Register now !    Login  
Main Menu
Who's Online
195 user(s) are online (173 user(s) are browsing Message Forum)

Members: 0
Guests: 195

more...




Browsing this Thread:   2 Anonymous Users




« 1 2 (3) 4 5 6 ... 8 »


Re: Council person Osborne presents Pedestrian plan
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/8/17 1:45
Last Login :
2020/8/26 13:40
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3141
Offline
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
... Also, who is John? ...


23 secs into your youtube video? Also posts under John1952?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=o-0OKx4I7xQ

Posted on: 2013/10/5 5:14
 Top 


Re: Council person Osborne presents Pedestrian plan
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/1/3 19:12
Last Login :
2020/9/30 18:46
From Van Vorst Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2391
Offline
Jersey city has many more things to figure out that take priority over people parking cars on the street. Yvonne, you personally have heard of people "circling the block" looking for parking? Well, yeah. Outside of the suburbs can you name a place whereyou don't have to circle the block to find a spot?

Posted on: 2013/10/5 5:10
 Top 


Re: Council person Osborne presents Pedestrian plan
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/17 2:16
Last Login :
3/21 23:34
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5375
Offline
I have no problem answering your question, but first let Candice answer the question on parking. Also, who is John? Parking is part of the problem facing downtown, it is not hijacking.

Posted on: 2013/10/5 5:02
 Top 


Re: Council person Osborne presents Pedestrian plan
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/8/17 1:45
Last Login :
2020/8/26 13:40
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3141
Offline
Yvonne - did you help John make that anti-Candice video? If I were Candice I'd also probably reserve my responses to you. Never know what's going to be taken out of context next. (And particularly when you're hijacking another thread).

Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
Since I made the comment I notice you didn't respond to the issue of new condos going up and not having enough parking or no parking for the development. It is a legitimate concern for people. I personally know of people circling the blocks trying to find parking spaces. Do you favor condos going up with reduced or no parking? Saying it is out of context does not answer the question.

Posted on: 2013/10/5 4:43
 Top 


Re: Council person Osborne presents Pedestrian plan
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/17 2:16
Last Login :
3/21 23:34
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5375
Offline
Since I made the comment I notice you didn't respond to the issue of new condos going up and not having enough parking or no parking for the development. It is a legitimate concern for people. I personally know of people circling the blocks trying to find parking spaces. Do you favor condos going up with reduced or no parking? Saying it is out of context does not answer the question.

Posted on: 2013/10/5 3:39
 Top 


Re: Council person Osborne presents Pedestrian plan
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/10/8 15:41
Last Login :
2018/3/13 14:11
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 113
Offline
Quote:

user1111 wrote:
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
. He said Candice commented, "People don't need cars, they work in NY." He was stunned.

This is idiotic, hopefully she backtracks that.


Hi there - I try to make a point of not getting into a back and forth on JCList, but just want to clarify that this quote is out of context and inaccurate in the way it has been presented here. I was relaying that there are other groups arguing we should be encouraging less 1 to 1 car parking and more shared cars and public transportation. I was pointing out that it isn't necessarily a simple issue, not advocating a personal position.

Posted on: 2013/10/5 2:52
 Top 


Re: Council person Osborne presents Pedestrian plan
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/1/11 18:21
Last Login :
2019/12/26 15:30
From GV Bayside Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5356
Offline
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
. He said Candice commented, "People don't need cars, they work in NY." He was stunned.

This is idiotic, hopefully she backtracks that.

Posted on: 2013/10/4 21:43
 Top 


Re: Council person Osborne presents Pedestrian plan
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/3/29 21:43
Last Login :
2023/9/5 18:27
From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1980
Offline
Quote:

dtjcview wrote:
Pebble

What's the problem, time? Cost? Mileage? Numbers on google maps not work for you? Traffic goes slower on local streets west of 78, but obeys google's numbers east of 78?

And why isn't a new on-ramp, at say Columbus, a better option? You'd prefer to dodge the line at the Holland by cutting through local streets instead of using 78? You'd rather lobby for the right to drive thru downtown, than lobby for better 78 access and solutions to tailbacks at the tunnel?

