Joined: 09 Sep 2005 Posts: 1133 Location: No longer at 8th and Prez
Wed Feb 28, 07 6:44 pm EST
Streetsblog reports that the city's Dept of Transportation is proposing major traffic pattern changes in Park Slope, including:
Narrowing of 4th Ave and widening of the medians
Changing Sixth Ave from two-way to one-way
Changing Seventh Ave from two-way to one-way
I'm all in favor of anything that pretties up Fourth Ave, but the changes to Sixth and Seventh sound like a very, very bad idea. Prepare to have traffic speeds increase on both streets, which I'm sure sounds like a great idea to DOT and everyone who likes to go freeway speed on Eighth Ave, but would be really awful for residents of Park Slope.
8thandPrez Stroller Person
Joined: 09 Sep 2005 Posts: 1133 Location: No longer at 8th and Prez
Wed Feb 28, 07 6:47 pm EST
Btw, DOT will present the changes to Community Board 6 at their next meeting on March 15. This is from their website:
Quote:
Mar 15 Transportation
Presentation and discussion of a proposal by the Department of Transportation to convert 7th Avenue (between Flatbush Avenue and Prospect Avenue) from a two-way street to a one-way southbound street and 6th Avenue (between Atlantic Avenue and 23rd Street) from a two-way street to a one-way northbound street.
Presentation and discussion of a proposal by the Department of Transportation to eliminate one northbound and one southbound travel lane from 4th Avenue (between Dean Street and Prospect Avenue) and replace them with improved left-turn turning lanes.
6:30 PM
location TBD
Jamzer Lifer
Joined: 06 Oct 2005 Posts: 914 Location: Park F'ing Slope
Wed Feb 28, 07 7:18 pm EST
I wonder if these changes are related at all to the AY development?
At first blush I agree with 8thandPrez 100%. The change to 4th Avenue would be welcome, but I don't like the changes proposed for 6th and 7th Avenues. Not a good idea at all.
lostingreenwoodhts Where has the day gone?
Joined: 06 Oct 2006 Posts: 1451 Location: Greenwood Hts., where else?
Wed Feb 28, 07 8:52 pm EST
WTF! Is DOT on drugs? Narrow 4th Ave after upzoning it from Flatbush to 25th St?!?! One-way on 7th Ave which is a nightmare to begin with?
And I won't even touch 6th Ave.
I need what they've been smokin'. _________________ A word or two from the highest point in Brooklyn--Greenwood Hts.
...elevation, not just inebriation...
willregistersoon Local
Joined: 19 Sep 2006 Posts: 268
Wed Feb 28, 07 10:56 pm EST
As a car owner I think I have to say that narrowing 4th ave may not be a good idea. It is a main corridor connecting several major roads. Especially if they build the stadium eventually, I could see 4th ave becoming a traffic nightmare. About 6th or 7th - I'm not sure. At first it sounded like a good idea, but yeah, I think it will make people go much faster and could become more unsafe. I'm really not sure about this one.
pitu Fake Buddhist
Joined: 13 Jul 2005 Posts: 6537 Location: Utopian Park Slope
Joined: 09 Sep 2005 Posts: 1133 Location: No longer at 8th and Prez
Thu Mar 01, 07 12:16 pm EST
willregistersoon wrote:
As a car owner I think I have to say that narrowing 4th ave may not be a good idea. It is a main corridor connecting several major roads. Especially if they build the stadium eventually, I could see 4th ave becoming a traffic nightmare. About 6th or 7th - I'm not sure. At first it sounded like a good idea, but yeah, I think it will make people go much faster and could become more unsafe. I'm really not sure about this one.
Well, my guess would be that they would eliminate one lane of traffic (from current 6 lanes to 5) to allow for widening of the median. I only hope that this comes with landscaping and not just a wider concrete trash collector like we currently have.
Korla Pundit Guest
Thu Mar 01, 07 12:21 pm EST
If they narrow Fourth Ave, then one third of Fourth Avenue's huge traffic volume will be diverted onto Fifth, Sixth and Seventh Avenues. Driving around the block, looking for a parking spot will now be twice as difficult, since you can't turn right or left depending on if it's 6th or 7th Avenue, once they go one-way. This is a nightmare! I'd rather have a corrupt mayor who takes graft money and does nothing than a mommy mayor who is destroying this city for free!
