing this?
How common are these accidents between cars and Green Line infrastructure? I doubt they happen often on the C line. They're commonplace at Packards Corner which is no surprise. If you're not familiar with the intersection, and it's dark, and road is wet, and the paint is faded, then it's very easy to misjudge and drive onto the tracks.
Revoke for life
So many idiots think they can beat trains on tracks (both on green line AND commuter rail). The Commonwealth should start revoking these licenses permanently.
Left on red is never legal
And if you hit a trolley it's pretty obvious you took one.
Left on red is sometimes legal
When turning from a one-way street to another one-way street.
Beacon is not a one-way street, so it wouldn't be legal here.
You beat me to the post by
You beat me to the post by mere seconds!
Each side of Beacon *might* be considered one-way
but St. Paul Street is not one-way.
True, but doesn't matter
because in a divided roadway, the one-way halves are always traveling to the right, not the left. :-)
Left on red is legal in Mass.
Left on red is legal in Mass. when you are on a one way street and turning onto a one way street. It's not commonly known but it is legal under those conditions.
I've had motorists scream at me for doing this
Not because of any close call, but because they saw me make the turn a block ahead and OMG BIKE RAN RED LIGHT. I typically suggest that they go download the driver's manual. This is a completely legal turn on red (after stopping and yielding, of course).
Is that true on a red arrow,
Is that true on a red arrow, or just a red ball? I'm pretty sure for right turns, if it's a red arrow, you still can't turn (even if there's no sign).
A red arrow is exactly the
A red arrow is exactly the same as a red light, except it only applies in the direction it's pointing. So in other words, it's legal to do right on red on a right arrow if it would be legal on a full red light (or left on red for a left arrow, although I don't know why they'd have a left arrow on a one-way street intersecting a one-way street).