|
|
| Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion (1233864) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 2 of 4 |
||
|
| (1234290) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Thu Jul 11 17:28:13 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by BrooklynBus on Thu Jul 11 11:32:15 2013. Thanks for rewriting my number 1. Where did I mention truck traffic in number 1? You did. I didn't.Lets take a look: 1- We could have fewer cars and trucks on the road by increasing mass transit options and encouraging rail freight.So yeah, you did put truck traffic in #1, as well as #6. I also never put cars in one category and automobiles into another. You said: Reducing car traffic is different from reducing automobile traffic.How is that not putting cars and automobiles in two different categories? Do you have any idea what type of density is required to build a subway line? Based on Washington DC, the Bay Area, Boston, and Philadelphia's experience it's pretty clearly not much more than would be required to justify a hierarchical street grid feeding into an expressway system. but don't forget, buses use roads too. You've already told us of the evils of dedicating road space to bus lanes through your rants against SBS. So yes, useless buses which waste their occupants time and ensure they never compete with the automobile in any regard do use roads in common with automobile traffic. But dedicated bus lanes provide a means for transit to become more attractive than the automobile for given trips by shielding the occupants of those buses from the congestion that would be present regardless of whether or not the bus lane existed. You obviously are one who hates cars and do not care about congestion because you do not drive and it is not your problem. You could not be more wrong if you tried. I own an automobile, drive it nearly every day, and live in suburbia. I have extensive experience with traffic congestion. I'm just lucky enough that whatever group of people decided to give me reasonably convenient access to a heavy rail rapid transit line were not nearly as foolish as you are. You are incredibly selfish. Pot, kettle, black. After all, is it not the height of selfishness for outer boroughs residents to demand they be given free and unfettered access to the streets in the CBD? The people who live in and around the CBD paid an extreme premium for the real estate they occupy. Yet you expect to be handed a space somewhere between half and a third their apartment or condo's size for free? the fact is I can cite where improvements have been made and congestion has been reduced. Okay, then cite them. Even some anecdotal evidence would be greatly welcomed in your fact-free zone. No new cars came to replace that congestion according to your misguided theory which is only true if an entirely new highway is built. Again, if you have any actual sources to back up this claim then that's great. But you're going to face an uphill battle countering the many cases Downs and Thompson documented in their respective works on the subject of congestion. I have also said nothing about everything being subservient to the automobile. Except that that has been the entire thrust of your argument against SBS, bike lanes, crosswalks, or even utility work. You're telling us the needs of the automobile driver are paramount over those of the transit rider, the bicyclist, the pedestrian, or even the maintenance of the city's infrastructure. Green time should be increased for pedestrians where necessary Ah, so when confronted with the logical conclusion of your argument now you want it to be everything to everyone? Except that you just told us: 5 - The only way to reduce the numbers of pedestrians crossing at an intersection is to either add a mid-block crossing or build a pedestrian overpass.So which one is it? Either you want to extend green light times for the sake of pedestrians, even where it may congest a busier, wider cross street, or you want to greatly inconvenience pedestrians by making them climb over or under your road so the drivers won't have to contend with anything obstructing traffic. Those things are mutually exclusive and this newest "solution" would negate what you said in your op/ed. And if you can say that a bicycle is a viable alternative to driving a car with a straight face, you are truly laughable. I've biked to work on a few occasions, even though I live in an area which is very poorly suited to bicycling in general. Were I to live in NYC I'd definitely contemplate year round cycle commuting. Letme see you transport a trunkful of groceries on a bike Okay. But really most grocery stores, even in the suburbs, have some sort of delivery service these days. travel from New York to Boston on a bike Last time I checked that's what a train, a bus, or a plane is there to provide. No bike advocate is going to claim the bike is the end-all-be-all transportation mode. Yet we have people such as yourself telling us that the automobile IS the end-all-be-all mode, and that everything in the city must be structured accordingly. The problem with you and people like you who require sources for all beliefs is that you have no idea what common sense is because you do not have any. And the problem with people like you is that you don't think. Period. You managed to bang your hands on the keyboard and compose some reasonably coherent sentences, but it's clear that virtually no thought went into your solutions. If it had you would have recognized the repetition present in so many of your points. You did zero research on the current best practices and what results is nothing more than a fluff piece to make you feel better about your persecution fantasies at the hands of NYCDOT. If I told you that people eat when they are hungry, you would ask me what is my source for that belief. You're the one who keeps asking me for sources, and I keep obliging you. A bit of reciprocation on the matter would be appreciated, so we can find out where your claims regarding long commutes in NYC came from or where exactly road widening has lead to a reduction in travel time. |
|
|
| (1234336) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Thu Jul 11 23:02:51 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jul 11 16:42:53 2013. Why are you repeating what I said?Because your phrasing was misleading. |
|
|
