Register now !    Login  
Main Menu
Who's Online
60 user(s) are online (49 user(s) are browsing Message Forum)

Members: 2
Guests: 58

Webmaster, Yvonne, more...




Browsing this Thread:   1 Anonymous Users




(1) 2 »


Re: JC's (safe) walkability factor (major failure)
#58
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2006/4/10 13:29
Last Login :
2019/12/6 20:15
From Mars
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2634
Offline
Wow, there was just a public safety commercial on cable from the NJ division of Highway safety reminding people its the law to stop for pedestrians in crosswalks. If only the JCPD would get the memo.

Posted on: 2011/3/10 4:30
 Top 


Re: JC's (safe) walkability factor (major failure)
#57
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2006/4/10 13:29
Last Login :
2019/12/6 20:15
From Mars
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2634
Offline
One problem with Jersey City is many of the major thoroughfares are not one way avenues-- meaning traffic is coming in both directions making it even more difficult to cross a street. The natural break in traffic created by traffic signals then does not extend the full length between signals. Traffic gaps in one direction of traffic are often disrupted by traffic in the opposite direction.

For example, Marin has a traffic signal at First and Sixth and an out of synchronization signal at Metro Plaza. But there is also a crosswalk and cross street at second. Since there is traffic in both directions-- and no pedestrian median-- its nearly impossible to cross Marin even if there is a gap in north or south bound traffic because traffic in the opposite direction continues to come. Also, the city doesn't bother enforcing state law for pedestrians at Second Street, so vehicle drivers rarely bother to stop.

Posted on: 2011/3/9 16:56
 Top 


Re: JC's (safe) walkability factor (major failure)
#56
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/7/31 1:16
Last Login :
2016/2/16 4:31
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 25
Offline
When I said I don't pay attention to the signs but rather check to see if the light for oncoming traffic is red and that no cars are coming I did not mean that I ignore traffic rules for pedestrians. What I meant was that I don't entrust my personal safety to signs and other drivers. Just because the sign says walk doesn't mean that someone is not going to drive through the crosswalk. I don't blindly walk through an intersection just because the sign says walk. I check to make sure no one is coming. Additionally, if the light is red and no one is making any turns how could you possibly be bothering anyone while crossing the street even if the walk sign has the "high five" signal up? Just don't take your sweet time like you own the place and expect cars to be courtious if their light turns green.

Posted on: 2011/3/9 13:26
 Top 


Re: JC's (safe) walkability factor (major failure)
#55
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 21:13
Last Login :
2021/4/5 17:57
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5562
Offline
Quote:

dtjcview wrote:
There are also total f**kwit drivers that block the view at intersections with their parked vehicles. Trucks/delivery vehicles are particularly offensive. They think it's ok to block views at an intersection so long as they have their hazard lights on. MADNESS. I'd like to be able to photo them, and have them ticketed on the spot tbh. I'll be real happy when someone develops an iphone/droid app for that.


One that has gotten bad recently is the buses in front of McNair parking right at the NW corner of Coles & 7th. Between having to actually be halfway across Coles before you can see the oncoming traffic that has no stop and the oblivious kids it's become terrifying.

Posted on: 2011/3/9 3:26
 Top 


Re: JC's (safe) walkability factor (major failure)
#54
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: 3010
Offline
Quote:

moobycow wrote:
Quote:

lagwagon113 wrote:
I of course don't pay attention to the walk signs....

As a driver I try to be extra courteous and drive slowly. However, I'm always afraid that some pedestrian is going to jump out in front of me when I least expect it or come out of a blind spot that I can't see. So please be careful as a pedestrian as well and don't assume that drivers have a perfect view of everything. This doubles and triples for people who speed and drive recklessly throughout the city.


I understand what you were saying, but the juxtaposition of your feelings while driving vs your disregard of traffic laws while a pedestrian struck me as funny.


To me lagwagon makes a lot of sense on this individual post. Perhaps you're responding to a combination which I haven't trawled.

As a driver though, I totally agree with the sentiment of the post. There are aggressive pedestrians that don't understand the meaning of "Dont Walk" signs.

There are also total f**kwit drivers that block the view at intersections with their parked vehicles. Trucks/delivery vehicles are particularly offensive. They think it's ok to block views at an intersection so long as they have their hazard lights on. MADNESS. I'd like to be able to photo them, and have them ticketed on the spot tbh. I'll be real happy when someone develops an iphone/droid app for that.

