BrooklynBus Posted November 10, 2014 Share #1 Posted November 10, 2014 http://www.sheepsheadbites.com/2014/11/commute-meaningfully-improve-traffic-safety-part-1-2/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted November 10, 2014 Share #2 Posted November 10, 2014 I have to agree with you. I think this new law a bunch of BS. Instead of requesting drivers to slow down, how about the mayor gets a clue and starts enforcing the law on the pedestrians who cross the street whenever they feel like crossing regardless of what is occurring? This is going to make commuting more difficult and costly and products will be more expensive to purchase unnecessarily. They already decreased the speed and flow of traffic when they started messing with the syncing of traffic lights years ago when that other airhead Kahn took over traffic operations under Bloomberg. Couldn't get rid of her fast enough... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peacemak3r Posted November 10, 2014 Share #3 Posted November 10, 2014 100% to the 100th power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooklynBus Posted November 11, 2014 Author Share #4 Posted November 11, 2014 I have to agree with you. I think this new law a bunch of BS. Instead of requesting drivers to slow down, how about the mayor gets a clue and starts enforcing the law on the pedestrians who cross the street whenever they feel like crossing regardless of what is occurring? This is going to make commuting more difficult and costly and products will be more expensive to purchase unnecessarily. They already decreased the speed and flow of traffic when they started messing with the syncing of traffic lights years ago when that other airhead Kahn took over traffic operations under Bloomberg. Couldn't get rid of her fast enough... I think Trottenberg is a little more reasonable than Kahn. She needs to be educated though. She doesn't realize the far flung implications this has like we do. Transportation Alternatives has her ear and that's the only side she hears. She needs to hear the other side of the story. That's what I am trying to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N6 Limited Posted November 11, 2014 Share #5 Posted November 11, 2014 I have to agree with you. I think this new law a bunch of BS. Instead of requesting drivers to slow down, how about the mayor gets a clue and starts enforcing the law on the pedestrians who cross the street whenever they feel like crossing regardless of what is occurring? This is going to make commuting more difficult and costly and products will be more expensive to purchase unnecessarily. They already decreased the speed and flow of traffic when they started messing with the syncing of traffic lights years ago when that other airhead Kahn took over traffic operations under Bloomberg. Couldn't get rid of her fast enough... Out of sync signals are so ANNOYING. You can't drive up Springfield Blvd and get though 2 consecutive green lights, you actually get around Queens faster by avoiding the main roads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooklynBus Posted November 11, 2014 Author Share #6 Posted November 11, 2014 Out of sync signals are so ANNOYING. You can't drive up Springfield Blvd and get though 2 consecutive green lights, you actually get around Queens faster by avoiding the main roads.I agree with you. What is really annoying is that much of it is intentional. They purposely put the signals out of sync whenever there are many complaints of speeders on a street. They use the lights as a speed limit. That only makes things more dangerous because it is so frustrating. it encourages you to speed up through the yellow after you have already just missed three consecutive green signals and watched them all turn red just as you approached the intersection. It turns a five minute trip into a 15 minute trip when there is no traffic. In the same manner, they use four way stop signs as speed controls also where they are not needed and put in traffic signals where a four way stop sign would do just fine. I have seen intersections that were moving just fine become traffic clogged just because a traffic signal was installed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted November 11, 2014 Share #7 Posted November 11, 2014 I agree with you. What is really annoying is that much of it is intentional. They purposely put the signals out of sync whenever there are many complaints of speeders on a street. They use the lights as a speed limit. That only makes things more dangerous because it is so frustrating. it encourages you to speed up through the yellow after you have already just missed three consecutive green signals and watched them all turn red just as you approached the intersection. It turns a five minute trip into a 15 minute trip when there is no traffic. In the same manner, they use four way stop signs as speed controls also where they are not needed and put in traffic signals where a four way stop sign would do just fine. I have seen intersections that were moving just fine become traffic clogged just because a traffic signal was installed. Oh it is intentional. That's why I don't understand the need to further restrict the speeding limit... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooklynBus Posted November 11, 2014 Author Share #8 Posted November 11, 2014 Oh it is intentional. That's why I don't understand the need to further restrict the speeding limit... Occasionally, they really are out of sync due to a computer malfunction, but that is always fixed within 24 hours. If it persists, it is intentional. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted November 11, 2014 Share #9 Posted November 11, 2014 Occasionally, they really are out of sync due to a computer malfunction, but that is always fixed within 24 hours. If it persists, it is intentional. Yeah but that scenario seems to be less and less of a problem. Can't remember the last time I've seen that problem either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooklynBus Posted November 11, 2014 Author Share #10 Posted November 11, 2014 Yeah but that scenario seems to be less and less of a problem. Can't remember the last time I've seen that problem either. But wen it happens, it is catastrophic. A free flowing trip at 35 mph that takes only 15 to 20 minutes is turned into a traffic congested nightmare at 10 mph. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N6 Limited Posted November 12, 2014 Share #11 Posted November 12, 2014 But wen it happens, it is catastrophic. A free flowing trip at 35 mph that takes only 15 to 20 minutes is turned into a traffic congested nightmare at 10 mph. So much for the no idling law Must be great for air quality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peacemak3r Posted November 12, 2014 Share #12 Posted November 12, 2014 Ocean Parkway is such a nightmare now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qjtransitmaster Posted November 12, 2014 Share #13 Posted November 12, 2014 Out of sync signals are so ANNOYING. You can't drive up Springfield Blvd and get though 2 consecutive green lights, you actually get around Queens faster by avoiding the main roads.truth this also impacts bus service negatively. The same mode this city is trying to add riders to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooklynBus Posted November 12, 2014 Author Share #14 Posted November 12, 2014 Ocean Parkway is such a nightmare now. It was always bad, but now it is worse. I remember the first time I used Woodhaven Blvd regularly in 1996. I expected it to be as slow as Ocean Parkway, and it was so much quicker. With SBS, it will be just as bad as Ocean Parkway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peacemak3r Posted November 13, 2014 Share #15 Posted November 13, 2014 Ocean Parkway was fine just the way it was with a 35mph since most people cruised it at 40. It was smooth, other than rush hours. Now, it's just a snail's race and waiting to see who will slam their brakes to avoid a red light camera or speed camera. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N6 Limited Posted November 13, 2014 Share #16 Posted November 13, 2014 A solution for red light and speed cameras is to make sure all motorists are aware of all locations to starve the beast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peacemak3r Posted November 14, 2014 Share #17 Posted November 14, 2014 Most motorists in the neighborhood and motorists who drive along that specific stretch do know the locations of the cameras, it's just a matter of "making the light" that comes to play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rsperez93 Posted November 16, 2014 Share #18 Posted November 16, 2014 I have to agree with you. I think this new law a bunch of BS. Instead of requesting drivers to slow down, how about the mayor gets a clue and starts enforcing the law on the pedestrians who cross the street whenever they feel like crossing regardless of what is occurring? This is going to make commuting more difficult and costly and products will be more expensive to purchase unnecessarily. They already decreased the speed and flow of traffic when they started messing with the syncing of traffic lights years ago when that other airhead Kahn took over traffic operations under Bloomberg. Couldn't get rid of her fast enough... Unfortunately these airheads care more about the people of the city rather than traffic. Just as the New York State says, pedestrians always have the right of way. Someone that jay walks mid block is having the right of way? I really do not think so. I agree with you 100% that this is a BS law. Good luck to the new drivers of New York. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted November 16, 2014 Share #19 Posted November 16, 2014 Unfortunately these airheads care more about the people of the city rather than traffic. Just as the New York State says, pedestrians always have the right of way. Someone that jay walks mid block is having the right of way? I really do not think so. I agree with you 100% that this is a BS law. Good luck to the new drivers of New York. Well I do agree that NYC is a pedestrian city and that we need to encourage people to use public transportation and leave their cars at home. HOWEVER, there also needs to be things done to encourage the flow of traffic for drivers AND for those using public transportation (i.e. bus service). Some drivers have no choice but to drive and if we expect them to pay more (which I believe that they should) then they should be entitled to expect a reasonable commute at a decent speed, and for those sacrificing and using bus service, they should expect the same thing. My personal opinion as someone who is big on protecting the environment is that we need to be increasing tolls to force people to use more mass transit and that we should continue to create more "premium services" like ferry service, commuter rail service and express bus service because some people simply don't want to use transit because it isn't appealing enough. In Europe "luxury" transportation is played up for those with money who can afford cars but can be attracted to the "premium services". It's a very smart strategy. Here, transportation is generally treated as service for those who can't afford to drive except for those riding the commuter trains or the express buses or ferry service (excluding the SI Ferry), and that should change. We need to promote our premium services to attract new riders that would otherwise be driving. If they're driving into city, those are the people who we should be targeting because transportation from their neighborhoods to the city should be good enough and convenient enough for them to use it. I know plenty of people who refuse to use the subway because they find it too ghetto and dirty and instead drive in. New express bus service or commuter rail service could perhaps attract those people if marketed correctly. I'm one of those people who am not a fan of the subway and take the express bus and commuter rail service because most of my commuting is to and from Manhattan, but if I had to commute outside of the city, I would certainly purchase a car and would want something environmentally friendly and fuel efficient. I saw a Tesla yesterday that was just beautiful, and that's the type of car that's luxurious but also environmentally friendly. http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/155897-tesla-model-s-is-now-the-best-selling-luxury-car-with-an-asterisk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooklynBus Posted November 16, 2014 Author Share #20 Posted November 16, 2014 My