during non peak hours the lights should be set in an alternating pattern, and not in a progression precisely to prevent people from speeding by making them stop every 4-5 blocks.

The nypd should give speeding tickets to people doing 50mph to beat the alternating pattern.

From some of the Rider Diaries posts, it sounds like the pace has slackened on the renovation of the signal tower and the lower Bergen Street station, so a little note to the governor supporting this project might help move it along.

The more "orderly" a street is, the worse it is for pedestrians and aesthetics. U-turns and double parking are part of what makes 7th av a multi-use, livable, local street.You won't see that on a throughway.

It's hardly the dangerous street that you portray--I let my 8 year old cross streets by himself now.

Why does a one-way street have to be a speedway? What about a low speed limit, frequent speed bumps, speeding tickets? There are ways to make people drive slowly. Then we could have wide, protected bike lanes that would make things safer for cyclists and pedestrians--and encourage people to leave their cars home.

I'm not familiar with any studies, but 7th Avenue is not a street that suffers from a lack of shoppers, and someone's making a dangerous u-turn on every block at any given moment.

Fifth one way? No, every study shows that a commercial street benefits from slow, 2-way traffic (as opposed to fast 1- or 2-way traffic.) Eliminating parking is not the answer either; parking slows traffic, insulates pedestrians and mollifies those who insist on driving to Scaredy Cat and Lulu's. Live and let live, the streets are for eveybody.

The solution is to demand the nomination of a new commissioner , to stop any major redesing until a new commissioner is named and to delay th process as much as possible ..

Sad but true.

Make 5th ave one-way, and one lane, south bound, or north, whichever. Eliminate parking on one side of the ave and make a two way bike lane with some kind of physical separation barrier from traffic. Deliveries have to park on side street.

"And, trying to increase use of mass transit begs the question of the quality and capacity of that system. The best way to get people to use it is to make them WANT to use it, not by trying to force them out of others means of travel. If the trains are packed, if the tracks are congested and slow-moving, if the schedules vary and change with inadequate communication to the riders, who the hell would willingly choose mass transit (I am speaking mostly of the subways, I rarely use the buses)."

I've been hearing this kind of thing a lot lately in response to anything that restricts car movement, like in a statement from John Liu about congestion pricing.

It's very frustrating. Of course we want to improve mass transit; we ride the subways and buses too! But every time we try to get something done (for example, the Second Avenue Subway, the N train extension to La Guardia) we're told that the money and/or the political will aren't there.

It seems to me like one way to build political support and eventually get support for funding is to increase the percentage of people who are transit riders. One way to do that is to take away the subsidies that encourage people to use cars; in that sense, it's a zero-sum game.

I also don't think it's fair to criticize people for not supporting transit without offering your own transit plan; Liu at least did that by suggesting expanded express bus service. Here are three non-road things you can support that will ease movement in Park Slope:

1. Speed up work on the signal tower at Bergen Street. That's what's preventing the resumption of express service on the F line (and possible extension of the V train).

2. Support the cross-harbor rail freight tunnel. How many trucks would that take off the Gowanus, freeing up "capacity" for the cars and trucks of Fourth Avenue?

3. Ken and I had a side discussion about the trolleys on Prospect Park West. I did actually ride an old PCC trolley in Philadelphia back in December; maybe it was one from Brooklyn! But what if those trolleys were back bringing people down PPW and Vanderbilt, over the Brooklyn Bridge to their jobs on Wall Street? Even if it were mostly local traffic in Park Slope, wouldn't it reduce some of the congestion in the neighborhood?

If you don't like my suggestions, please post your own!

About 4th Ave: My personal preference would be to put in place traffic-calming devices AND reduce the lanes to 2 each way with a bicycle lane. This would fit in well with the street's future denser residential nature, now that it's been rezoned.

That said, it's unlikely to happen w/o the screw-up of 5th/7th. It's obvious that DOT wants to make up for the reduced capacity of their changes to 4th. So 1) if that's the only choice, yes, I say leave everything alone; it's the devil we know 2) if DOT actually wants to improve things:

--shorter signal cycles (50 to 60 seconds max)
--better left turn lanes.
--advanced pedestrian phasing to allow crossing pedestrians to occurpy the cross-walk before veicles get the green light so that turning vehicles have to wait for pedestrians.
--Provide curb bulb-outs at intersections and curb extensions at mid-block locations

One simple (or what really ought to be simple) change would be a remote interest in the enforcement of traffic law on the part of the NYPD. If traffic cops ticketed even every third double-parked car on fifth and seventh avenues, it would help. If law enforcement personnel woke up to the fact that making a u-turn is actually illegal, it would help. Let's get these jackasses out of the way!

