|
|
| Re: Signal priority in NYC (342447) | |
 |
|
| Home > BusChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 2 of 3 |
||
|
| (342502) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jun 3 00:09:44 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by checkmatechamp13 on Wed Jun 2 23:47:58 2021. I disagree. You still have plenty of traffic well into the evening after bus frequency subsides. Weekends too. |
|
|
| (342503) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Thu Jun 3 01:35:14 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by BrooklynBus on Wed Jun 2 10:49:48 2021. Hopefully by 2025 we’ll have a mayor that has some common sense and will restore the old 30 MPH speedlimit. |
|
|
| (342504) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by Dyre Dan on Thu Jun 3 02:44:59 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by Stephen Bauman on Tue Jun 1 16:52:11 2021. What are these design changes that make cars less dangerous to pedestrians? |
|
|
| (342505) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Jun 3 07:28:43 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by BrooklynBus on Wed Jun 2 21:49:01 2021. For buses every three minutes, lanes would be justified,What's the basis for this assertion? |
|
|
| (342506) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Jun 3 09:11:31 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by Dyre Dan on Thu Jun 3 02:44:59 2021. What are these design changes that make cars less dangerous to pedestrians?Designing for safety Europe's requirements aim to ease the blow to a pedestrian's body in two areas: the head and leg. To comply, designers have sought more pliable hoods that can deform to absorb impact in case a pedestrian is thrown onto the hood. They also have moved hoods higher to create space over the hard points underneath, such as the engine. On front-end bumpers, designers have lowered them, and have used softer materials, such as foams and crushable plastics to reduce the severity of impact on legs. https://www.treehugger.com/teslas-in-europe-have-active-hood-to-protect-pedestrians-4856678 Here's a link to the Citroen system video showing shock absorbing hood. |
|
|
| (342507) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Thu Jun 3 10:49:41 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jun 3 00:08:30 2021. Every few years when I visit Kew Gardens or Forest Hills, I use the subway mezzanine to cross the street. |
|
|
| (342508) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Jun 3 10:57:40 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by Joe V on Thu Jun 3 10:49:41 2021. when I visit Kew Gardens or Forest Hills, I use the subway mezzanine to cross the street.I grew up in Forest Hills and had to cross Queens Blv to reach the library. My mother taught me to use the subway to cross Queens Blv. |
|
|
| (342509) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jun 3 11:30:07 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by randyo on Thu Jun 3 01:35:14 2021. I wish, but I really doubt it. |
|
|
| (342510) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Jun 3 11:49:40 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by randyo on Thu Jun 3 01:35:14 2021.  we’ll have a mayor that has some common sense and will restore the old 30 MPH speedlimit. The 30 mph was imposed on NYC by a NYS law in 1964. It had been 25 mph. The 25 mph minimum speed limit was similarly imposed by NYS law. It had been 20 mph until 1961. There's a genocide thread going on in OTC. Are you trying to reduce the pedestrian collisions by providing a "final solution" for pedestrians? :=) [sarcasm] |
|
|
| (342511) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Thu Jun 3 12:23:06 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Jun 3 11:49:40 2021. I don't think anyone doubts that the higher speed driven, both the higher chance of a pedestrian struck and a higher chance that pedestrian dies.So unless the limit is brought down to zero, it all comes down to a risk-benefit analysis. |
|
|
| (342512) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jun 3 14:30:25 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by New Flyer #857 on Thu Jun 3 12:23:06 2021. I don’t think it’s even that. The goal should always be to avoid the collisions in the first place, and they’re all caused by either the pedestrian or the driver (or both) violating some other rule of the road. |
|
|
| (342513) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Jun 3 15:10:35 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jun 3 14:30:25 2021. The goal should always be to avoid the collisions in the first place,There has been a reduction of occupant deaths and injuries since the 1960's (Nader's Unsafe at Any Speed.) The reason for this decrease has not been a reduction in collisions. Collisions per vehicle-mile have increased. The reduction has been because of changes in automobile design. Reducing pedestrian-automobile collisions is a worthwhile goal. It may not be the most efficient way to reduce pedestrian injuries and death. |
|
|
| (342516) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Thu Jun 3 19:43:57 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Jun 2 10:56:46 2021. Doesn't even benefit all the rich, and I'm not actually sure it's the woke doing it. Cycling is a mode that is inaccessible to elderly, handicapped and woefully out-of-shape individuals, with that last group making up a chunky part of the woke.It's naive environmentalist types who think carbon 0 is possible and they're doing their part by cycling, as they crank up the AC at their destination and double shower (I hope) every day. |
|
|