Korla Pundit Guest
Thu Mar 01, 07 12:25 pm EST
I see the steamrolling has already begun. They've just stuck up HUGE signs over the intersection of 5th Avenue and 6th Street that read "6TH STREET" and 'FIFTH AVENUE," respectively. It looks like the signs on the Los Angeles freeway. It's just awful. The uglification of Park Slope continues. This is what Bloomie is spending our parking ticket fines on.
caaahyoko Carneviento Devotee
Joined: 04 Aug 2005 Posts: 1258
Thu Mar 01, 07 12:32 pm EST
willregistersoon wrote:
As a car owner I think I have to say that narrowing 4th ave may not be a good idea. It is a main corridor connecting several major roads. Especially if they build the stadium eventually, I could see 4th ave becoming a traffic nightmare. About 6th or 7th - I'm not sure. At first it sounded like a good idea, but yeah, I think it will make people go much faster and could become more unsafe. I'm really not sure about this one.
Yeah, I do agree that 4th is a major traffic thoroughfare, but it would be nice to have medians that feel safe to be on. Its kinda rediculous that you can't step forward or backward one step without ending up in traffic.
pitu Fake Buddhist
Joined: 13 Jul 2005 Posts: 6537 Location: Utopian Park Slope
Thu Mar 01, 07 12:44 pm EST
I like the giant signs they put on Fourth Ave, but I hope they haven't put the same kind on Fifth...how ugly!
Fourth is a death trap on many counts - I lost count ages ago of the number of flipped or flaming cars I've seen there, from 3rd to Flatbush.
It's wide *enough* that one dorkus car service turned into it the wrong way the other evening...
I haven't looked at the plan - and have yet to wrap my mind around the idea of 6th and 7th changing to one way. Thanks for posting this 8thPrez!
Does anyone posting here attend the CB6 meetings? _________________ "When fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in the flag
and carrying a cross."
- Sinclair Lewis
linusvanpelt Jockin my Mercedes
Joined: 12 Oct 2005 Posts: 394 Location: Center Slope, between 4th and 5th Avenues
Thu Mar 01, 07 1:15 pm EST
As a car owner, I'm all for narrowing Fourth Ave, if that makes it a little more attractive and pedestrian-friendly. (Maybe they can spring for some planters for the medians, so the fake trees in the renderings of all the new apartment buildings can become a reality.) If it slows down traffic--maybe that's bad for the city overall. But as a pedestrian who crosses the avenue, I look forward to it. It's difficult to cross in one go unless you catch the light just as it changes, so I'd love to see the islands of death get wider. I feel like freaking Frogger out there.
By the way, the plan as I read it is to lose one lane of traffic in each direction.
8thandPrez Stroller Person
Joined: 09 Sep 2005 Posts: 1133 Location: No longer at 8th and Prez
7.2.1.2 4th Avenue
4th Avenue is a major north-south artery that forms the eastern boundary of the primary study area. It carries 17,800 vehicles per day (vpd) in the peak northbound direction. Due to its width it acts as a barrier for east-west movement, particularly by pedestrians. Accordingly, the strategy for this corridor is to improve conditions for pedestrians crossing 4th Avenue without compromising its traffic -carrying capacity. This should be accomplished by reducing crossing distances and providing maximum possible crossing times for pedestrians wherever possible. In order to improve pedestrian conditions, space should also be reclaimed for pedestrian use wherever possible and particularly around the subway stations at Pacific, Union, and 9th Streets.
To the west of 4th Avenue are Living Streets on which through traffic should be minimized. Particularly at 4th Avenue’s northern end, where the traffic congestion at its intersection with Atlantic and Flatbush Avenues in the morning commuter peak encourages drivers to seek alternate routes, such intrusion is a problem. A number of options for discouraging left turns by northbound drivers onto east-west Living Streets west of 4th Avenue were investigated, including removing the short left turn lanes at each intersection, which would provide greater pedestrian storage area in the middle of the road, and banning some left turns. It should be noted that the design of the 4th Avenue median is constrained to some extent by the subway that runs beneath the road and the subway vents in the median strip. In consultation with the community, it was recommended that NYCDOT investigate LPIs for pedestrians crossing 4th Avenue and continue to provide left turns off it.