See y'all at the meeting next Thursday.

FOr instance, nothing was said about the timing of traffic lights. In my experience ill-timed lights increase speeding, because motorists try to make up for wasted time.

And, trying to increase use of mass transit begs the question of the quality and capacity of that system. The best way to get people to use it is to make them WANT to use it, not by trying to force them out of others means of travel. If the trains are packed, if the tracks are congested and slow-moving, if the schedules vary and change with inadequate communication to the riders, who the hell would willingly choose mass transit (I am speaking mostly of the subways, I rarely use the buses).

Finally, if you slow traffic speeds, are you not causing more traffic congestion and causing cars/trucks to be on the road longer? Is that the right idea?

As one who uses the subways about 60% of time, walks 30% and drives 10%, here are my experiences:

7th Avenue is a difficult drive because of the ill-timed lights, double parking and jay-walking. I doubt making one-way will solve any of those issues. It's also can be a frusterating walk because of the crowds and strollers, but hey, I guess that means that it is successful.

I find 8th Avenue to be a pleasant walk, mostly because I like looking at the buildings. I don't find the speed of the traffic to be a hinderance because I don't walk in the street and try not to cross agianst the light when there is traffic coming (hey, if you cross against the light or jay-walk, you aint got reason to complain when traffic scares you).

I found many of the other comments thought-provoking, though I wonder about some:

1. How many of those commenting are traffic engineers, or have specific training in the field?

2. Are we looking at traffic flow as a city-wide issue, or do we really believe that a neighborhood is a private island, unrelated to the rest of the city?

3. What's with this US vs THEM attitude? That is not the way to make reasonable informed decisions. We are all in this together, whether we live up the hill or down, been in the neighborhood for 30 years or 30 minutes, whether we walk, bike, drive or take mass transit. We need to stop vilifying each other, accept that we may have differing agendas, and work together. Otherwise all the talk is nothing but hot air.

You have read this thread, right? Johnny and I are hardly the only ones who frame the issue this way:

"I also think Fourth Avenue works relatively well now as the highway that it is"

"if you make it officially two lanes without closing down all of the businesses, it will effectively turn into a one-lane street since the businesses and their trucks have no place else to (double) park.

is that what we want?"

"Horrible idea for both 7th and 4th Avenues."

"the CAPACITY in 6th & 7th is being expanded to make up for reduced capacity in 4th."

"They're putting up large buildings on 4th avenue, which has always been the industrial corridor and the route of big trucks carrying goods and services to Brooklyn, and by narrowing and reshaping the character of 4th avenue it will cease to be that corridor."

"This is really a bald takeover of an existing neighborhood avenue and attempt to turn an industrial corridor (a heretofore indispensable one that will be seeing even MORE traffic in coming years) into a residential avenue. It's a devaluation of existing property in Park Slope at the hands of new developments."

"A big part of what has made our neighborhood attractive to people, and later developers, is its scale and local character. It has been skirted by a major traffic artery (4th avenue) through an industrial area that is essential to the city."

...and these are just the more excerptable quotes. However you slice it, the takeaway is: keep 4th Avenue as is, to protect 6th and 7th. Which I find sad on a site devoted to the interests of pedestrians in NYC. (Though I do recognize that SOME posters have welcomed the proposed improvements to 4th.)

I too hope it's not an either/or choice, but I'd be more persuaded of it if I saw more people here saying they planned to vocally oppose the change to 6th and 7th AND vocally support the change to 4th. Are you seeing that?

The city can develop Fourth Avenue into a great residential urban boulevard without shunting more traffic through the neighborhood streets around Fourth Avenue. It's a false choice to insist that Fourth Ave.'s development must mean Park Slope's demise.

I'm sure that DOT and others will try to position this issue as Poor Old Fourth Avenue vs. Well-Off Park Slope NIMBY's. But I don't hear or see a whole lot of people other than you guys framing it like that. It's not an either / or choice. The city can and should come up with a plan that makes Fourth Avenue better while maintaining a high level of neighborhood quality of life around Fourth Avenue.