Posted on: 2011/3/9 2:50
 Top 


Re: JC's (safe) walkability factor (major failure)
#53
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2009/12/22 20:28
Last Login :
2017/11/7 17:48
From 8th st
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 730
Offline
Quote:

lagwagon113 wrote:
I of course don't pay attention to the walk signs....

As a driver I try to be extra courteous and drive slowly. However, I'm always afraid that some pedestrian is going to jump out in front of me when I least expect it or come out of a blind spot that I can't see. So please be careful as a pedestrian as well and don't assume that drivers have a perfect view of everything. This doubles and triples for people who speed and drive recklessly throughout the city.


I understand what you were saying, but the juxtaposition of your feelings while driving vs your disregard of traffic laws while a pedestrian struck me as funny.

Posted on: 2011/3/9 2:27
 Top 


Re: JC's (safe) walkability factor (major failure)
#52
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: 3010
Offline
In the past few days:

1. I've been in a cab travelling down columbus at nearly 50 mph.
2. I've pulled out from a stop sign to find a cyclist travelling the wrong way up a one-way street, veering onto the pedestrian crossing (presumably to get pedestrian right-of-way privileges).
3. Cyclists blowing through stops signs and red lights, because they feel they have both pedestrian and vehicle rights-of-way and they can take both.

I'm a big fan of real cycle lanes, along with traffic calming measures. However, I'd support the city blitzing idiots with violation tickets, whether they are cyclists, motorists or pedestrians.

Posted on: 2011/3/9 2:04
 Top 


Re: JC's (safe) walkability factor (major failure)
#51
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/7/31 1:16
Last Login :
2016/2/16 4:31
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 25
Offline
This thread is interesting. Being from the car dependent south I consider Jersey City extremely walkable and never really have any issues. That said, I can understand the issues everyone has pointed out. They just never occurred to me. I of course don't pay attention to the walk signs. I look to see if the light for oncoming traffic is red and that no cars are coming before I cross. Hopefully the issues people have brought up can be addressed.

As a driver I try to be extra courteous and drive slowly. However, I'm always afraid that some pedestrian is going to jump out in front of me when I least expect it or come out of a blind spot that I can't see. So please be careful as a pedestrian as well and don't assume that drivers have a perfect view of everything. This doubles and triples for people who speed and drive recklessly throughout the city.

Posted on: 2011/3/9 1:58
 Top 


Re: JC's (safe) walkability factor (major failure)
#50
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 21:13
Last Login :
2021/4/5 17:57
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5562
Offline
Quote:

tern wrote:
> Oh I see, you count those wishful thinking "why can't
> we all get along" signs that make Monmouth & Coles
> bike lanes too.

No, it is more than that, they have solid white road markings demarcating bike only lanes.

Robin.


How new are they? I don't recall them and they're not on Streetview. I've certainly been on Madison in the last couple of months and not noticed a lined bike lane.

Posted on: 2011/3/9 1:23
 Top 


Re: JC's (safe) walkability factor (major failure)
#49
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2006/5/10 16:36
Last Login :
1/18 16:29
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 914
Offline
> Oh I see, you count those wishful thinking "why can't
> we all get along" signs that make Monmouth & Coles
> bike lanes too.

No, it is more than that, they have solid white road markings demarcating bike only lanes.

Robin.

Posted on: 2011/3/8 19:55
 Top 


Re: JC's (safe) walkability factor (major failure)
#48
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2006/4/10 13:29
Last Login :
2019/12/6 20:15
From Mars
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2634
Offline
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Oh I see, you count those wishful thinking "why can't we all get along" signs that make Monmouth & Coles bike lanes too. I haven't found those to be very effective in changing anything at all except the rhetoric of the politicians taking credit for them.


The painted lanes on Madison tend to be fairly effective. Sure, these aren't divided like the fancy ones in Manhattan, but they are lanes and they are far more in your face than signs posted along the road.

Posted on: 2011/3/8 19:36
 Top 


Re: JC's (safe) walkability factor (major failure)
#47
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 21:13
Last Login :
2021/4/5 17:57
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5562
Offline
Quote:

ianmac47 wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

ianmac47 wrote:
Hoboken found space for bike lanes and many of their streets are more narrow than ours are.


Really? Where? I drive in Hoboken often and can only think of the waterfront bike path.



Check out the satellite image here:
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&sourc ... &hl=en&geocode=&q=Hoboken,+NJ&aq=0&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=35.219929,53.876953&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Hoboken,+Hudson,+New+Jersey&ll=40.746867,-74.033566&spn=0.000518,0.001333&t=k&z=20

Two different style of bike lanes: one with actual lanes and the other with icons every few feet to remind drivers bicyclists are also sharing the road.