The plans shown indicate that a parking lane would be sacrificed on the west side of 4th to provide a larger median and left turn lanes. Neckdowns at street intersections would also provide more area for pedestrians. Overall, not a terrible plan. Couldn't find any info on 6th or 7th avenues though. Streetsblog posts this response they received from NYCDOT:
Quote:
DOT has proposed changing 6th and 7th Avenues to one-way streets which we believe will have many benefits including simplifying the turning movements at intersections to make it safer for pedestrians crossing the street and narrowing the travel lanes on 7th Avenue to encourage vehicles to travel within the existing speed limit. DOT also proposes making these changes in conjunction with a plan that would remove a travel lane in each direction on 4th Avenue (between 17th and Dean Streets) using this space to improve the existing left turn bays.
Again, sounds ok in principle, but in reality I can't see how this is a good idea. One-way will result in higher speeds... you only have to look at 8th Ave to see the result. Even with lights every block it's like a raceway. It will also only increase traffic on each street as people are forced to navigate the one-ways. Overall, I think it's a terrible idea from an agency that has a long history of not-very-innovative thinking.
Oiseau Wacky Tobacconist
Joined: 07 Sep 2005 Posts: 660 Location: Who wants to know?
Thu Mar 01, 07 1:48 pm EST
This city is retarded. They want there to be more and more building, more and more people but they don't do anything to improve the subways or the roads! Making Vanderbilt Ave one lane was retarded. Now they want to narrow 4th ave? Why? So there can be more traffic? I wouldn't mind them making 7th and 6th ave one way but they may as well make 5th ave one way while they're at it. Perhaps the best thing to do would be to actually get the police to do their job! If the police actually ticketed double-parked trucks, there wouldn't be so much traffic!
The thing is, this city wants it's cake and to eat it too. They want there to be parking meters but they don't give trucks a place to make deliveries! What about a loading zone? Furthermore, many metered parking spaces are taken up by people whop feed the meter all day long! In the small town I grew up in, the meter maid would chalk the tires, I guess chalk costs too much or the meter maids in NYC are too stupid to know what a tire is, I have no idea.
And don't even get me started on allowing double-parking for churches on Sundays.
8thandPrez Stroller Person
Joined: 09 Sep 2005 Posts: 1133 Location: No longer at 8th and Prez
Thu Mar 01, 07 4:28 pm EST
Oiseau, I actually have just about the exact opposite position as you... traffic, as you describe it, is what makes streets more attractive for pedestrians. Double-parked trucks slow down traffic, narrowed streets slow down traffic.. all these things may create headaches for motorists but vastly improve safety and enhance the pedestrian condition on our streets. And I'd even dispute that these things would disrupt motorists.. most of our problems seem to be related to the fact that too many NYers own cars and that we have major bottlenecks that snarl traffic, like the intersection of Flatbush and Atlantic and Grand Army Plaza. The answer isn't making all streets totally friction-free so that cars can whizz along at full speed... this will hurt Park Slope. We need to discourage driving and make 8th/7th/6th ave work like the neighborhood streets that they are.
Rose Ninja
Joined: 10 Nov 2005 Posts: 911 Location: South Slope
Thu Mar 01, 07 4:37 pm EST
8thandPrez wrote:
Double-parked trucks slow down traffic, narrowed streets slow down traffic.. all these things may create headaches for motorists but vastly improve safety and enhance the pedestrian condition on our streets. And I'd even dispute that these things would disrupt motorists..
I agree that slower traffic on 7th Ave is good but I think the situation with all the double-parked cars and trucks is disruptive to drivers and dangerous to pedestrians. Cars are constantly veering into the wrong side of the street to get around all the double-parked vehicles and the B67 buses that can't pull into the bus lane because it is blocked by illegally parked cars. I feel like I'm risking a head-on collision every time I drive on 7th Ave. And then for some reason no one crosses at the light on 7th Ave., they just wander across the street in mid-block without looking. It seems like it would make more sense to slow traffic with staggered traffic lights rather than by tolerating all the double-parking.