| (342517) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Jun 3 21:31:31 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Jun 2 10:56:46 2021. Cycling benefits the rich. The true egalitarian mode is the bus.A yearly (365 days) unlimited pass for Citibike costs $179. A yearly (360 days) costs $1524. |
|
|
| (342518) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Jun 3 21:36:04 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Thu Jun 3 19:43:57 2021. woefully out-of-shape individuals, with that last group making up a chunky part of the woke.E-bikes are providing personal transportation for the woefully out-of-shape. |
|
|
| (342521) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jun 3 22:48:41 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Thu Jun 3 19:43:57 2021. Actually, the reason that it benefits the rich is distance. In NYC, people who live within cycling distance of the CBD are more likely to be upper class. |
|
|
| (342522) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jun 3 22:50:00 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Jun 3 21:31:31 2021. When CitiBike launched it was only available in upper class areas. Even though that’s changed, most middle and lower class people live too far away from their jobs to use non-motorized transportation. |
|
|
| (342523) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jun 3 22:54:05 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Thu Jun 3 19:43:57 2021. Carbon 0 is possible.*What’s not possible is simultaneous carbon 0 and uranium 0. If you oppose nuclear power, you are not serious about reducing carbon emissions, period. *Except for aviation. |
|
|
| (342524) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Thu Jun 3 23:11:57 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Thu Jun 3 19:43:57 2021. I still remember Paul Steely White who was head of Transportation Alternatives biking to a speech he was giving in Lower Manhattan about 30 years ago.. It was a hot day in June and he approached the podium a hot sweaty mess to give his speech. I wonder what type of impression he thought he was making. I know what I thought. That the guy has no common sense. I have no recollection of anything he said. |
|
|
| (342525) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Thu Jun 3 23:14:03 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by randyo on Thu Jun 3 01:35:14 2021. That’s if the next disastrous Democratic mayor is not re-elected. One reason I am not voting for Stringer is because he refused to oppose deBlasio four years ago, which proves he is cut from the same cloth. |
|
|
| (342526) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Thu Jun 3 23:21:01 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Jun 3 15:10:35 2021. And education and properly maintained crosswalks and proper signage are the best ways of reducing fatalities and also increased fencing where appropriate to reduce jaywalking. Lowering speeds to ridiculously low levels is no solution. Getting rid of arterial roadways in areas of the city without expressways makes it impossible to get anywhere. No one abides by ridiculous low limits and drivers get frustrated and drive more carelessly. Arterial roads weren’t even supposed to be part of a Vision Zero when deBlasio announced the program. Instead they became his first target. |
|
|
| (342527) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Thu Jun 3 23:25:03 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by checkmatechamp13 on Wed Jun 2 23:42:42 2021. On Woodhaven, they were going the speed limit of 35 mph when that was in effect. I know this for a fact because I was driving at the speed limit and couldn’t pass a Limited bus until it had to stop. I remember once driving next to a bus at Metropolitan Avenue and not being able to pass him until past 63rd Drive. |
|
|
| (342528) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Jun 3 23:26:35 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jun 3 22:50:00 2021. most middle and lower class people live too far away from their jobs to use non-motorized transportation.What's the basis for that assertion? N.B. according to the LEHD census, about 10% of all NYC resident workers live within walking distance (1 mi) of their workplace. About 30% of all NYC resident workers live within biking distance (4 mi) of their workplace. About 50% of all NYC resident workers live within e-bike distance (8 mi) of their workplace. |
|
|
| (342529) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Thu Jun 3 23:26:52 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by checkmatechamp13 on Wed Jun 2 23:47:58 2021. That’s not even the point. The purpose of bus lanes should be to speed buses not to slow down other traffic. |
|
|
| (342530) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jun 3 23:31:53 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Jun 3 23:26:35 2021. Thanks for agreeing. |
|
|
| (342531) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Thu Jun 3 23:37:32 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Jun 3 07:28:43 2021. You are inferring that I said they would not be justified when operated at lower frequencies, which is not what I said. I believe they could also be useful if buses operated at every four or five minutes, but not greater than that. If you want to know what textbook that comes from, I can’t answer that, other than it is common sense that if a bus operates say every ten minutes and you are taking away a lane for that bus which results in 5 mph speed for everyone else when it would have been 10 or 15 mph with the extra lane, you would be hurting more people than you are helping even if there are 1.5 people per car and say 30 people per bus.The goal for any change should be to help more than you hurt and not ignore an entire sector of the population with the belief, that it doesn’t matter how slow you make automobile traffic, because those people have no business using a car anyway and should be in the bus to begin with, and that saving bus riders time should be your only goal regardless of the consequences. No one has a right to make that judgment. Not to mention you are also slowing down trucks. |