You can also see them by the shoprite.

Grand, Madison and 8th.


Oh I see, you count those wishful thinking "why can't we all get along" signs that make Monmouth & Coles bike lanes too. I haven't found those to be very effective in changing anything at all except the rhetoric of the politicians taking credit for them.

Posted on: 2011/3/8 18:58
 Top 


Re: JC's (safe) walkability factor (major failure)
#46
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2006/4/10 13:29
Last Login :
2019/12/6 20:15
From Mars
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2634
Offline
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

ianmac47 wrote:
Hoboken found space for bike lanes and many of their streets are more narrow than ours are.


Really? Where? I drive in Hoboken often and can only think of the waterfront bike path.



Check out the satellite image here:
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&sourc ... &hl=en&geocode=&q=Hoboken,+NJ&aq=0&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=35.219929,53.876953&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Hoboken,+Hudson,+New+Jersey&ll=40.746867,-74.033566&spn=0.000518,0.001333&t=k&z=20

Two different style of bike lanes: one with actual lanes and the other with icons every few feet to remind drivers bicyclists are also sharing the road.

You can also see them by the shoprite.

Grand, Madison and 8th.

Posted on: 2011/3/8 17:54
 Top 


Re: JC's (safe) walkability factor (major failure)
#45
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2006/5/10 16:36
Last Login :
1/18 16:29
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 914
Offline
Hoboken has marked bicyle lanes on several streets, I can't remember exactly, but maybe Madison/Clinton/Jefferson.

Robin.

Posted on: 2011/3/8 16:37
 Top 


Re: JC's (safe) walkability factor (major failure)
#44
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 21:13
Last Login :
2021/4/5 17:57
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5562
Offline
Quote:

ianmac47 wrote:
Hoboken found space for bike lanes and many of their streets are more narrow than ours are.


Really? Where? I drive in Hoboken often and can only think of the waterfront bike path.

Posted on: 2011/3/8 16:20
 Top 


Re: JC's (safe) walkability factor (major failure)
#43
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2006/4/10 13:29
Last Login :
2019/12/6 20:15
From Mars
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2634
Offline
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

CatDog wrote:
well yeah sorry I guess it is bikeable. I bike in JC nearly every day. But it's definitely not bike-friendly. Not a single bike lane here. Even Newark has bike lanes now, why are we so behind?


Easy one there: apparently there's no "bike lane contractor" who has given a generous campaign contribution to Team Healy. If it don't pay, it don't play.

Truly though, there's few roads wide enough to support a dedicated bike lane, and those few, like Columbus, probably wouldn't attract enough bike traffic to make it worthwhile. You'd have to sacrifice a lane on a 2 or 4 lane street like Kennedy or Palisade. Montgomery would be a good one till it get narrow in VVP, but I can't think of many more.

The only real way would be to change some 2 way roads to one way and use the extra lane for bikes. And that ain't gonna happen since we can't even get the dysfunctional east end of Newark 1 way. But I'd have said you could never close down Broadway in Midtown, so who knows?



Hoboken found space for bike lanes and many of their streets are more narrow than ours are.

Posted on: 2011/3/8 16:12
 Top 


Re: JC's (safe) walkability factor (major failure)
#42
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2006/4/10 13:29
Last Login :
2019/12/6 20:15
From Mars
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2634
Offline
Quote:

DanL wrote:
we also find Jersey City very walkable for the same reasons. there are sidewalks most everywhere, busy intersections have traffic signals and specific to the historic districts are the lack of driveways/curbs improving safety for all but notably small children and seniors.

the glass is half full.



These qualities are more or less the definition of a city.

The reasons Jersey City is less walkable than many other cities is that many of the crosswalks still have not been repainted from when the city repaved the streets -- 4th and Erie, 5th and Erie -- as two examples off the cuff. The corners themselves often have cars parked in them -- a situation best remedied by bulb outs / curb extensions; the city just replaced many of the corner sections of sidewalk in Harsimus Cove and Hamilton Park; adding curb extensions to these corners would have been easy and cost effective while they were ripping up all the old concrete and totally replacing these segments of sidewalk.

Many of the traffic signals benefit cars rather than pedestrians. The light at Marin Blvd and Metroplaza has a long interval between red lights, doesn't respond to pedestrian push buttons, and often cycles through without ever producing a walk signal. This is by definition pedestrian unfriendly. Marin Blvd is one of the worst offenders. Second Street should probably have some sort of traffic control for pedestrians considering two blocks from that intersection is a light rail station that attracts pedestrians. Crossing north of Sixth Street is always tricky.

