|
|
| Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. (321363) | |
 |
|
| Home > BusChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 9 of 11 |
||
|
| (322226) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by fdtutf on Mon Jan 16 20:08:56 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jan 13 17:22:28 2017. I realize that you have nothing to teach me. Learning incorrect things is not beneficial |
|
| (322228) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Jan 16 21:30:32 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by AlM on Mon Jan 16 19:35:25 2017. Except that, as I keep saying, it INCREASES economic activity, not decreases it to treat patients more cheaply. |
|
| (322229) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Jan 16 21:32:13 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by fdtutf on Mon Jan 16 19:50:57 2017. You clearly do not.While you did argue that it’s cheaper to to prevent conditions, it is completely non-responsive to my question as such increases economic activity over treating a condition that has already occurred and affected a patient’s quality of life. |
|
| (322230) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Jan 16 21:33:48 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by fdtutf on Mon Jan 16 19:21:08 2017. LOL! Thanks for proving my point so definitively. I wasn’t talking about the “broken windows theory” at all!SELF-PWN3D! |
|
| (322232) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Mon Jan 16 22:00:22 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by BrooklynBus on Sat Jan 14 18:23:50 2017. Happy now? |
|
| (322237) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by JerBear on Tue Jan 17 09:16:49 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by BrooklynBus on Sat Jan 14 20:17:53 2017. I can't get to any report with hundreds of pages, so I can't see that.But one set of numbers immediately jumps out at me: $40.2 million minus $28.3 million (grant from the Feds) equals about $12 million. Add a little for scope creep and you can easily get $15 million. Perhaps when they say that the cost is $15 million, they mean that the cost to New York City taxpayers is $15 million, with the rest paid for by all residents of the country? And when MTA mentions the costs, maybe they're talking about their costs to run the B44? (which is paid for by the state) So maybe the reasons the costs don't match up is that it depends who (DOT vs MTA) is stating a cost to whom (City Council vs MTA Board) and which pots of money the funds are coming from (city, state, federal), and what is being paid for (street markings vs fare machines vs additional buses vs bus driver salaries)? |
|
| (322238) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Tue Jan 17 09:49:17 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Jan 16 21:30:32 2017. OK, fine. Society has more money to spend on something else if it doesn't have to pay for all those emergency room visits. |
|
| (322239) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Tue Jan 17 09:51:21 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by Stephen Bauman on Mon Jan 16 19:50:34 2017. My gut feel, not backed up by statistics but backed up purely by personal experience, is that people have more accidents if lanes are only 1/2 foot wider than their vehicle than if lanes are 1 foot wider than their vehicle. |
|
| (322240) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by fdtutf on Tue Jan 17 10:42:53 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by AlM on Tue Jan 17 09:51:21 2017. In other words, motorists generally do a poor job of judging what is a safe speed. |
|
| (322242) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by fdtutf on Tue Jan 17 10:46:50 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Jan 16 21:33:48 2017. No, just didn't know what you were talking about.So I'm essentially saying it's better to prevent a broken window than to fix one, and that means I subscribe to the broken window fallacy? I think you've got that backwards, but that's no surprise. |
|
| (322243) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by fdtutf on Tue Jan 17 10:48:20 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Jan 16 21:30:32 2017. Treating patients more cheaply means less money is spent, which means less economic activity. WTF are you talking about? |
|
| (322244) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by fdtutf on Tue Jan 17 10:50:44 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by fdtutf on Tue Jan 17 10:48:20 2017. Although of course prevention would be cheaper still, obviously. |
|
| (322245) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Tue Jan 17 11:08:35 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by AlM on Tue Jan 17 09:51:21 2017. people have more accidents if lanes are only 1/2 foot wider than their vehicle than if lanes are 1 foot wider than their vehicle.First off, a very small percentage of vehicles are 8.5' wide. Most are 7' or less. This means the conflicts between 8.5' wide vehicles in adjacent lanes are few and far between. Where there are such encounters, both drivers are usually extra cautious and leave their auto-pilot mode. My gut feel, not backed up by statistics but backed up purely by personal experience Here's what Sam Schwartz wrote regarding the Williamsburg Bridge in The Rise of Cities and the Fall of Cars, Street Smart, pp. 58-59. What made the bridge substandard? Its lane widths. The "standard" lane - on interstate highways, on the Cross-Bronx Expressway - was twelve feet wide, but the Williamsburg had lanes that barely