Comments on: Traffic Mitigation Commission Meeting Pre-Spin http://www.streetsblog.org/2007/09/25/traffic-mitigtation-commission-meeting-pre-spin/ Covering the New York City Streets Renaissance Mon, 23 Nov 2009 05:31:30 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8 hourly 1 By: Angus Grieve-Smith http://www.streetsblog.org/2007/09/25/traffic-mitigtation-commission-meeting-pre-spin/comment-page-1/#comment-37607 Angus Grieve-Smith Thu, 27 Sep 2007 00:24:24 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/2007/09/25/traffic-mitigtation-commission-meeting-pre-spin/#comment-37607 Thanks for that link, Chris! I knew I'd read somewhere about that lane being maxed out. I found a more recent newsletter here: http://www.panynj.gov/CommutingTravel/tunnels/pdfs/XBLnwslttr9-06R1.pdf Operational Alternative 1 (converting one eastbound lane to HOV) is clearly the preferable of the four discussed. One thing that's missing from both of those PDFs is the number of passengers who travel through the other three lanes. I'll bet that the single counter-flow lane carries more passengers than the other three lanes combined - maybe even the three lanes plus the 2-3 lanes of 30th Street. Operational Alternative 1 would definitely carry more than these lanes. Hm, there doesn't seem to be any news since last September on this issue. They should also look at other ways to accommodate more bus traffic, like dedicated bus lanes for the Holland Tunnel and the George Washington Bridge. Thanks for that link, Chris! I knew I'd read somewhere about that lane being maxed out. I found a more recent newsletter here:

http://www.panynj.gov/CommutingTravel/tunnels/pdfs/XBLnwslttr9-06R1.pdf

Operational Alternative 1 (converting one eastbound lane to HOV) is clearly the preferable of the four discussed. One thing that's missing from both of those PDFs is the number of passengers who travel through the other three lanes. I'll bet that the single counter-flow lane carries more passengers than the other three lanes combined - maybe even the three lanes plus the 2-3 lanes of 30th Street. Operational Alternative 1 would definitely carry more than these lanes.

Hm, there doesn't seem to be any news since last September on this issue.

They should also look at other ways to accommodate more bus traffic, like dedicated bus lanes for the Holland Tunnel and the George Washington Bridge.

]]> By: Chris H http://www.streetsblog.org/2007/09/25/traffic-mitigtation-commission-meeting-pre-spin/comment-page-1/#comment-37557 Chris H Wed, 26 Sep 2007 11:26:58 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/2007/09/25/traffic-mitigtation-commission-meeting-pre-spin/#comment-37557 They've actually maxed out the bus lane (XBL) and the PA is considering converting another to HO/T. http://www.panynj.gov/CommutingTravel/tunnels/pdfs/01_09_XBL-II_nwslttr_285fri.pdf They've actually maxed out the bus lane (XBL) and the PA is considering converting another to HO/T.

http://www.panynj.gov/CommutingTravel/tunnels/pdfs/01_09_XBL-II_nwslttr_285fri.pdf

]]> By: Angus Grieve-Smith http://www.streetsblog.org/2007/09/25/traffic-mitigtation-commission-meeting-pre-spin/comment-page-1/#comment-37540 Angus Grieve-Smith Tue, 25 Sep 2007 21:16:43 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/2007/09/25/traffic-mitigtation-commission-meeting-pre-spin/#comment-37540 I can confirm Dave's observation: a few weeks ago I was in slow-moving reverse-commute traffic on the Lincoln Tunnel and its approach road through Union City. It didn't ease up until we got through the Palisades. But I was in a bus, so please stop throwing things! I think they should at least have dedicated bus-only lanes in both directions. One entire tube of the tunnel should be bus-only, and probably the inner lane of the approach road in both directions. At least. There are tons of buses using the tunnel now, and I'd love to see more. If they want to shift the lanes around during rush hours on the approach road, it's not a big deal to me, as long as the buses are moving. FWIW, Dave, the tunnel is controlled by the Port Authority and 495 is controlled by NJ DOT, so you can't blame this on Weinshall. I can't say for sure who's to blame. I can confirm Dave's observation: a few weeks ago I was in slow-moving reverse-commute traffic on the Lincoln Tunnel and its approach road through Union City. It didn't ease up until we got through the Palisades. But I was in a bus, so please stop throwing things!

I think they should at least have dedicated bus-only lanes in both directions. One entire tube of the tunnel should be bus-only, and probably the inner lane of the approach road in both directions. At least. There are tons of buses using the tunnel now, and I'd love to see more. If they want to shift the lanes around during rush hours on the approach road, it's not a big deal to me, as long as the buses are moving.

FWIW, Dave, the tunnel is controlled by the Port Authority and 495 is controlled by NJ DOT, so you can't blame this on Weinshall. I can't say for sure who's to blame.

