Submitted by MichaelRahmani t3_ytij3o in nyc
Comments
[deleted] t1_iw4coft wrote
[deleted]
neodymiumPUSSYmagnet t1_iw4fbxb wrote
Cops need some place to park
FarFromSane_ t1_iw4fwtj wrote
This is the proposal to expand what they are currently doing up to 58th? Nice. Making quick work of this. Good job DOT, I just wish they did two traffic lanes. There is currently two traffic lanes in the construction zone and it’s not like there is a traffic doomsday (don’t really care if there was).. so just keep it. If it works on 8th Ave, why can’t it work on 9th.
doodle77 t1_iw4l02e wrote
Changing the curbs requires a drainage redesign.
NYCRSSfeed t1_iw4sdxe wrote
spoil_of_the_cities t1_iw4un3x wrote
I've been disappointed they've been taking away all the mixing zones, they are the best I've experienced. Everything just flows.
WeirdWreath t1_iw4zhax wrote
Cab these proposals account for stopped trucks in a traffic lane delivering their shit to Morton Williams on 58th? Lul
FarFromSane_ t1_iw500nl wrote
What are you referring to exactly?
TeamMisha t1_iw52dzm wrote
> Why would they not actually extend the pavement to make it seamless?
The NYCDOT's strategy is to avoid what is called "capital construction", or pouring concrete or utility work, at almost any cost. This is why they only almost always do painted treatments such as painted curb extensions, aka bulbouts, medians, refuge islands, etc. You're probably asking well if they save all this money, when do they ever do capital construction? I can't tell you, despite the budget approved this year being 1 billion dollars, no clue lol. The biggest "problem" with expanding the sidewalk is drainage, you would need to move every catch-basin which involves digging up the road and can be quite costly.
TeamMisha t1_iw52qh2 wrote
Yes, NYCDOT does not do road diets or bus lanes, for example, without performing a traffic analysis. They would have already determined that the roadway can support one less lane under the same conditions. The second bullet also will help a lot "expand commercial loading..." so I am glad they likely acknowledged the problem you mention (which is very bad in many places) of truck activity. Slowly there has been positive movement at DOT to do more curb regulations for commercial loading to try and improve double or even triple parking that is pervasive around the city.
TeamMisha t1_iw533xh wrote
Look is it perfect, no, but it's in the right direction. I've ridden the 9th Ave bike lane a lot and it's a shitshow, a very chaotic situation indeed as the article posted below mentions. This treatment seems to be working nicely on 8th Ave so I can't complain too much :)
edman007 t1_iw53bb3 wrote
It doesn't really leave any emergency access. The parking between traffic and bike lane intentionally blocks all vehicles, no cops illegally parked, no delivery trucks, no crashing vehicles.
That said, emergency vehicles can just take a traffic lane so it's not really an issue.
RAXIZZ t1_iw56qej wrote
> NYCDOT's strategy is to avoid what is called "capital construction"
AFAIK, capital projects have to go through DDC. So it's not just much more expensive, but also requires cross-agency collaboration, which means it's basically impossible.
TeamMisha t1_iw57050 wrote
I believe you are quite right that sounds very familiar and you're spot on, some projects are already miracles to begin with so if you add two agencies into the mix then it's a giga-miracle, and 3 or more... not even god himself can achieve the coordination 💀
supremeMilo t1_iw59414 wrote
Slope it towards the street?
supremeMilo t1_iw595ce wrote
Why don’t we just do bus bulbs?
spoil_of_the_cities t1_iw5a48g wrote
"Update mixing zones to offset crossings" in the slide above.
The mixing zone is the bike lane setup where there's like a small car left turn lane just in front of the intersection
FarFromSane_ t1_iw5cd6z wrote
Ehhh mixing zones are kind subpar imo. Though they are better than having the turn lane right next to the bike lane. Ideally the turn lane is far enough away from the bike lane that a driver in a turning car can look to the side and see bikes coming without using mirrors.