exceeded nine feet; at the bridge's towers, the lanes were even narrower. The bridge had no shoulders or breakdown lanes, and had such low clearances that trucks could not use the inner roadways. That meant it wasn't able to move the maximum number of cars into Manhattan as fast as possible. But we didn't want to move the maximum number of cars into Manhattan. And we sure didn't want them moving any faster when they got there. The bridge was still moving a quarter of a million people back and forth over the East River after eighty-five years, which seemed about right to me... In order to test the wider-lanes-are-safer-lanes hypothesis, I studied every crash that occurred on the bridge over a three year period and marked each one on a map. If that notion had been true, I reasoned, more crashes would have occurred where the lanes were narrowest, that is at the towers. Just the opposite turned out to be the case. The towers, it turned out, were the safest places on the entire bridge; my explanation is that when traffic lanes get very narrow motorists drive more carefully. |
|
| (322246) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Jan 17 12:11:45 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by fdtutf on Tue Jan 17 10:46:50 2017. You are claiming that preventing the broken window decreases economic activity. The claim that breaking the window increases economic activity and conversely economic activity is decreased by stopping windows breaking, is at the heart of the "broken window fallacy." Similarly, allowing diseases to occur instead of preventing them is breaking windows as it were. |
|
| (322247) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Jan 17 12:12:16 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by AlM on Tue Jan 17 09:49:17 2017. Yes. Economic activity is not decreased. |
|
| (322248) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Jan 17 12:15:49 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by fdtutf on Tue Jan 17 10:48:20 2017. You clearly are not equipped to participate in this conversation.Although, of course, you know how that is given that you continue to respond to BrooklynBus. |
|
| (322249) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Tue Jan 17 13:38:10 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by Stephen Bauman on Tue Jan 17 11:08:35 2017. First off, a very small percentage of vehicles are 8.5' wide. Most are 7' or less. This means the conflicts between 8.5' wide vehicles in adjacent lanes are few and far between. Where there are such encounters, both drivers are usually extra cautious and leave their auto-pilot mode.I've driven in the UK where lanes tend to be narrower. I'd driven on the left before in the US Virgin Islands in wider lanes, so I know how driving on the left affects me. So again, it's only me, but even discounting the effect of driving on the left, I certainly felt less safe driving in the UK at prevailing speeds compared to driving in comparable circumstances in the US. And I feel the same way about driving at the prevailing speed on the narrow portions of Memorial Drive in Cambridge. |
|
| (322250) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Tue Jan 17 14:45:15 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by AlM on Tue Jan 17 13:38:10 2017. I certainly felt less safe driving in the UK at prevailing speeds compared to driving in comparable circumstances in the US.As per Sam Schwartz' speculation, there may be a difference between your "feelings of safety" and the actual thing. The narrower lanes raise your anxiety level to the point that you concentrate on your driving to the exclusion of other distractions. And I feel the same way about driving at the prevailing speed on the narrow portions of Memorial Drive in Cambridge. It's been 50 years, since I last drove regularly on Memorial Drive. I don't recall ever feeling claustrophobia on it. I was driving a 1954 Ford with manual everything at that time. The tactile feedback from the steering wheel might account for my lack of apprehension. The only narrow lane roadway that gave me trouble in that era was the Hutchinson River Parkway. Not only were did the lanes narrow coming off the Merit but there was no barrier from oncoming cars. The Hutch lanes have been widened. The only narrow lane roadway that gives me pause is the Union Turnpike cut on the Interborough. I slow down, stay to the right and let those with better reflexes pass me. |
|
| (322251) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Tue Jan 17 15:10:44 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by Stephen Bauman on Tue Jan 17 14:45:15 2017. The only narrow lane roadway that gave me trouble in that era was the Hutchinson River Parkway.There is still that nice piece of the northbound Taconic where you have two lanes between a guard rail to your left and a high brick wall to your right. But the lanes there are narrow but not unusually narrow. |
|
| (322252) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by fdtutf on Tue Jan 17 15:30:20 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Jan 17 12:15:49 2017. You clearly are not equipped to carry on a civil conversation, but of course I already knew that. |
|
| (322253) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by fdtutf on Tue Jan 17 15:33:01 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Jan 17 12:11:45 2017. No, I never claimed that. Apparently I'm not the one who's not equipped to participate in this conversation. |
|