8thandPrez Stroller Person
Joined: 09 Sep 2005 Posts: 1133 Location: No longer at 8th and Prez
Thu Mar 01, 07 4:54 pm EST
Rose -
I think a system of alleys would have been perfect... truck traffic and garbage go out back and the street is returned to the forward-facing uses. But, I think we're a little late for that solution
I agree that the double-parking can create problems... but it definitely slows traffic.
I happen to be one of those who crosses at the midblock on 7th... I just cant help myself. i guess that's one thing that would be made easier by the one-way conversion... easier jaywalking! Go DOT!
Rose Ninja
Joined: 10 Nov 2005 Posts: 911 Location: South Slope
Thu Mar 01, 07 5:10 pm EST
One thing that is definitely true is that I very rarely drive in Park Slope because I find it so aggravating, and of course parking is so difficult. So, from a certain perspective, that's a good thing, because I guess we can all agree that it would be a better world if people drove less and walked more. On the other hand, if I need to buy things, at least heavy things, I'm more likely to drive over to Target, where there is parking available, than to shop at the small, locally-owned stores in Park Slope, where parking is so difficult.
linusvanpelt Jockin my Mercedes
Joined: 12 Oct 2005 Posts: 394 Location: Center Slope, between 4th and 5th Avenues
Thu Mar 01, 07 5:51 pm EST
Oiseau, if I were one of the people moving into the new buildings on 4th Avenue, I would rather have the avenue be a safer, more appealing one to walk on and cross than a convenient one to drive on. This is still New York City--even if you drive, you walk a lot more often.
Oiseau Wacky Tobacconist
Joined: 07 Sep 2005 Posts: 660 Location: Who wants to know?
Thu Mar 01, 07 6:13 pm EST
When the owners of the new buildings had the great idea to build these huge buildings on 4th avneue, they knew just what they were getting into. Look, 4th avenue is already a two lane road with one lane for parking and another lane for double-parking. Do you really want to be in your apartment and hear all the horns honking because and smell all the fumes because people are stuck in traffic outside your front window? And please don';t tell me that there should be "NO Honking" zones, like a cop is actually going to enforce that.
As for double parking being good, no it's not. As Rose mentioned it is dangerous for other drivers, pedestrians and bicyclists. I don't want to get a bunch of drivers with road rage, I'd rather have things work like they are supposed to.
Ah yes, but this is NYC. People do what they are going to do. People are going to drive no matter how much traffic there is. Driving allows one to be in their own private idaho, you don't have to deal with anyone except other drivers and they can't do anything to you because you can always get their license plate.
Now perhaps if the subways and mass transit were improved, but sorry to say, it's only going to get worse. More buildings, more people, more traffic, more crowded mass transit, etc.
One idea I'd like to put out there is to stop large boats/ships from going up and down the east river. Then they could build flat bridges across the east river and people would be more able to bike and walk (and it will be easier to drive) to and from Manhattan.
theoryofpractice and a cast of thousands
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 Posts: 230 Location: slope
Thu Mar 01, 07 6:19 pm EST
The proposal to narrow Fourth Avenue for pedestrians is good.
They should forget about Sixth and Seventh Avenues, and go back to two way traffic on Eighth Avenue and Prospect Park West.
Oiseau Wacky Tobacconist
Joined: 07 Sep 2005 Posts: 660 Location: Who wants to know?
Thu Mar 01, 07 6:23 pm EST
Even with all the new buildings being built on 4th avenue, the question remains, "Who really wants to walk up and down 4th avenue?" (except if your going to the subway)
8thandPrez Stroller Person
Joined: 09 Sep 2005 Posts: 1133 Location: No longer at 8th and Prez
Thu Mar 01, 07 7:25 pm EST
Oiseau, double-parked trucks aren't sympomatic of something broken... it's how things are supposed to work in the city. Trucks double-park to make deliveries, that's just the way it is. Setting aside truck loading zones isn't workable in a city where streets are lined with continuous strips of retail; you'd need loading zones on each block, which would eliminate parking and hurt the retail uses. On-street loading and unloading is done just about everywhere where you have active streetlife. Separation of pedestrians from service harkens back to the Moses era of elevated walkways and service vehicles at street level.