Speed cameras, yes. Stop sign cameras, yes. More enforcement, yes. Proposed traffic calming, yes. Pedestrian plazas on residential streets such as Erie and Manila, yes.

Less speeders and traffic volume, yes please.

I think you missed the part where I take the PATH to work?

I am looking at it from the aspect of the driver from the area in which I live. I know that not everyone around me thinks a nice mile walk is a good way to start the day. What I look at is fairness from everyone. I don?t know what an on-ramp at Columbus will do. If it is part of the toll road, I don?t expect it to do very much at all.

I would say that there are a lot of reasons someone might choose to drive through downtown over taking the highways. Right now, 78 has horrendous construction. It?s not even drivable on weekends. I?ve been using 15E and taking Communipaw from South Kearny. Another aspect could be that someone just likes looking at the buildings. There are people that drive through areas just to see homes. I had a nice commute through Montclair for a few years where I would drive past homes worth $8million and above. Some people find the highways too congested and that sitting at lights is a shorter route. But in all honesty, does it really matter? Are some reasons less valid than others?

Quote:

Azul_the_Cat wrote:
How about this?

1. The city puts speed humps (not bumps) along local streets that are frequently used as a cut through. It works in Hoboken on Clinton street to slow people down. Trust me, if you hit those at 25 mph once you'll never do it again.

2. Police step up enforcement of existing laws re: yielding to pedestrians in cross walks. I remember there was a ticket blitz some months ago with undercover cops posing as pedestrians; then ticketing drivers down the block who didn't yield. Increase fines and points as well. Extra money for the city to fund more enforcement.

3. Speed cameras on Grand and Columbus. The speed cameras on Queens Blvd have helped to slow down the traffic a lot. Plus the speed cameras can generate money to fund the speed humps and more red light/ speed cameras in other areas.

4. Random speed traps set up on secondary streets where people are known to speed. If you publicize this is going on I'm sure it will help to slow some people down. Again more money generated for the city.



One thing I think we all need to realize is the volume of people driving through the DTJC is only going only going to get worse, especially with all the new high rise, high density condos being built. What we need to focus on is how can we slow people down to make it a safe environment for everyone. Pedestrians, cyclists, and drivers.

I like all of it but item 2. I am not opposed to the idea of stopping for pedestrians in crosswalks, but those ticket blitzes were entrapment. The cop would jump off the curb and land in the street just as the car was pulling up. Either the person slams on the brakes late or they get a ticket. Additionally, I think there needs to be some common sense to this. You can?t just have people standing just off the curb when those people have a red light and expect cars to stop.

Outside of that, I think there is something there. I think a lot of that would give everyone a better sense of safety.

Posted on: 2013/10/4 21:21
Dos A Cero
 Top 


Re: Council person Osborne presents Pedestrian plan
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/6/14 12:07
Last Login :
2014/12/21 14:01
Group:
Banned
Posts: 851
Offline
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
He said Candice commented, "People don't need cars, they work in NY."


Had I known that was her position I would have voted for her twice. You can do that in Jersey City, you know.

Posted on: 2013/10/4 21:16
 Top 


Re: Council person Osborne presents Pedestrian plan
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/17 2:16
Last Login :
3/21 23:34
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5375
Offline
I just bumped into a former neighbor, who is was surprised and disappointed by Candice's response to the parking and traffic downtown. He complained about new construction in the Van Vorst area (Grand St) and the reduction of parking for the condos. He said Candice commented, "People don't need cars, they work in NY." He was stunned.

Posted on: 2013/10/4 21:03
 Top 


Re: Council person Osborne presents Pedestrian plan
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2009/3/19 15:20
Last Login :
2020/6/2 11:06
From Scenic McGinley Square
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 709
Offline
How about this?

1. The city puts speed humps (not bumps) along local streets that are frequently used as a cut through. It works in Hoboken on Clinton street to slow people down. Trust me, if you hit those at 25 mph once you'll never do it again.