| (322263) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Wed Jan 18 01:29:18 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by AlM on Tue Jan 17 15:10:44 2017. Ah yes, that part, though I'm more familiar with the southbound equivalent in the same spot: two lanes, with a guard rail on your left and a low wall with drop of death to your right. I will only use the left lane when driving my narrower mid-size car... |
|
| (322264) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Wed Jan 18 03:04:25 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Wed Jan 18 01:29:18 2017. But at least the southbound side is uphill, so there is a built-in braking system if someone goes out of control. |
|
| (322265) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Wed Jan 18 03:08:10 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by AlM on Wed Jan 18 03:04:25 2017. Fun in both directions! |
|
| (322269) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Jan 18 11:15:28 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by fdtutf on Tue Jan 17 15:30:20 2017. You clearly are equipped to be a hypocrite. You were the one who called my comment an "idiotic comment," despite the fact that it was YOU who didn't understand it. |
|
| (322270) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Jan 18 11:18:11 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by fdtutf on Tue Jan 17 15:33:01 2017. You claimed exactly that. |
|
| (322272) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by fdtutf on Wed Jan 18 15:32:36 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Jan 18 11:15:28 2017. I apologize for that. |
|
| (322273) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Jan 18 15:56:43 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by fdtutf on Wed Jan 18 15:32:36 2017. That is very nice of you. You are a credit to this community. I apologize for being ambiguous and condescending. |
|
| (322297) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by fdtutf on Fri Jan 20 08:03:12 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Jan 18 15:56:43 2017. I'm sorry I got so dismissive when I thought I understood you, but didn't. |
|
| (322351) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Sun Jan 22 12:41:39 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by R30A on Sat Jan 14 23:52:31 2017. "If the signals are timed appropriately for the new speed!How many times do I have to repeat this????" It doesn't matter how many times you repeat it because signals ON THE VAST MAJORITY OF STREETS ARE NOT SYNCHRONIZED. Yet you are trying to make it appear that synchronization is the rule when it is the EXCEPTION. So when we are talking average speeds we are talking about average streets without signal synchronization. And since the vast majority do not abide by ridiculously low speed limits anyway, you are not going to have significantly fewer accidents. |
|
| (322352) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Sun Jan 22 12:51:59 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by R30A on Sat Jan 14 22:48:24 2017. "The vast majority of high volume one way streets appear to have synchronization to me..."True. but we are talking about all streets not only high volume one-way streets. And of course the number of vehicles using those streets are very significant. But if you look at an average trip, chances are no street with traffic signal synchronization would even be used. Even if you want to look at miles traveled, I would estimate that no more than 20 percent involve streets with signal synchronization. Even if it is more than 20 percent, it certainly is way less than 50 percent. And you are the first one to dismiss anything less than 50 percent as insignificant just as you stated that most riders have an unlimited MetroCard. I believe the figure is 54 percent. So you just dismiss that other 46 percent as insignificant. So if you can do that. I certainly can dismiss the number of miles traveled on streets with signal synchronization. So as for the larger point, I still maintain that lowering the speed limit lowers the average speed as long as some abide by the lower speed limit. |
|
| (322353) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Sun Jan 22 13:12:17 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by R30A on Sat Jan 14 22:54:43 2017. ME: Not all people speed, then wait at each light resulting in them making the same average speed. They are the exceptions not the rule.YOU: Nobody said otherwise. Yet you tried to make them the rule by stating that lowering the speed limit to coincide with signal synchronization would have no affect on reducing the average speed limit. I already replied to all but the last sentence in your second paragraph. So now you state that speed limits need to be further lowered and streets need to be redesigned to accommodate lower speed limits. Am I to conclude that the city speed limit needs to be 20 mph for arterials including Ocean Parkway and Queens Boulevard although there wasn't single fatality on Queens Boulevard last year? And streets with no intersections, parking or pedestrians like Flatbush Avenue south of the Belt Parkway having a speed limit of 30 mph or under? That would just be insane. And if you are wondering why there were no fatalities on Queens Blvd last year, it has nothing to do with the 25 mph speed limit that few abide by. It is due to the fences installed along the medians not allowing jaywalking. "That is why you put in bus lanes! To solve the problem!" So every street having a bus should have a bus lane. That is your solution. What about streets with only one lane. Your solution I assume would be to eliminate all parking and deliveries on those blocks. "Probably insignificant in the grand scheme of things. Bus lanes on the active parts of routes would likely more than make up for this." You are speaking out of your ass with absolutely no facts or figures. "Again, almost certainly insignificant on a per unit basis." And why is a per unit basis significant? I am sure Federal Express would be looking at aggregate numbers not a per unit basis. And a consumer would look at extra dollars he spent on everything he purchased that year, and not look at each item separately. Using your logic, one could conclude at raising the fare from $2.75 to $4.00 is insignificant on a per trip basis because it is only a $1.25 difference and that amount buys little these days, not even enough for a weekday New York Times. But most would argue that it would be a significant fare increase. |