| (1234337) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jul 11 23:04:17 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Thu Jul 11 23:02:51 2013. How so? |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1234342) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jul 12 01:03:00 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by Wakefield-241st Street on Thu Jul 11 13:52:01 2013. Yes, I forgot what you mentioned in point 2. You could also mention when President Obama is in town, but special events and parades and such will continue and you really can't do anything to reduce the congestion those events cause.When you are traveling down a street and the following signal turns red just as yours turns green time after time, it hardly seems it is a coincidence. The purpose of slow speed school zones is to slow down traffic during arrival and dismissal times. At 3 AM, the area should be treated as a regular street. Outside the city it is with flashing yellow signals to let you know when the school speed limit of 20 mph is in effect. That is fine. However, in the City, when years ago school crossing guards regulated traffic near schools, in the past 20 years hundreds or thousands of traffic signals have been placed in front of virtually every school and are in effect at all times when they should only flash yellow when school is not in session and they are not in sync with other signals. They greatly slow down traffic and increase congestion forcing you to constantly stop and start. You don't use traffic signals to slow down reckless drivers. Truly reckless drivers will go right through red signals and stop signs anyway. You are just inconveniencing everyone else. You get it? I agree with you 100% about preventing accidents. I have never seen a car weaving in and out of lanes on a highway going 20 mph faster than everyone else be pulled over. Too much emphasis is placed on parking violators and not enough on dangerous drivers which is much worse. I am rarely in the Bronx and don't intend to ride te Bx41, but I have a friend who lives there who can give me a report. From what he told me before it was implemented, I gather he was not in favor of it but I haven't asked him why yet. No one said anything about doing roadwork on residential streets overnight. Most busy streets are commercial anyway and I was mainly talking about highways. Of course you woudn't want to disturb residents. |
|
|
| (1234345) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Fri Jul 12 05:22:01 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jul 11 23:04:17 2013. How so?"Most" people in areas served by ZipCar not owning cars. That doesn't change the fact that a significant number of ZipCar customers did own cars and no longer do thanks to ZipCar. |
|
|
| (1234356) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by MR RT on Fri Jul 12 07:59:53 2013, in response to What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Jul 9 12:40:18 2013. "... traffic congestion ... causes ..."- 6 Too many trucks ... agree with that - + 8 Too many cars ! "... how to fix (or not fix) the causes ..." - 1 We could have fewer cars & trucks ... incr. in Mass Transit --- a. Tunnel under Hudson River for freight, fix bridges & tunnels in Bronx so "double stack" RxR cars can make it over Hell Gate Bridge. This will remove a lot of the trucks on the George Washington Bridge & elsewhere in NYC. This must include creation of facilites at Fresh Pond, 65th Street Brooklyn & some spot on Long Island. --- b. do N-O-T expand expressways & parkways, e.g. creating a deck over the LIE will only encourge more cars/traffic into Manhattan. The point here goes with some of your other comments regarding adjustments & expansions to mass transit because NYC has too much cars & truck traffic so the only way to go is to give commuters an insentive to use mass transit vs. making it easier for them to drive to work. |
|
|
| (1234357) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Fri Jul 12 08:00:06 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jul 12 01:03:00 2013. special events and parades and such will continue and you really can't do anything to reduce the congestion those events cause.Sure you can - cancel them all, since they only benefit a small minority of the population at the expense of the great motoring majority. When you are traveling down a street and the following signal turns red just as yours turns green time after time, it hardly seems it is a coincidence. It's obviously not a coincidence, but it could simply be clock drift or a lack of coordination. in the past 20 years hundreds or thousands of traffic signals have been placed in front of virtually every school and are in effect at all times when they should only flash yellow when school is not in session and they are not in sync with other signals. There are signals in front of schools, not at intersections, that turn red during non-school hours? I have never seen a car weaving in and out of lanes on a highway going 20 mph faster than everyone else be pulled over. Too much emphasis is placed on parking violators and not enough on dangerous drivers which is much worse. Highway patrol and traffic enforcement are different departments. Besides, illegally parked vehicles are fish in a barrel (and a safety issue). Pulling over a reckless motorist requires an officer to be present when it happens. |
|
|
| (1234364) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jul 12 09:34:37 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by MR RT on Fri Jul 12 07:59:53 2013. Agree with all your comments. There already is a deck over the LIE. Can't imagine another one. |
|
|
| (1234369) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jul 12 10:34:20 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by WillD on Thu Jul 11 17:28:13 2013. You take two small obvious errors and blow them into major proportions. Okay, I made a mistake by including trucks and rail freight into my response for number one which only should have included cars. Big deal.Then you take a second small mistake in my response where I stated cars and automobiles when I meant to say cars and trucks and also try to turn that into something major like cars and automobiles are two separate things. Again big deal. It makes no difference if points 1 and 6 are combined or are listed separately. The points are still the same. A much greater density is required for a subway line than for an expressway and street grid. Are you proposing a city with only pedestrian malls and subways with no streets? Maybe okay for a new community, but we are talking about existing cities here. Those are two different things. I said green time should be increased for pedestrians where necessary