2. Police step up enforcement of existing laws re: yielding to pedestrians in cross walks. I remember there was a ticket blitz some months ago with undercover cops posing as pedestrians; then ticketing drivers down the block who didn't yield. Increase fines and points as well. Extra money for the city to fund more enforcement.

3. Speed cameras on Grand and Columbus. The speed cameras on Queens Blvd have helped to slow down the traffic a lot. Plus the speed cameras can generate money to fund the speed humps and more red light/ speed cameras in other areas.

4. Random speed traps set up on secondary streets where people are known to speed. If you publicize this is going on I'm sure it will help to slow some people down. Again more money generated for the city.



One thing I think we all need to realize is the volume of people driving through the DTJC is only going only going to get worse, especially with all the new high rise, high density condos being built. What we need to focus on is how can we slow people down to make it a safe environment for everyone. Pedestrians, cyclists, and drivers.

Posted on: 2013/10/4 20:06
 Top 


Re: Council person Osborne presents Pedestrian plan
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/8/17 1:45
Last Login :
2020/8/26 13:40
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3141
Offline
Pebble

What's the problem, time? Cost? Mileage? Numbers on google maps not work for you? Traffic goes slower on local streets west of 78, but obeys google's numbers east of 78?

And why isn't a new on-ramp, at say Columbus, a better option? You'd prefer to dodge the line at the Holland by cutting through local streets instead of using 78? You'd rather lobby for the right to drive thru downtown, than lobby for better 78 access and solutions to tailbacks at the tunnel?

Speed cameras, yes. Stop sign cameras, yes. More enforcement, yes. Proposed traffic calming, yes. Pedestrian plazas on residential streets such as Erie and Manila, yes.

Less speeders and traffic volume, yes please.

Posted on: 2013/10/4 19:26
 Top 


Re: Council person Osborne presents Pedestrian plan
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/3/29 21:43
Last Login :
2023/9/5 18:27
From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1980
Offline
Quote:

dtjcview wrote:
Get it right Pebble.

Speeding commuters kill people. Not cars = death.

Speeding commuters should not be on residential streets. Not cars banished

And compare the routes you mentioned using mapquest or google maps. 1-5 mins extra time at worst going through 78 junction 14B instead of downtown, not 15 mins. And a new on-ramp at LSC or Columbus would make the commute faster.

So if speeding commuters is the problem, the solution is to stop the speeders not remove cars from the road. Why are you sending them all over town to jump on ramps somewhere else?

I gave you an address: Communipaw and Summit. Google Maps gives it "7-minutes" when we both know, with lights, it's 10 minutes driving South, away from the Holland Tunnel. Then you get on the highway and, let's assume the traffic is moving nice and smooth, it will take approximately 5 minutes to reach back to the point at which the person started. In short, you've not only added miles (drive away from the tunnel to drive towards it) which would drive up unnecessary gas use but you?ve also now pushed people onto other streets.

Let?s see? Communipaw and Summit to Bayview Ave on ramp is 1.5 miles. But let?s go farther. Let?s take that drive so that the person is now on 78 above Gand Ave. This is a total of 2.8 miles. You want a driver to go 2.8 miles when the person is literally 0.5 miles away from their home. To top it off, they get to pay the 14B to 14C toll. Genius!

How about this math? Communipaw and Summit, straight down Grand, make a left at Marin = 2.4 miles to the Holland Tunnel. But, you want the driver to go all the way down Garfield make a left on Bayview and then hop on route 78.

I gave another address of Pacific and Johnston? I?ll let you guess what those mileage numbers are?

In short, what you really should be writing is that you?d rather have people driving around Greenville and Bergen-Lafayette than through Downtown.

If speeders are the problem, then why isn?t your solution to put up speed ticket cameras? They work like red light cameras only it catches speeders. How about cops in cars at known intersections?

Posted on: 2013/10/4 18:21
Dos A Cero
 Top 


Re: Council person Osborne presents Pedestrian plan
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/8/17 1:45
Last Login :
2020/8/26 13:40
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3141
Offline
Get it right Pebble.

Speeding commuters kill people. Not cars = death.