Columbus Blvd is getting wider; wider is always more hazardous for pedestrians. The traffic signals also strongly benefit the cars and not the pedestrians.

While the downtown does have few curb cuts these often lead to access to spaces too small for cars meaning the cars often stick out into the sidewalk. Some of not most of these curb cuts were probably made illegally and the cars that park in them but stick out into the sidewalk should be, but never are, ticketed.

So yes, like any city, there are plenty of sidewalks and traffic control signals, but none of these are particularly pedestrian friendly.

Posted on: 2011/3/8 16:10
 Top 


Re: JC's (safe) walkability factor (major failure)
#41
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/2/6 23:13
Last Login :
2021/7/30 1:08
From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1204
Offline
correction, my wife and I (we both bike to work) find Jersey City very bike-able. it is compact, fairly flat (not hilly, only up and down) and you can bike most everywhere by local streets (avoiding the multi-lane roads) with few obstacles.

we also find Jersey City very walkable for the same reasons. there are sidewalks most everywhere, busy intersections have traffic signals and specific to the historic districts are the lack of driveways/curbs improving safety for all but notably small children and seniors.

the glass is half full.

Quote:

DanL wrote:
JC is very walkable and bike-able,

unfortunately, we lack the amenities to make more people feel comfortable (and safe) doing so.

for bicycling, please follow http://www.bikejc.org/

Posted on: 2011/3/8 15:57
 Top 


Re: JC's (safe) walkability factor (major failure)
#40
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2006/8/15 21:22
Last Login :
2016/3/22 21:14
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 426
Offline
I think wide roads like Christopher Columbus, Grand Street should be the main arteries of allowing ingress and egress to Jersey City; that there should be a median on CC with plants, trees, bushes etc. similar to McCarter Highway in Newark; and to foster an atmosphere conducive to pedestrian traffic Newark Avenue below the clock/former Milanos furniture should be cordoned off and turned into a ramblas like Horace Greeley Park or Church Street in Montclair and have pockets of this around the City. Part and parcel of this would include the spot where the rubble is where a bldg once stood to permit access to and fro between Newark and Columbus. The City has lots of potential. They messed up on the waterfront I think as that should have been contiguous entertainment/retail on the ground floor so that there's life after 6 PM.

From NJ Biz.
The long, slow road to economic recovery for New Jersey will have major implications for redevelopment projects in the state going forward, economic and housing experts said Friday.
?The recovery is not happening fully yet in New Jersey,? said Joseph J. Seneca, economics professor at the Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy at Rutgers University, speaking at a workshop at the New Jersey Future Redevelopment Forum, in New Brunswick.

New Jersey is lagging the nation in many respects, with personal income rising 2.7 percent last year, comparing to the national average of 3.6 percent, and wages and salaries growing 1.7 percent, slower than the U.S. increase of 2.7 percent, he said.

The Garden State lost 245,000 jobs from February 2008 to January 2010, and is a long way from regaining those jobs, since even in good economic times, it has added an average of 23,000 jobs a year, he said.

Seneca also noted that with housing costs in the state 55 percent higher than the national median, ?household income advantage in New Jersey has eroded significantly? over the years.

The lack of housing affordability in New Jersey helped the multifamily market improve ?consistently and dramatically? last year, even with the expiration of the homebuyer tax credits, said Jeffrey G. Otteau, president of Otteau Valuation Group, an East Brunswick-based appraisal and consulting firm.




Jeffrey Otteau?We?re seeing a rush of new product coming to the market? in multifamily, which had been underbuilt in New Jersey for many years, Otteau said.
In fact, apartment rentals currently are a bright spot for redevelopment in the state, and are expected to anchor many redevelopment projects in New Jersey in the future, he said.

But with the recovery of private-sector jobs lost during the recession expected to take a decade, demand for new office space ?will be very slim,? Otteau said.

Meanwhile, ?we?re still several years off for retail development to be feasible,? he said. Retail spending is expected to be far less than prior to the recession, partly because many baby boomers ? who had been key drivers of retail spending in the past ? are expected to reduce spending as they find they don?t have enough saved for retirement, he said.

Otteau saw real estate demand shifting to more walkable neighborhoods in the urban or inner-ring suburban communities, largely reflecting the preferences of younger buyers, those now aged 20 to 29, who are expected to generate a surge of housing demand in 2016 to 2018.

