|
|
| Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd (317143) | |
 |
|
| Home > BusChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 7 of 34 |
||
|
| (317899) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Sep 9 12:19:57 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd, posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Sep 9 11:40:39 2016. Yes, they do: |
|
|
| (317901) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd |
|
|
Posted by terRAPIN station on Fri Sep 9 12:38:01 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd, posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Sep 9 12:19:57 2016. Yes, they do:MOTHERF*&^%$G OWNED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
|
|
| (317902) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Sep 9 12:58:42 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd, posted by terRAPIN station on Fri Sep 9 12:38:01 2016. Thanks. And it was obvious where to look. |
|
|
| (317903) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd |
|
|
Posted by northshore on Fri Sep 9 13:28:22 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd, posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Sep 9 12:19:57 2016. Shouldn't it say "Maine" since that is the end of I-95? |
|
|
| (317904) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Fri Sep 9 13:42:04 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd, posted by northshore on Fri Sep 9 13:28:22 2016. No, it should say the next major destination or control city. |
|
|
| (317905) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd |
|
|
Posted by terRAPIN station on Fri Sep 9 14:00:32 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Fri Sep 9 13:42:04 2016. No, it should say the next major destination or control city.Thanks for correcting him. |
|
|
| (317906) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Fri Sep 9 14:08:39 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd, posted by northshore on Fri Sep 9 13:28:22 2016. Usually they display the next "Control" city.You don't see Seattle on I 90 in Boston, nor the reverse. |
|
|
| (317907) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Sep 9 14:33:03 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd, posted by TerrApin Station on Tue Sep 6 17:51:26 2016. It is very confusing. It's a 50 50 chance you will go the right way to Grand Central or Astoria Blvd without any signage. I would say less than 10 percent need the Marine Air Terminal and since the sign doesn't say LGA, one might think you need to go right for the other terminals since left is the Marine Terminal. |
|
|
| (317908) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Sep 9 14:36:54 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd, posted by terRAPIN station on Tue Sep 6 12:40:41 2016. And GPS s are always correct? Mine can't distinguish from a highway or a service road as I am sure many others can't either. It tells me to make a left not Ocean Avenue from the Belt Parkway if I just got on the highway because it thinks I am on the service road.But according to you we should always listen to them. They have to,d npme that I arrived at my destination although I was a mile away. They are no substitute for signage. |
|
|
| (317909) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Sep 9 14:38:47 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd, posted by Wakefield-241st Street on Tue Sep 6 13:11:33 2016. My GPS always shows which lane to take. They are no substitute for signage since they can be incorrect and sometimes are. They have told me to turn into a cement wall or into a river. |
|
|
| (317910) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Sep 9 14:39:19 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd, posted by R30A on Tue Sep 6 11:10:42 2016. Which was not the case. |
|
|
| (317911) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Sep 9 14:41:20 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd, posted by terRAPIN station on Tue Sep 6 12:35:02 2016. But it was poor signage since there was no indication that a left turn automatically sent you over the bridge. There was no "exit only" sign, justly a directional so if you were not from the area you would not know how far away the bridge was or that there was not another exit. |
|
|
| (317912) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Sep 9 14:42:34 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd, posted by fdtutf on Tue Sep 6 11:02:26 2016. Because people do not have a God given right to walk wherever they want to.I admitted I was wrong about the Atlantic Avenue elevator for one. |
|
|
| (317913) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Sep 9 14:43:17 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd, posted by terRAPIN station on Tue Sep 6 12:37:01 2016. You don't even know how to reason. All you can do is accuse anyone who doesn't agree with you as being wrong. |
|
|
| (317914) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Sep 9 14:47:27 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd, posted by terRAPIN station on Tue Sep 6 12:43:33 2016. Because when it happened was not relevant because the same problems exist today with poor signage everywhere and that includes buses and trains.I came back from LaGuardia at Roosevelt Avenue Station. The sign for the elevator says to E,F, and R. Inside at the upper mezzanine level the buttons say lower mezzanine and platform. If you press platform you are on the Manhattan side. There is no sign that tells you if you want Jamaica to get off the elevator on the lower mezzanine to change elevators. |
|
|
| (317915) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Sep 9 14:48:30 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd, posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Sep 6 17:11:38 2016. So what is your point? That I omitted the o in Washington? |