As for 4th Ave, it's actually been getting better. It's nice to see new restaurants and bars opening. I'm no fan of the ugly buildings going up, but they'll certainly improve the pedestrian condition
willregistersoon Local
Joined: 19 Sep 2006 Posts: 268
Thu Mar 01, 07 8:04 pm EST
This is interesting actually. Back in the time of Robert Moses, the fuss was all about highways coming in and dividing up neighborhoods. Now it's the oppisite. The neighborhood is growing to overtake the highway (highway in this case being 4th avenue).
I'm really torn on this now. 4th avenue is a major thoroughfare. I use it all the time to get on to the BQE or Prospect Expy, or Flatbush/Atlantic, or even to drive down to Bay Ridge. I'm definately against making 6th or 7th one way for all the reasons mentioned. But I'm also against the 4th avenue plan because we do need some highway-type roads like it. One downside to it is that if 4th ave doesn't provide a faster solution, people might stick more to using 6th or 7th to go north/south - esp if those become two-way. So it all cancels itself out.
On the other hand, I am all for beautifying 4th ave as much as possible. Agggh! What to do!
Oiseau Wacky Tobacconist
Joined: 07 Sep 2005 Posts: 660 Location: Who wants to know?
Thu Mar 01, 07 8:11 pm EST
So you're saying that we need parking spaces so people can drive to go shopping, well obviously you aren't making it any easier fpr them to get there. Anyway, I believe many metered spaces are used by people who feed the meter all day (or at least longer then the limit).
Yes on street loading and unloading is done, but you did say that "a system of alleys would have been perfect" and yes, NYC doesn;t and will not ever have that, so why not make a lane that is just for loading?
The real solution is to actually narrow the sidewalks in many areas, put in seperated bicycle lanes, then parking/loading, then traffic lanes. The medians should be elimanted unless they are planning to grow trees on them.
As for Moses, I'm not a big fan, but at least he had some solutions to traffic.
Fact - traffic is not going to be less, ever, so let's do what we can to keep it in one place, as willregistersoon said, on a "highway-type road". And no, the BQE is not an option.
As for Fourth ave, it is getting nicer, true, but it will continue to as long as employed people keep moving into these buildings even if none of these proposals are not put in place.
Last edited by Oiseau on Fri Mar 02, 07 12:14 am; edited 1 time in total
Korla Pundit Guest
Thu Mar 01, 07 11:15 pm EST
Limiting when and where you can turn only serves to prolong the driving time of every car on the road. This is yet another nightmare being forced on the Brooklyn's drivers by people who have no concept of what they are doing, but they will plow ahead and do it anyway because their motives are also punitive.
homeowner "Way Too Incestial"
Joined: 20 Jan 2006 Posts: 2116 Location: Between a rock and a hard place
Fri Mar 02, 07 12:58 am EST
Well this answers one big question I've had about AY. Every time I see the renderings there is a street that has a tree lined median like Park Avenue in midtown. I've never been able to figure out if it was supposed to be Flatbush or what, but now I guess its supposed to be 4th.
Stupid idea. Where the hell is all the traffic supposed to go? Don't envy any of you folks as this plan is sure to make PS the most expensive parking lot in Brooklyn.
charlesbklyn Regular
Joined: 22 Dec 2006 Posts: 102
Fri Mar 02, 07 1:22 am EST
Park Slope is not ready to have 7th avenue and 6th avenue changed to one way avenues. We already have 4th, 8th, and Prospect Park West one way. Once we lose our two way avenues, the pedestrian friendly Park Slope will be displaced, and lost forever. Perhapse, in the future, this would be a prudent change. But not now, not here. Realize this ... the city government is facilitating the taking of Park Slope from its residents, and as a landlord, I am not pleased ... one damn bit. I intend to fight this change.
Charles
Bklyn
8thandPrez Stroller Person
Joined: 09 Sep 2005 Posts: 1133 Location: No longer at 8th and Prez
Fri Mar 02, 07 9:44 am EST
Oiseau wrote:
So you're saying that we need parking spaces so people can drive to go shopping, well obviously you aren't making it any easier fpr them to get there. Anyway, I believe many metered spaces are used by people who feed the meter all day (or at least longer then the limit).
Yes on street loading and unloading is done, but you did say that "a system of alleys would have been perfect" and yes, NYC doesn;t and will not ever have that, so why not make a lane that is just for loading?