Real estate development and redevelopment are ?no longer the field of dreams? they had been in the past, but will need to be based on the needs of the market, Otteau said, which will require planning and zoning in towns to occur after market analyses have been performed.

Otteau expected job creation to gain traction, foreclosure to accelerate, and construction financing to remain scarce in 2011, while the housing recovery will begin to pick up in 2012, as mortgage lending loosens. Then, 2013 to 2017 will be the time for ?the construction phase to begin again for redevelopment,? he said.




Lori GrifaDuring the second round of workshops at the forum, Lori Grifa, commissioner of the state Department of Community Affairs and chair of the New Jersey Meadowlands Commission, spoke about progress on the failed EnCap site in the Meadowlands.
?We?re getting to the final chapters in that book, and ready to put it back on the shelf,? she said.

The commission is planning to redevelop seven landfills that were part of the EnCap site, with the landfills in the Kingland Redevelopment Area expected to be capped by 2013, she said.

Redevelopment opportunities for the Kingsland landfills include warehouse and distribution facilities, data centers, recreational facilities, hotels, and restaurants, she said.

Requests for proposals are due to come out within the next few months, Grifa said.

Posted on: 2011/3/4 19:57
 Top 


Re: JC's (safe) walkability factor (major failure)
#39
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 21:13
Last Login :
2021/4/5 17:57
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5562
Offline
Quote:

CatDog wrote:
well yeah sorry I guess it is bikeable. I bike in JC nearly every day. But it's definitely not bike-friendly. Not a single bike lane here. Even Newark has bike lanes now, why are we so behind?


Easy one there: apparently there's no "bike lane contractor" who has given a generous campaign contribution to Team Healy. If it don't pay, it don't play.

Truly though, there's few roads wide enough to support a dedicated bike lane, and those few, like Columbus, probably wouldn't attract enough bike traffic to make it worthwhile. You'd have to sacrifice a lane on a 2 or 4 lane street like Kennedy or Palisade. Montgomery would be a good one till it get narrow in VVP, but I can't think of many more.

The only real way would be to change some 2 way roads to one way and use the extra lane for bikes. And that ain't gonna happen since we can't even get the dysfunctional east end of Newark 1 way. But I'd have said you could never close down Broadway in Midtown, so who knows?

Posted on: 2011/3/4 19:25
 Top 


Re: JC's (safe) walkability factor (major failure)
#38
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/11/17 1:11
Last Login :
2021/11/10 1:20
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1181
Offline
well yeah sorry I guess it is bikeable. I bike in JC nearly every day. But it's definitely not bike-friendly. Not a single bike lane here. Even Newark has bike lanes now, why are we so behind?

Posted on: 2011/3/4 18:41
 Top 


Re: JC's (safe) walkability factor (major failure)
#37
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 21:13
Last Login :
2021/4/5 17:57
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5562
Offline
Quote:

CatDog wrote:
JC isn't bikeable at all.


I guess there's a difference between "bikeable" and "bike friendly". The latter, no. Not at all. But many of us bike regularly. You just have to be more cautious and defensive than you might be in a more bike friendly city.

I must say the biggest boon I've had is the closing of the block of Newark east of Grove. it reduced the westbound traffic east of Jersey to nearly nothing, which makes going around all the illegally parked truck & cars on the south side of Newark much safer.

I'll say it again: that section east of Jersey should be 1 way with meters & commercial loading zones on the south side. Safer for everyone to provide legal parking for the trucks that obviously must serve the businesses there.

Posted on: 2011/3/4 15:57
 Top 


Re: JC's (safe) walkability factor (major failure)
#36
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/11/17 1:11
Last Login :
2021/11/10 1:20
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1181
Offline
JC isn't bikeable at all.

I got an email from a city engineer. Apparently Columbus Drive is expected to be fully repaved by May, and before that they'll have a new traffic system in place and programmed (I thought they already had a new traffic system in place and programmed?). I'm not really sure what it means. Hopefully when May rolls around they'll have fixed that street's awful walk signals.

Posted on: 2011/3/4 15:20
 Top 


Re: JC's (safe) walkability factor (major failure)
#35
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/10/19 1:18
Last Login :
2020/9/25 20:40
From somewhere else
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1578
Offline
Quote:

DanL wrote:
JC is very walkable and bike-able


The National Highway Transportation Safety Administration puts out a bikeability survey - take it and let me know how you score. I thought I was being generous and came up with a 12, which falls in the range of:

11-15
Conditions are poor and you deserve better than this! Call the mayor and the newspaper right away.