personal opinion as someone who is big on protecting the environment is that we need to be increasing tolls to force people to use more mass transit... Sorry, but I totally disagree with that. Isn't $15 enough to cross the Verazzano Bridge? Do you want it to be $20? I think our tolls are the highest in the country possibly with the exception of the Chesapeake Bay Tunnel. And don't forget the other expenses of driving like high parking costs. $8 a day for the outer areas. Forget about even trying to park in Manhattan. No one should be "forced" to use mass transit. Do you think for one minute that if tolls were raised, you would be able to get a seat on the subway at all times during the off-peak? The MTA has no desire at all to change the guidelines back to 100% seating capacity from 125% during the off peak and 100% still does not guarantee a seat. Standing is a big deterrent for not using the subways and buses. Not to mention the MTA has no desire to reduce the number of fares required for a trip or change the fare structure so that a bus-train-bus trip which might be the fastest does not cost double fare. Also they keep raising a fare and reducing the discount benefits, though maybe not at the same time. You encourage mass transit by improving it. Sorry but a $1.4 billion Fulton Transit Center that a small portion of commuters can actually use with elevators and escalators already breaking down during the first week, does not qualify as a major improvement to encourage mass transit. Adding or changing 50 bus routes to cut commute times, indirect routes, and transfers would. Not adding a few shuttle routes at 30 minute frequencies and paying little attention to bus reliability or having buses with seats bypassing passengers making them wait ten or fifteen extra minutes while the bus saves 30 seconds. Sorry, but I don't see any major improvements to mass transit that justifies continual increases in tolls. People need choices. You don't encourage mass transit by reducing other options. If it takes 90 minutes to make the trip by bus and 60 minutes to drive, you don't make the two competitive by making both trips take 90 minutes. Yet that is what the city is doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted November 16, 2014 Share #21 Posted November 16, 2014 Sorry, but I totally disagree with that. Isn't $15 enough to cross the Verazzano Bridge? Do you want it to be $20? I think our tolls are the highest in the country possibly with the exception of the Chesapeake Bay Tunnel. And don't forget the other expenses of driving like high parking costs. $8 a day for the outer areas. Forget about even trying to park in Manhattan. No one should be "forced" to use mass transit. Do you think for one minute that if tolls were raised, you would be able to get a seat on the subway at all times during the off-peak? The MTA has no desire at all to change the guidelines back to 100% seating capacity from 125% during the off peak and 100% still does not guarantee a seat. Standing is a big deterrent for not using the subways and buses. Not to mention the MTA has no desire to reduce the number of fares required for a trip or change the fare structure so that a bus-train-bus trip which might be the fastest does not cost double fare. Also they keep raising a fare and reducing the discount benefits, though maybe not at the same time. You encourage mass transit by improving it. Sorry but a $1.4 billion Fulton Transit Center that a small portion of commuters can actually use with elevators and escalators already breaking down during the first week, does not qualify as a major improvement to encourage mass transit. Adding or changing 50 bus routes to cut commute times, indirect routes, and transfers would. Not adding a few shuttle routes at 30 minute frequencies and paying little attention to bus reliability or having buses with seats bypassing passengers making them wait ten or fifteen extra minutes while the bus saves 30 seconds. Sorry, but I don't see any major improvements to mass transit that justifies continual increases in tolls. People need choices. You don't encourage mass transit by reducing other options. If it takes 90 minutes to make the trip by bus and 60 minutes to drive, you don't make the two competitive by making both trips take 90 minutes. Yet that is what the city is doing. I should be clear in saying that I support initiatives like congestion pricing provided that those monies be earmarked for immediate transportation improvements and nothing else. In a place like NYC where the population continues to grow we need more people using mass transit. My mentality is very European in this way. When I lived in Europe, I was amazed at how efficient transportation was. Even the whole taxi system was more efficient compared to here. I do agree that transportation needs to be more efficient, cleaner and faster to foster more usage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N6 Limited Posted November 16, 2014 Share #22 Posted November 16, 2014 If they were more efficient they wouldn't need to pilfer as much money in the name of tolls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peacemak3r Posted November 16, 2014 Share #23 Posted November 16, 2014 Raising tolls to force people to use mass transportation? Are you mad? Especially for someone complaining about the quality of service in our subways and you want to force people to use public transportation. There are many instances where driving is more feasible than taking public transportation but that's a completely different subject. Traffic safety has to start with the pedestrians if you ask me. Let's face it, most people walk before obtaining their licenses right? Teach them proper pedestrian etiquette. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooklynBus Posted November 17, 2014 Author Share #24 Posted November 17, 2014 I should be clear in saying that I support initiatives like congestion pricing provided that those monies be earmarked for immediate transportation improvements and nothing else. In a place like NYC where the population continues to grow we need more people using mass transit. My mentality is very European in this way. When I lived in Europe, I was amazed at how efficient transportation was. Even the whole taxi system was more efficient compared to here. I do agree that transportation needs to be more efficient, cleaner and faster to foster more usage. You know how government lies. That's why I would be against congestion pricing under any circumstances. Remember what they did with the lottery? Vote for the lottery because all the money will go to education. Yes, all the lottery money went to education minus the millions spent on TV ads every ten minutes to promote the lottery. And for every dollar the lottery generated for education, a dollar was removed from the state budget for education. The state budget went from something like 75% being spent on education to like 30% on education after the lottery started. Result? No additional money for education. Even if they say all congestion pricing money will go to transportation, the city will then use congestion pricing to fund the entire DOT budget like potholes, roadway reconstruction, signage, red light and speed cameras on every corner. Then instead of contributing anything to the MTA budget, city subsidies would now come from congestion pricing. They won't add new bus routes or reduce the crowding standards so as to increase subway service. They will find excuses not to do what is needed. They will use the money for capital projects and the state will reduce its contribution to the MTA accordingly. And what capital projects will they choose? The ones that help the developers and bankers who are connected to the MTA Board. Or useless edifices like the new PATH Station or the Moynihan Station that does nothing to increase train capacity. Result of congestion pricing? Same service we have now, but drivers going to and through Manhattan would spend much more. Then in a few years they would change their mind and start tapping into congestion pricing for non-transportation purposes. Just let them get teir foot in the door. If Long Islanders didn't protest to get the 10 cent toll removed on the Southern State when they wanted to raise it to a quarter in the 1970s, today it would cost $3.75 and next year $4. Why should there even be a toll to get from one part of Queens to another? That's why I don't even trust Sam Schwartz's proposal that would cut the price of tolls for non-East River Crossings. Because that would ony hold for five years and then they would increase it back to where they are now. They never would stay low for the long term. Sorry, but I have been lied to too many times to trust the city anymore. How many bond issues did we already approve to get the Second Avenue Subway? Two or three? And none of that money was used for the Second Avenue subway. We had to borrow more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rsperez93 Posted November 17, 2014 Share #25 Posted November 17, 2014 Well I do agree that NYC is a pedestrian city and that we need to encourage people to use public transportation and leave their cars at home. HOWEVER, there also needs to be things done to encourage the flow of traffic for drivers AND for those using public transportation (i.e. bus service). Some drivers have no choice but to drive and if we expect them to pay more (which I believe that they should) then they should be entitled to expect a reasonable commute at a decent speed, and for those sacrificing and using bus service, they should expect the same thing. My personal opinion as someone who is big on protecting the environment is that we need to be increasing tolls to force people to use more mass transit and that we should continue to create more "premium services" like ferry service, commuter rail service and express bus service because some people simply don't want to use transit because it isn't appealing enough. In Europe "luxury" transportation is played up for those with money who can afford cars but can be attracted to the "premium services". It's a very smart strategy. Here, transportation is generally treated as service for those who can't afford to drive except for those riding the commuter trains or the express buses or ferry service (excluding the SI Ferry), and that should change. We need to promote our premium services to attract new riders that would otherwise be driving. If they're driving into city, those are the people who we should be targeting because transportation from their neighborhoods to the city should be good enough and convenient enough for them to use it. I know plenty of people who refuse to use the subway because they find it too ghetto and dirty and instead drive in. New express bus service or commuter rail service could perhaps attract those people if marketed correctly. I'm one of those people who am not a fan of the subway and take the express bus and commuter rail service because most of my commuting is to and from Manhattan, but if I had to commute outside of the city, I would certainly purchase a car and would want something environmentally friendly and fuel efficient. I saw a Tesla yesterday that was just beautiful, and that's the type of car that's luxurious but also environmentally friendly. http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/155897-tesla-model-s-is-now-the-best-selling-luxury-car-with-an-asterisk So you're saying that you want people to turn to public transportation if it was made more convenient for riders? Mass transit is still considered public transportation. I bet there is more people taking public transportation to commute somewhere then there is drivers commuting in the city. With new laws such as this it may be possible that the numbers will increase for public transportation. Mind you that there is billions of people that ride the MTA in a day. I know having a vehicle is nice to have but it is not a necessity. The way I look at it is owning a vehicle in NYC is a convenient thing. It is for those drivers that would rather drive to commute than take public transportation. Public transportation does get the deed done as well. But if we are talking convenience here, then the city needs to look at both traffic and public transportation. Fixing one alone won't really resolve anything, rather than just make the other worst. Regardless you are still going to have drivers and riders. I have been taking public transportation longer than I have been driving. If its anyone that really wants to talk about real traffic, California may be your choice topic of discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.