|
|
| (342532) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Fri Jun 4 00:19:09 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by BrooklynBus on Thu Jun 3 23:21:01 2021. And education and properly maintained crosswalks and proper signage are the best ways of reducing fatalities and also increased fencing where appropriate to reduce jaywalking.A frequent misconception of the uninformed. From New York City Pedestrian Safety Study & Action Plan: Technical Supplement (August 2010). Table 1-4. Top Apparent Contributing Factors Pedestrian KSI Crashes (KSI = Killed/Severely Insured) Driver Inattention - 36.0% Failure to Yield Right of Way - 20.6% Failure to Yield and Driver Inattention The related issues of driver inattention and failure to yield are involved in large portion of pedestrian KSI crashes, and substantially coincide with crashes in which the injured pedestrian was crossing legally with the signal or at an unsignalized crosswalk. These numbers are likely to underestimate the frequency of both failure-to-yield-violations in pedestrian KSI crashes, and driver inattention, since NYSDOT contributing factor data does not account for all crashes. Further, these labels appear to be used interchangeably for some types of crashes, including failure-to-yield crashes. Pedestrian Behavior Pedestrian error/confusion is reported in 21.5% of cases, and is typically reported in crossing-against-the-signal and midblock-crossing crashes. However, pedestrian action data is a more reliable source for understanding pedestrian behavior as relates to crashes. Speed 21% of all pedestrian KSI crashes were attributed by responding officers to speed-related contributing factors: speeding (8.3%), slippery pavement (i.e. driving too fast to stop under prevailing weather conditions, 3.8%), limited sight distance (i.e. driving too fast for specific geometric conditions, 5.2%), aggressive driving (3.8%), and following too closely (0.5%). These numbers are likely to underestimate the importance of speeding, since NYSDOT contributing factor data does not account for all crashes, and only two contributing factors may be reported for each crash. Many DWI crashes (4.8%) and driver inattention crashes (36%) are also suspected to involve speeding or unsafe speeds. Alcohol Alcohol involvement was reported as a factor in 8.1% of fatal crashes and 3.1% of severe injury crashes. This may also be an underestimate, since other data (discussed above) suggest that drivers leave the scene in about 21% of the fatal and serious injury crashes. Other research indicates that drivers who leave the scene (and are later identified) are more likely to have had a previous arrest for driving while intoxicated than drivers who remain at the scene. Arterial roads weren’t even supposed to be part of a Vision Zero when deBlasio announced the program. Instead they became his first target. Vision Zero started under the Bloomberg Administration. The first order of business was to discover where the KSI collisions occurred. Guess what - arterial roads accounted for a disproportionate share, based on their length. |
|
|
| (342535) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by Allen45 on Fri Jun 4 05:45:30 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by Stephen Bauman on Fri Jun 4 00:19:09 2021. Speed cameras also were something the Bloomberg administration wanted. The days of Iris Weinshall's as DOT commissioner are long over. |
|
|
| (342536) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Fri Jun 4 07:34:10 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by BrooklynBus on Thu Jun 3 23:37:32 2021. No one has a right to make that judgment.But such judgments are always being made regardless. It was basically "judged" that the streets are not for kids to play ball in as much as for unoccupied private vehicles to sit on. It was basically "judged" that except for bus lanes and other BRT stuff buses with dozens of people need to sit behind cars with one person if the car got there first. Those count as judgments. Whether the belief is true or false that people should be out of their cars and in the buses. . .I think people on both sides should at least be able to weigh in with data and reasoning to make their case. |
|
|
| (342538) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Fri Jun 4 08:19:10 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by BrooklynBus on Thu Jun 3 23:37:32 2021. You are inferring that I said they would not be justified when operated at lower frequencies, which is not what I said. I believe they could also be useful if buses operated at every four or five minutes, but not greater than that.Your statement was so ambiguously and imprecisely stated that I could not draw any inference. e.g. operated at lower frequencies...buses operated at every four or five minutes. N.B. four or five minutes are headways not frequencies. They are reciprocals. A lower frequency means a greater headway and vice-versa. If you want to know what textbook that comes from, I can’t answer that, other than it is common sense You should not confuse your ideas with "common sense." If your ideas were based on common sense, you should have no trouble finding them in texts or articles. |
|
|