Be honest when you fill it out. Reflect conditions as they really are throughout the city and not what you hope for the future or an isolated exception. (From the BikeJC website: "And although some of Google?s bike routes in Jersey City can be a little dicey, it provides a visual reminder of how the city could be connected by bike." Could be. Geez - even the roads considered bike routes are described as dicey.)

We don't have bike paths (exclude LSP - isolated and doesn't serve a commuting purpose - and the river walkway as that is really for walking and running, at best.) There are no segregated bike lanes. There are no bicycle traffic signals, as you see now in Manhattan and Brooklyn. Public bike racks are essentially non-existent. Traffic control is a major problem for all modes of transport. Road surfaces are inconsistent in many parts of the city. Where is this "very bikeable JC" you speak of? If only it were so...

Posted on: 2011/3/4 14:27
 Top 


Re: JC's (safe) walkability factor (major failure)
#34
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/10/19 1:18
Last Login :
2020/9/25 20:40
From somewhere else
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1578
Offline
Quote:

CatDog wrote:
"basically nothing"

Not sure what magical land you live in. The sign itself costs quite a bit to manufacture, and then you have to pay a dude to install it. Costs even more if there needs to be new hole + concrete + poles.

Put one of those at every intersection in the city and you're talking about a ton of money.


Brewster was talking about hanging a few signs at major entrances to the city. A couple dozen signs out of the city's $12 billion capital commitment budget for last year? Yeah, I'd say that's basically nothing.

Posted on: 2011/3/4 14:07
 Top 


Re: JC's (safe) walkability factor (major failure)
#33
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Hide User information
Joined:
2009/11/17 0:49
Last Login :
2016/6/3 19:43
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 109
Offline
It all comes down to enforcement of traffic laws (or lack thereof). All drivers know the rules, or did at one point, when they got their licenses, but they also know they'll never get a ticket for anything, no matter how flagrant, on the streets of downtown JC.

This is a real peeve of mine, cities keep cutting police forces to save money, and the few remaining cops have better things to do than enforce traffic laws. But it would be a huge source of revenue, which could pay for more cops doing even more important duty.

Posted on: 2011/3/4 13:33
 Top 


Re: JC's (safe) walkability factor (major failure)
#32
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/11/17 1:11
Last Login :
2021/11/10 1:20
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1181
Offline
Quote:

T-Bird wrote:
You're right, of course. A sign costs basically nothing and not everyone driving in NYC was born there. Funny though - I've always thought of "bridge and tunnel" as outer boroughs as much as NJ - and the other boroughs are part of NYC... which means no right on red. I know, I'm being too literal.
"basically nothing"

Not sure what magical land you live in. The sign itself costs quite a bit to manufacture, and then you have to pay a dude to install it. Costs even more if there needs to be new hole + concrete + poles.

Put one of those at every intersection in the city and you're talking about a ton of money.

Posted on: 2011/3/4 4:13
 Top 


Re: JC's (safe) walkability factor (major failure)
#31
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2007/9/23 21:28
Last Login :
2021/10/4 18:03
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 169
Offline
same time stop signs became optional

Posted on: 2011/3/4 4:10
 Top 


Re: JC's (safe) walkability factor (major failure)
#30
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/2/6 23:13
Last Login :
2021/7/30 1:08
From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1204
Offline
JC is very walkable and bike-able,

unfortunately, we lack the amenities to make more people feel comfortable (and safe) doing so.

for bicycling, please follow http://www.bikejc.org/

Posted on: 2011/3/4 3:52
 Top 


Re: JC's (safe) walkability factor (major failure)
#29
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/10/19 1:18
Last Login :
2020/9/25 20:40
From somewhere else
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1578
Offline
Quote:

brewster wrote:
You don't often see it during the day, it's at night when the bridge and tunnel crowd is in town and no one has ever told them it's illegal. Even a bozo from the burbs knows there must be SOME speed limit, but if you've never been anywhere that there's no right on red, how would you know? Really? They have a "welcome to NYC" sign at the tunnel, why not a "no right on red in NYC" sign?


You're right, of course. A sign costs basically nothing and not everyone driving in NYC was born there. Funny though - I've always thought of "bridge and tunnel" as outer boroughs as much as NJ - and the other boroughs are part of NYC... which means no right on red. I know, I'm being too literal.

Posted on: 2011/3/3 22:38
 Top 




(1) 2 »




[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