What I'm saying is that the parking spaces are valuable for multiple reasons. They provide parking for people who shop on 7th Ave and 5th Ave. They also provide an important role in improving the pedestrian condition. They serve as a buffer between moving vehicles and the sidewalk; they make the sidewalks safer and make pedestrians more comfortable using them. If the parking lanes were given over to truck loading, this buffer would be eliminated.
Oiseau wrote:
The real solution is to actually narrow the sidewalks in many areas, put in seperated bicycle lanes, then parking/loading, then traffic lanes. The medians should be elimanted unless they are planning to grow trees on them.
I'm right there with you on the separate bike lanes, but narrowing the sidewalks? Talk about a move that would completely destroy the vitality of the neighborhood. 7th Ave actually has a great street life: lots of stores, lots of people, lots of sidewalk vendors. Narrow sidewalks would kill all 3 of those things. I'd sacrifice a bike lane anyday to keep a wide sidewalk.
Oiseau wrote:
As for Moses, I'm not a big fan, but at least he had some solutions to traffic.
He had solutions, and they tended to be very farsighted outside of the city. In the city, however, his ideas havent really worked as planned. A good system of bridge tolls and congestion pricing would help, together with a beefed up transit system. Those are modern Moses-type ideas, we shouldn't shy away from them just because they're unpopular.
Oiseau wrote:
Fact - traffic is not going to be less, ever, so let's do what we can to keep it in one place, as willregistersoon said, on a "highway-type road". And no, the BQE is not an option.
I don't think anyone is advocating turning 4th into a "local" street. In DOT's report, they classify streets as "traffic", "neighborhood", "local", etc (or something like that, I don't have the report in front of me). 4th Ave will always be high-volume, and that's a good thing. I use it to get into and out of Park Slope and down to Fairway all the time. I just don't think it's such a bad idea to eliminate ONE parking lane to widen the median for pedestrians. I completely agree that it should be planted and not just concrete.
willregistersoon Local
Joined: 19 Sep 2006 Posts: 268
Fri Mar 02, 07 10:52 am EST
What about making 4th avenue follow a model like Eastern or Ocean Parkways? These are wide, 6 lane roads with wide sidealks and no medians at all actually. How come its not a problem there?
Also, does anyone know - is this plan officially approved now?
lostingreenwoodhts Where has the day gone?
Joined: 06 Oct 2006 Posts: 1451 Location: Greenwood Hts., where else?
Fri Mar 02, 07 12:10 pm EST
Rumored 3/15/07 meeting is between CB6 and DOT...hope they plan to include CB7 and CB 10 as well...
Still a very bad idea, no matter how you slice & dice it. _________________ A word or two from the highest point in Brooklyn--Greenwood Hts.
...elevation, not just inebriation...
Oiseau Wacky Tobacconist
Joined: 07 Sep 2005 Posts: 660 Location: Who wants to know?
Fri Mar 02, 07 12:22 pm EST
8thandPrez wrote:
If the parking lanes were given over to truck loading, this buffer would be eliminated.
How? There'd be trucks parked there instead of cars. What? Trucks aren't buffers?
8thandPrez wrote:
7th Ave actually has a great street life
I'm not saying 7th avenue, but perhaps Flatbush, Atlantic, 4th ave, etc.
8thandPrez wrote:
I just don't think it's such a bad idea to eliminate ONE parking lane to widen the median for pedestrians.
Pedestrians don't want to be walking up and down a median.
Fourth ave has 4 lanes now. 3 for traffic one for parking although really one is for double parking. If you cut this down to one for parking and 2 for traffic you're really just turning it into another Flatbush Ave and I can attest that the traffic on Flatbush ave is horrible especially during rush hour. If you really want to keep the cars out of Park slope you will give them a viable alternative to trying to cut through the slope.
Carnivore Brooklyn Snark
Joined: 14 Apr 2005 Posts: 13712 Location: St Johns Pl and Underhill
Fri Mar 02, 07 12:32 pm EST
Oiseau wrote:
Fourth ave has 4 lanes now. 3 for traffic one for parking although really one is for double parking.
There are 3 traffic lanes and one parking lane in each direction. Just clarifying.