and that means also if it is possible which in many cases it isn't. I was in favor of increasing green time for pedestrians on Queens Blvd because it was quite evident that it was not possible to cross the street at once. Now there is plenty of time to cross, except at perhaps diagonal intersections which need to be redesigned so that you cross at right angles with rearrangement of traffic lights, new lights and pedestrian barriers. In other cases where you cannot extend green time to accommodate everyone, you can build pedestrian overpasses. No one likes stairs and I wasn't proposing that. Why could you not have at 6th and 7th Avenue and 42 Street, pedestrian ramps that start sloping up about 100 feet or more from the intersection, cross the street, and slope down? On the strip in Las Vegas there are overpasses with elevators and escalators at virtually every intersection and no one is allowed to cross at street level. Most people would not like to bike every day. I did not say bikes are not an alternative way to commute, but that they will not be a major way to commute in NYC due to the great trip length to work. You asked me for my source, so here it is . I hope you are happy now. Next to Washington DC, NYC has the greatest trip lengths in the country. Many supermarkets do not have delivery services. It's usually only the ones that have no parking lots that have them. First you state that a bike is a substitute for a car and now you try to do some back pedaling when I bring up long distance travel and say all those trips can be made by rail or bus. You make it seem like no one should own a car, then you admit to owning one and driving it nearly every day and you say I am calling the kettle black. Why shouldn't I be allowed to drive to Boston instead of having to lug heavy suitcases up and down stairs via subway to Grand Central Terminal or the Port Authority bus Terminal taking an hour and a half or spending $50 for a cab at each end? I never said anything about providing people living near the CBDs with free parking spaces. I agree if they want to have a parking space they should pay for it dearly. You are trying to make it seem like I am some auto enthusiast who believes everyone has the right to drive and park where ever they want for little or no cost. All I did is try to present a balanced system where you use mass transit where it makes sense or drive or bike where that makes sense. You accommodate bikes where you can but you don't harm everyone else in the process. I am pro bus lanes if it involves taking away parking, but I am not for bus lanes that reduce street capacity for other vehicles where that capacity is needed such as on Woodhaven Boulevard where most of the current drivers will not even be able to use th SBS because they still will require three or more local buses to access the SBS bus and bus frequency does not even justify an SBS lane, you have a much better alternative by reactivating the Rockaway line. You would need like a bus every minute or two to justify a bus lane. And when I speak of overdevelopment, I am talking about filling every vacant lot in Downtown Brooklyn with skyscrapers as is currently proposed, and replacing the demolition of single family homes in the outer areas with 6 family condos without providing for increased parking so after six new condo developments are built within one or two new blocks, you have 30 new cars circling the blocks looking for parking spaces. That adds to congestion. Criticize my writing abilities all you want. There are many others who think the opposite and I have been complimented many times. The problem is that you just don't agree with me so you have to attack, rather than coming up with logical arguments. |
|
|
| (1234371) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jul 12 10:42:12 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Fri Jul 12 08:00:06 2013. I never said anything about cancelling special events so don't put words in my mouth.If its lack of coordination, then something should be done about it like coordinating them, but hey why make anything easier for the driver, people will just run out and by more cars if we make anything more convenient for them. I never said signals in front of schools are not at intersections. Are you saying every intersection needs a traffic signal? I've seen perfectly good intersections with stop signs and no signals become congested once a signal was put there. Most illegal parking tickets are given to cars that overstay parking meters. That is hardly a safety issue but a revenue issue. Cops give tickets to double parkers that are not causing any congestion while ignoring double parkers that do. |
|
|
| (1234374) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jul 12 10:53:46 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by WillD on Thu Jul 11 17:28:13 2013. One more point.You asked me where traffic improvements were made that resulted in less congestion. Prior to about 1980, on the BQE southbound between Atlantic Avenue and the Battery Tunnel there was a merger from three lanes to two. The road was chronically congested moving at 5 to 10 mph at all times except between about 11PM and 6 AM. A new ramp was built eliminating the merger around 1980. Today except for rush hours when the road moves between 10 and 20 mph, for the remaining 20 hours a day, it moves at least at 30 mph and usually at 40. That's some improvement and there are no new cars in over 30 years that suddenly appeared to bring congestion back to its previous level as you so theorized. Also, I have been criticizing DOT for 20 years for artificially striping off areas causing unnecessary mergers near the Brooklyn Bridge. Cars would routinely queue up for 15 or 20 minutes. Since the restriping last month that I have long been advocating, I hear that delay has all but been eliminated. That improvement alone is not going to cause anyone to run out and buy a car. That is a complex decision that requires a lot more thought. |
|
|
| (1234376) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by fdtutf on Fri Jul 12 10:59:10 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jul 12 10:34:20 2013. In other cases where you cannot extend green time to accommodate everyone, you can build pedestrian overpasses.Okay, I have to parse this out now. It is always *possible* to extend green time. So I have to assume that you cannot always extend green time *to accommodate everyone*. But since extending green time always accommodates pedestrians, I have to assume that you mean that sometimes you cannot extend green time without inconveniencing automobile drivers. So this turns out to be one more instance of your view that the automobile is primary and every other kind of traffic must be subservient to the automobile. Next to Washington DC, NYC has the greatest trip lengths in the country. In *time*, yes. The linked article says nothing about distance. (PS NYC is actually first and DC second, per the linked article, but that's a minor point.) |