This is the case on some intersections on some streets but for some reason they don’t implement everywhere on new bike lanes.
mr_birkenblatt t1_iw5j642 wrote
imho it's actually better. if you have to swerve out of the bikelane (e.g. if something is blocking it) you can just do that. if the sidewalk was raised that would not be possible
_Maxolotl t1_iw5j8am wrote
Does using real metal bollards instead of plastic bollards that might as well be imaginary require a drainage redesign, though?
froggythefish t1_iw5peqe wrote
People need 26 feet to walk but only 6 feet to bike? Widen the bicycle lane, make driving more expensive to incentivize using it
burningicecube t1_iw5pjhe wrote
Why do they show people walking in the bike lane?
sabotage45 t1_iw5pr2h wrote
The short answer is yes.
The longer answer is the redesign for the footings needed and the having to raise grade around the bollards to ensure normal traffic doesn't hit them because they win everytime not the car. And have setbacks from the new curb to ensure someone can open their car doors easily. There is a lot of planning and coordination that occurs between a bunch of city and start agencies and utilities and private stakeholders where the bollards are places
_Maxolotl t1_iw5se69 wrote
The entire point is that they win every time not the car. And cars win every time not a human being walking.
Paint them orange make them reflective and if people can’t manage to avoid hitting shiny orange things that have a foot or two of painted striped in front of them, then they deserve a fucked up car.
jerseycityfrankie t1_iw5uvtx wrote
Let’s apply this more vigorously in more locations and improve everyone’s safety and quality of life. It’s a no-brainer.
huebomont t1_iw5vvk0 wrote
traffic is always bad. eliminating half of it by cutting the number of general purpose lanes is a huge benefit for everyone except drivers, who will always be miserable anyway.
spoon_sporkforker t1_iw5ww2h wrote
What the fuck is this and/or shit? Fuck your parking. A bus needs the bus lane at rush hour more than any other time!
huebomont t1_iw5xrtc wrote
i dont love when cars “flow” into me without looking, it’s kind of deadly. drivers don’t know they’re supposed to yield
break_card t1_iw603pe wrote
I live on 52nd and 9th, they just completed construction that’s been going on for months. Was pleasantly surprised!
illegal-character t1_iw60f63 wrote
library_rat t1_iw6j22u wrote
Both sidewalks need to be widened, the 15’ shown on the diagram is misleading. Restaurant seating takes up at least half of, if not 2/3 of the sidewalks on both sides of the street, and there are constant bottlenecks trying to walk up and down 9th ave. Granted, most of the time I’m on 9th Ave is to eat at said restaurants, but if we want the outdoor seating there needs to be more space for it and pedestrians.
sabotage45 t1_iw6syol wrote
I don't disagree with you. But also there are many factors that go into these decisions. It's not that black and white. Engineers have to consider a lot of city state and federal laws rules and regulations. Such as ADA requirements. Utility interaction (existing and future). How the general public will use and abuse them. Because people are dumb. Engineers often have to thing about how to help the dumbest of us.
Also everytime the bollards get hit they need to be redone. If it's just a surface scratch then no but any kind of hit that can damage a car. Because the integrity of the bollard is compromised and it won't work as designed the next time it gets hit.
Also proper drainage needs to occur around the bollards otherwise water will degrade the metal and they are no longer useful to protect.
LuisTechnology t1_iw6ycs1 wrote
More walking space, less cars inside the city can only be a good thing imo. I own a car and like and enjoy them lots.
DLFiii t1_iw6yjfa wrote
Yes, but that’s what they want. They’re trying to force people into cycling or using public transport.
craftkiller t1_iw70sb9 wrote
Cyclists are generally traveling from point A to point B whereas the sidewalk is for:
- groups of people standing still talking/looking at phones/scamming tourists/taking photos
- food carts / news stands / those folding table "vendors" reselling stolen goods from CVS
- that extra doorway restaurants construct every winter
- outdoor seating for restaurants
- dogs
- sleeping people / people who took too much drugs and need to rest it off
- bus stops
- covid testing tents
- subway entrances
- dogshit
- police vehicle parking
- children playing / running / and even riding bicycles if they're 12 or under
- food delivery people riding full-blown motorized vehicles
- giant piles of garbage
kapuasuite t1_iw7c49r wrote
New York City's bureaucratic feudalism never ceases to amaze me.
Dragon_Fisting t1_iw7d2zs wrote
Do they have to move the basins though? Couldn't they connect the extended sidewalk to the current catch basins with diagonal holes?
nycfoto t1_iw7dlb4 wrote
DDC is part of the cross-city agency collaboration for decades. DDC, DOT and DEP are sister agencies that work in tandem, but not always in the correct order.