| (342540) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jun 4 09:53:53 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by Stephen Bauman on Fri Jun 4 00:19:09 2021. And you don’t believe that a crosswalk that is totally worn out makes contributes to a driver being more aware and able to see pedestrians in a crosswalk, making him more attentive? The two aren’t mutually exclusive. And signage alerting drivers to a pedestrian crossing also helps, as does better education making drivers and pedestrians more aware of the consequences ofheir actions.It is the uninformed who believe that statistics tell the entire story. It is only part of the story. So I wouldn’t discount my comment out of hand in an insulting manner as you just did. |
|
|
| (342541) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jun 4 09:56:05 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by New Flyer #857 on Fri Jun 4 07:34:10 2021. I didn’t say those judgments are not being made and I agree with you regarding your last statement. |
|
|
| (342542) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jun 4 10:00:11 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by Stephen Bauman on Fri Jun 4 08:19:10 2021. Okay, so I meant higher frequencies, not lower frequencies. You knew what I meant so you didn’t have to make a big deal about it. Show me the textbook that states the purpose of bus lanes is to slow down other traffic since that seems to be what you are advocating since you ha e no problem with bus lanes when there are very few buses running. There is absolutely no reason for a bus lane when a bus operates once every ten minutes. Show me proof that there is. |
|
|
| (342543) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Jun 4 10:54:06 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jun 4 09:53:53 2021. IAWTP, although I think the worst problem is really ignorance or carelessness by drivers for crosswalks. |
|
|
| (342544) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Jun 4 10:55:13 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by Allen45 on Fri Jun 4 05:45:30 2021. She was the last Transportation Commissioner. I refer to her successors as “Cycling Commissioner.” |
|
|
| (342545) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by checkmatechamp13 on Fri Jun 4 11:46:14 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by BrooklynBus on Thu Jun 3 23:26:52 2021. I'm not talking about slowing down traffic from 30 mph to 25 mph. I'm talking about slowing it down from highway speeds (i.e. Drag racers and super-aggressive drivers) to something a bit less reckless. |
|
|
| (342546) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jun 4 13:25:25 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Jun 4 10:54:06 2021. Sometimes drivers are so glad when opposing cars finally stop coming so they can make a left turn, they forget think about pedestrians that need to cross the street. A clearly painted crosswalk, even if no one is crossing is a healthy reminder. I even complained about one such warn out crosswalk and can tell you how much safer it feels once it finally was repainted. It should be done automatically if the city really cares, rather than on complaints. The same is true for warn out lane markings. |
|
|
| (342547) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Fri Jun 4 13:27:20 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Jun 4 10:54:06 2021. My driving philosophy is that when approaching any crosswalk (except when going straight through on a solid green or with a green arrow pointing your direction), there is a pedestrian about to step into the street until visually established otherwise. For most drivers, there are presumably no pedestrians present until they happen to notice one.If you share my driving philosophy, then I personally don’t care much about your speed when not near a crosswalk. |
|
|
| (342548) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jun 4 13:31:16 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by checkmatechamp13 on Fri Jun 4 11:46:14 2021. If there is little traffic after midnight which I assume there is say on Richmond Avenue, I doubt that having the bus lane in effect is enough to slow down those reckless drivers. I was complaining pretty much on principle that bus lanes should not be in effect when buses aren't operating. If it's a real problem, you would need occasional police enforcement until they get the message. I am assuming the cameras are not in effect then. |
|
|
| (342549) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by Joe on Fri Jun 4 13:35:07 2021, in response to Signal priority in NYC, posted by Joe on Sat May 29 13:02:25 2021. May I return to my original question, posted May 29th? How is signal priority accomplished nowadays in New York City? Is it by radar or GPS or pavement sensor or what? Thanks. |
|
|
| (342550) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Jun 4 13:45:18 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jun 4 13:25:25 2021. Properly maintained markings are a good idea anyway, but people should still understand unmarked crosswalks. |
|
|
| (342553) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Fri Jun 4 14:40:00 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by Joe on Fri Jun 4 13:35:07 2021. How is signal priority accomplished nowadays in New York City? Is it by radar or GPS or pavement sensor or what?What. There's a radio receiver at the traffic signal and a radio transmitter on the bus. It's ultra low power and short range. Something like bluetooth. If the receiver detects the signal, the green aspect is extended a maximum of 3 seconds. |
|
|
| (342554) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Jun 4 14:48:26 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by Stephen Bauman on Fri Jun 4 14:40:00 2021. Seems useless. |
|
|