Oiseau Wacky Tobacconist
Joined: 07 Sep 2005 Posts: 660 Location: Who wants to know?
Fri Mar 02, 07 12:37 pm EST
Carnivore wrote:
Oiseau wrote:
Fourth ave has 4 lanes now. 3 for traffic one for parking although really one is for double parking.
There are 3 traffic lanes and one parking lane in each direction. Just clarifying.
yeah many times one of those three lanes has a dfouble parked car/truck in it which is expected.
8thandPrez Stroller Person
Joined: 09 Sep 2005 Posts: 1133 Location: No longer at 8th and Prez
Fri Mar 02, 07 1:45 pm EST
Oiseau, what I'm saying is that there is so much retail along these streets that you would need many loading lanes for trucks. This would eliminate parking spaces and introduce truck in/outs right next to the sidewalk. Idon't think that's a good thing. Also, I think it would be a bit oppressive to have trucks constantly parked next to the sidewalk.
I get as frustrated as anyone when I'm driving by all the double parking that slows up traffic. But when I'm a pedestrian, I'm thankful that traffic moves slowly and more carefully because of these obstructions.
linusvanpelt Jockin my Mercedes
Joined: 12 Oct 2005 Posts: 394 Location: Center Slope, between 4th and 5th Avenues
Fri Mar 02, 07 1:49 pm EST
Oiseau wrote:
8thandPrez wrote:
7th Ave actually has a great street life
I'm not saying 7th avenue, but perhaps Flatbush, Atlantic, 4th ave, etc.
8thandPrez wrote:
I just don't think it's such a bad idea to eliminate ONE parking lane to widen the median for pedestrians.
Pedestrians don't want to be walking up and down a median.
(1) The sidewalks are narrow as it is -- in many places, from the fence of a house or building, they're not as wide as a parking lane.
(2) The issue with the medians is not the ability to walk up and down them, but the safety of standing on them in the middle of the crosswalk, which people regularly do when crossing because the lights change very quickly. For the left turn lanes as they exist, the medians are cut in so that you have maybe a couple feet width of concrete. It's like standing on a ledge.
Bottom line, though I own a car, I think the concerns of pedestrians should trump the convenience of drivers in NYC. As you said, rightly, people will drive regardless. They'll just drive slower. (Like on Flatbush, which you noted is terrible yet people still drive on.) The idea that 4th Avenue will become a "parking lot" is hyperbole. (As is the idea that 7th and 6th will suddenly become death traps -- in 15 years in Park Slope, I've never heard people talk about the blocks near the Park as "pedestrian-unfriendly" until now, despite the one-way streets.) As it is now, the biggest problem on 4th Avenue is cars driving dangerously fast and crashing or flipping.
You also noted correctly that people moving to apartments on 4th Avenue knew what they were getting into. Well, so do people who choose to drive a lot in NYC--because of personal preference, the neighborhoods they choose to live in, what have you--they're relying on cars in a city where it sucks to drive.
Oiseau Wacky Tobacconist
Joined: 07 Sep 2005 Posts: 660 Location: Who wants to know?
Fri Mar 02, 07 1:53 pm EST
linusvanpelt wrote:
As it is now, the biggest problem on 4th Avenue is cars driving dangerously fast and crashing or flipping.
And decreasing the traffic lanes to two will help this how?
Better timed traffic lights would solve this.
I just think there are better things to spend our taxpayer money on then making a section of 4th avenue more pedestrian friendly.
Last edited by Oiseau on Fri Mar 02, 07 1:56 pm; edited 1 time in total
8thandPrez Stroller Person
Joined: 09 Sep 2005 Posts: 1133 Location: No longer at 8th and Prez
Fri Mar 02, 07 1:55 pm EST
Personally, I'd much rather see traffic improvements like these:
Joined: 15 Nov 2006 Posts: 85 Location: Prospect Avenue Station
Fri Mar 02, 07 2:11 pm EST
Fourth Avenue is a ridiculous street, you have to agree, with its bizarre half-ass turning lanes and the here-it-is-there-it-isn't median. So it's hard to argue against doing something to it. ...It is creepy, though, to consider that these changes are probably being driven by the Atlantic Yards project.