|
| (322362) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Sun Jan 22 15:59:31 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by BrooklynBus on Sun Jan 22 12:41:39 2017. It doesn't matter how many times you repeat it because signals ON THE VAST MAJORITY OF STREETS ARE NOT SYNCHRONIZED. Proof? Furthermore, whether the vast majority of signals are synchronized or not is not relevant to the point. Yet you are trying to make it appear that synchronization is the rule when it is the EXCEPTION. Proof? Furthermore, whether the vast majority of signals are synchronized or not is not relevant to the point. So when we are talking average speeds we are talking about average streets without signal synchronization. Proof? Furthermore, whether the vast majority of signals are synchronized or not is not relevant to the point. And since the vast majority do not abide by ridiculously low speed limits anyway, you are not going to have significantly fewer accidents. That is why substantially higher levels of enforcement are needed along with substantially harsher penalties. |
|
| (322363) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Sun Jan 22 16:07:18 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by BrooklynBus on Sun Jan 22 12:51:59 2017. "The vast majority of high volume one way streets appear to have synchronization to me..."True. but we are talking about all streets not only high volume one-way streets. And of course the number of vehicles using those streets are very significant. Of course they are! But if you look at an average trip, chances are no street with traffic signal synchronization would even be used. Even if you want to look at miles traveled, I would estimate that no more than 20 percent involve streets with signal synchronization. Even if it is more than 20 percent, it certainly is way less than 50 percent. Proof? This seems quite likely false to me. And you are the first one to dismiss anything less than 50 percent as insignificant just as you stated that most riders have an unlimited MetroCard. I believe the figure is 54 percent. So you just dismiss that other 46 percent as insignificant. I have never implied that a simple minority is an insignificant quantity. So if you can do that. I certainly can dismiss the number of miles traveled on streets with signal synchronization. A. I have never done the former. B. You have no data to back the latter. C. Whether or not such is true is in fact irrelevant to the point So as for the larger point, I still maintain that lowering the speed limit lowers the average speed as long as some abide by the lower speed limit. It may. It depends on the street. It does not do so everywhere.(WHICH WAS MY WHOLE DAMN POINT!) In some places I am sure it will, AS SUCH IS SOMETIMES THE GOAL. But the way you figure that out is by FINDING THE NEW AVERAGE SPEED, not making up absurd guesses based on nothing. |
|
| (322364) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Sun Jan 22 16:20:26 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by BrooklynBus on Sun Jan 22 13:12:17 2017. Yet you tried to make them the rule by stating that lowering the speed limit to coincide with signal synchronization would have no affect on reducing the average speed limit.Never made any such claim. So now you state that speed limits need to be further lowered and streets need to be redesigned to accommodate lower speed limits. Am I to conclude that the city speed limit needs to be 20 mph for arterials including Ocean Parkway and Queens Boulevard although there wasn't single fatality on Queens Boulevard last year? Said conclusion does not follow from premise. Never said ALL streets need their speed limits lowered to any specific number such as 20MPH. And streets with no intersections, parking or pedestrians like Flatbush Avenue south of the Belt Parkway having a speed limit of 30 mph or under? That would just be insane. Never claimed it should have such. And if you are wondering why there were no fatalities on Queens Blvd last year, it has nothing to do with the 25 mph speed limit that few abide by. It is due to the fences installed along the medians not allowing jaywalking. Unsupported assumptions. "That is why you put in bus lanes! To solve the problem!" So every street having a bus should have a bus lane. That is your solution. What about streets with only one lane. Your solution I assume would be to eliminate all parking and deliveries on those blocks. No. Only streets where the traffic is at such a level where it is interfering with bus service. Yes. If such a street is a single lane, both transit mall conversion and rerouting the bus route to a paralell road without such issues should be considered. Deliveries can be made in off hours should the street become a dedicated busway. "Probably insignificant in the grand scheme of things. Bus