|
|
| (1234379) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Fri Jul 12 11:14:50 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jul 12 10:42:12 2013. I never said anything about cancelling special events so don't put words in my mouth.No, you didn't. Yet you repeatedly allude to reallocating pavement from cars to other modes of transportation as punishing the majority of the population in favor of an insignificant minority. Why should special events be any exception? If its lack of coordination, then something should be done about it like coordinating them Yes, "something should be done." Have you brought any out-of-phase signals to the attention of DOT, the Community Board, or your local representatives, or are you content with complaining about them on blogs and blaming the bicycle lobby? I never said signals in front of schools are not at intersections. Are you saying every intersection needs a traffic signal? I've seen perfectly good intersections with stop signs and no signals become congested once a signal was put there. I was midlead by "in front of virtually every school" since a school is a building and not an intersection. No, not every intersection needs a signal and there are specific criteria that need to be met before considering a signal. Those criteria include requiring coordination of a signalized school crossing if it is within 300 feet of another signal. In any event, it should *not* switch to flashing operation during off-hours, since that would deactivate the pedestrian actuation. Most illegal parking tickets are given to cars that overstay parking meters. That is hardly a safety issue but a revenue issue. Cops give tickets to double parkers that are not causing any congestion while ignoring double parkers that do. Elsewhere in this thread, you have brought up cars circling looking for parking as creating congestion. The purpose of meters is to encourage turnover so cars don't have to circle and look for parking all day, so yes, overstaying a meter causes congestion. |
|
|
| (1234381) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Fri Jul 12 11:22:49 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jul 12 10:34:20 2013. you write. "And when I speak of overdevelopment, I am talking about filling every vacant lot in Downtown Brooklyn with skyscrapers as is currently proposed, and replacing the demolition of single family homes in the outer areas with 6 family condos without providing for increased parking so after six new condo developments are built within one or two new blocks, you have 30 new cars circling the blocks looking for parking spaces. That adds to congestion."The new condos need to be sold with free monthly Metrocards for the residents as long as they do not own lease or long term rent cars. The occasional ZipCar trip doesn't count. I am not interested in encouraging or even enabling auto use. |
|
|
| (1234384) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jul 12 11:46:48 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by fdtutf on Fri Jul 12 10:59:10 2013. Your interpretation of what i was speaking about extending green time not being possible in some cases is wrong. I was not referring to pedestrians vs autos. I was talking about autos vs autos.If the traffic demand is great in all directions which is often the case, making one road flow easier by increasing green time makes the other flow slower because their green time is reduced simply moving the congestion from one street to another. Quit trying to make it seem like all I care about is autos and have no regard for pedestrians. All drivers are at one time pedestrians also. |
|
|
| (1234385) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jul 12 11:49:17 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Fri Jul 12 11:22:49 2013. And who would pay for those free MetroCards, and if that were done, how could you enforce they would not also buy a car? |
|
|
| (1234386) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by fdtutf on Fri Jul 12 11:57:43 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jul 12 11:46:48 2013. Your interpretation of what i was speaking about extending green time not being possible in some cases is wrong. I was not referring to pedestrians vs autos. I was talking about autos vs autos.If the traffic demand is great in all directions which is often the case, making one road flow easier by increasing green time makes the other flow slower because their green time is reduced simply moving the congestion from one street to another. You're still making my point, which is that to you, only automobiles matter. You're not even taking into account the benefit for the pedestrians, or trying to weigh that against the potential worsening of conditions for motorists. Quit trying to make it seem like all I care about is autos and have no regard for pedestrians. You don't need me to do that. You're doing a great job all by yourself. All drivers are at one time pedestrians also. But depending on how the city is arranged, drivers in many cases don't need to cross streets to get where they're going. Convenient, no? |
|
|
| (1234390) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jul 12 12:03:38 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Fri Jul 12 11:14:50 2013. Special events are temporary situations. Removing a traffic lane is permanent. That is the difference. I have not complained regarding out of sync signals because I am not convinced DOT would be willing to listen. My CBD has unsuccessfully tried to get them to move a bike lane over one block where it is enter suited. This battle has been ongoing for nine years and they won't listen. The Board also was never consulted about the installation of the bike lane under the previous administration.I have also written to DOT on a number of other matters regarding traffic regulations and have always received negative responses with reasons I did not agre with. Only one time I was able to get a street restriped after waiting three years and multiple letters. Why would you need a traffic signal operating near a school at 3 AM when the only reason for installing the signal in the first place was because of the high number of pedestrian crossings during school hours? At 3 AM there is little traffic or pedestrian movement so I see no reason why those signals need to be active 24 hours a day. Regarding parking meters, the primary purpose is revenue, not preventing traffic congestion. That's why rates go up once every six months. Do you realize how many meters are taken up by store owners who park in front of their stores and feed the meter all day long? Why doesn't the city do anything about that if they care about reducing congestion which they don't. |
|
|
| (1234391) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jul 12 12:09:13 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Jul 11 12:04:23 2013. We can afford to build whatever we want to build. The problem is that we do not want to spend the money on improving mass transit.Why was there enough money for a $3 billion new PATH station that could have been built for much cheaper but someone owed someone a favor so they constructed some overly expensive useless artwork that does nothing to improve transit. I wonder if for $3 billion they coud have combined PATH with the Number 6 line instead. |
|
|
| (1234393) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Fri Jul 12 12:48:26 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by BrooklynBus on Thu Jul 11 11:36:40 2013. Yes, the pie needs to be larger, but more importantly the looting by the financial fraudsters and the defense contractors needs to be stopped or at the very least reduced. A progressive tax system such as we had during the Eisenhower years (coincidentally? the best economic decade in the last seven) and a major cut in money wasted on unneeded weaponery would give us enough surplus to build the entire Second System (or a modernized version) as well as bring the highway system to a state of good repair. Squeeze those teabags. |
|
|
| (1234402) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jul 12 14:04:47 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by fdtutf on Fri Jul 12 11:57:43 2013. If you bothered to read my other articles you would see that the vast majority are devoted to mass transit. It was solely because of my efforts that the MTA chose not to totally discontinue the B4 in Sheepshead Bay in 2010. How do I know it was because of my efforts solely? Because the MTA told me so personally. And it was because of my efforts the B4 was totally restored this year.It was also because of my 4 years of work we now have a successful B1 route in southern Brooklyn. Prior to 1978, it required four buses to get from Brighton Beach to Bay Ridge. Because of me it now takes one bus. So you are dead wrong by saying that for me only automobiles matter. The only time a driver is not a pedestrian is if he begins and ends all his trips at a garage or parking lot. How many actually do that? |
|
|
| (1234404) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Fri Jul 12 14:12:08 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jul 12 14:04:47 2013. Good on you for the advocacy work! |
|
|
| (1234405) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by fdtutf on Fri Jul 12 14:16:28 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jul 12 14:04:47 2013. If you bothered to read my other articles you would see that the vast majority are devoted to mass transit. It was solely because of my efforts that the MTA chose not to totally discontinue the B4 in Sheepshead Bay in 2010. How do I know it was because of my efforts solely? Because the MTA told me so personally. And it was because of my efforts the B4 was totally restored this year.It was also because of my 4 years of work we now have a successful B1 route in southern Brooklyn. Prior to 1978, it required four buses to get from Brighton Beach to Bay Ridge. Because of me it now takes one bus. So you are dead wrong by saying that for me only automobiles matter. First of all, I have read your other articles, but I am judging your priorities based on this thread, which evinces no concern for any kinds of traffic other than automobile traffic. There's even a hidden assumption in the very title you chose for the thread: you wrote, "What Really Causes Traffic Congestion," but automobile traffic is not the only kind of traffic, nor the only kind that experiences congestion. The only time a driver is not a pedestrian is if he begins and ends all his trips at a garage or parking lot. How many actually do that? You forgot about home. But also, my point was that if a driver can park directly in front of a store, she's not a pedestrian in any meaningful sense as she is only using the sidewalk for a few moments. Even where that's not the case, if the driver can park on the same block (physical block within streets, not block *of* the street) that her destination is on, she never has to cross a street. Even where *that's* not the case, drivers do a hell of a lot less walking than the people we typically refer to as "pedestrians," in many cases only needing to cross one street to reach their destinations. If the interests of motorists and of pedestrians were one and the same, which I assume was the point of your "drivers-are-pedestrians-too" red herring, then there would be no need for pedestrian overpasses, now would there? |
|
|
| (1234417) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jul 12 15:29:44 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by fdtutf on Fri Jul 12 14:16:28 2013. I cannot discuss everything in every article. The week before I discussed bus congestion and the need for off-street bus terminals. This week I discussed traffic congestion in general. I purposely did not tite it automobile congestion because I realize they are not the only vehicles that cause congestion. In Amsterdam, bicycles cause congestion so I really don't know what your point is.I did not forget about home. Some people can go directly from their home into a garage. In NYC it is rare to find a parking spot on the same block where you need it. Most of the tie you need to ark on the next block and in some cases a quarter-mile away, so drivers are often pedestrians as well. The reason for making that statement is not to show that the interests of drivers and pedestrians are the same, but to show the two are not mutually exclusive populations and that one knows what the other goes through. I admit that as a pedestrian I sometimes do things that as a motorist I criticize pedestrians for doing, but I don't do anything or try not to do things I criticize drivers for doing. To make a generalization that drivers do less walking than pedestrians may or may not be true. Some days I drive but other days I walk for miles. I am the same person. I don't understand what you mean that pedestrian overpasses would not be necessary if the interests of both groups were the same. They are the same only as far as both grous want to get where tey are going quickly, but if too many pedestrians crossing take up the entire green cycle meant for both pedestrians and turning vehicles, there is no time for cars to make their turns since pedestrians have the right of way and go first. In those cases, there either has to be a special cycle for pedestrians and another for cars (which was tried with the Barnes Dance) and discontinued, or else you have to do something to allow cars to turn or you ban turning at the intersection altogether. Banning right turns at 6th Avenue is not an option since there are right turns only at 1st Av, 3 Av, and Madison at 42 Street. If you ban the turn at 6th there will be no turns at all from Third Avenue to Eighth Avenue greatly increasing distances cars and taxis woud have to travel since left turns are prohibited at most intersections anyway. So the only option really are overpasses to improve pedestrian and traffic flow as well as safety. |
|
|
| (1234418) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Fri Jul 12 15:32:57 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Tue Jul 9 15:09:12 2013. That does nothing except make politicians richer. |
|
|
| (1234422) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Jul 12 15:56:45 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Fri Jul 12 11:14:50 2013. that would deactivate the pedestrian actuationWhat pedestrian actuation? These lights are all timed and have no buttons. |
|
|
| (1234423) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Jul 12 15:58:04 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Fri Jul 12 05:22:01 2013. That's not misleading. I never made any claim about ZipCar reducing car ownership and had no intention of implying such a claim. |
|
|
| (1234425) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by fdtutf on Fri Jul 12 16:00:15 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jul 12 15:29:44 2013. To make a generalization that drivers do less walking than pedestrians may or may not be true.On any given trip, a motorist is going to walk substantially less than a pedestrian would on the same trip. Is this not obvious? I don't understand what you mean that pedestrian overpasses would not be necessary if the interests of both groups were the same. You had said that drivers are also pedestrians. That's pointless unless you're trying to imply that the interests of the two groups converge and there is no conflict. No conflict means there is no need to get either group out of the way of the other, so no overpasses are needed. Otherwise I don't know what point you were trying to make by saying that drivers are also pedestrians. They are the same only as far as both grous want to get where tey are going quickly, but if too many pedestrians crossing take up the entire green cycle meant for both pedestrians and turning vehicles, there is no time for cars to make their turns since pedestrians have the right of way and go first. One obvious solution to that is to have a separate WALK cycle for pedestrians only and a separate green cycle for cars only, at least at busy times of the day. Obviously this results in increased waiting time for both cars and pedestrians, but at intersections with high volumes of pedestrians it may be the only way to achieve any movement at all for both groups. So the only option really are overpasses to improve pedestrian and traffic flow as well as safety. Pedestrian overpasses do not improve pedestrian flow; they impede it. An overpass is a detour, which is an impediment. This is the sort of statement that makes me, and not only me, think that the needs of motorists are all you can see. |
|
|
| (1234429) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Jul 12 16:49:00 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Fri Jul 12 12:48:26 2013. Good post but unfortunately wishful thinking. |
|
|
| (1234430) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jul 12 16:50:53 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by fdtutf on Fri Jul 12 16:00:15 2013. When I studied Urban Planning in 1972, my transportation professor that the "new thinking" was to separate pedestrians and vehicles at intersections to minimize conflicts. I finally saw that thinking in action on the strip in Las Vegas in 2010. It works quite well. It is a slight nuisance for the pedestrian, but it would be much worse to cross at street level crossing twelve lanes of traffic. Congestion would be much worse and there would be many pedestrian car accidents. I can't even imagine that area without the overpasses. You should be able to see what it looks like on Google Earth or Google Maps.In NYC the overpasses would obviously be much narrower and shorter, but they would definitely be an improvement at about half a dozen intersections. If you are comparing someone who walks his entire trip and another who drives most of the trip, of course the driver walks less. But what does that prove? I already stated that drivers and pedestrians are not two mutually exclusive groups. In a Venn diagram the two circles would intersect. That's all I was saying. It doesn't matter what the interests of the groups are, they will conflict if they both need to use the same space at the same time which happens at 6th Avenue and 42 Street and at Times Square. You avoid that with overpasses which really do not have to be inconvenient if no stairs are involved. Pedestrian overpasses definitely do improve pedestrian and traffic flow since people aren't crowding the sidewalk waiting for the light to change. They are constantly moving. I can see merchants near the overpasses opposing them because fewer people will pass their stores for impulse buying. The Barnes Dance I referred to was separate cycles for walking. It was in use for over 30 years but slowly was phased out. I sort of liked it. We had it near my house until about five years ago. Supposedly, green time for cars was increased since it was discontinued, but I haven't noticed any improvement in traffic flow. The only problem I could see with it is that people still crossed the street during the time allocated for vehicles because they didn't want to wait for the pedestrian cycle. |
|
|