For example, they would repave the road over a long stretch.....then rip up the streets to expand water mains and sewer pipes. Then patch up the pavement. Instead of doing it the other way around. Replace the underground pipes THEN put fresh new asphalt pavement.
I know. I used to work for DDC ;)
Other_World t1_iw7gte6 wrote
What's the advantage of a painted sidewalk, instead of just extending the actual sidewalk so there's still a curb? I find people don't even realize that's for pedestrians and just crowd the curbed sidewalk. A curb would also discourage cyclists from riding on the sidewalk.
Is it simply the cost?
SolitaryMarmot t1_iw7lhi5 wrote
They should take another car lane to make a nice wide bike lane with 2 lanes to accommodate all the micromobility users.
SI_MonsterMan t1_iw7lk2l wrote
Sounds like the revamping of the South Ferry terminal and Peter Minuit Plaza that had been rebuilt and torn up a half dozen times from 1990 to 2010.
Pinuzzo t1_iw7mna6 wrote
You need to have a parking lane for curbside deliveries / service vehicles at the very least or cargo trucks will end up blocking the travel lane. That implies that parking is restricted to commercial vehicles only.
nycfoto t1_iw7msso wrote
Ridiculous. Perhaps the contractors didn't build to spec. Drainage issues, possible post-9/11 secured barricades?
Pinuzzo t1_iw7mz24 wrote
They want to keep at least one curb for deliveries
Pinuzzo t1_iw7nc59 wrote
Partly the cost and also because it's sort of a temporary measure, like a painted curb extension. There are some curb extensions that are upgraded to full concrete pavements after they've proved successful.
Adventurous-Quiet434 t1_iw7ntav wrote
In what logical world does reducing car lanes improve traffic? Less lanes for cars means more cars trying to fit into less lanes. And how does the DOT make those determinations? Has anyone in those “improvement” neighborhoods seen DOT testing the area? Over the last ten years it seems someone is intentionally making it harder to own and operate a private vehicle in NYC.
DaBadFeelingGoesAway t1_iw7rbfm wrote
FIRE ALL DDC @ DOT ENGINEERS!They get pains peanut but are up for the highest bidder! DA …. PLEASE INVESTIGATE!
[deleted] t1_iw831yi wrote
[deleted]
awesomeyo9876 t1_iw84hld wrote
Ding ding ding "intentionally making it harder to own and operate a private vehicle in NYC."
Road used to be 59/95 for private cars, now its gonna be 49/95 for private cars. Thats 62% for cars going down to 52%.
mateo_fl t1_iw8cg2u wrote
To justify the need for the new painted sidewalk
[deleted] t1_iw8hq6j wrote
[deleted]
_allycat t1_iw8igxe wrote
I'm not going to argue over the semantics of what they intend with 'painted' but the extended sidewalks they've made without moving the original curb are fine. Examples are by Worth Square and outside Macys and up Broadway a bit.
GoldCoasting t1_iw8mswq wrote
Can someone explain how basically expanding the sidewalk 11 feet is beneficial?
gko2408 t1_iw8qrcf wrote
I thought of it as flawed too, but it might have a helpfully unintended benefit of keeping pedestrians/tourists aware of where where they are relative to bicyclists and the street. Especially if people will be looking at their phones while walking, the color change in their periphery could help.
TeamMisha t1_iw8r1c4 wrote
So I think there are ways to do it whereby you keep the current basins and cover conduits basically for the water to flow into them, but I am not 100% sure of current design standards if that is what the city would do or consider
CactusBoyScout t1_iw8yu4k wrote
I don’t understand why they give such wide painted sidewalks on just one side. Why not add 5.5 feet on both sides?
bike__punk t1_iwbk9zx wrote
Is this supposed to make a difference?
SI_MonsterMan t1_iwjngcz wrote
Nope. Grift.
MichaelRahmani OP t1_iw4agyt wrote
I believe they just finished doing this on 8th ave and are almost done with the 9th ave reconstruction.
Its much improved but I can't help but notice how flawed it looks to have an extended sidewalk to be just a painted part of the road. Why would they not actually extend the pavement to make it seamless?