|
|
| (317916) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Sep 9 14:49:56 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd, posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Sep 6 21:29:22 2016. There is no such sign today perhaps. |
|
|
| (317917) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Sep 9 14:51:05 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd, posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Sep 7 11:08:10 2016. But the sign used to be there. |
|
|
| (317918) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Sep 9 14:51:46 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd, posted by AlM on Wed Sep 7 10:46:40 2016. And if going left sends you into another city over a bridge, a sign is needed. |
|
|
| (317919) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Sep 9 14:52:54 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd, posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Sep 7 16:11:25 2016. A sign indicating lane directions is still a "sign". A sign does not need words to be a sign. |
|
|
| (317920) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Sep 9 14:53:50 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd, posted by AlM on Mon Sep 5 06:18:06 2016. Thank you . Exactly. That was all I was trying to say. |
|
|
| (317922) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvdn medians |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Sep 9 15:00:27 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvdn medians, posted by R30A on Fri Sep 9 11:33:40 2016. Okay show me your proof that there are car accidents on sidewalks every single day. Are you considering the entire US or the world? If so then I would agree.So according to you the majority of the "community" agrees with DOT. You have zero proof of that. DOT has been known to mislead before and they are continuing to do so. |
|
|
| (317923) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Sep 9 15:03:10 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd, posted by R30A on Fri Sep 9 11:37:12 2016. The final changes for northern Woodhaven are in except for the extension of the bus lane to north of Dry a Harbor which will only increase congestion forcing all Queens Blvd west traffic into two lanes. The malls on northern Woodhaven and moving the bus lanes to the center have been dropped, thank goodness. |
|
|
| (317925) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvdn medians |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Sep 9 15:06:45 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvdn medians, posted by R30A on Fri Sep 9 12:07:52 2016. As a planner, I certainly know that a plan refers to the future and not the present, something you have not yet grasped. |
|
|
| (317926) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd |
|
|
Posted by northshore on Fri Sep 9 15:08:32 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Fri Sep 9 13:42:04 2016. Shouldn't it be Philly? |
|
|
| (317927) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd |
|
|
Posted by northshore on Fri Sep 9 15:09:07 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd, posted by terRAPIN station on Fri Sep 9 14:00:32 2016. Shouldn't it be Phully? |
|
|
| (317928) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Sep 9 15:09:21 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd, posted by terRAPIN station on Fri Sep 9 12:11:02 2016. You click on what is relevant, not for the purpose of clicking which you may do just to amuse yourself. You don't click on Brooklyn if you want Queens, yet you keep insisting that is perfectly logical. |
|
|
| (317929) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvdn medians |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Sep 9 15:10:27 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvdn medians, posted by terRAPIN station on Fri Sep 9 12:13:55 2016. I don't agree with you about anything. |
|
|
| (317930) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvdn medians |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Fri Sep 9 15:12:39 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvdn medians, posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Sep 9 15:06:45 2016. Except that is flat out incorrect. |
|
|
| (317931) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd |
|
|
Posted by terRAPIN station on Fri Sep 9 15:24:13 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd, posted by northshore on Fri Sep 9 15:09:07 2016. You really don't learn, do you? You better not be jerking me around, either. Is your other handle "LuchAAA"? |
|
|
| (317933) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Fri Sep 9 15:26:07 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd, posted by northshore on Fri Sep 9 15:08:32 2016. Shouldn't it be Philly?According to AASHTO, "it may be desirable to select 'control city' destinations whose location may be more readily recognized by the interstate traveler than to the city which may be listed next in the sequential order." |
|
|
| (317934) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Fri Sep 9 15:26:25 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd, posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Sep 9 14:39:19 2016. You have no frame of reference to determine such. |
|
|
| (317935) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvdn medians |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Sep 9 15:26:43 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvdn medians, posted by R30A on Fri Sep 9 15:12:39 2016. So a plan can refer to the present?If the plan is to do nothing, then you are correct. But I wouldn't call a plan that recommends no changes a plan. It is a rejection of a plan to make changes. |
|
|