However, it seems like if you make Sixth and Seventh one-way streets, it would encourage people to use them as through streets. It would certainly make intra-Slope driving even more of a nuisance. Are those streets so pedestrian-unfriendly that change is necessary?
That being said, I am doubly glad I sold my truck last year.
Oiseau Wacky Tobacconist
Joined: 07 Sep 2005 Posts: 660 Location: Who wants to know?
Fri Mar 02, 07 2:24 pm EST
8thandPrez wrote:
Personally, I'd much rather see traffic improvements like these:
Those aren't the only Amsterdam-like changes I'd like to see
linusvanpelt Jockin my Mercedes
Joined: 12 Oct 2005 Posts: 394 Location: Center Slope, between 4th and 5th Avenues
Fri Mar 02, 07 2:38 pm EST
Oiseau wrote:
linusvanpelt wrote:
As it is now, the biggest problem on 4th Avenue is cars driving dangerously fast and crashing or flipping.
And decreasing the traffic lanes to two will help this how?
Better timed traffic lights would solve this.
I just think there are better things to spend our taxpayer money on then making a section of 4th avenue more pedestrian friendly.
Unless I'm reading you wrong, you believe the change will make traffic on 4th Ave much slower. Ergo, fewer cars driving dangerously fast.
I'm all for better-timed traffic lights too, tho, depending how you define better.
As for taxpayer money, I'm not sure of the cost here, but given that 4th Avenue is going to get a big influx of new pedestrians (many of whom will live on the west side of 4th and probably will want to walk over to 5th Ave, etc., regularly), I can think of worse uses.
Even now--before any of the bigger buildings are occupied--I see far more people crossing 4th Avenue into the Slope from the R train at rush hours than I did just 2 or 3 years ago.
linusvanpelt Jockin my Mercedes
Joined: 12 Oct 2005 Posts: 394 Location: Center Slope, between 4th and 5th Avenues
Fri Mar 02, 07 2:45 pm EST
Username: * wrote:
However, it seems like if you make Sixth and Seventh one-way streets, it would encourage people to use them as through streets. It would certainly make intra-Slope driving even more of a nuisance. Are those streets so pedestrian-unfriendly that change is necessary?
I'm all for discouraging intra-Slope driving. How badly does someone really need to drive a car from one point in the Slope to another? If you're doing it, it's probably for personal convenience, which I just don't see as the biggest public priority. (I do it sometimes myself, to make a big purchase or something, but I don't think DOT's planning should revolve around making it easier to drive a mile to get a case of wine or something.)
However, and I'm not an expert, I can't imagine that the reason is to make 6th and 7th more ped-friendly. The impetus, I'm guessing, is to make 4th more ped-friendly (to accomodate the coming population boom?), and to speed up 6th and 7th to compensate. Not defending that part of it, just guessing at the reasoning.
8thandPrez Stroller Person
Joined: 09 Sep 2005 Posts: 1133 Location: No longer at 8th and Prez
Fri Mar 02, 07 3:00 pm EST
Oiseau wrote:
Those aren't the only Amsterdam-like changes I'd like to see
First two are Copenhagen, actually, but I'm right there with you on the Amsterdamization of Brooklyn.
ic96 Regular
Joined: 01 Nov 2005 Posts: 130 Location: Park Slope, Brooklyn
Fri Mar 02, 07 4:27 pm EST
I have a feeling this has more to do with Gowanus than it does PS.....
Joined: 07 Sep 2005 Posts: 660 Location: Who wants to know?
Fri Mar 02, 07 5:48 pm EST
I'd say 90%+ of the car traffic on 4th avenue is not from Park Slope. I think this change will make more cars stuck in traffic emitting more pollution in the area (good luck to those tress they want to plant on the median) and more pissed off drivers who will clog up 3rd and 5th avenues as well. And the pedestrians who actually stroll down 4th ave wil breath pollution and hear a shitload of street noise and horn honking. Sure we could use better timed lightd to slow down trafiic is that's the problem. No matter how bad traffic gets, it will not force the majority of drivers to use mass transit. Plus they'll we'll need more room for cars once that Whole Foods gets built.
Fix the schools, fix the potholes, fix the subways, build bike lanes first. Anyways, aren't there blighted areas of Brooklyn that need a make-over far more than fourth avenue?
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Subscribe in a reader
