Traffic calming is needed at McGuinness intersection with Meeker Ave. As a pedestrian it is dangerous to cross Meeker, under the BQE and across McGuinness. Southbound cars on McGuinness attempt to beat the lights at Engert, Newton and Bayard in order to hit the W 278 on-ramp at high speed. Traffic off the E 278 Exit 33 off-ramp aggressively merge onto Humboldt/McGuinness at high speed. The entire traffic complex under the BQE at Meeker/Humboldt/McGuinness is designed as a pedestrian-hostile highway that encourages drivers to race through the neighborhood as if it is not a dense residential area.
McGuinness has two modes of existence: 1) as an empty highway for speeding; 2) as a rush-hour traffic jam. This is because a large traffic volume is not local. However, locals in Greenpoint who drive fear that a road diet will "make traffic worse." In fact, the induced demand of through-traffic on the the multi-lane highway will fall away when the excess lanes are removed -- and this will actually IMPROVE conditions for local drivers in the neighborhood. It's a similar situation for parking. Local drivers fear that removing parking on McGuinness will make it harder for them to park. But parking on side streets fills up with non-local vehicles during the day, forcing local residents returning by car at the end of the day to compete with them. DOT could solve this with a residential parking permit program. DOT, please make sure your traffic study accounts for LOCAL traffic volumes (ie trips that start/end in Greenpoint) versus THROUGH traffic volumes -- this will provide the evidence needed to address the fears of local drivers who worry that reducing car lanes will harm them (it won't -- it will simply curb the elastic demand of through traffic). Please also consider what a local residential parking program would look like -- this will provide the evidence needed to address the fears of local drivers who worry that reducing parking lanes will harm them (it won't -- eliminating parking on McGuinness will provide space for protected bike lanes and non-car users, and a parking permit program would protect local drivers from having to compete for non-local parking). Please note this comment applies to all of McGuinnes Blvd.
One if the other PS34 parents was also asking what would be done with the trees in the median if that were to be converted. How does that get handled during a redesign- could we save those trees? reuse them?
Make sure it's accessible to all forms of micromobility and road users
carve out a pocket plaza - little areas where DOT has been putting safety planters/bollards - I would love an elec vehicle plug in pilot (like I see now at ADO on Norman Ave) - vending cart. So no propane - but electrical charging. I saw a post this week about elec vehicle - with ice cream. For ppl to eat - during work day or fun/off work times. Kids having ice cream,etc.
add countdown clocks where they are not**
We need a road diet to begin with because that means we get everything else - protected bike lanes, loading zones, etc.
bike lanes protected by lane of parked cars seem to be a good design that works for both modes; safer than having moving cars along the bike lane.**
second using bioswales as daylighting; should think creatively to incorporate better drainage in the capital redesign because of issues of climate change, rising seas, and flooding since it's more expensive to dig up road over and over again
don't pit peds vs cyclists vs car owners.**
Comments should be related to the posted topic or specific project. The Projects and Initiatives website is not meant for comments that do not directly relate to the purpose or topic of the specific project. For general comments or communications concerning an agency, please contact the agency's Commissioner on www.NYC.gov. For service requests, please contact 311 Online.
Pan left or rigth to show the area you wish to comment on.
To add your comments:
How do you want to submit your comment: