Greenvillelifer wrote:
Please re read the first paragraph.

JCbiscuit wrote:
the sidewalk below my bedroom window seems to be a favorite place for JC women to scream at their boyfriends at 2am. but it drowns out the neighbor's barking dog for a moment, so I'll take that as a win.

corybraiterman wrote:
I am truly enjoying seeing the crazy lady try and explain how you can simply shove more ball bearings down a pipe and thus, you'd have better running ball bearings because they aren't stopping at every section along the pipe!

heights wrote:
I mention to the salmons out there all the time "wrong way" all I get in return is "F off" ! They don't look like regular cyclists. I bet these same idiots take up 2 spots when parking their gas spewing vehicle.

HippieShowgirl wrote:

So inappropriate meaning EVER on the sidewalk, right?

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

Sully wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Actually, I have been to many places where pedestrians signals are slightly delayed to allow for traffic (cars) to be able to make turns. If pedestrians signals were to turn at the same time as the green light, cars will have a hard time making turns, which can lead to gridlock. Given that the city has already altered the timing of some traffic signals (possibly to prevent cars from being able to speed throughout the city) it would make sense that they would want cars to be able to turn when lights do change.

At many big intersections in Manhattan, the opposite is now true: pedestrians get the Walk signal a few seconds before traffic in the same direction gets the green light (so for a few seconds, car traffic in all directions has a red light). I've seen this specifically on 6th Avenue, at the intersections with 14th St and 23rd St... and noticed it at other intersections where an aveune crosses one of the big 2-way streets.

It is one more thing that boils down to a simple question: Is it more important to move cars around quickly, or keep pedestrians safe?

It is not that simple. The intersections you point out (6th Ave at 14th and 23rd Streets) are particularly tricky, because there is not only regular pedestrian traffic, but you also have both PATH and subway stations, so there is a lot of foot traffic, and additional people trying to navigate those intersections. You HAVE to favor pedestrians at those intersections because you would otherwise have a mass of people overflowing onto the streets.

Indeed, sometimes you must favor pedestrians, but sometimes you must favor vehicular traffic. It all comes down to the specifics of each intersection being evaluated. For the reasons I explained before (traffic signals have been altered to prevent motorists from being able to speed through some downtown areas) it is now necessary to alter the way pedestrians signals are timed. If they don't do that, downtown would quickly devolve into a vehicular mess, which wouldn't be good for anyone.

I should also point out that, based on my observations of other places and cities, most places where traffic and pedestrians lights are not mutually synched, an effort is made to point this out with a sign (e.g., "Delayed green"). I don't believe I have seen those around here in JC. Perhaps, once patterns and solutions are analyzed and made permanent, those will be implemented.

bodhipooh wrote:
Actually, I have been to many places where pedestrians signals are slightly delayed to allow for traffic (cars) to be able to make turns. If pedestrians signals were to turn at the same time as the green light, cars will have a hard time making turns, which can lead to gridlock. Given that the city has already altered the timing of some traffic signals (possibly to prevent cars from being able to speed throughout the city) it would make sense that they would want cars to be able to turn when lights do change.

tern wrote:
I don't understand who would be hiring these bikes in Jersey City.

Monroe wrote:

And we think Hudson County can make this work?? All it will do is give some politico's 'green' props for a program no-one but a few want. It's a resume builder for a few, that's all.