Speeding commuters should not be on residential streets. Not cars banished

And compare the routes you mentioned using mapquest or google maps. 1-5 mins extra time at worst going through 78 junction 14B instead of downtown, not 15 mins. And a new on-ramp at LSC or Columbus would make the commute faster.


Quote:

Pebble wrote:
Quote:

dtjcview wrote:

Quote:

Pebble wrote:
....
I never argued in favor of speeding. You have my quote in your post, please, point out exactly where I argue that paying taxes allows people to speed.

Route 78 isn?t always the best route. Columbus might be solid. I know that Montgomery and Grand is often used, based on proximity. I?ve not tried to drive in that direction of the extended spur of the Turnpike, but is that portion a toll road?

In short, I?m just trying to grasp where you think cars should just be banished from the roads entirely. There has to be a middle ground where drivers can still get to where they are going, without taking a half an hour to get out of the city, and commuters can be safe reaching the train in a timely manner.


....and I never argued that cars should be banished entirely. However, we've seen the consequences of commuters using local streets as a cut through: speeding and pedestrian deaths. Local commuter access to streets should never take priority over neighborhood safety, and if drivers are inconvenienced by being forced to slow or change route, tough.

The "middle" ground for your specific example was to improve connections to 78E, and make it the best route to the Holland Tunnel for traffic coming from the south. It would be much better to have on ramps to 78E at LSC and/or Columbus, than the existing plan to build a bridge between Philip St and Jersey Ave, and feed LSP/commuter traffic through downtown.

There is an on-ramp to 78E near Bayview Ave, which is probably a faster option from Bergen-Lafayette to the tunnel most of the time, and the toll is likely cents.


Actually, you are arguing for cars off the roads. You wrote this:
However, we've seen the consequences of commuters using local streets as a cut through: speeding and pedestrian deaths.

Your whole argument is that cars = death. Thus, your argument is that you don't want them there.

That Bayview Ave on-ramp is in Greenville. I listed information about someone in my area, Bergen-Lafayette, driving. Essentially, your suggestion to that person is to drive 10 minutes away from the city to get on a highway that will take you about 5 minutes more to get about where you started from. Great suggestion!

If someone lives on Communipaw Ave near Summit, what route do you want them to take? How should they drive if they live on Pacific and Johnston?

Cars don't equal death. People not following the laws that exist result in problems.

Posted on: 2013/10/4 17:47
 Top 


Re: Council person Osborne presents Pedestrian plan
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/3/29 21:43
Last Login :
2023/9/5 18:27
From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1980
Offline
Quote:

dtjcview wrote:

Quote:

Pebble wrote:
....
I never argued in favor of speeding. You have my quote in your post, please, point out exactly where I argue that paying taxes allows people to speed.

Route 78 isn?t always the best route. Columbus might be solid. I know that Montgomery and Grand is often used, based on proximity. I?ve not tried to drive in that direction of the extended spur of the Turnpike, but is that portion a toll road?

In short, I?m just trying to grasp where you think cars should just be banished from the roads entirely. There has to be a middle ground where drivers can still get to where they are going, without taking a half an hour to get out of the city, and commuters can be safe reaching the train in a timely manner.


....and I never argued that cars should be banished entirely. However, we've seen the consequences of commuters using local streets as a cut through: speeding and pedestrian deaths. Local commuter access to streets should never take priority over neighborhood safety, and if drivers are inconvenienced by being forced to slow or change route, tough.

The "middle" ground for your specific example was to improve connections to 78E, and make it the best route to the Holland Tunnel for traffic coming from the south. It would be much better to have on ramps to 78E at LSC and/or Columbus, than the existing plan to build a bridge between Philip St and Jersey Ave, and feed LSP/commuter traffic through downtown.

There is an on-ramp to 78E near Bayview Ave, which is probably a faster option from Bergen-Lafayette to the tunnel most of the time, and the toll is likely cents.


Actually, you are arguing for cars off the roads. You wrote this:
However, we've seen the consequences of commuters using local streets as a cut through: speeding and pedestrian deaths.

Your whole argument is that cars = death. Thus, your argument is that you don't want them there.