]]> By: Dave http://www.streetsblog.org/2007/09/25/traffic-mitigtation-commission-meeting-pre-spin/comment-page-1/#comment-37537 Dave Tue, 25 Sep 2007 21:00:42 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/2007/09/25/traffic-mitigtation-commission-meeting-pre-spin/#comment-37537 Mike: My car sits in the garage in Manhattan during the week where I pay $400 for the pleasure of using it on the weekends. It adds nothing to traffic congestion. Wols: OK so make one lane in the tunnel for buses only and only let one lane of the tunnel be for individual cars. The idea is that if you make it more difficult for people to drive into the city then they won't...what's the saying...adding a lane to a road or highway does nothing to alleviate traffic as additional traffic finds and uses the additional volume. Take away the contra-flow lane and traffic will spike in the short-trm but will then likely decrease. Under Giuliani and Weinshall the city was made car-friendly at the expense of pedestrian and other street users. For example: - Giuliani corners in midtown where pedestrian are forced to cross the street three times to allow for easier turns. - The tragic redesign of Houston St adding left turn lanes at the expense of pedestrian space (how about banning left turns from Houston...traffic would figure a way to deal) - Contra-flow lanes. When were they added? I would not be surprised if they were added by Iris "make way for more cars" Weinshall. - Rampant placard abuse. Anyone have the figures on how many were in use under each mayor? Make it more difficult to enter the city and more expensive to park (ie permit parking and fewer meters) and traffic will be reduced more cost effectively than by CP. Revenues lost from CP would be gained from permit parking revenues and additional registrations from those forced to register in the city who now do so elsewhere (illegally). Mike:
My car sits in the garage in Manhattan during the week where I pay $400 for the pleasure of using it on the weekends. It adds nothing to traffic congestion.

Wols:
OK so make one lane in the tunnel for buses only and only let one lane of the tunnel be for individual cars. The idea is that if you make it more difficult for people to drive into the city then they won't...what's the saying...adding a lane to a road or highway does nothing to alleviate traffic as additional traffic finds and uses the additional volume. Take away the contra-flow lane and traffic will spike in the short-trm but will then likely decrease.

Under Giuliani and Weinshall the city was made car-friendly at the expense of pedestrian and other street users. For example:
- Giuliani corners in midtown where pedestrian are forced to cross the street three times to allow for easier turns.
- The tragic redesign of Houston St adding left turn lanes at the expense of pedestrian space (how about banning left turns from Houston...traffic would figure a way to deal)
- Contra-flow lanes. When were they added? I would not be surprised if they were added by Iris "make way for more cars" Weinshall.
- Rampant placard abuse. Anyone have the figures on how many were in use under each mayor?

Make it more difficult to enter the city and more expensive to park (ie permit parking and fewer meters) and traffic will be reduced more cost effectively than by CP. Revenues lost from CP would be gained from permit parking revenues and additional registrations from those forced to register in the city who now do so elsewhere (illegally).

]]> By: Wols http://www.streetsblog.org/2007/09/25/traffic-mitigtation-commission-meeting-pre-spin/comment-page-1/#comment-37535 Wols Tue, 25 Sep 2007 20:03:07 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/2007/09/25/traffic-mitigtation-commission-meeting-pre-spin/#comment-37535 Actually, if you stand on the Pulaski Bridge in morning rush hour you will see that the contra-flow lane moves a lot of buses past the jammed-up general traffic lanes on the LIE approach to the tunnel. Maybe not a lot of vehicles but a lot of people are moving well in that lane. Actually, if you stand on the Pulaski Bridge in morning rush hour you will see that the contra-flow lane moves a lot of buses past the jammed-up general traffic lanes on the LIE approach to the tunnel. Maybe not a lot of vehicles but a lot of people are moving well in that lane.

]]> By: Mike http://www.streetsblog.org/2007/09/25/traffic-mitigtation-commission-meeting-pre-spin/comment-page-1/#comment-37533 Mike Tue, 25 Sep 2007 19:50:30 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/2007/09/25/traffic-mitigtation-commission-meeting-pre-spin/#comment-37533 Dave: One "simple congestion remediation effort that should be tried NOW" is to get rid of your car. Dave: One "simple congestion remediation effort that should be tried NOW" is to get rid of your car.

]]> By: Dave http://www.streetsblog.org/2007/09/25/traffic-mitigtation-commission-meeting-pre-spin/comment-page-1/#comment-37524 Dave Tue, 25 Sep 2007 17:19:36 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/2007/09/25/traffic-mitigtation-commission-meeting-pre-spin/#comment-37524 I drove out of the city last Friday morning and spent 30 minutes gridlocked at the Midtown tunnel because of the contra-flow lane that allows three lanes into Manhattan and one out and the redirection of traffic related to it. It shouldb noted that there was minimal traffic coming in through that extra lane. The city should immediately end the contra-flow measures at the WillieB, Midtown tunnel and elsewhere...how insane is it that we facilitate driving into the city and then complain about the congestion it creates. And this would SAVE money; I wonder how much is spent on police O/T to implement this policy? The city can do many things at minimal cost to reduce congestion: getting rid of the contra-flow; reforming placard abuse, implementing city-wide permit parking are a few, that would help redue congestion without the high cost of CP. In general I support CP (though as a Manhattan resident in the zone I find it unduly burdens me vs other city residents who won't have to pay $4 to drive down the block) but feel there are other simpler congestion remediation efforts that should be tried NOW. I drove out of the city last Friday morning and spent 30 minutes gridlocked at the Midtown tunnel because of the contra-flow lane that allows three lanes into Manhattan and one out and the redirection of traffic related to it. It shouldb noted that there was minimal traffic coming in through that extra lane.

The city should immediately end the contra-flow measures at the WillieB, Midtown tunnel and elsewhere...how insane is it that we facilitate driving into the city and then complain about the congestion it creates. And this would SAVE money; I wonder how much is spent on police O/T to implement this policy?

The city can do many things at minimal cost to reduce congestion: getting rid of the contra-flow; reforming placard abuse, implementing city-wide permit parking are a few, that would help redue congestion without the high cost of CP.

In general I support CP (though as a Manhattan resident in the zone I find it unduly burdens me vs other city residents who won't have to pay $4 to drive down the block) but feel there are other simpler congestion remediation efforts that should be tried NOW.

]]>