| (1234431) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jul 12 16:50:53 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by fdtutf on Fri Jul 12 16:00:15 2013. When I studied Urban Planning in 1972, my transportation professor that the "new thinking" was to separate pedestrians and vehicles at intersections to minimize conflicts. I finally saw that thinking in action on the strip in Las Vegas in 2010. It works quite well. It is a slight nuisance for the pedestrian, but it would be much worse to cross at street level crossing twelve lanes of traffic. Congestion would be much worse and there would be many pedestrian car accidents. I can't even imagine that area without the overpasses. You should be able to see what it looks like on Google Earth or Google Maps.In NYC the overpasses would obviously be much narrower and shorter, but they would definitely be an improvement at about half a dozen intersections. If you are comparing someone who walks his entire trip and another who drives most of the trip, of course the driver walks less. But what does that prove? I already stated that drivers and pedestrians are not two mutually exclusive groups. In a Venn diagram the two circles would intersect. That's all I was saying. It doesn't matter what the interests of the groups are, they will conflict if they both need to use the same space at the same time which happens at 6th Avenue and 42 Street and at Times Square. You avoid that with overpasses which really do not have to be inconvenient if no stairs are involved. Pedestrian overpasses definitely do improve pedestrian and traffic flow since people aren't crowding the sidewalk waiting for the light to change. They are constantly moving. I can see merchants near the overpasses opposing them because fewer people will pass their stores for impulse buying. The Barnes Dance I referred to was separate cycles for walking. It was in use for over 30 years but slowly was phased out. I sort of liked it. We had it near my house until about five years ago. Supposedly, green time for cars was increased since it was discontinued, but I haven't noticed any improvement in traffic flow. The only problem I could see with it is that people still crossed the street during the time allocated for vehicles because they didn't want to wait for the pedestrian cycle. |
|
|
| (1234432) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by fdtutf on Fri Jul 12 17:04:30 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jul 12 16:50:53 2013. If you are comparing someone who walks his entire trip and another who drives most of the trip, of course the driver walks less. But what does that prove?It emphasizes that saying "drivers are also pedestrians" is pointless! I already stated that drivers and pedestrians are not two mutually exclusive groups. In a Venn diagram the two circles would intersect. That's all I was saying. It doesn't matter what the interests of the groups are, they will conflict if they both need to use the same space at the same time which happens at 6th Avenue and 42 Street and at Times Square. *At any given moment*, nobody is both a driver and a pedestrian. You can be one or the other, but not both. As you went on to acknowledge above ("...they will conflict if they both need to use the same space at the same time..."). This still leaves me wondering what the point was of saying that drivers are also pedestrians. You avoid that with overpasses which really do not have to be inconvenient if no stairs are involved. Well, yeah, they're still inconvenient, to say nothing of the absurd amounts of space ramps would take up if you were determined to avoid stairs. Climbing a ramp isn't that much better than climbing stairs, except for wheelchair users, and the insanely long ramps that would be required in order to keep the grade shallow enough for them to use the ramps would consume even more space. Ramps would also block, or at least reduce the natural light through, some of the windows of adjacent buildings. Pedestrian overpasses definitely do improve pedestrian and traffic flow since people aren't crowding the sidewalk waiting for the light to change. Yes, getting people off the sidewalks "improves" pedestrian traffic flow by shifting the congestion elsewhere. However, that also gets pedestrians farther away from their destinations, which typically are at ground level. That's what I meant by "detour." And a detour is inherently an impediment. Pedestrians naturally take the straightest route available to wherever they're going, and they do not appreciate being steered away from that route for someone else's supposed convenience. I can see merchants near the overpasses opposing them because fewer people will pass their stores for impulse buying. Well, no kidding. That's another disadvantage they have. It's bad not only for pedestrians who want to reach the stores, but for merchants who depend on impulse shoppers. |
|
|
| (1234434) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by fdtutf on Fri Jul 12 17:05:20 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jul 12 16:50:53 2013. Oh, and:In NYC the overpasses would obviously be much narrower and shorter, but they would definitely be an improvement at about half a dozen intersections. ...which would have a negligible impact on traffic overall. |
|
|
| (1234441) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by chud1 on Fri Jul 12 17:53:15 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jul 12 16:50:53 2013. did u get ur degree in urban planning?chud1. :).... |
|
|
| (1234481) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Fri Jul 12 21:00:49 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jul 12 16:50:53 2013. Clearly your urban planning studies missed some basics. Streets are for people--cars are interlopers IMHO. Send the cars through underpasses if you want them to get through an intersection without waiting for pedestrians. Relegating pedestrians to ramps/bridges/overpasses defeats the entire point of having businesses and residences at street level. |
|
|
| (1234484) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Fri Jul 12 21:02:20 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Jul 12 16:49:00 2013. Wishful perhaps but IMHO the path out of the dark forest. |
|
|
| (1234485) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Fri Jul 12 21:06:58 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jul 12 15:29:44 2013. you write "too many pedestrians crossing take up the entire green cycle meant for both pedestrians and turning vehicles, there is no time for cars to make their turns since pedestrians have the right of way and go first."There is no such thing as too many pedestrians. There ARE too many Single Occupancy Vehicles. |