That Bayview Ave on-ramp is in Greenville. I listed information about someone in my area, Bergen-Lafayette, driving. Essentially, your suggestion to that person is to drive 10 minutes away from the city to get on a highway that will take you about 5 minutes more to get about where you started from. Great suggestion!

If someone lives on Communipaw Ave near Summit, what route do you want them to take? How should they drive if they live on Pacific and Johnston?

Cars don't equal death. People not following the laws that exist result in problems.

Posted on: 2013/10/4 16:16
Dos A Cero
 Top 


Re: Council person Osborne presents Pedestrian plan
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/8/17 1:45
Last Login :
2020/8/26 13:40
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3141
Offline

Quote:

Pebble wrote:
....
I never argued in favor of speeding. You have my quote in your post, please, point out exactly where I argue that paying taxes allows people to speed.

Route 78 isn?t always the best route. Columbus might be solid. I know that Montgomery and Grand is often used, based on proximity. I?ve not tried to drive in that direction of the extended spur of the Turnpike, but is that portion a toll road?

In short, I?m just trying to grasp where you think cars should just be banished from the roads entirely. There has to be a middle ground where drivers can still get to where they are going, without taking a half an hour to get out of the city, and commuters can be safe reaching the train in a timely manner.


....and I never argued that cars should be banished entirely. However, we've seen the consequences of commuters using local streets as a cut through: speeding and pedestrian deaths. Local commuter access to streets should never take priority over neighborhood safety, and if drivers are inconvenienced by being forced to slow or change route, tough.

The "middle" ground for your specific example was to improve connections to 78E, and make it the best route to the Holland Tunnel for traffic coming from the south. It would be much better to have on ramps to 78E at LSC and/or Columbus, than the existing plan to build a bridge between Philip St and Jersey Ave, and feed LSP/commuter traffic through downtown.

There is an on-ramp to 78E near Bayview Ave, which is probably a faster option from Bergen-Lafayette to the tunnel most of the time, and the toll is likely cents.

Posted on: 2013/10/4 15:35
 Top 


Grand St Redo Council person Osborne presents Pedestrian plan
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2011/3/21 20:32
Last Login :
2017/8/9 18:01
From Bayside Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 153
Offline
I suggest an in-between solution as a driver, walker and bike rider....Make Grand a 3 lane road, two traffic lanes, and a continuous left turn lane. Use the extra space to put in a dedicated bike lane and maintain some parking where there is enough space.

I agree that diverting traffic through the other streets is a big mistake.

And why cant the pedestrian plan go throughout the city? Try walking in Greenville

Posted on: 2013/10/4 15:09
 Top 


Re: Council person Osborne presents Pedestrian plan
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/3/29 21:43
Last Login :
2023/9/5 18:27
From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1980
Offline
Quote:

Quote:

Pebble wrote:
I?ll preface this by saying that I don?t live Downtown and I do use the PATH to commute. I know people in my area that drive into The City to go to work and, having been in the car with them, I know how they drive.

A lot of people have this misconception that those who drive are doing so out of ?laziness? or some other reason. Personally, I like taking the train. I like reading my book. I also like walking a little bit to and from the station as a small means of exercise.

Others, however, are not fans. I have a friend that doesn?t ride the train because she has unpleasant experiences. Either from gropers in a packed car and you can?t find where those hands are coming from to just not enjoying the feeling of being packed in like sardines. There is also the aspect of being able to run errands while on the way home, if you are in a car. My friend lives close and she drives through Downtown to get to the Holland because driving south west in order to go east is not efficient.

Everybody is a little different in their preferred method of commuting. The streets and sidewalks are all paid for by the tax dollars of those that live around here. Adjusting the roads in such a way that people can?t drive on them is social engineering. I don?t oppose making it safer, but making it impossible to drive through downtown under a nebulous idea of preventing out-of-towners seems wrong. I don?t believe those cutting through Downtown are out-of-towners. I think a lot of them are Bergen-Lafayette residents that see a very direct route. (Remember, there isn?t great mass transit options. The light rail, round trip plus PATH round trip, isn?t that much different in cost than the Holland Tunnel.)