lanes on the active parts of routes would likely more than make up for this." You are speaking out of your ass with absolutely no facts or figures. I make no claims contrary. Yes, this is my assumption. considering the relative amounts of time spent on route vs deadheading, I think it is a fairly safe assumption. "Again, almost certainly insignificant on a per unit basis." And why is a per unit basis significant? I am sure Federal Express would be looking at aggregate numbers not a per unit basis. And a consumer would look at extra dollars he spent on everything he purchased that year, and not look at each item separately. And it would all be small. Using your logic, one could conclude at raising the fare from $2.75 to $4.00 is insignificant on a per trip basis because it is only a $1.25 difference and that amount buys little these days, not even enough for a weekday New York Times. But most would argue that it would be a significant fare increase. I would never claim such. There may be a time when it becomes necessary, but such would surely be significant. |
|
| (322367) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by fdtutf on Sun Jan 22 17:28:31 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by BrooklynBus on Sun Jan 22 13:12:17 2017. You are speaking out of your ass with absolutely no facts or figures.IRONY ALERT!!! |
|
| (322377) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Sun Jan 22 19:42:20 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by fdtutf on Sun Jan 22 17:28:31 2017. Yes R30 is allowed to do that. Excuse me I forgot. He gets a pass from you of course. |
|
| (322384) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by fdtutf on Mon Jan 23 08:40:42 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by BrooklynBus on Sun Jan 22 19:42:20 2017. That's not the point, not that I accept that he did that. The point is that you do that all the time, and you complain like the dickens when somebody calls you on it, but you're perfectly willing to call other people on it when you think they've done it. Hypocrisy much? |
|
| (322394) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Jan 23 11:39:11 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by fdtutf on Mon Jan 23 08:40:42 2017. When I do it, it is based on logical assumptions which he never accepts always requesting data as proof, usually data he knows I don't have or doesn't exist.His assumptions are usually just not true. That is the difference. Not hypocrisy at all. |
|
| (322397) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Mon Jan 23 12:13:39 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by Stephen Bauman on Sat Jan 14 17:47:31 2017. It's virtually impossible to have progressive signals on a two-way street.Not at all, especially where traffic is directional. A lot of times it's desirable to have a "green wave" in the off-peak direction so traffic gets a string of greens, and a reverse green wave in the peak direction so waiting queues can clear out before releasing traffic from the previous intersection. |
|
| (322398) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Mon Jan 23 12:16:12 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Jan 23 11:39:11 2017. When I do it, it is based on logical assumptions which he never accepts always requesting data as proof, usually data he knows I don't have or doesn't exist.His assumptions are usually just not true. That is the difference. Not hypocrisy at all. Your assumptions are generally way off and several have even been disproven with actual data and/or arithmetic. R30's assumptions are usually reasonable. |
|
| (322399) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Mon Jan 23 12:45:44 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Jan 23 11:39:11 2017. I rarely make assumptions, and when I do, I clearly state I am doing so. |
|
| (322400) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by orange blossom special on Mon Jan 23 14:48:32 2017, in response to Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Dec 26 10:23:59 2016. A 15- or 20–mile-per-hour speed limit would bring the average speed to below 10 miles per hour, a little more than twice the walking speed and significantly increase already slow travel times.*** Sounds like that metric nonsense. I think in problem intersections, cars and people should not be competing. A separate cycle for pedestrians only. |
|
| (322403) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Jan 23 15:39:10 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Mon Jan 23 12:16:12 2017. Okay, so if my assumptions are way off please explain the following. DOT proposed elminating left turns at Metropolitan and Woodhaven. I asked them how large trucks going southbound supposed to get to Metropolitan going east. They told me the trucks shoukd make a right turn not Cooper and a left onto Metropolitan.When I explained that it would be very difficult for a tractor trailer to make a 270 degree left turn without making it from the right lane (and very carefully and slowly) which would be dangerous, they changed the proposal to make Trotting Course Lane a two way so that southbound trucks could use it to make a left onto Metropolitan. When I pointed out that Trotting Course was totally residential and narrow for those blocks and the traffic all night would disturb the residents, they abandoned that idea too. They said instead trucks shoukd continue south and make a u-turn before the LIRR and them a right onto Metropolitan. And finally when I showed them how heavy the left turn movements were at that intersection on weekends which might even be the peak turning period (with queues of 50 cars waiting to make left turns, they abandoned the idea of prohibiting left turns at that intersection. So my "assumptions" if you want to call them that were right on target and DOT realized that by changing their proposal numerous times. |