| (317936) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Fri Sep 9 15:30:05 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd, posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Sep 9 15:03:10 2016. "The final changes for northern Woodhaven are in except for the extension of the bus lane to north of Dry a Harbor which will only increase congestion forcing all Queens Blvd west traffic into two lanes. The malls on northern Woodhaven and moving the bus lanes to the center have been dropped, thank goodness. "Really? Where has that been put in writing? If true, such is quite unfortunate. |
|
|
| (317937) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvdn medians |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Fri Sep 9 15:33:26 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvdn medians, posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Sep 9 15:00:27 2016. "Okay show me your proof that there are car accidents on sidewalks every single day. Are you considering the entire US or the world? If so then I would agree."US is big enough to be a safe assumption. Where is your evidence that medians are in any way less safe than sidewalks? "So according to you the majority of the "community" agrees with DOT. You have zero proof of that." Where in the world did I say that? (Hint: I never did, as I am not a dishonest person.) "DOT has been known to mislead before and they are continuing to do so." Your conspiracies are absurd to the point of no longer being particularly entertaining. |
|
|
| (317938) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd |
|
|
Posted by Cornell Park on Fri Sep 9 15:36:47 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd, posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Sep 9 14:36:54 2016. If you have a GPS you shouldn't need signs at all. Also if you use the same roads often you also do not need signs.The signs are for everyone else especially tourists without GPS. This is here- http://www.subchat.com/buschat/read.asp?Id=317733 My GPS always shows which lane to take. They are no substitute for signage since they can be incorrect and sometimes are. They have told me to turn into a cement wall or into a river. This is here- http://www.subchat.com/buschat/read.asp?Id=317909 And now this- And GPS s are always correct? Mine can't distinguish from a highway or a service road as I am sure many others can't either. It tells me to make a left not Ocean Avenue from the Belt Parkway if I just got on the highway because it thinks I am on the service road. But according to you we should always listen to them. They have to,d npme that I arrived at my destination although I was a mile away. They are no substitute for signage. Do we trust the GPS or not? And the signs- leave up or take down? Does it even matter at this point? Either way, your going to be confused. |
|
|
| (317939) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd |
|
|
Posted by northshore on Fri Sep 9 15:39:24 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Fri Sep 9 15:26:07 2016. So it should be Philly |
|
|
| (317940) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd |
|
|
Posted by northshore on Fri Sep 9 15:40:14 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd, posted by terRAPIN station on Fri Sep 9 15:24:13 2016. What don't you understand that I posted? |
|
|
| (317942) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Sep 9 15:57:55 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd, posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Sep 9 14:41:20 2016. You didn't just cite the "mythical" DC sign, you cited other signs like the one in Atlantic City which is NOT an example of poor signage. |
|
|
| (317943) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd |
|
|
Posted by fdtutf on Fri Sep 9 16:00:35 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd, posted by R30A on Fri Sep 9 14:08:39 2016. Although if you're leaving Baltimore westbound on I-70, there is a sign on the opposite (eastbound) side, facing the westbound traffic, showing the distance to Denver. :-D |
|
|
| (317946) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvdn medians |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Fri Sep 9 16:34:40 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvdn medians, posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Sep 9 15:26:43 2016. "So a plan can refer to the present?"Certainly! "If the plan is to do nothing, then you are correct. But I wouldn't call a plan that recommends no changes a plan. It is a rejection of a plan to make changes." Depends on what definition of plan you are using. |
|
|
| (317959) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvdn medians |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Sep 9 21:59:32 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvdn medians, posted by R30A on Fri Sep 9 16:34:40 2016. How many definitions of plan are you referring to?Unless your plan is to do nothing, any plan changes existing conditions. |
|
|
| (317960) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Sep 9 22:02:16 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd, posted by R30A on Fri Sep 9 15:30:05 2016. Don't know if it is in writing anywhere but DOT publicly stated at meetings that there are no current plans to relocate the existing bus lane by instituting islands and narrowing lanes.If it were done traffic would be hopelessly tied in knots as well as emergency vehicles hampered. |
|
|