I definitely think a middle ground can be met. I don?t have the answer myself, but I know it isn?t in the one-sided ideas proposed here.
dtjcview wrote:
On-ramps to 78E at LSC and/or Columbus might be a better answer for Bergen-Lafayette residents wanting to get to the Holland tunnel? Plus perhaps solving congestion at the tunnel, instead of pushing traffic on to local streets?

Also, paying local taxes doesn't give anyone the right to speed through local neighborhood streets and kill people. So I'm not sure I see your point.

I never argued in favor of speeding. You have my quote in your post, please, point out exactly where I argue that paying taxes allows people to speed.

Route 78 isn?t always the best route. Columbus might be solid. I know that Montgomery and Grand is often used, based on proximity. I?ve not tried to drive in that direction of the extended spur of the Turnpike, but is that portion a toll road?

In short, I?m just trying to grasp where you think cars should just be banished from the roads entirely. There has to be a middle ground where drivers can still get to where they are going, without taking a half an hour to get out of the city, and commuters can be safe reaching the train in a timely manner.

Posted on: 2013/10/4 14:07
Dos A Cero
 Top 


Re: Council person Osborne presents Pedestrian plan
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/8/17 1:45
Last Login :
2020/8/26 13:40
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3141
Offline
On-ramps to 78E at LSC and/or Columbus might be a better answer for Bergen-Lafayette residents wanting to get to the Holland tunnel? Plus perhaps solving congestion at the tunnel, instead of pushing traffic on to local streets?

Also, paying local taxes doesn't give anyone the right to speed through local neighborhood streets and kill people. So I'm not sure I see your point.

Quote:

Pebble wrote:
I?ll preface this by saying that I don?t live Downtown and I do use the PATH to commute. I know people in my area that drive into The City to go to work and, having been in the car with them, I know how they drive.

A lot of people have this misconception that those who drive are doing so out of ?laziness? or some other reason. Personally, I like taking the train. I like reading my book. I also like walking a little bit to and from the station as a small means of exercise.

Others, however, are not fans. I have a friend that doesn?t ride the train because she has unpleasant experiences. Either from gropers in a packed car and you can?t find where those hands are coming from to just not enjoying the feeling of being packed in like sardines. There is also the aspect of being able to run errands while on the way home, if you are in a car. My friend lives close and she drives through Downtown to get to the Holland because driving south west in order to go east is not efficient.

Everybody is a little different in their preferred method of commuting. The streets and sidewalks are all paid for by the tax dollars of those that live around here. Adjusting the roads in such a way that people can?t drive on them is social engineering. I don?t oppose making it safer, but making it impossible to drive through downtown under a nebulous idea of preventing out-of-towners seems wrong. I don?t believe those cutting through Downtown are out-of-towners. I think a lot of them are Bergen-Lafayette residents that see a very direct route. (Remember, there isn?t great mass transit options. The light rail, round trip plus PATH round trip, isn?t that much different in cost than the Holland Tunnel.)

I definitely think a middle ground can be met. I don?t have the answer myself, but I know it isn?t in the one-sided ideas proposed here.

Posted on: 2013/10/3 15:58
 Top 


Re: Council person Osborne presents Pedestrian plan
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2005/7/13 15:03
Last Login :
7/5 23:54
From Western Slope
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4638
Offline
Create an atmosphere as they did on Secaucus Rd. which borders the Heights and North Bergen just off Tonnelle Ave. They made all the streets leading to Secaucus Rd. one way exiting the area but not entering. You have to use the county road east bound to Kennedy Boulevard to travel into those areas because the residents are tired of the thru traffic invading thier neighborhood.

Posted on: 2013/10/3 13:50
Get on your bikes and ride !
 Top 


Re: Council person Osborne presents Pedestrian plan
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/3/29 21:43
Last Login :
2023/9/5 18:27
From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1980
Offline
I?ll preface this by saying that I don?t live Downtown and I do use the PATH to commute. I know people in my area that drive into The City to go to work and, having been in the car with them, I know how they drive.

