soulman wrote:
Years ago, you could cross the boulevard underground and come up behind the Loews, I bet the network is still there and can be reactivated for less money than building a bridge. The area used to be populated with food and retail stores. Even Liss, (now Rite Aid), and JM Fields (now CH Martin) had an entrance from that lower level. Whenever it rained or snowed is was a sheltered way of crossing, without waiting for the light to change.

Yvonne wrote:
I asked awhile back about the traffic lights and I was told the city wants to stagger the lights to slow down the traffic. Here is the problem, the development in JC is done in redevelopment zones. Redevelopment zones are outside the norms of regular development including traffic studies. The city ignores the problem of traffic including the lack of parking, I am sure part of the problem is people circling the block looking for parking spaces. The problem will only get worse because more redevelopment zones are being created and some redevelopment zones has been given new life when they expire. The original Colgate Redevelopment zone expired a while back and the city council gave it 20 more years.

Yvonne wrote:
I asked awhile back about the traffic lights and I was told the city wants to stagger the lights to slow down the traffic. Here is the problem, the development in JC is done in redevelopment zones. Redevelopment zones are outside the norms of regular development including traffic studies. The city ignores the problem of traffic including the lack of parking, I am sure part of the problem is people circling the block looking for parking spaces. The problem will only get worse because more redevelopment zones are being created and some redevelopment zones has been given new life when they expire. The original Colgate Redevelopment zone expired a while back and the city council gave it 20 more years.

JerseyCityFrankie wrote:
I agree crossing the busy streets surrounding the Journal Square plaza on foot is way too difficult and DANGEROUS. The timing of the lights allows no room for error when trying to cross at any of the intersections. It doesn't help that all of the intersections are complex ones with multiple lanes of traffic and traffic islands. But clearly whoever set the timing of the Walk/Don't Walk lights was heavily biased towards the needs of the vehicular traffic. If there are recognized urban planning standards for the ideal amount of time Walk signs need to stay illuminated for safe crossing over given distance, I am CERTAIN our lights are set to the absolute minimum, if not below that number. Given the huge numbers of pedestrians who have to use these intersections, I find this situation unforgivable. The timing should CERTAINLY be set in favor of the pedestrians. Let the cars wait at the light, their personal safety is not in question and if they are slightly inconvenienced then as a harried and harassed Jersey City pedestrian I am disinclined to care. It isn't the pedestrians who are making our city streets dangerous.

JCCheerleader wrote:
I'm not sure that anyone official from Jersey City is very familiar with what it's like here in Journal Square. What's supposed to be a mass transit orientated neighborhood-which has to be pedestrian friendly in order to work-is actually pretty crazy for pedestrians. I've always wondered if the people who make the decisions that effect us the rest of our lives even live in the City, let alone the neighborhoods they control.

Pebble wrote:
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
Quote:

Pebble wrote:
Quote:

JCCheerleader wrote:
50% wouldn't be so bad. Who gets to decide which 50% actually gets developed? If they just redid that shitty Path station I'd be happier but I also like to see those trolleys.

I agree.

One thing I would really like would be a straight shot light rail line from the MLK hub through JSQ to the Heights, it would be pretty fantastic.

isn't there a plan to run the light rail along the passaic river or something like that...from bayside

I've seen a few proposals on it and plans for expansion. One would put a stop across 440. Another extends down into Staten Island and ventures north from North Bergen. However, I was looking more at the idea of crisscrossing the center of the city. Use the existing MLK hub and run off from there, north and south. It would connect the more West side Greenville residents, possibly driving development, as well as Bergen Hill/McGinley Square (selfishly) to JSQ and the Heights. Placing a light rail in the middle of the Heights that connects to JSQ would do wonders for those living there.

hero69 wrote:
Quote:

Pebble wrote:
Quote:

JCCheerleader wrote:
50% wouldn't be so bad. Who gets to decide which 50% actually gets developed? If they just redid that shitty Path station I'd be happier but I also like to see those trolleys.

I agree.

One thing I would really like would be a straight shot light rail line from the MLK hub through JSQ to the Heights, it would be pretty fantastic.

isn't there a plan to run the light rail along the passaic river or something like that...from bayside

Pebble wrote:
Quote:

JCCheerleader wrote:
50% wouldn't be so bad. Who gets to decide which 50% actually gets developed? If they just redid that shitty Path station I'd be happier but I also like to see those trolleys.

I agree.

One thing I would really like would be a straight shot light rail line from the MLK hub through JSQ to the Heights, it would be pretty fantastic.

JCCheerleader wrote:
50% wouldn't be so bad. Who gets to decide which 50% actually gets developed? If they just redid that shitty Path station I'd be happier but I also like to see those trolleys.