| (317961) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvdn medians |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Sep 9 22:11:43 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvdn medians, posted by R30A on Fri Sep 9 15:33:26 2016. When I stated the community is against DOT's proposal, you stated that the people at the protest were not the community. The inference is that the community supports the proposal. Now you said you never said that so you are talking out of both sides of your mouth. The protestors either represented the larger community or they did not. You can't have it both ways.It is not a conspiracy theory that DOT misleads. It is a known fact. When the proposal was first presented DOT was asked why the speed limit was lowered. The response was that it was lowered because of Vision Zero which is separate from SBS. Now DOT is stating that Vision Zero and SBS are both part of the Complete Streets program and that SBS. So if they are both part of the same program, it is inaccurate to say they have nothing to do with each other. SBS is either related to Vision Zero or it is not. Vehicles on the main roadway travel at higher speeds than along service roads. So if a car hits someone on the sidewalk he is more likely to hit that person at a lower rate of speed than if he were on the main roadway. Of course maniacs can still do 60 mph on a service road, but it is less likely. |
|
|
| (317962) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Fri Sep 9 22:21:19 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd, posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Sep 9 22:02:16 2016. "Don't know if it is in writing anywhere but DOT publicly stated at meetings that there are no current plans to relocate the existing bus lane by instituting islands and narrowing lanes."Considering that you can't even understand "Exit Only" I will not take your understanding as the truth without substantiation "If it were done traffic would be hopelessly tied in knots as well as emergency vehicles hampered." No, they would not. |
|
|
| (317963) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Sep 9 22:22:09 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd, posted by Cornell Park on Fri Sep 9 15:36:47 2016. You can't assume everyone has GPS or that it is always correct, so you definitely need signage. But they should be intended for tourists and those unfamiliar with the road since regular users can manage without signs.. (I am not talking about temporary detour signage.)You trust GPS unless there is an obvious reason not to trust them like they are instructing you to do something impossible or dangerous to do. There is no substitute for common sense. I am not confused when the signage is clear. I have found the signage to be much clearer on the west coast than along the Eastern Seaboard. I once got lost about a dozen times between Virginia and Boston, but never got lost once traveling through Washington, California, Nevada, Arizona, Utah, etc and those were days before GPS. |
|
|
| (317964) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvdn medians |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Fri Sep 9 22:28:49 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvdn medians, posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Sep 9 22:11:43 2016. "When I stated the community is against DOT's proposal, you stated that the people at the protest were not the community."Correct. They in no way represent the community as a whole. "The inference is that the community supports the proposal." No such inference can be made. "Now you said you never said that so you are talking out of both sides of your mouth." Being accurate is not "talking out of both sides of your mouth" "The protestors either represented the larger community or they did not." They did not. "You can't have it both ways." I don't "It is not a conspiracy theory that DOT misleads." Yes it is. "It is a known fact." Only to you and your conspiracy theorist friends. "When the proposal was first presented DOT was asked why the speed limit was lowered. The response was that it was lowered because of Vision Zero which is separate from SBS." Yes. "Now DOT is stating that Vision Zero and SBS are both part of the Complete Streets program and that SBS." Correct. "So if they are both part of the same program, it is inaccurate to say they have nothing to do with each other." No it is not inaccurate. Different elements of a program certainly can be unrelated. "SBS is either related to Vision Zero or it is not." OK! Most binary statements can be true. Such does not give them any substantive meaning. "Vehicles on the main roadway travel at higher speeds than along service roads." Potentially. Not reliably. "So if a car hits someone on the sidewalk he is more likely to hit that person at a lower rate of speed than if he were on the main roadway." Based on unsubstantiated prior assumption "Of course maniacs can still do 60 mph on a service road, but it is less likely." Actually, the chance of somebody speeding on a service road ending up on the sidewalk is likely much greater as they are not engineered for higher speeds. |
|
|
| (317966) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Sep 9 22:30:27 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd, posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Sep 9 15:57:55 2016. I disagree because you do not "exit" from local streets with crossings every 200 feet. |
|
|
| (317971) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Sep 10 00:18:04 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd, posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Sep 9 22:30:27 2016. Yes, you do.Nobody cares if you disagree. You can continue to tilt at windmills. |
|
|
| (317975) | |
Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Sat Sep 10 05:07:03 2016, in response to Re: Fighting the DOT S(BS) on Woodhaven Blvd, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Fri Sep 9 15:26:07 2016. My cousin got fouled up by this one many years ago.He knew he had to take I-5 northbound. Basically, his view was "WTF is Redding?" Yes, he should have deduced it was "not LA." |
|
|
|
Page 7 of 34 |
||