A lot of people have this misconception that those who drive are doing so out of ?laziness? or some other reason. Personally, I like taking the train. I like reading my book. I also like walking a little bit to and from the station as a small means of exercise.

Others, however, are not fans. I have a friend that doesn?t ride the train because she has unpleasant experiences. Either from gropers in a packed car and you can?t find where those hands are coming from to just not enjoying the feeling of being packed in like sardines. There is also the aspect of being able to run errands while on the way home, if you are in a car. My friend lives close and she drives through Downtown to get to the Holland because driving south west in order to go east is not efficient.

Everybody is a little different in their preferred method of commuting. The streets and sidewalks are all paid for by the tax dollars of those that live around here. Adjusting the roads in such a way that people can?t drive on them is social engineering. I don?t oppose making it safer, but making it impossible to drive through downtown under a nebulous idea of preventing out-of-towners seems wrong. I don?t believe those cutting through Downtown are out-of-towners. I think a lot of them are Bergen-Lafayette residents that see a very direct route. (Remember, there isn?t great mass transit options. The light rail, round trip plus PATH round trip, isn?t that much different in cost than the Holland Tunnel.)

I definitely think a middle ground can be met. I don?t have the answer myself, but I know it isn?t in the one-sided ideas proposed here.

Posted on: 2013/10/3 13:30
Dos A Cero
 Top 


Re: Council person Osborne presents Pedestrian plan
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2006/11/10 20:17
Last Login :
2018/5/21 19:38
From Downtown
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 216
Offline
The road paving in Harsimus Cove presents a good insight into how speed humps might work to calm traffic. Since 4th & 5th Streets were milled last week, a rough patch of pavement was left on Erie St at those intersections. A large orange "BUMP" sign is there to warn drivers of the dip.

And guess what? I have noticed car after car come zooming down Erie and then SLOW DOWN for the intersection! It's like a miracle. Cars are even stopping for pedestrians in the crosswalk--it's amazing how much more alert drivers are when they have to reduce speed and pay attention to the road.

If it's too expensive to get the humps installed along Erie, maybe they can just leave the milled section there. So far, it is doing the job wonderfully.

Posted on: 2013/10/2 14:08
 Top 


Re: Council person Osborne presents Pedestrian plan
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2009/3/19 15:20
Last Login :
2020/6/2 11:06
From Scenic McGinley Square
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 709
Offline
Quote:

jcman420 wrote:
For one, careless drivers represent a greater risk of harm to pedestrians than careless pedestrians do to drivers...


Careless drivers are a big problem problem for pedestrians, and I fully support a major increase in ticketing, fines, and points. Careless pedestrians are a danger to themselves though.

Probably the best example of this is when someone darted out between two parked cars without looking. The poor girl came within an inch of getting caught in my open window and taken for a ride. I was not speeding or driving reckless in way, just going about my merry way.

I know incidents like that are rare, and Darwin will do his part to weed out some of these people. My point it pedestrians need to take a least a little personal responsibility. The law of tonnage is universal...

Posted on: 2013/9/29 14:28
 Top 


Re: Council person Osborne presents Pedestrian plan
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/9/24 1:49
Last Login :
2020/5/28 15:24
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 181
Offline
On the issue of enforcement, I think it's sensible to emphasize enforcement against drivers over enforcement against pedestrians, although there is a need for both. For one, careless drivers represent a greater risk of harm to pedestrians than careless pedestrians do to drivers. Secondly, there is simply a greater expectation that you may be ticketed while driving than while walking (And spare me the "fairness" point-- if you think constituent outrage isn't a consideration for politicians, I have a bridge to sell you.)

I think the police should start out by increasing enforcement against reckless driving in the form of tickets and increasing enforcement against reckless walking in the form of written warnings (except in extreme situations).

I think people would be surprised about the impact that a 30 second lecture from a cop and a threat of a future ticket would have on jaywalkers.