|
|
| (1234489) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jul 12 21:20:44 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Fri Jul 12 21:00:49 2013. The only problem is that underpasses for cars are much more expensive to construct than overpasses for pedestrians. I did recommend once an underpass for vehicles at Kings Plaza.In Vegas, where try have overpasses, the businesses are on the second level, the same as the pedestrians. |
|
|
| (1234490) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jul 12 21:26:03 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Fri Jul 12 21:06:58 2013. At 6th Avenue and 42 Street, during a single cycle, you could have over 100 pedestrians crossing and only three vehicles able to make the right turn on that cycle with three, four, or five cars having to wait for additional cycles to make the turn. I would call that too many pedestrians, not too many cars, and you have no idea how many of them are single occupancy cars or how many are cabs. |
|
|
| (1234497) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Fri Jul 12 21:53:37 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jul 12 21:26:03 2013. I would NOT call that situation "too many pedestrians."There is a need to move hundreds of people through that intersection in every 90-second cycle. Right now it's being done very efficiently. The hundreds of pedestrians get through with minimal delay, and the dozens of riders in cars have a slower trip. Any revamping (like shorter Walk signals or a pedestrian overpass) would reduce overall efficiency by making the trip for the hundreds pedestrians take longer just to speed the dozens in cars. |
|
|
| (1234500) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Fri Jul 12 22:05:25 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jul 12 21:26:03 2013. At 6th Avenue and 42 Street, during a single cycle, you could have over 100 pedestrians crossing and only three vehicles able to make the right turn on that cycle3 cars x 1.3 people/car = 4 people. So, it's 100 pedestrians vs. 4 people in cars. Who should be favored for a shared use facility? N.B. Automobiles laid claim to NYC streets during the 1920's. The park on Park Ave was truncated to add more traffic lanes; Central Park's drives were turned into automobile bypasses; pedestrian paths on the Queensboro Bridge were replaced by automobile lanes; traffic lights were installed to prevent traffic jams; etc. |
|
|
| (1234506) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Fri Jul 12 22:49:54 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jul 12 21:26:03 2013. Clearly, sitting here in Oakland CA, I can't see the intersection in question, however, if you count each auto @ 4 persons (not likely but makes my point) and 5 are delayed, that' one auto passenger per 5 pedestrians. Sounds democratic to me. Let'em wait.Again, there is NO SUCH thing as too many pedestrians. Cities are concentrations of PEOPLE whether there are cars or not. |
|
|
| (1234508) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Fri Jul 12 22:54:15 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jul 12 21:20:44 2013. Yes, building convenience for cars is expensive--make the drivers pay for the privilege of driving where they should be walking or using well designed traffic. |
|
|
| (1234541) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Sat Jul 13 09:44:16 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jul 12 21:26:03 2013. Are you aware that there already is a pedestrian underpass at the location you describe? No one uses it for that purpose because it's a time waster compared to staying on the level. |
|
|
| (1234543) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Sat Jul 13 10:12:21 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by AlM on Sat Jul 13 09:44:16 2013. I realize no one likes to walk stairs and I wouldn't ask anyone to do that to cross a street. I was proposing long ramps not stairs which are much easier to negotiate.Why the MTA got rid of the ramp at Times Square on the BMT and replaced it with a stairway, I don't know. |
|
|
| (1234561) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by fdtutf on Sat Jul 13 13:19:28 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by BrooklynBus on Sat Jul 13 10:12:21 2013. As AlM said:No one uses it for that purpose because it's a time waster compared to staying on the level. It wouldn't be less of a time-waster if it used long ramps. Nor would it be that much less work. You're still having to climb at one end or the other. |
|
|
| (1234622) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Sat Jul 13 19:34:58 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jul 12 16:50:53 2013. I finally saw that thinking in action on the strip in Las Vegas in 2010. It works quite well.Then you should have seen that Las Vegas Boulevard still experiences extreme congestion despite being 11 lanes and more than 150 feet wide with multiple turn lanes and your vaunted overpasses. There is no more clear cut example of just how sisyphean a task attempting to "cure" congestion really is. You propose to have the city spend millions of dollars on infrastructure to maintain the automobiles primacy on city streets, but the only example you can find does not prevent congestion. |
|
|
| (1234626) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Sat Jul 13 19:46:13 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jul 12 15:29:44 2013. So the only option really are overpasses to improve pedestrian and traffic flow as well as safety.We have roads which consist of nothing but those. They're called limited access highways. Every pedestrian (and road!) crossing is either an overpass or underpass. They still become congested. Your point is simply invalid. |
|
|
| (1234903) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Sun Jul 14 21:52:44 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by chud1 on Fri Jul 12 17:53:15 2013. Yes I did. |
|
|
| (1234904) | |
Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Sun Jul 14 21:54:37 2013, in response to Re: What Really Causes Traffic Congestion, posted by fdtutf on Fri Jul 12 17:05:20 2013. Depends on what you mean by overall. Of course there would be no effects in the other boroughs or other parts of Manattan . But there woud be ripple effects to other sections of midtown. |
|
|
|
Page 2 of 4 |
||