|
| (322404) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Jan 23 15:39:53 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by R30A on Mon Jan 23 12:45:44 2017. You make assumptions all the time just like everyone else here does. |
|
| (322405) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Mon Jan 23 19:22:12 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Jan 23 15:39:53 2017. You claim I am making assumptions many times when I am not. |
|
| (322407) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Jan 24 00:19:47 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by orange blossom special on Mon Jan 23 14:48:32 2017. They already tried that. It was called the Barnes Dance. They claimed it slowed down cars too much, but when it was removed at Brighton Beach Avenue and Coney Island Avenue, which was one of the last intersections to have it, I did not notice traffic improve.One problem with it was that the pedestrians would not listen. They still crossed when the signal was green for cars and the walk was red as well as when the walk was green. Also few crossed diagonally which they were permitted to do. |
|
| (322416) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by orange blossom special on Tue Jan 24 17:22:05 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Jan 24 00:19:47 2017. "They still crossed when the signal was green for cars and the walk was red as well as when the walk was green."A solution to people not following the rules and ruining everything would be electric collars. |
|
| (322510) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Jan 31 14:12:46 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by R30A on Sun Jan 22 15:59:31 2017. "Proof?"Is that the only thing you can say? Why is it that I have to prove every statement I make and you don't have to prove anything? Where is your proof that the majority of signals are synchronized? Of course you don't have any because the opposite is true. They are only synchronized full time on major one-way avenues and on major two way streets in one firection only during peak hours. Those streets surely so not account for most of the street miles in NYC. And the signals that are synchronized for the north south avenues are not synchronized for the cross streets, so even those signals are not fully synchronized. And is certainly is relevant to the point because your entire theory that the lower speed limit does not lower the average speed is based on the premise that most signals are fully synchronized when in fact none are. And you make it appear that traveling a few miles over the speed limit is the major factor for accidents when that certainly is not the case. It's those going excessively fast which has nothing to do with the lower speed limit since they would be speeding regardless. The only thing that more cameras will do is increase the amount of revenue the city collects by those traveling at 36 or 37 mph. As far as harsher penalties, that has to be done on a case by case basis. Tell me what would you do to that 85 year old man you killed a lady while backing up besides taking away his license? Would you fine him a few thousand dollars to make him more careful or lock him up for the rest of his life? Yes we need better policing and more thorough investigations. I am all for that as well as retesting all drivers periodically like every time they renew their license. A written test for younger drivers and a road test for older drivers. But you emphasis with the need to keep lowering the speed limit is utter nonsense because it won't accomplish anything. Queens Blvd had no pedestrian fatalities last year not because the speed limit was lowered but because fencing was installed in the center median preventing midblock crossings by jaywalkers and clearer marked crosswalks. We need a multi-faceted sensible approach. |
|
| (322511) | |
Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter. |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Jan 31 14:25:41 2017, in response to Re: Pedestrians aren't the only ones who matter., posted by R30A on Sun Jan 22 16:07:18 2017. "I have never implied that a simple minority is an insignificant quantity."I have made a number of statements and you responded with a statement like it only applies to a minority of the cases. You are a master of changing your position. After you failed to make the case that lowering the speed limit does not lower your average speed, your position now is that your point is only true on some streets. It is true on the vast majority of streets. I have already replied to your incessant requests for proof so I will not get into that again. And yes the goal by the city is to reduce speeds all over not only in some places. They think by doing that fewer will drive. They won't without improved mass transit when people have to stand in crowded vehicles at all times of the day or night with service that may not be frequent enough. You want the new average speed? I can only tell you what it is for me because my car keeps track of that every time I start my vehicle. It is between 7 and 12 mph hour when I am not on the highway. When I combine highway and city driving, it is between 19 and 27 mph. Do you think that is too fast? Imagine how much lower it would be if I never exceeded the speed limit. |
|
|
Page 9 of 11 |
||