Posted on: 2013/9/28 15:42
 Top 


Re: Council person Osborne presents Pedestrian plan
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/9/24 1:49
Last Login :
2020/5/28 15:24
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 181
Offline
I actually wasn't aware that the stretch of Grand St in question used to be two lanes and was widened to accommodate Liberty Harbor. Frankly, if it existed with two lanes before, it could probably exist that way again without significant disruption. I actually think the impact (both beneficial or detrimental) would be minimal.

Also the idea that some people here want Grand Street to be safe for pedestrians and others want it to be a "superhighway" is a silly strawman debate. I certainly agree that Grand St is too dangerous for pedestrians and that cars on that street travel way too fast. I'm all for taking significant measures to change this , such as de-synchronized lights, increased enforcement, raised crosswalks, etc. I remain skeptical, however, of the benefits of narrowing the road. At the end of the day, it's probably too inconsequential to bother debating.

It would be nice if we could shift the conversation away from the ridiculous "Driver vs. Walker" tone. I, for one, am a pedestrian first and foremost, who happens to have a car that I am required to drive on occasion. Pedestrian safety is a major concern for me.

Posted on: 2013/9/28 15:00
 Top 


Re: Council person Osborne presents Pedestrian plan
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/8/17 1:45
Last Login :
2020/8/26 13:40
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3141
Offline
Looked like another bad accident around 7:30am this morning on Grand opposite McDonalds. Saw an overturned car, trapped passenger(s), with fire, police and ambulances. Speed and blinding morning sun probable causes, I'd guess.

Posted on: 2013/9/28 12:12
 Top 


Re: Council person Osborne presents Pedestrian plan
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/3/21 16:01
Last Login :
2023/5/7 19:50
From Bergen-Lafayette
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 116
Offline
Quote:

LurkingSince99 wrote:
Congestion pricing for the LSP and CC Blvd turnpike exits during commuter hours sounds like a good idea. It should have the effect of lowering the volume of cars using DTJC as a shortcut.


It's only a good idea to you because may not live in that neighbourhood. I do, and I take the LSP exit to go home--near the Park--not DTJC.

Posted on: 2013/9/28 2:40
 Top 


Re: Council person Osborne presents Pedestrian plan
Newbie
Newbie


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/9/27 14:39
Last Login :
2014/4/6 16:10
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3
Offline
Congestion pricing for the LSP and CC Blvd turnpike exits during commuter hours sounds like a good idea. It should have the effect of lowering the volume of cars using DTJC as a shortcut.

Posted on: 2013/9/27 14:49
 Top 


Re: Council person Osborne presents Pedestrian plan
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2011/2/5 22:36
Last Login :
2015/8/3 1:43
Group:
Banned
Posts: 234
Offline
Quote:
tommyc_37 wrote:
Quote:
I think a good simple idea, for both Columbus and Grand, would be a median in the middle with trees, to give pedestrians a halfway point. Plus it would look damn nice, especially on Columbus which is a pretty ugly streetscape.


Great idea!

Posted on: 2013/9/27 14:27
 Top 


Re: Council person Osborne presents Pedestrian plan
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2005/3/2 4:49
Last Login :
2018/6/12 15:20
From Downtown Ex Pat happy in McGinley Sq.
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 844
Offline
Quote:

tommyc_37 wrote:
I think a good simple idea, for both Columbus and Grand, would be a median in the middle with trees, to give pedestrians a halfway point. Plus it would look damn nice, especially on Columbus which is a pretty ugly streetscape.

What is the best way to propose this and other feedback to Candace, simply email her?

Traffic concerns for commuters really should be the last priority in all of these considerations. We should be encouraging suburban commuters to take public transportation. Jersey City is very well connected from the suburbs.


+1000! Also, Grand St. by Liberty Harbor area needs wider sidewalks, especially on the North side near the Brownstone Diner. Its scary narrow now.

Posted on: 2013/9/26 23:40
 Top 




« 1 2 (3) 4 5 6 ... 8 »




[Advanced Search]





Login
Username:

Password:

Remember me



Lost Password?

Register now!



LicenseInformation | AboutUs | PrivacyPolicy | Faq | Contact


JERSEY CITY LIST - News & Reviews - Jersey City, NJ - Copyright 2004 - 2017