| (342555) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Fri Jun 4 15:25:43 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jun 4 09:53:53 2021. a crosswalk that is totally worn out...signage alerting drivers to a pedestrian crossing... better education....You keep confusing the goal with a single strategy for achieving the goal. The goal is to reduce pedestrian fatalities (and severe injuries) to close to zero. One strategy for achieving this goal is to eliminate vehicle/pedestrian collisions. Another strategy for achieving this goal is to make vehicle/pedestrian collisions less lethal. Which of these two strategies have the better chance for achieving the goal? If collision speed is reduced from 30 mph to 20 mph, the probability of a pedestrian fatality is reduced by 75%. That's from data compiled by the AAA Highway Safety Foundation, not Vision Zero zealots. It is the uninformed who believe that statistics tell the entire story. Doctors would still be practicing blood letting, were it not for the uninformed statisticians. |
|
|
| (342556) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Fri Jun 4 15:37:04 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Jun 4 14:48:26 2021. Seems useless.[traffic signal priority for buses]I would be more charitable and say its benefits have been exaggerated. That's my gut feeling. I've been stymied in trying to quantify expected TSP improvement in a rigorous manner. That would require knowledge of all traffic signal locations and their timing. I could then simulate before and after bus trips. My FOIL request was denied on the basis of security. |
|
|
| (342557) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by checkmatechamp13 on Fri Jun 4 22:33:46 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jun 4 13:31:16 2021. You mean the speed cameras? Those are 6am - 10pm on weekdays. The bus lane cameras are 24/7 if I'm not mistaken. |
|
|
| (342558) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jun 4 22:52:35 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Jun 4 13:45:18 2021. Of course, but most do not and it isn’t cost efficient to mark every crosswalk. But once it’s marked, it should be maintained and not allowed to completely wear out. |
|
|
| (342559) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jun 4 22:59:51 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by New Flyer #857 on Fri Jun 4 13:27:20 2021. Let me ask you a question. I am at an unsignaled intersection with a stop sign, approaching a fairly wide street and no pedestrians are near the intersection, but when I am halfway through the intersection a pedestrian starts crossing in the crosswalk on the opposite side of the street. That means I must stop in the middle of the intersection to let them finish crossing. Since they see I am already going through the intersection, shouldn’t they wait for me to get through the other side before they start walking? |
|
|
| (342560) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Jun 4 23:00:02 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jun 4 22:52:35 2021. Lane lines too. |
|
|
| (342561) | |
Re: Signal priority in NYC |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jun 4 23:24:22 2021, in response to Re: Signal priority in NYC, posted by Stephen Bauman on Fri Jun 4 15:25:43 2021. I never said there was a single strategy for achieving the goal. I said that better education was one of those strategies and you dismissed it out of hand with a handful of statistics that didn’t dispute what I said.As far as achieving the goal, it is an unachievable goal. It will never be close to zero until the speed is close to zero. That is the problem. For four years we have been consistently lowering speeds, and deaths have gone up not down, so why should we even believe that further lowering of the speed will help achieve that goal? My other point is that lowering the speed limits further is unrealistic and drivers will not abide by unrealistic speed limits and it actually makes drivers drive more recklessly increasing fatalities. When every speed limit is 10 or 20 miles below what the road is designed for, drivers tend to ignore all speed limits. I believe you should drive at a limit that is sensible for the conditions. If a road is designed for 70 mph and most everyone is going 70, although the speed limit may be 50, no one is doing anything that is dangerous. But someone doing 50 is the one posing the danger. Then when there is a realistic speed limit, drivers will automatically think they can safely exceed it, when they can’t, and then there is an accident. So it’s better to do what is safe. Yesterday, I got off the New Jersey Turnpike northbound at exit 2. There was a sharp curve and I could only do 25 mph safely. Then I noticed the speed limit was 45. I can’t see how someone even could have exited at 45 mph. Now someone used to seeing these unrealistic speed limits and seeing a 45 mph limit could easily think he could go 5 or 10 mph above that. That’s why I believe these unrealistically low speed limits make it more dangerous, not safer. I did not say statistics doesn’t have its place. Just that there are many other factors involved like human nature which is often overlooked, and statistics only tell a part of the story, not the entire story. That also holds true when studying bus patronage and bus routes. Relying only on statistics and never riding the bus to actually see what is happening, could lead you to erroneous conclusions because you might be overlooking something very important. Statistics is only one tool. We have to balance safety with the need to get places efficiently. We can’t say that we must try to approach zero deaths ignoring everything else in spite of the fact that you may believe that a 5 mph speed limit is the answer to achieving zero fatalities. |
|
|
|
Page 2 of 3 |
||